text:
In the world of enterprise programming, the mainstream is broad and deep. Code is written predominantly in one of a few major languages. For some shops, this means Java; for others, it's C# or PHP. Sometimes, enterprise coders will dabble in C++ or another common language used for high-performance tasks such as game programming, all of which turn around and speak SQL to the database.
Programmers looking for work in enterprise shops would be foolish not to learn the languages that underlie this paradigm, yet a surprising number of niche languages are fast beginning to thrive in the enterprise. Look beyond the mainstays, and you'll find several languages that are beginning to provide solutions to increasingly common problems, as well as old-guard niche languages that continue to occupy redoubts. All offer capabilities compelling enough to justify learning a new way to juggle brackets, braces, and other punctuation marks.
[ Keep up on key application development insights with the Fatal Exception blog and Developer World newsletter. | See how the latest Python IDEs and PHP tools fared in our recent InfoWorld Test Center reviews. ]
While the following seven niche languages offer features that can't be found in the dominant languages, many rely on the dominant languages to exist. Some run on top of the Java Virtual Machine, essentially taking advantage of the Java team's engineering. And when Microsoft built C#, it explicitly aimed to make the virtual machine open to other languages. That detail may help make deployment easier, but it doesn't matter much to the programmer at creation time.
Either way, these seven languages are quickly gaining converts in the enterprise. Perhaps it's time to start investigating their merits.
Programming languages on the rise: Python
There seems to be two sorts of people who love Python: those who hate brackets, and scientists. The former helped create the language by building a version of Perl that is easier to read and not as chock-full of opening and closing brackets as a C descendant. Fast-forward several years, and the solution was good enough to be the first language available on Google's AppEngine -- a clear indication Python has the kind of structure that makes it easy to scale in the cloud, one of the biggest challenges for enterprise-grade computing.
[ For a look at the wide-ranging flock of Python IDEs, see "InfoWorld review: Nine fine Python development tools." ]
Python's popularity in scientific labs is a bit hard to explain, given that, unlike Stephen Wolfram's Mathematica for mathematicians, the language never offered any data structures or elements explicitly tuned to meet the needs of scientists. Python creator Guido von Rossum believes Python caught on in the labs because "scientists often need to improvise when trying to interpret results, so they are drawn to dynamic languages which allow them to work very quickly and see results almost immediately."


text:
It's great that we want to preserve the friezes on 150 Main Street West, but what about the building itself?
By Ryan McGreal
Published February 11, 2011
this article has been updated
We're not seriously going to sit back and watch yet another in a long, ignoble line of heritage buildings get demolished in the name of narrow expediency ... are we?
We already have decades of clear evidence supporting a strong preference for adaptive reuse of existing buildings over demolition, particularly in structurally sound, architecturally significant buildings like the Fed.
This isn't a business vs. heritage argument. Heritage buildings have tangible value for economic uplift, and adaptive reuse confers real net efficiencies and benefits.
Former Revenue Canada Building at Main and Caroline
After the recent annoucement by property developer Darko Vranich that he plans to demolish the former Revenue Canada building at 150 Main Street West (at Caroline St.), the cry went up about Hamilton artist Elizabeth Holbrook's six bas-relief sculptures that adorn the building's facade.
It's great that we want to preserve the friezes - and that Vranich seems willing to allow this to happen - but what about the building itself?
The building is beautiful, structurally sound, emblematic of its time and a good candidate for adaptive reuse. In the hands of an imaginative developer, the L-shaped lee of the building would be perfect for a striking slender tower.
Revenue Canada building view from behind
Vranich has owned the old building since he bought it from the Federal Government in 2004 for $1.2 million, stating his plan to convert it into a condominium with 170 or 180 units.
The building had already been identified in 2003 as a good candidate for conversion into condos, and was specifically named in the 2006 Hamilton Residential Intensification Study.
Vranich quickly submitted plans and a request for $4 million in funding through the Downtown Residential Loan Program. The City approved the request for a conditional loan in September 2004. It sat on the Residential Loan Program books as an as-yet unfunded, pending development project for the next four years.
In late 2006, Vranich applied to the City's "Enterprise Zone Municipal Realty Tax Incentive Grant Program", an incentive program that essentially returns the increased tax assessment on a renovated downtown property back to the owner for several years. For condo developments, the developer is allowed to pass the tax grant onto the buyers of the individual condo units.
In 2008, four years after Vranich bought the building, the City canceled the Downtown Residential Loan offer "due to the owner not proceeding with the residential development project".
In 2009, Vranich applied for a grant through the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program 2009 Extension to build affordable housing in the old Revenue Canada building, but the application did not pass the program's eligibility criteria.
In May 2008, the OPP filed criminal charges against Gord Moodie, the head of the City's Downtown Residential Loan Program, for allegedly accepting a $5,000 bribe from Darko's son Denis on behalf of the elder Vranich.
The alleged bribe was in the form of a check dated November 11, 2005 from the Gown and Gavel Restaurant, a Hess Village pub that Vranich co-owned. The OPP indicated their belief that the cheque was a kickback for considering the municipal loan for the Revenue Canada building.
Denis Vranich and Gord Moodie were both charged under Section 123 of the Criminal Code, which reads:
(1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years who directly or indirectly gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to a municipal official or to anyone for the benefit of a municipal official - or, being a municipal official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for themselves or another person - a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the official
(a) to abstain from voting at a meeting of the municipal council or a committee of the council;
(b) to vote in favour of or against a measure, motion or resolution;
(c) to aid in procuring or preventing the adoption of a measure, motion or resolution; or
(d) to perform or fail to perform an official act.
Influencing municipal official
(2) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years who influences or attempts to influence a municipal official to do anything mentioned in paragraphs (1)(a) to (d) by
(a) suppression of the truth, in the case of a person who is under a duty to disclose the truth;
(b) threats or deceit; or
(c) any unlawful means.
In September 2009, Superior Court Justice James Ramsay dismissed the charge against Moodie, concluding Moodie did not qualify as a "municipal official" under the Criminal Code but was merely a municipal employee.
Section 123 defines a "municipal official" as:
a member of a municipal council or a person who holds an office under a municipal government.
By this time, Moodie was no longer working for the City. He was fired in April 2009, after he pleaded guilty to impaired driving and driving with a suspended licence. It was his second drunk driving offence.
At the time of his second arrest, he was driving a vehicle registered to Vrancor Real Estate Corp, a development company owned by Denis Vranich.
The old Revenue Canada building has sat derelict and undeveloped throughout all these affairs.
For several years, it has been on the radar of the Municipal Heritage Committee (LACAC) for years, identified as a Building of Concern.
In March 2008, the Heritage Committee noticed that in addition to the graffiti and broken windows, the building was now being used to store furniture and mattresses, which were propped up against the window.
Committee member Michael Adkins and then-Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina notified the City's Property Standards office about the building's apparent use as a furniture warehouse. By the end of the year, the building had been secured at street level but was still being used to store mattresses.
Finally, in August 2009 the City levied a $10,500 fine for violating the Ontario Fire Code. The office building was not coded as a warehouse, and the sprinkler system was not operational.
Meanwhile, in March 2009 Vranich installed a new parking kiosk near George St.
In June 2010, a proposal was floated to designate the six sculptures on the building as protected heritage features.
In July, the Heritage Committee noted that it was impossible to see into the building to assess whether it was being used to store materials that "may endanger the heritage assets of the building" and moved to ask City staff to investigate.
In August 2010, Vranich claimed that he would start developing the block framed by Main, Bay, King and Caroline if the City went ahead with a West Harbour stadium.
However, the City ultimately committed to a partial rebuild of Ivor Wynne Stadium instead of a new stadium at the West Harbour.
Now Vrancor intends to demolish the building at 150 Main West, ostensibly to build a 140 unit, 20-storey condominium on the site.
The Municipal Heritage Committee submitted a recommendation to the Planning Committee on February 1, 2011 to designate 150 Main Street West as a Municipal Heritage building under the Ontario Heritage Act. They cited the following heritage criteria:
Thanks to the intrepid, tireless volunteers at Citizens at City Hall (CATCH), you can read a full transcript of the Planning Committee meeting.
