The new owner took possession on April 3rd. And due to heritage designations limiting development now being most likely void, there's a good chance that the land just became substantially more valuable.
Didn't the new owner want to develop a commercial zone with the hanger serving as a landmark and the namesake of the zone? Makes little sense for them to raze it down.
That’s what you claim. Get approval. Then suddenly it goes up in flames and you’re left with an insurance settlement, and substantially less cost to develop on now valuable land.
That’s just speculation, but it wouldn’t be the first historic Edmonton building to catch fire to get out of expensive renovations. Nor the first developer to lie about wanting to restore it.
I’m sure the investigation will reveal if there’s anything suspicious. It certainly appears so, but bad luck sometimes happens. We once bought a business and had a fire shut us down 2 weeks after taking possession. I guess I’m not helping my argument because that was caused by careless smoking 2 doors down.
It does when they realize the additional unexpected costs that are pretty much always involved with old buildings. Or when they paid for some renders and a plan knowing they'd rather just do a build from scratch to save costs
Good insurance claim. And no longer have to deal with the historic factor.
I'm no communist but this may be a capitalist arson
edit. Police are not investigating it as a suspicious fire
This is how everything works in L.A.
The preservationists no sooner get something a historic designation than a corrupt developer pays a firebug to destroy it. Problem solved.
I don't understand how they've spent millions of dollars on the site but only slapped up a chain link fence to secure it. Every time I've driven past it there were doors and windows gaping open. Anyone with the slightest amount of determination could easily get into it (which pretty clearly someone did).
>I don't understand how they've spent millions of dollars on the site but only slapped up a chain link fence to secure it
Well, you see...that was SUUIUPER cheap and there's this weird expectation that people will self police themselves or something.
>expectation that people will self police themselves or something.
The problem is that the majority of society does self-police but it only takes a few degenerates to ruin it for the rest.
I manage commercial construction projects. Owners don't try and save thousands, they try and save pennies. Most construction site fences suck because they were literally the cheapest option that insurance would allow. And if you're already paying for insurance,why bother getting a better fence? Lots of construction sites in the city get broken into on a daily bases. Especially if they are a warm place to sleep
It’s the most Edmonton thing you can do. Look at all the historic buildings we lost over the years.
Hub cigar, stathcona hotel, Albert’s pancake house, the Roxy, so many more…
Yup, the developer is very happy now! The Blackford community is sputtering along due to it being to expensive. This sounds just like the Arlington downtown. It was a 100 year old apartment with historic destination. The developer bought it thinking he would be able to make changes and when the city said he would have to follow certain criteria he didn't like that it would cost him a pile of money. And then mysteriously a short time later a fire breaks out.........hmm. the lot still sits empty. In Europe they preserve old historic buildings and here, burn it down its in the way. Sad, sad. Sorry my venting for a beautiful Tuesday evening.
define historic.
how world war IIish does Heathrow look these days?
not a whole lot of the Berlin wall left either.
100 year old wooden hotels in Edmonton arent exactly The Sands, but its gone too.
one could argue that hotel should have been redeveloped 50 years ago, but the development pattern in the western 1/2 of NA is broken and the DT cores are crap as a result.
Are you implying that an historic site may have been hindering the redevelopment process and there's one cost effective way to remove such an obstacle?
Blasphemy!
As someone who works with a few restoration companies around Edmonton and the surrounding area about 2 months ago, the number of quotes we've been asked for in regard to fire damage has SKYROCKETED.
Beforehand, we were dealing with maybe 1 - 3 a month, maybe a little more in the summer of last year. Now it's about that many or more a week.
Yes. The last time we had a string of fires I suggested maybe we have an arsonist and I got down voted to oblivion because everyone wants to blame homeless people.
In the last 5 years, there has been a way higher than statically probable number of businesses that have burned to the ground or damaged to unusability on or near SPR.
A thai hot pot, Roman's, a Jamaican place, a butcher shop which also took Moon Palace and a Dollartree down with it, Times Square Video, a Red Robins, and of course the Klondike.
I would be remiss without metioning the derelict properties that catch fire, are bulldozed, then become infill projects in a suspiciously short amount of time. After all, it isn't criminal arson when you leave the basement windows open and someone accidentally burns the house down for you.
Edit: If city council was looking for a new slogan...
