The owners of 322 to 336 King Street East—the vacant lot on the southwest corner at Wellington—are testing the waters to see if anyone is interested in negotiating a purchase.
Fifteen years ago, in 2010, the last remaining structures on the property were demolished after years of neglect. At the time, the buildings were deemed to be “in danger of imminent collapse.”
Now, the owners have listed the property for $1 through RE/MAX, a clear signal they are trying to gauge market interest.
2010 Meeting with Denningers and Bob Bratina
Back in 2010, the lands were owned by R. Denninger Ltd.
A few days after I published the story below, Mahesh Butani arranged a meeting with the owner of Denninger’s, Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina, and myself.
I recall the owner saying he planned to build on the site within two years. Bratina, for his part, said he had “100 percent confidence” that the development would proceed. The two-year timeline was significant: because the building had been demolished under emergency circumstances, Hamilton’s bylaws required that a replacement structure be built within two years.
Each time I walk past the property, I remember this meeting—and the unfulfilled promise.
June 7, 2010 Story
Here’s my June 7, 2010 story:
Demolition began yesterday on an unsafe building at a downtown intersection.
Unlike with recent city-ordered demolitions, there has been no public outrage.
Community advocate Matt Jelly, organizer of the grassroots Bylaw Crawl, and Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina say the building’s demolition reflects the city’s increased vigilance with enforcing building standards in the downtown core.
A recent engineering report said the building at 322-326 King St. E. at Wellington, estimated to be 60 to 70 years old, is “in danger of imminent collapse” and the city issued an unsafe order requiring it to be demolished. It’s owned by R. Denninger Ltd., the specialty food shop, and once housed street-level retail space and eight apartments above it.
In August 2009, Denninger’s applied for a demolition permit for the building with the stipulation that a replacement building be built within two years or a fine of $160,000 would be imposed against the company. The permit was approved by council but not issued.
With the unsafe order, the fine no longer applies if the land remains vacant.
“I’m pretty sure that lot won’t remain empty,” Bratina said. “I’ve heard two proposals for that site.”
No applications for building permits have yet been requested for the site.
Jelly said he is not opposed to the demolition.
“I don’t think every building should be saved,” he said. “I would just hope that the developer is acting in good faith and does plan to rebuild on the site.”
Attempts to reach a Denninger’s spokesperson were unsuccessful.
Production Details
v. 1.0.0
Published: June 4, 2025
Last updated: June 4, 2025
Author: Joey Coleman
Update Record
v. 1.0.0 original version