Tim McCabe, the Director of Planning and Economic Development, noted that the recommendation was "done as a rush to stop a demolition permit that is before us" and argued that issuing a notice to designate "at the ninth hour" would provide "uncertainty to our investment community".
At the Committee meeting, Councillor Terry Whitehead pointed out that the Federal Government sold the property to Vranich along with a covenant committing the owner to "conserve, protect and maintain the heritage features and characteristics" of the building and "not to raze to the ground or otherwise demolish the entire building located on the lands."
Vranich signed the covenant when he bought the property.
Asked directly about this covenant, McCabe said that the covenant is between Vranich and the Federal Government and it is not the City's job to enforce it.
Councillor Whitehead asked whether the City has an "ethical responsibility" to inform the Federal Government about Vranich's intent to demolish the building.
Lisa Pasternak from the City's Legal department responded that the Feds could be involved "informally" if "there was a desire to get them involved", but that the Covenant "can't affect [Vranich's] building code process".
The Committee voted against the Heritage Committee's recommendation to designate the building and agreed to issue the demolition permit.
The next day, Government Services Canada sent a leter to Vranich stating that the building cannot be demolished.
The letter, written by Robert Brick, states:
Please be reminded that the Government of Canada sold the property with a covenant that runs with the land in perpetuity which, in addition to protecting certain designated features and facades, requires that you and subsequent purchasers not 'raze to the ground or otherwise demolish the entire building'.
It adds that the Federal Government will ask the City to refuse the demolition permit request.
150 Main West, view from southeast
Vranich also owns the property just east of the old Revenue Canada building, the site of the old Hamilton Motor Products (HMP) automobile dealership at Main and Bay, which was constructed in 1911 and expanded in 1917-18. (HMP moved to a new dealership at Rymal Rd. and Hwy. 20, but General Motors decided in May 2009 not to renew its sales and service contract as part of a major restructuring.)
Council granted Vranich permission to demolish the building in October 2007 and it was demolished in November in November 2007, ostensibly to make room for a 15-story Hilton Homewood Suites hotel. That has not happened.
According to Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr in an email to RTH, "I have been told by Vrancor the project (ultimately five major projects in one) will be breaking ground very soon."
Farr, who held a press conference with Vranich on February 11 in regards to preserving the bas-relief friezes, concluded:
My intent was to save the Friezes and encourage positive growth in our core. The Vrancor Group have told me they are committed to on both fronts. I am hopeful we (all of us) will be satisfied with the results.
Vranich is apparently negotiating with the Federal Government.
Update: This article originally stated that Vrancor owns the site of an illegal parking lot at the corner of Main Street and Bay Street. This is incorrect: the HMP site, at 132 Main Street West, is an L-shaped lot that wraps to the east and north of the parking lot at the corner, which is at 114 Main Street West and is not owned by Vrancor. RTH regrets the error.
By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 00:28:05
I don't get it. How does he make money? Near as I can tell, his process is to buy up old buildings, sit on them until they become dilapidated, and maybe convert a few into parking lots. How is that a business model? Where's the revenue? Are these old buildings really of such completely negative value?
By David Reid (anonymous) | Posted March 11, 2011 at 22:08:38 in reply to Comment 59618
The unfortunate answer to that is that a parking lot in downtown Hamilton earns more profit due to low overhead, than office or residential space per square foot. Building in the area is costly and refurbishing an existing building even more so with operating costs and taxes associated with such a venture. The project for restoration and expansion can go forward with fundraising or investment but is unlikely to gain significant returns on such a large investment. The city of Hamilton would have much to gain however, from such an investment garnering business and improving real estate values just as the opposite transpired with the demolition of the HMP building. A building that in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver or Calgary, would have had developers scrambling to retrofit into profitable units obtainable in Hamilton but without the necessary funding or city council vision.
By drb (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 01:47:58 in reply to Comment 59618
Vrancor owns Hotels and clubs all over the the place. Their "investments" in Hamilton properties are speculative.
Losses in undeveloped property in Hamilton are easily off-set elsewhere.
By TnT (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 00:29:46
Am I right in thinking he is buddy buddy with Bratina?
By drb (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 01:19:28
Hmmmm... Quite a track record. Between father and son, illegal parking lots, derelict buildings, failure to abide by a covenant with the Federal government, an allegation of bribing a municipal employee, and wasn't there a civil court sexual assault award against the son?
These two are quite a pair. And McCabe is worried about "uncertainty in the investment community"? Given their history in Hamilton I'd be worried about investing in them.
By hammy (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 05:12:23
Comment edited by hammy on 2011-02-12 05:14:30
By jason (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 08:45:44
He's planning 5 projects on these sites? Man, I wish I owned a company that specialized in low quality stucco.
If this guy wants any goodwill or confidence from the city or public, he should build his condo project 7 steps from the Federal Building on his illegal parking lot. Surely if there is a market for a 20 storey condo at the fed building site, there is a market for one 7 feet away.
This is why we need an architectural design board. Based on Vranich's track record, this will be the ugliest complex of buildings ever built in the city. I'd much rather see empty lots for another decade than low quality buildings.
Also, is nobody else concerned that the new 20 storey proposal will hold less units than the original proposal for the federal building? In other words, expect most of this site to house a parking lot.
I came across this beauty quote from Bratina in 2007: "they don't just sit on properties. They do things with them".
ARTICLE: Developer owns troubled building What will Denis Vranich do with Dundurn eyesore that cost $1.5 million?
Steve Arnold and Lisa Grace Marr The Hamilton Spectator (Oct 2, 2007)
Denis Vranich is the latest owner of 220 Dundurn St. -- a sorry four-acre plot of land with a large building that has at times acted as a hosiery factory, school board storage facility and flophouse.
Land registry records show Vranich purchased the site Jan. 31 for $1.5 million under the name 220 Dundurn St. Inc.
The building on the site has been plagued with problems that have intensified since 2004 when its third-floor caught fire under then-suspicious circumstances. In 2005, under the ownership of a numbered company in Thornhill, the city had dozens of calls a week from residents complaining about the derelict state of the building.
Brian McHattie, Ward 1 councillor, said the plot at the corner of Chatham and Dundurn streets has been at the top of his priority list since he was elected four years ago.
"It is one of the great frustrations in the city how these abandoned buildings can bring down neighbourhoods," he said.
McHattie said he met with Vranich twice since he purchased the property and while there were no definite plans discussed, Vranich indicated he hoped to submit building plans to the city by the end of November.
"I'm not getting too excited except I'll give him a call about it at that time."
McHattie said the city has received two property standard complaints since Vranich purchased the property.
"We've sent over cleanup crews and just added it to his tax bill -- just what we've done with previous owners."
Paul Buckle, acting co-ordinator of the municipal law enforcement division, said two orders to clear up the property and a third to secure it against trespassers have been issued. The boarding up of windows was done by a city contractor. The status of the cleanup work remains uncertain, but Buckle said if work is being done at the property now, it is likely ordered by Vranich.
Vranich did not return phone calls from The Hamilton Spectator. His father, developer Darko Vranich, refused to comment.
Since 1998, the building has been through five owners -- the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board sold it for $400,000 to a company called Dundurn Street Loffts Inc. which planned to turn it into loft apartments. A year after the purchase Dundurn Loffts gave a $1.5 million mortgage to Mississauga-based Retrocom Growth Fund Inc. Retrocom took possession of the property under power of sale in 2003 and sold it to 1574296 Ontario Inc., of Thornhill, for $2 million. The numbered company then sold it this year to Vranich for $1.5 million.
Neighbour Mark Powell, was delighted by the chance something might finally happen with a building which has been a blight on the neighbourhood for years. "If we can do anything to expedite something happening there I'm sure the whole community will get behind it," he said.
Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina said it was his understanding that Denis has a business separate from his father.
But Bratina said that both father and son don't "just sit on properties, (they) do things with them."
Darko Vranich owns the former Hamilton Motor Products (HMP) building on Bay Street and is proposing a 120-room Hilton Homewood Suites Hotel at that site. He is also behind plans for a 100-room Holiday Inn Express at King and Queen streets and a 60-room Days Inn at Main and Spring streets.
Bratina said Darko Vranich told him he intends to submit plans to the city's building department in October, which will have details about the Hilton hotel complex.
"He's had to change his plans for the (HMP) building at the behest of the heritage committee," said Bratina.