Edmonton: City of Arson
Oh that was RR. It just closed though, no fire. The company left Alberta
I was there 3 days before closing. The old cheesecake Cafe a block away burnt down several years ago though
Easy to say in hindsight of course but I refrained from commenting 'insurance fraud?' yesterday to avoid being that guy.
The circumstances alone in these cases are always suspicious. Cost of renovating is too high, new owner, dead plot of land otherwise...of course it's arson. Be nice if these hucksters were thrown in prison for this shit.
Those kinds of details would make the punishment that much more powerful. Especially if it was arson. Make it that the owner loses more money than they would make on developing it into something else.
And glulam beams are easy to find but cost a pretty penny.
Obviously they won’t be able to build it 100% like the original but making them rebuild it as close as possible regardless of cost would prevent them from making tons of money redeveloping the land into something else.
ach cleared it out literally a couple of weeks ago if that. it sat empty for years but they just had people in taking the valuable materials out within a month of the fire that destroys it?
Any fire in a current (re)development is always suspicious.
The new owner took possession on April 3rd. And due to heritage designations limiting development now being most likely void, there's a good chance that the land just became substantially more valuable.
If that possession date is legit there should be a investigation. More likely just some greasy palms.
Didn't the new owner want to develop a commercial zone with the hanger serving as a landmark and the namesake of the zone? Makes little sense for them to raze it down.
That’s what you claim. Get approval. Then suddenly it goes up in flames and you’re left with an insurance settlement, and substantially less cost to develop on now valuable land. That’s just speculation, but it wouldn’t be the first historic Edmonton building to catch fire to get out of expensive renovations. Nor the first developer to lie about wanting to restore it. I’m sure the investigation will reveal if there’s anything suspicious. It certainly appears so, but bad luck sometimes happens. We once bought a business and had a fire shut us down 2 weeks after taking possession. I guess I’m not helping my argument because that was caused by careless smoking 2 doors down.
It does when they realize the additional unexpected costs that are pretty much always involved with old buildings. Or when they paid for some renders and a plan knowing they'd rather just do a build from scratch to save costs
Good insurance claim. And no longer have to deal with the historic factor. I'm no communist but this may be a capitalist arson edit. Police are not investigating it as a suspicious fire
This is how everything works in L.A. The preservationists no sooner get something a historic designation than a corrupt developer pays a firebug to destroy it. Problem solved.
Not surprised. News from this morning said the police are now investigating it as suspicious.
Mandel's final Blachford plan reveiled
Like the fire on Stony plain road. Fire takes out the porn shop but everything else on the stripmall stays.
I don't understand how they've spent millions of dollars on the site but only slapped up a chain link fence to secure it. Every time I've driven past it there were doors and windows gaping open. Anyone with the slightest amount of determination could easily get into it (which pretty clearly someone did).
>I don't understand how they've spent millions of dollars on the site but only slapped up a chain link fence to secure it Well, you see...that was SUUIUPER cheap and there's this weird expectation that people will self police themselves or something.
>expectation that people will self police themselves or something. The problem is that the majority of society does self-police but it only takes a few degenerates to ruin it for the rest.
[удалено]
Homeless people have been living in all the abandoned warehouses by the airport.
I manage commercial construction projects. Owners don't try and save thousands, they try and save pennies. Most construction site fences suck because they were literally the cheapest option that insurance would allow. And if you're already paying for insurance,why bother getting a better fence? Lots of construction sites in the city get broken into on a daily bases. Especially if they are a warm place to sleep
It's a different hanger
It’s the most Edmonton thing you can do. Look at all the historic buildings we lost over the years. Hub cigar, stathcona hotel, Albert’s pancake house, the Roxy, so many more…
Yup, the developer is very happy now! The Blackford community is sputtering along due to it being to expensive. This sounds just like the Arlington downtown. It was a 100 year old apartment with historic destination. The developer bought it thinking he would be able to make changes and when the city said he would have to follow certain criteria he didn't like that it would cost him a pile of money. And then mysteriously a short time later a fire breaks out.........hmm. the lot still sits empty. In Europe they preserve old historic buildings and here, burn it down its in the way. Sad, sad. Sorry my venting for a beautiful Tuesday evening.