Darko Vranich, with partner Steve Pocrnic, is also behind a plan to transform ratty buildings on Main Street West, Hess Street South and Queen Street South into modern loft-office combinations, while Denis Vranich and partner John Bukovac are behind plans for a $30-million hotel-office project at Golf Links and Stone Church roads in Ancaster's Meadowlands.
Denis Vranich, 31, pleaded guilty in court in September to sexually assaulting a female bartender at a Hess Street business where he is property owner and manager. He is to be sentenced Oct. 30.
He is not the first owner of the Dundurn Street building to find himself in court -- in 2005 Dundurn Loffts owner Adam J. Stelmaszynski of Brantford and two of his companies were convicted of four charges under the federal Excise Tax Act in a Brantford court.
Comment edited by jason on 2011-02-12 08:47:08
By drb (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:14:54 in reply to Comment 59624
Well Smith, your "logic" is flawed. The "part of the city" that you mention was built by industry. Factories, office buildings, and commercial properties have been sold to free-market multinationals that then shut them down and move jobs and operations to nations with few labour or safety/environmental laws. The loss of income in this "part of the city" was never in-filled, and lead to the slow bleed that results in speculative buyers and abandoned properties.
Your blessed free market created this situation, not "lefties and whiners".
And your "government freebies" quip? Glib, but nothing from the government is free. If you want to save 17% on your property taxes you may want to concentrate your efforts on getting the social service costs (down-loaded to the municipality by the Harris PCs, maintained by The McGuinty Libs) up-loaded to the province.
Your attempt to draw conclusions from the random joining of words is simple-minded. From all of your compilations of figures and statistics I somehow expected more from you.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 12:46:47 in reply to Comment 59630
By Woody10 (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 14:43:28 in reply to Comment 59639
Great idea. I think I'll start up a brewery here in the old building on BArton. Oh, wait, I can't. That big multinational took that posibility away from me, and everyone else who wishes to compete fairly out of it.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 17:38:21 in reply to Comment 59643
By Woody10 (registered) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 08:48:05 in reply to Comment 59772
Sent them a letter already, bet you didn't?
By jason (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 10:34:05 in reply to Comment 59624
sorry, we forgot that it's communist to hold multi-millionaires to societal standards that the rest of us adhere to.
Maybe I'll buy every house on your street, except yours, and demolish them all and leave weedy lots there for the next few decades. I'm sure your property value will be just fine. The free market will simply do it's thing, right?
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 10:56:15
Ask yourself why the downtown is the only place this is happening? Why isn't it happening in Ancaster, Dundas, Stoney Creek, on the Mountain, Oakville, Burlington, Mississauga, Toronto, etc.
What is unique about downtown Hamilton that makes evil developers want to destroy the neighbourhood but nowhere else in the GTA? Is it a conspiracy?
Perhaps, just perhaps, it has to do with government policies that tax property investment at high rates, plus spending policies that encourage consumption but not work.
You want new private investment downtown, great. But the only answer I hear from RTH'ers is more government spending. WH stadium, LRT, new roads, etc.
I thought the goal was new PRIVATE investment, NOT new taxpayer investment. What am I missing?
By Tybalt (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 00:28:03 in reply to Comment 59628
Property investments aren't taxed at high rates. They are taxed at low rates. Particularly given that capital appreciation is only half taxed, and then is deferred until disposition.
Learn something about tax policy before you start to talk about it, son.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 10:43:03 in reply to Comment 59715
As compared to other areas, downtown properties ARE taxed at high rates...
$200k investment downtown Hamilton * 1.538% = $3,076
$200k investment in Ancaster * 1.391% = $2,782
$200k investment in Dundas * 1.374% = $2,748
$200k investment in Stoney Creek * 1.356% = $2,712
$200k investment in Burlington * 1.04% = $2,080
Therefore, a person that invests $200k buying a house and hoping to build equity, will have the hardest time doing that if they buy in the old city of Hamilton.
Let's say home values go up an average of 3% every year after inflation. In this scenario, the homeowner in Hamilton will be left with 3% - 1.538% = 1.462% after property taxes. The Burlington homeowner will have 3% - 1.04% = 1.96% after tax return.
If the goal is to increase the amount of new investment downtown Hamilton, shouldn't we be giving people tax incentives, rather than tax penalties?
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:15:41
Jason, I know you admire Portland. I have never been, but it looks like a nice city. In that state, there is a property tax cap which limits local government spending.
From 2005-2009, the City of Portland increased spending by 23.6%, while population increased by 4.6%. In contrast, Hamilton increased spending by 30.2%, while population increased only 1.3%. After adjusting for population growth, spending in Portland was 19%, while in Hamilton it was 28.9%. That's 52.1% more public spending in Hamilton than Portland from 2005-2009.
Is it possible that if we followed the Portland model of restrained government here in Hamilton, we would encourage private individuals to invest, rather than having them look to the government to kick start projects?
By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:24:40
Now, what have we learned?
a) Don't sell important parts of government-owned real estate to shady speculators and developers.
b) Don't give twice the purchase price of that government-owned real estate to the shady developer in "incentives" and "loans"
c) Don't expect anybody to live up to deals made with the Federal Government that involve not simply levelling whatever they buy (cough US Steel).
d) Sometimes those nasty cynical people are absolutely right about what shady developers are going to do with buildings.
When this is done we'll be able to see from bay to Hess. Now how much of that land is owned by you-know-who? And am I the only one who sees more parking directly next to Hess Village (also largely a Vranich holding) as a serious public safety threat?
Comment edited by Undustrial on 2011-02-12 11:25:43
By hammy (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 14:54:56
Comment edited by hammy on 2011-02-12 15:11:26
By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 16:36:37 in reply to Comment 59644
By the way... I'm assuming congratulations are in order. 'Mcgreal' et al seem to have such power in this town that they were capable of scuppering what (presumably) was a sure-thing.
Betcha didn't realize you'd been imbued with so much cachet!
Thanks to The Enlightened One, aka 'hammy' for pointing this out.
So, 'Mcgreal'; how are you going to (mis)use your powers next? Can't wait for hammy's commentary. Not.
Comment edited by mystoneycreek on 2011-02-12 16:37:10
By PeterF (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 19:09:39 in reply to Comment 59649
It is comical, when someone like hampster goes from saying RTH is a minority without a voice to actually saying that RTH set the whole WH agenda. Almost as much nonsense as IW cannot work anymore. We will not play at WH never, ever. EM, driveway to driveway experience. MIP, OK for us, CP lands, that will work. Aldershot, now that is the ticket!!! You know what IW WILL work. Sorry we put you guys through this.
By Tyrone (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 15:28:20
Hammy - I ask this honestly and as a straight forward question: What exactly is your issue? Is it that you simply disagree with what the people on this site talk about or is it something more significant? The reason I ask is that you come across as a really angry person as opposed just having a different point of view.
By just me (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 15:46:02
re un-nameable troll-brain nearby (we can't mention 'cause it'd only encouraging her/him): RTH will soon require a minor pass level on an intelligence test administered by the hosts (blab dopes) "hosting" CHML's 'call-ins'. That should be a threshold low enough to allow many to post to RTH but high enough to reduce painful junk messages. I know, an IQ test won't really keep anybody out except those who deserve real help
By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 16:27:28
When's the next RTH 'live, and in-person' get-together?
Can we take up a collection for Joey C to webcast it?
And have 'hammy' as the guest speaker?
Better yet...how about a roast? A la 'Dean Martin Celebrity Roasts'?
'Roast hammy' Mmm-mmm-good.
We could make it a charity event. A fund-raiser.
Can't wait to see the highlights...
By NortheastWind (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 18:13:50
Ryan says "the is building is beautiful" - Whaaat? It is ugly. Save the sculptures, tear it down and build a beautiful modern building at the entrance to our downtown.
By Tybalt (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 00:32:21 in reply to Comment 59650
Myself, I love the building.
The fed building is at its low point in the cycle of historical appreciation right now, but it is heading upwards. (Almost all buildings go through a cycle of public esteem, that hits its lowest point when a building is around 50 years old if I remember correctly).
By PeterF (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 18:58:51
Hampster, be consistent!!! Are we pinkos or neocons??? Cannot be both. Go to your ticat forum and complain about "what would have been" if we only accepted BY's offer to build at the EM. He offered us OUR money to build the velodrome and an amphitheatre at WH. Try reading sometime before you post.
Comment edited by PeterF on 2011-02-12 19:10:16
By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 19:23:18
Blame RTH, blame the communists, blame the west harbour stadium, the NIMBY crowd, the heritage advocates, the government, the homeless people downtown and the spectator.
Blame anybody but the people who actually own the building, make all the decisions, and have a track record of doing exactly the same thing on countless sites within a few minutes walk. Surely, the people responsible for submitting the demolition permit can't be blamed...
At what point is this just denial? All of this is on public record - the bribery, the fire code violations, the promise not to "raze" the building... When exactly are we going to start holding developers accountable for this tomfoolery?
By Scamich (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 19:33:58
@NorthEastWind: Have you seen Vranich's previous additions to downtown? The stucco-covered retirement home (former hotel) behind the new Federal Building on Bay St?
I sure would love a stucco tower welcoming all those to Hamilton. "In Hamilton; Where Quality Never Counts"
So, don't tear it down. Renovate, market as 'heritage' lofts. Then build a brand new, quality, slim tower beside it on the old HMP footprint. Maybe Stinson can get in on this? He did it with 1 King West in Toronto.
By hammy (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 20:55:19
Comment edited by hammy on 2011-02-12 21:39:36
By drb (registered) - website | Posted February 12, 2011 at 21:45:48 in reply to Comment 59656
Hahahahahaaaaaaahahahahaha!! Hammy, you are priceless, and you don't even know it. You're a character in a Beckett play... you're the love child of George Bush Jr and Sarah Palin.
By PeterF (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:07:15 in reply to Comment 59659
He cannot be for real, he must be just putting on this act. If it is for real..... wow, how sad. Bang on with the Beckett play.
By PeterF (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 21:34:47 in reply to Comment 59656
Hamster, so since you are registered at RTH, you are a pinko, neocon RTHer?. Every time you post your stupidity reaches a new level.
By hammy (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 21:38:21
Comment edited by hammy on 2011-02-12 21:41:16
By Emptor (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 21:57:42 in reply to Comment 59658
You are registered, that pretty much makes you a member. A jackass; but nonetheless, a member! Welcome to the team sizzle chest!
By Jeff_Stock (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:17:48
This pithy online bickering is pathetic. It reeks of cowardice. It is easy to spew anger while hiding behind a computer screen.
Let me offer a quote from the late Jane Jacobs:
"Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings."
Let's hope something new and wonderful comes from this staple of the core.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:23:22
The city should also get working on cleaning up the Rheem site. I know how bad all you RTH'ers felt when you lost the stadium debate, so it's the least the city can do to make it up. What would we all like to see there once it's rehabilitated? Condos? Retail? Social housing?
By Emptor (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:47:51 in reply to Comment 59665
Every citizen of this city lost the debate. You CHML'ers were screaming at the top of your lungs that stadiums don't city build, when you thought the stadium was going to WH but your leader told you he wanted con fed park or EM. Now that you're at IW again, it is all about the city building at a location that has never been able to city build. The one location that definitely and unequivocally does not and has not been able to make money for this city or the Ticats. Yeah, you won the debate, right! And Bob Young has investors and Santa Claus is real!
By Jeff_Stock (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:27:43
A Smith, would you be willing to offer some constructive advice? What do you wish for this site?
By Woody10 (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:41:03
A Velodrome and amphitheatre. Maybe build a new YMCA there as well. How about a Great Lakes/RCN Naval history museum (better located near the Haida). Just random thoughts.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:44:38
Jeff, here are some ideas, because I can't seem to think of any myself...
By Jeff_Stock (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 22:57:26
Interesting site. The article regarding the rezoning of manufacturing in NYC to residential reminds me of an issue that was brought up in an urban ecology course I took a couple years ago. Essentially the problem is that when a city begins to redevelop with a focus on residential reclamation, a hole is created in the core where jobs used to exist. People living in the core who have moved into these converted lofts have to commute out of town. A perfect example is what's happening in downtown Toronto right now.
Something definitely worth considering as the downtown rejuvenates.
By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted February 12, 2011 at 23:52:44
I'm hearing rumours from someone I know well in the building trades that the Board of Education will be moving to the West Harbour. I hope this is not the case but the scuttlebutt is that underground utility locates have been done for the project. He also said something about McMaster taking over the Board of Ed building for a medical research location. I'm pretty sure these projects have been floated in the Spec before as well, but from what I'm hearing they are gaining traction.
Comment edited by mrjanitor on 2011-02-12 23:54:10
By jason (registered) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 00:04:48 in reply to Comment 59671
oh brother. The school board is almost as bad as Vranich. Now our WH will have a huge, one storey box surrounded by hundreds of parking spaces. Way to use the most precious water-view land in the city.
Comment edited by jason on 2011-02-13 00:05:24
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 00:14:04
Jason, what is the goal for this land? Is it jobs, tourism, living, entertainment? Cleaning it up is easy, but what do you do with a blank slate?
By jason (registered) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 08:49:38 in reply to Comment 59673
I'd like to see a high density, mixed use community. Sort of like Portland's Pearl District or Vancouvers False Creek area. Lots of residential needs to be included. And then other uses that encompass the areas you mention. Make it a 365 neighbourhood/destination in a true urban sense. Very walkable and connected by transit. Make it Hamilton's model 21st Century neighbourhood. The same way Westdale was the model planned neighbourhood in it's time. That's my two cents anyhow.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 10:43:03 in reply to Comment 59677
Jason, you and other RTH'ers should go to his office, bring along some pictures of what you have in mind and then ask him to start funding it.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 10:47:17 in reply to Comment 59684
...unless of course you're too scared of rejection.
You're not scared are you Jason?
By PeterF (registered) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 01:17:51
Something like the distillery section of TO would be amazing. Of course some of the buildings already existed. Makes you think about all the cotton mills that were once all over this city at one time.
Speaking of NYC, the last time I was there, I ran into a fellow who explained how the repurposing of buildings tended to happen there in certain areas of Manhatten. As companies, wharehouses old hotels etc. moved on and the area became derelict. Artists and artisans would rent them for basically next to nothing. As the area became hip, the rents went up, the spaces renovated and places like SOHO become trendy and cool to live in. The starving artists then move on, the wealthy ones open galleries and so on. One place in Brooklyn is just starting to get super expensive but has gone through the same type of evolution as SOHO is DUMBO. They love acronyms. Makes you think, maybe James ST. N is going through this now??
By jason (registered) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 08:50:10 in reply to Comment 59674
I'll be sitting in Distillery tomorrow. Can't wait! I walked the Brooklyn Bridge earlier this year and was struck mainly by two things: The redevelopment district along Brooklyns waterfront. Tons of old warehouses being repurposed as living spaces and work places. And of course, I was in awe of Gehry's new tower in Manhattan. Wow. What a beauty.
Comment edited by jason on 2011-02-13 08:51:53
By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted February 13, 2011 at 02:07:48
It isn't up to RTH to provide an alternative building plan. It's up to the people who bought the building and accepted millions in public funding to provide one.
Anyone noticed that Vranich is also seeking control of the Convention Centre?
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 11:02:10 in reply to Comment 59675
Undustrial >> It isn't up to RTH to provide an alternative building plan.
And it isn't up to me to make pretty girls smile, but I do it anyway. Clue in genius, if you aspire to something good, you need to show some passion and fight.
I bet if you wanted to you could find a way to buy that building, fix it up and sell it for a profit. Are you willing to try or are you happier pointing fingers?
By Realist (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 08:46:50
Tear that building down. It's obsolete and an inefficient energy hog and can never hope to get anything close to LEED, it's also full of asbestos that many belive killed a number of public servants after they developed Mesothelioma while working in there. The Oncologist report I read from the lawsuit that was filed by the victims families stated the the icidence of cancer in that building was 2.5 times the rate found in the general population.
Anyone here want to buy a condo there?
By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted February 13, 2011 at 10:18:44 in reply to Comment 59676
can never hope to get anything close to LEED,
LEEDs is a joke. A certification typically costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and need not actually even look at the finished building's performance. It's a marketing scheme for new developments and a make-work project for highly paid consultants - not an effective building code.