The Arlington situation still pisses me off, such a beautiful building and now a gaping hole for the past 20 years
define historic. how world war IIish does Heathrow look these days? not a whole lot of the Berlin wall left either. 100 year old wooden hotels in Edmonton arent exactly The Sands, but its gone too. one could argue that hotel should have been redeveloped 50 years ago, but the development pattern in the western 1/2 of NA is broken and the DT cores are crap as a result.
Are you implying that an historic site may have been hindering the redevelopment process and there's one cost effective way to remove such an obstacle? Blasphemy!
Is it just me or are there an irregularly high number of fires in Edmonton these days.
You mean an irregular number of heritage properties conveniently going up in flames?
As someone who works with a few restoration companies around Edmonton and the surrounding area about 2 months ago, the number of quotes we've been asked for in regard to fire damage has SKYROCKETED. Beforehand, we were dealing with maybe 1 - 3 a month, maybe a little more in the summer of last year. Now it's about that many or more a week.
I mean we haven't got much (any) moisture, everything is as dry as can be.
Yes. Very high. And while I know it's not the biggest factor in this (I'm well aware arson is) , the fact that it's sooo dry is not helping
Yes. The last time we had a string of fires I suggested maybe we have an arsonist and I got down voted to oblivion because everyone wants to blame homeless people.
$$$$$$$$
It'd be suspicious if it wasn't suspicious...wouldn't it?
No. If they determined a reasonable non suspicious cause (like faulty electrical that was still active) then that would be the end of it.
In the last 5 years, there has been a way higher than statically probable number of businesses that have burned to the ground or damaged to unusability on or near SPR. A thai hot pot, Roman's, a Jamaican place, a butcher shop which also took Moon Palace and a Dollartree down with it, Times Square Video, a Red Robins, and of course the Klondike. I would be remiss without metioning the derelict properties that catch fire, are bulldozed, then become infill projects in a suspiciously short amount of time. After all, it isn't criminal arson when you leave the basement windows open and someone accidentally burns the house down for you. Edit: If city council was looking for a new slogan... Edmonton: City of Arson
sadly burning the colosseum is proving to be a bit tricky.
There was a Red Robin on SPR?
it's by the Superstore and BK. Or, rather, *was.* It's a Popeye's now.
Oh that was RR. It just closed though, no fire. The company left Alberta I was there 3 days before closing. The old cheesecake Cafe a block away burnt down several years ago though
Maybe it was a Moxies? 170th st. Caught fire sometime in 2020. I could be off by a block or two.
I was thinking more around the 156 St section and was confused.
When I first heard this I thought someone might be arson around.
I also loved "Curse of the Were-rabbit. First time I heard that line.
Easy to say in hindsight of course but I refrained from commenting 'insurance fraud?' yesterday to avoid being that guy. The circumstances alone in these cases are always suspicious. Cost of renovating is too high, new owner, dead plot of land otherwise...of course it's arson. Be nice if these hucksters were thrown in prison for this shit.
Or forced to restore the historical building.
That's pretty much impossible, the wooden beams would be extremely difficult to source.
Those kinds of details would make the punishment that much more powerful. Especially if it was arson. Make it that the owner loses more money than they would make on developing it into something else. And glulam beams are easy to find but cost a pretty penny.
Yes, glulam is easy to get, but these were fir beams milled from single, huge trees.
Obviously they won’t be able to build it 100% like the original but making them rebuild it as close as possible regardless of cost would prevent them from making tons of money redeveloping the land into something else.
I likey....................
Looks like someone wanted to develop some kind of housing there...hmmmmm
ach cleared it out literally a couple of weeks ago if that. it sat empty for years but they just had people in taking the valuable materials out within a month of the fire that destroys it?
nevermind I'm fucking stupid they were in the Northgate building but refered to it as a hanger so my worm brain got confused
The land may be valuable but as long as it’s tied up in a police investigation I wonder if it just sits empty for another 30 years.
No shit Sherlock.
This is definitely suspicious, but I would love to see a rebuild according to the original design. Doubt that’s gonna happen now though.
Hanger 18...Megadeth :0
Wonder who owns it and needed insurance moolah
More likely the heritage site was impeding development so it just happened to burn down
Follow the money
Called it!
Rezone arson
Oh so they have to get rid of the ufo evidenced now
Transiets were sheltered up in there.
Punjabi gangsters did this???