Why not knock down every old building in town that can't cough up a six figure sum to have their building greenwashed?
By RenaissanceWatcher (registered) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 13:39:24
mrjanitor wrote:
"I'm hearing rumours from someone I know well in the building trades that the Board of Education will be moving to the west harbour. I hope this is not the case but the scuttlebutt is that the underground utility locates have been done for the project. He also said something about McMaster taking over the Board of Ed building for a medical research location. I'm pretty sure these projects have been floated in the Spec before as well, but from what I'm hearing they're gaining traction."
mrjanitor and his source appear to be spot on. This interest of the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board in the west harbour lands is listed as item 12.4 "Private and Confidential- Verbal" on the agenda for Hamilton city council's General Issues Committee meeting tomorrow at 9:30 a.m.
Comment edited by RenaissanceWatcher on 2011-02-13 13:41:18
By Egyptor (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 16:21:02
The Federal Building is an eyesore that should get fixed. Period. The end.
By Shempatolla (registered) - website | Posted February 13, 2011 at 16:47:23
The reason Vranich (or more probably any developer) does not/would not want to redevelop the Fed building is that a retrofit/renovation/development of that nature is tremendously more expensive than ripping it down and building from scratch. While the building may be sound, there are no doubt issues of asbestos abatement, tear out of every old system in the building, the engineering required to retrofit new systems like electrical, water, hvac, fire suppression and detection, reroute ingress and egress to accomodate new residential floor plans and on and on. Its not that its not doable, it simply costs more. His only motivation here is bottom line. If you are familiar with any of his other projects downtown, visionary and forward thinking are not words that are normally associated with Vrancor.
By jc x (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 19:11:16
Just a question re. the cost of asbestos abatement being a factor in retrofitting a building vs. demolition...
Wouldn't the asbestos still have to be removed safely/properly before the building could be demolished?
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 09:39:54 in reply to Comment 59703
I believe so, yes... but not applicable in the case of the Federal building. Vranich has already carried out the abatement, I've seen it myself.
By nobrainer (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 09:45:15 in reply to Comment 59731
Why the heck would he go through the trouble of cleaning out the asbestos only to knock the building down later? What, does he get a big tax cut for having an empty lot instead of an empty building?
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 10:03:53 in reply to Comment 59732
The abatement was done years ago, soon after he bought the building. I can only imagine that at the time, his plans to develop the building were more concrete.
Same thing happened with the Connaught, they did the asbestos abatement as soon as the building was purchased... but then it sat, plans died... and now it's still empty and for sale.
By Tybalt (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 00:38:07 in reply to Comment 59703
Yes it would.
By Shempatolla (registered) - website | Posted February 14, 2011 at 08:10:33 in reply to Comment 59717
Yes it would. But in a renovation/redevelopment the process is more time consuming and meticulous. If the whole building is coming down there is stuff that gets overlooked. Not supposed to but it does. Just the nature of the beast.
The engineering and install costs to retrofit modern electrical, hvac, fire suppression, detection, are the real costs that make these projects more expensive vs tear down new build.
By Lightheart (anonymous) | Posted February 13, 2011 at 20:39:24
What are the chances Vranich is telling Bratina what to do?
What are the chances Bratina is doing it?
By Tybalt (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 00:39:08 in reply to Comment 59707
I don't know, what are they? Bratina and Vranich are pals. I don't think Vranich wags Bratina any way he likes though.
By Mogadon Megalodon (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 08:41:20
Look who's a two-way proponent!
Converting Caroline Street to two-way traffic in downtown Hamilton is the linch-pin to the development of a $100-million downtown development, says a prominent local developer.
Darko Vranich, president and chief executive officer of Vrancor Group, said the city needs to convert the current one-way traffic along Caroline Street to two-way to make his proposed residential and commercial development from Bay to Caroline streets work.
"Two-way on Caroline is key to the development," said Vranich.
The proposed scheme includes building three 25-storey towers for residential and possibly senior condominiums, and two hotels. Vranich said he could begin construction on the hotel at George and Caroline streets within six months.
"I'm ready to go," said Vranich. "I'm looking forward to working with the city staff and planning committee."
He said there will be 800 underground parking spaces, and along George Street there will be commercial spaces. But to make the development work, he said, people must be able to drive along Caroline from Main Street to get to George Street. He said if all goes well, the development could be completed within five years.
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 09:35:46
Thats good that he is getting on board with a good idea, but it doesn't change my opinion of him. He has a lot of good quality hotels and condos to build before I take him seriously.
Comment edited by MattM on 2011-02-14 09:36:19
By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 11:20:33
Asbestos abatement has to be done before any demolition to protect the public and workers from any exposure. The stuff is light and flies everywhere. Trust me, I've been working in old boilerhouses for years and see it frequently.
Abatement in an old building can be either a sign of demolition or residential conversion. The Ministry of Labour allows encapsulation (containing it in-situ on the pipe or vessel in a plastic or fiberglass wrap) as a acceptable asbestos control strategy for workplaces. This is by far the cheapest option and the one most companies take. If the asbestos is removed it's coming down or it's going to be made into something special.
By Realist (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 12:32:02
We all know that any contaminant has to be removed from any building. I am speaking as a tenant or a purchaser, I would not want to live or work in a building that's been exposed or is going to cost me more to heat and cool especially in Mr. Green Premiers new Ontario. I don't trust that a clean-up would get everything, as mrjanitor said, when this stuff is friable, it goes everywhere. Given the choice between a modern new building and an old one, I will always put my money into a condo that has a warranty. Builders love condo renos because they're off the hook for major problems and leaves the consumer with no recourse.
There is also a matter of disclosure, asbestos contamination cleanup should be disclosed to any tenant or purchaser prior to signing any deal.
By Tybalt1 (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 12:36:35
A Smith, I would vote you up if I could. Will when I get the chance. Your point about property taxes (a small part of the tax mix, mind you) is absolutely right (we need to get better control over city spending, for sure, and stop penalizing downtown) but the numbers applied to homes aren't particularly relevant for a commercial development.
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 13:19:36
I hope the provincial plaques in the foyer above the elevators weren't trashed. They were pretty and still untouched when I saw them about 3 years ago.
By DubbleDeez (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 14:50:09
This is an interesting thread and one I've enjoyed reading. With exception of a couple of singularly questionable posts that try only to assassinate character, a lot of people make some great points.
That said, I think underpinning all of the talk surrounding redevelopment or building new is quite simply cost. You can complain about 'ugly stucco' hotels all you want popping up along the side of the QEW but folks the slave labour that built the world's most beautiful structures no longer exists. Stucco keeps room rates at $100 bucks a night. Brick and stone ... you'd have to pay double that. And frankly, there is NO market for that.
The market gets forgotten a lot in these conversations. I too would like to see a conversion of this building but those units would have to come to the market likely in the over $350K range to make them viable. I know you all love downtown, but there is simply NOT the market here for that yet. Perhaps someday but certainly not now.
In the meantime, whatever happens, happens. Beyond the sculptures, there is NO reason to save this building. It is significant of nothing although perhaps sentimental to the people who worked there for years, a member of my family included. Every building must be looked at individually and realistically to determine its true value.
By the way, on the issue of speculation, in this city more will lose than will win. The pick-up in Hamilton is simply not going to be like it was in Toronto. It will come more slowly than that and perhaps in more concentrated bursts. It will be a LONG time before a residential community at WH can be built in a manner that makes economic sense. And if it was SO easy to convert and make a profit, why aren't we ALL doing it? Heck, I could use the money.
Anyway, keep up the good debate. It's healthy. But please, as a newer reader of this blog, keep it professional and maintain some integrity. Simply because someone leans one way or another away from your typical line of thinking, doesn't mean they deserve your scorn. Neither does it mean you pull out run ins with the law on completely un-related matters.
Let he who is without sin ...
By Cityjoe (anonymous) | Posted February 17, 2011 at 00:51:35 in reply to Comment 59758
Doesn't that depend on the kind of run-ins?
By r silva (anonymous) | Posted February 14, 2011 at 23:00:27
The city should buy this building, fix it up and then sell it to people who want to live downtown.
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 08:56:54 in reply to Comment 59780
Maybe this would be possible if they didn't just spend a giant amount of money on something-something for you-know-who at the you-know-what.
By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 12:58:26 in reply to Comment 59794
MattM >> Maybe this would be possible if they didn't just spend a giant amount of money
As of 2010, NYC had $12,908 in net debt (including capital assets) per resident. In 2009, Hamilton had $7392 in net assets per resident (including capital assets).
That's a difference of $20,300 in debt per resident.
Boston has net assets of only $860 per resident in 2010.
As of 20009, Toronto has net assets per resident of $5,358.
If Hamilton's financial picture was to match that of Toronto, we would have to incur an additional $2,034 in net debt per resident, or $1.07 billion.
If the things we spent money on had a long lifespan (bridge, building, fibre optic network, research facility equipment, LRT, subway, etc) or returned some portion of the debt to the taxpayer (fixing and selling the Federal Building to homebuyers), the net debt would be reduced further.
Before I looked at the numbers myself, I assumed that Hamilton was poor because it had squandered money. Now I'm starting to think that Hamilton is more like the corner bum, who just happens to have an investment account worth millions. He may look poor, but he's just really, really frugal.
By MattM (registered) | Posted February 16, 2011 at 10:02:06 in reply to Comment 59806
Smithy, you would be awesome to drink with. Bustin' out that calculator of yours whenever someone shoots off a joke or un-researched opinion.
I salute you, fine sir.
By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted February 15, 2011 at 00:21:34
It's not as if asbestos in an old building is really unusual any way. If we were to rip down every building that'd ever had asbestos in it, we'd have a lot of people living, working, and going to school in tents.
In any case, whatever costs would have been necessary when the building was originally purchased would be tiny compared to what is now required after years of neglect, vacancy, and structural damage during the HMP demolition.
By Jonathan Dalton (registered) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 12:42:19
The market gets forgotten a lot in these conversations. I too would like to see a conversion of this building but those units would have to come to the market likely in the over $350K range to make them viable. I know you all love downtown, but there is simply NOT the market here for that yet. Perhaps someday but certainly not now.
I heard recently from a condo developer that the cost of converting a building is substantially less than that of new construction, and that is why most condos here in Hamilton are in fact conversions. This developer is planning a new construction with units starting in the low $200's. Unless the Federal Building is an unusually hard case for conversion, I wouldn't write off the possibility of a suitable market.
180 units at $200,000 each gives him a budget of $36M. Unless City Hall is giving out the contracts, he should be able make that work. Don't forget, someone made it work for the Pigott and SunLife, and the Bell Canada building, not to mention all the smaller projects.
By TnT (registered) | Posted February 17, 2011 at 20:42:28 in reply to Comment 59803
Don't forget the Chateau Royale building right beside the GO station. How is it working out?
By Shempatolla (registered) - website | Posted February 17, 2011 at 12:02:06 in reply to Comment 59803
Thats a blanket statement that depends on each and every building, its condition, its age, its type of construction and the desired "feel" and look the developer is attempting to accomplish.
In general any renovation/redevelopment is fraught with unforseen costs in addition to known procedures that must take place before any kind of conversion can even start.
The build process takes longer, retrofitting building systems can be problematic, and sometimes you get into a portion of a project to the enth degree only to find "we can't do this this way"
So an individual project might ......MIGHT...... come in costing less than new build. But generally no.
By Malex (anonymous) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 13:43:50 in reply to Comment 59803
Where is your developer friend building these new condos? Downtown, I hope!? Is it an infill project?
By F.Ward Cleat (anonymous) | Posted February 15, 2011 at 13:24:56
A few posters here have suggested the adaptive reuse of this building is not financially viable. I find those assumptions troubling, given the fact that the developer proposed a 120 unit condo development in 2003 with a $9.6 million pricetag. Even with inflation factored in at 3% over 8 years the same project is $11 million give or take. That's less than a $100k per unit. The question is, 'what's the expected profit margin?'
If one were to design and build the existing structure to meet today's building code, 'what would that cost?' No one has ever suggested the structure is not sound and a basic knowledge of building construction would prove the opposite is true. The adaptive reuse of this building has its challenges but I'am sure Vrancor has talented people working on their behave who can design and build a signature development without destroying the heritage that the 'Federal Building' possesses.
By Shempatolla (registered) - website | Posted February 17, 2011 at 11:56:41 in reply to Comment 59808
He made this proposal in 2003 when the economy was growing rapidly. Why didn't it happen? Likely because the realized the price tag was considerably larger than 9.6 million. The asbestos abatement alone on a building that size would have run into the millions.
By dropping the Fed and building new, higher to accomodate 180-200 units he most likely drives his per unit cost down and the per unit profit up.
Retrofitting and redeveloping is more expensive than new construction, period. Vrancor likely doesn't see the appetite for 300k plus condo units in downtown Hamilton. We can disagree with him all we want. Its his money to spend.
Personally I would be less and less accommadating were I running the city develpment department until this organization started doing something with the numerous illegal parking lots they have erected on sites they have razed in our downtown.
By bra-buddy (anonymous) | Posted February 16, 2011 at 17:13:31
Bob Bratina should be vocally fighting this demolition in order to publicly distance himself from vrancor.
He needs a publicity manager BADLY
By TnT (registered) | Posted February 17, 2011 at 20:44:38
Paging Matt Jelly, where have you gone?
By Disappointed (anonymous) | Posted February 20, 2011 at 15:54:21
I'm starting to realize that people run for the salary, not the issues. Where are those same voices now? Passion run dry? This is very disappointing actually Martinez and Matt. Especially Matt, I'm really sorry to say.
This entire issue around the Federal Building is truly sickening. Vranich has created a serious issue for our downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. The City's legal dept has no balls and is simply downright corrupt! That goes for the Planning Dept. The worst in the country sadly. Again, where is Matt and others who ran for Ward 2? Guess they got too deflated and gave up.
By nobrainer (registered) | Posted February 20, 2011 at 16:27:38 in reply to Comment 60071
You don't have the right to demand of any volunteer that they step up and spend there own time and energy doing something you think is important, if it's important to you, there's no stopping you from doing what Matt, Martinus and other have already been doing, getting involved and trying to make a difference.
By TnT (registered) | Posted February 21, 2011 at 12:00:23 in reply to Comment 60073
Fair enough. I certainly wasn't demanding a volunteer to stand up and dedicate their time, more it was admiration for the work in the past that has been done. I don't know Matt Jelly personally, but was very impressed with his grassroot activism. He has been missed.
Yet, I doubt that he was doing any of the work as a cheap political stunt. That is going way too far.
By MonkeyDo (anonymous) | Posted February 20, 2011 at 16:22:07
The Federal Government sold the building to Vranich for $1.2M with a covanent to ensure he wouldn't raise the building, or destroy the heritage elements. The price of the sale was determined based on these elements being preserved - which means they were assigned a value. While they may not have been given a dollar value - they were given a cultural value. Since the Federal government was relieving itself of the maintenance of these items it was willing to give the building owner a deal on the asset provided he/she maintained the culturally significant items for all to enjoy.
I have been given a tour of the building and the internal items noted in the covanent no longer exist to my recollection. The freizes on the outside have been left to rot for years and are in the worst condition since their installation in the 1950s. The owner has requested the right to tear down the building. If this final requests moves forward he will have broken every covanent in the agreement with the Federal government.
Is this emblematic of how all contracts with the Federal government are enforced?
Are there any other buildings in our community that are governed by similar covanents?
I would argue that the owner is in a breach of contract scenario and the Feds should demand the building back. The Feds should buy it back from him for the cost he paid less the decreased value in the asset now that he has ripped out every piece of recycleable metal, countless windows, HVAC, internal heritage elements as noted in the covanent, and now doubt countless other issues.
This would bring the building value down under $1M and I would personally guarantee that the community could raise the funds to buy the building from the Feds and to renovate it into a truly mixed use facility for the community - housing, services, creative industry space, commercial and retail.
There is now reason we should accept shit developments in our core any more. As noted by so many people if Vranich needs an empty lots he can use the HMP as promised or deal with his burnt out building at King and Hess.
We simply shouldn't stand for this crap. Where is our Federal government? Who is representing us in this dialogue?
By TnT (registered) | Posted February 21, 2011 at 12:03:42
Well, I think a letter to our federal NDP members would be a good start. I've noticed from a media standpoint Christopherson has been invisible on this local issues. I assumed that he represents Hamilton, but is it gauche to comment on things seen a Provincal or Municipal, but a Fed?
By Woody10 (registered) | Posted February 21, 2011 at 21:13:38
It would be nice to see some development, anywhere, but quality is of upmost importance in my opinion. Anyway, anything new for the "Cranespotting" section?? Is the last article really from 2009??
By Bazouki Joe (anonymous) | Posted February 26, 2011 at 08:40:05
By Tybalt (registered) | Posted March 02, 2011 at 09:38:40 in reply to Comment 60292
Not just safety issues:
Kehoe said he has since cut ties with Vrancor, and he accused the developer of hiring only five employees along with subcontractors and other workers who were paid under the table.
Accusations of dodging taxes as well. Unfortunate.
By nobrainer (registered) | Posted March 02, 2011 at 08:17:42 in reply to Comment 60292
Not just one conviction for unsafe operations, FOUR CONVICTIONS...
Vrancor Development Corp. was fined $65,000 for operating an unsafe job site during construction in 2009 of the $15-million Hampton Inn by Hilton on McKeown Avenue.
Vrancor has three previous convictions under Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act for operating other unsafe job sites in the province, including inadequate guardrails during construction of another North Bay hotel, Holiday Inn Express and Suites on Seymour Street, in 2007.
Justice of the Peace James Bubba found Vrancor and site supervisor Sean Kehoe liable for failing to comply with an inspector's order to keep the McKeown Avenue site free of obstructions, including heating equipment and other construction materials embedded in ice.
By Woody10 (registered) | Posted March 02, 2011 at 08:13:54 in reply to Comment 60292
Oh oh, just great eh.
By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted April 05, 2011 at 09:33:03
Work on a $100 million project that would change the skyline of downtown Hamilton is expected to start as early as June.
The project, conceived by developer Darko Vranich, will bring 628 condo units, two extended stay hotels and 20,000 square feet of retail space to the core.
"Darko is putting his money where his mouth is for this project," said downtown councillor Jason Farr. "This spring is what they are shooting for to get shovels in the ground."
You must be logged in to comment.
There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Richard D. Granvold has the training, knowledge and experience to help you get out of debt but in a way best for you. From credit counseling and financial planning to bankruptcy filing, he is here to assist you.
- Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
- Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
- Discharging Student Loans
- Garnishments & Bank Levies
- Foreclosure Laws in Washington
- Re-Affirmation Agreements (Keeping your home or car through bankruptcy)
Since 1987, Richard D. Granvold has assisted about 10,.000 persons in filing Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 or advising persons not to file when it is not the right answer for them. Click on the "experience" button above and see his professional memberships, recent bankruptcy seminars attended, and his education. Top 4 awards: 2014 through 2018 Clients Choice Award for Chapter 7, Featured Attorney Chapter 7 Award, Top Contributor 2014 through 2021 Award: See Avvo.com or click the button below!
Richard D. Granvold can advise you of the differences between Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 and which one is better for you. (For a comparison of Chapter 7 versus Chapter 13 click here). Many attorneys endorse Richard D. Granvold. One Washington Attorney states:
"I have known Richard for many years. He is an amazing advocate for his clients. He is creative, knowledgeable and aggressive. If I have a potential bankruptcy client that I cannot represent he is on a very short list of attorneys I refer to".
Another attorney states:
"I endorse this lawyer. Richard Granvold is one of the most generous and good-hearted attorneys I know. He spends numerous hours each week donating time on AVVO by answering the legal questions of those in need. He takes the time to write a thoughtful and detailed response to each and every question he answers and never misses a single issue. His responses show a depth of knowledge and experience, as well as compassion for those in need. I will not hesitate to refer people to him who are in need of a good bankruptcy attorney."
You can click here to read more "Peer Reviews on AVVO" and see why over 66 different Bankruptcy Attorneys who endorse Richard D. Granvold and why; these are attorneys who understand bankruptcy law and endorse Richard D. Granvold in representing you. AVVO has a rating of high rating for Richard D. Granvold!
Our attorney himself will call you back quickly and can discuss your case immediately with you, not a week later! Most clients discuss with Richard D. Granvold the day they call and immediately, if not advising another client when you call. Only Richard D. Granvold provides advice to you. Whether you are at home, lunch break or driving down freeway, give our office a phone call so we can discuss your situation when you have 30 or more minutes of time to discuss your case.
Whether you need to speak at 6 am or up to 9 pm, we can help you to expediently answer your questions! Many of you need expediency, as you are being garnished, being foreclosed against or trying to obtain back your driver's license (click on that button above to discuss those areas of law). As a result, we normally complete all bankruptcies within 1 or 2 days of you providing all information. You will NEVER hear your questions being answered by a legal intern, associate, secretary, or other person: Richard D. Granvold will personally discuss your case directly with you, addressing all questions and concerns.
Overpaying for legal advice when you are low on money, trying to save a home or being garnished is not needed. Richard D. Granvold's fees are reasonable as you will see if you compare what other attorneys are charging for bankruptcy advice. Our advice will be the same no matter what your fee is in Chapter 7, for most clients. It is free to speak to you (individuals, not corporations). You are encouraged to talk to Richard D. Granvold even after you have consulted with another attorney; you will see the difference!
Why you care: many attorneys require all at once a lump sum payment as they do not do monthly billings. We have allowed clients to make payments since opening our law firm in 1990. You can pay $100 down as part of our fee to retain us immediately. The advantage? You can immediately, not only refer those nagging calling creditors to Richard D. Granvold's office, but you can also take up to 5 months to make all payments or such portion he agrees to before filing the case, as well as the filing fee!
See the Testimonials at the top of this home page and see many client's statements of appreciation and thanks and a door full of "Thank You" cards and letters in the picture herein. You can see over 114 client 5 STAR reviews on AVVO and on Google and Yelp. Although we cannot please everyone, we certainly try as 50% of our business comes from client referrals and we appreciate and strive for that result.
Did you know MOST Bankruptcy Attorneys (our guess 99%) have NEVER tried to help a bankruptcy client attempt to discharge student loans? Click on the Student Loan page herein and see numerous (59 plus) lawsuits on student loans Richard D. Granvold has filed and the results thereof in discharging millions of dollars of student loans. Click on the AVVO button herein and see many other bankruptcy attorney's endorsement on AVVO of Richard D. Granvold's actions in discharging such student loans.
"What you should be asking to pick the right bankruptcy attorney..but don't." Click on the blog button and see the answers to that question!
Our office is aggressive in protecting your rights. You really care about two goals: Can you keep all your property you own and have equity in, and can you discharge all your debts. That is what bankruptcy really comes down to.
Click on the various tabs on our website and you will not only see our full services, but the quality of our representation of you to achieve your goals. Whatever you need help with, whether foreclosure, stopping garnishments, obtaining back your driver's license, or just discharging your debts, you can click on that portion of our website for information on it and then call Richard D. Granvold now to discuss.
Do not wait if you are having financial problems especially if you are being garnished, foreclosed against or sued. Call our offices now. Four questions our office will advise you if bankruptcy is right for you: (1) Is there any reason to wait to file; (2) which creditors should you be paying from the time you speak to Richard D. Granvold up to the filing date; (3) are all your assets you have equity in protected; and (4) do you have any types of non-dischargeable debts.
If you have been sued, call and speak immediately concerning your options; this is important before a judgment is entered against you and possibly becomes a lien on any house or land you own and a resulting garnishment! You cannot change the past, only the future, so email or call now! Email is best, if you also leave your phone number include area code and advise us on how early and how late you can be called, so you are not woken up or when not to call, in case you sleep during the day! We look forward to assisting and advising you in reducing your financial stress.
Thanks for reading our home page and we welcome the opportunity to personally assist you today. Email now so we can assist you at a time you are having financial problems.


text:
- Search
- Home
- Subscribe
- Support Centre
- Puzzles
- Contests
- Cannabis
- Submit News Tip
- News
- Sports
- Travel
- Trending Now
- Newsletters
- Autos
- Classifieds
- Jobs
- Business
- Entertainment
- Photo Galleries
- Life
- Community
- Opinion
- Video
- Weather
- Obituaries
- Marketplace
- Contact Us
- Site Map
B.C. cop investigated for stuffing cash in sock
Local police have asked RCMP to investigate
Plea for help found in walnut shell likely a hoax, police say
Abbotsford woman found note glued inside nut purchased in Langley
B.C. hockey team denies responsibility for alleged $200,000 hotel damages
Hotel owner blames young players for ruptured water line
Barnful of ducks die in early morning blaze
The cause of the fire is unknown
Girl, 9, killed after being struck by city bus identified as Syrian refugee
Hala Albarhoum and her family fled a war-torn country and resettled in Abbotsford
PHOTOS: Procession and funeral for Const. John Davidson
Thousands attended celebration of life for Abbotsford police officer
'Oh my God, it's the baby!' — Mom recalls unexpected birth on Abbotsford highway
Mom recalls unexpected birth on Abbotsford highway
'There are no words': Abbotsford community holds quiet vigil for fallen police officer
A few dozen residents laid flowers and lit candles at the Abbotsford Police Department's door
Hacker threatens to release UFV student information if not paid ransom
Threats to release students' personal information
MLA Darryl Plecas kicked out of BC Liberal Party
Plecas shocked caucus after accepting Speaker job in the legislature
B.C. MLA defies own party, named Speaker
Liberal MLA Darryl Plecas nonimated as new legislature Speaker
B.C. cop finds bridge made of shopping carts, carpet, pallets
'The ingenuity amazes me,' officer says, after finding engineering feat in unexpected place
Three tied up at gunpoint while three-year-old slept in B.C. home invasion
Abbotsford police looking for suspects who stole valuables and vehicles
B.C. police officer dragged by car fleeing traffic stop
The Abbotsford police officer escaped with minor injuries after a scuffle inside the car


text:
[3cx-webinar id="674″ title="3cx-webinar"]
[3cx-webinar id="674″ title="3cx-webinar"]
Let us build your next website!
VOIP stands for Voice Over IP. This is a new communication technology that allows you to make and receive phone calls through the use of the internet.
VOIP phones do not use the regular twisted-pair copper cable. An IP phone, as they are commonly called, only requires an internet connection in the same way that a computer does.
Due to the fact that IP phones work digitally, as opposed to analogously, VOIP service providers can offer a wider range of features that allow businesses and their employees to be more productive and efficient in their communications.
A business that is looking forward to make the move to VOIP must first have a reliable and fast internet connection. Before making the transition to VOIP, companies need to ensure their internet service meets the minimum requirements requested by their VOIP provider.


text:
In the right hands, Photoshop's pen tool can be a very powerful tool for creating incredible; even photo realistic images. In today's tutorial we will demonstrate how to draw a photo realistic USB cable in Photoshop.
Step 1
Open a New Document 1000 x 1000 pixels, Resolution: 72 dpi. This document will be created using approximately 60 layers. Organization is key. I have created 4 folders to organize my layers. See the image below.
Step 2
Take the Pen tool (P), draw the shapes below. Create New Layers for each part of the drawing.
Step 3
Use following Layer Styles for parts listed numerically.
Step 4
Copy this Layer Style & apply it to the other 3 drawing layers. For each layer you will need to change the angle of the Gradient Overlay, For Shape 2, use an angle of -59 degrees, for shape 3 & 4, use an angle of -51 degree. See the completed effect below.
Step 5
Now create the inner side of the Head. Again, use Pen tool. See the image below.
Step 6
Add detail to the Head of the USB Cable. Cmd + Click on the Layer thumbnail of Drawing area 1 (see step 2), go to Edit > Stroke, Width - 3px, Color - white, Location- center. Now go to Filter > Blur > Gaussian Blur, Radius- 0.6px. Take the Eraser tool (E), Brush Size- 100, Opacity- 50%, Flow- 100%. See the image below.
Step 7
Again take the Pen tool and draw a shape like the one below. Then apply the following layer styles.
Step 8
Take the Pen tool and create a shape like this one, if you facing problems in creating the right shape you could also use the Add Anchor Point tool and the Direct selection tool for adjustment. You could also use Rounded Rectangle tool (U) for this one, after you create the shape hit Cmd + T to transform it. Once this is done apply the following layer styles.
Step 9
Cmd + Click on the Layer thumbnail that we just created. Create a New layer, go to Select > Modify > Contract, Contract by 1px. Fill it with white color. Now follow the Layer styles. See the image below.
Step 10
Create a New Folder, name it "Head" as I described before in step 1 & place all of the layers into this. Now create a New layer below the "Head" folder. Take the Pen tool and create 3 the shapes shown below. Create a new layer for each part of the drawing.
Step 11
Copy this Layer Style & paste it onto the other 2 portions, change the Gradient Overlay Angle. For 'Part 2' use change the Angle to -35 degrees and for 'Part 3' use an Angle of 13 degrees.
Step 12
Now it is time to add some lines to the side of the 'Body'. Create a New Layer and name it 'Line'. Then create multiple copies as shown below.
Step 13
After creating the copies of the lines, select all of 'Line' layers and press Cmd + E to Merge the layers. Cmd + Click on the layer thumbnail of 'Line' to make selection. Create a new layer, fill the selection with white.
Step 14
Use Rounded Rectangle tool to create a shape like the one described below & follow the instructions.
Step 15
Add more details to the 'Body'. Take the Elliptical Marquee tool (M) and create a shape like the one described below, then apply layer styles.
Step 16
Take the Pen tool, create a shape as described below and then follow instructions.
Step 17
Add some highlights to the 'Body' area. You can do this by drawing the shapes with the pen tool and by adding a Gaussian Blur.
Step 18
Now let's create the 'Head Wire', the wire that connects the head to the wire. For this, use the pen tool and follow the instructions below.
Step 19
To add a bit of detail to this 'Wire' layer, create a New layer, Cmd + Click on the Layer thumbnail of 'Wire', fill the selection with white color, take the Eraser tool, brush size 35px (use soft brush), Opacity 50%, and follow instructions below.
Step 20
Again take the Pen tool and create the shape as shown below.
Step 21
Add some highlights to this portion.
Step 22
Use the methods that we have shown previously to create the 'Back Side' of the object.
Step 23
Let's add some finishing touches. Select all the Layers of the USB cable except the Background layer, Right click > Duplicate. Now Merge all of the duplicated layers. Drag this layer to top, Cmd + Click on the layer thumbnail to make selection, Fill it with black, go to Filter > Noise > Add Noise, Amount 23.62% on Gaussian and Monochromatic. Change the Layer Blending mode to Overlay & Opacity to 10%.
Additionally, you can create a shadow of the object at the bottom.
When used properly, the pen tool can be a powerful tool for creating objects in Photoshop. Hopefully, this tutorial has given you some insight into how you can use the pen tool combined with layer styles to create amazing designs in Photoshop.


text:
By David Crane
defrev (at) gmail (dot) com
The following article is property of DefenseReview.com (DR) and is copyrighted material. If you are reading this article on another website other than DefenseReview.com, please email us the website address/URL (where the unauthorized DR article reprint is located) at defrev (at) gmail (dot) com. Thank you.
Photo(s) Credit: Syrac Ordnance and Brownells
October 15, 2013
Back in February (2013), shortly after SHOT Show 2013, DefenseReview (DR) mentioned the MicroMOA 'The Govnah' Modular Regulated Gas Block lo-pro/lo-vis (Low-Profile/Low-Visibility) adjustable gas block for AR-15 and AR-10/SR-25-type tactical AR rifles/carbines/SBRs in our article on the Legion Firearms LF-4D 5.56mm tactical AR carbine and LF-10D 7.62mm tactical AR carbine, since it looked like a well-designed and well-made product. Well, Jason Adams, formerly of piston AR manufacturer Adams Arms, has started a company called Syrac Ordnance, and it looks like they, too, are offering well-designed and made lo-pro gas blocks for 5.56mm and 7.62mm ARs, which are now available from Brownells.
The Syrac Ordnance AR-15/M16 5.56mm NATO/.223 Rem. and AR-10/SR-25-type 7.62mm NATO/.308 Win. Low-Profile Adjustable Gas Blocks are made of stainless steel and are melonited (melonite-coated), which means they're salt-bath-nitrided or nitro-carburized. Why melonited stainless steel? I'll Mr. Adams tell it (from AR15.com):
Because it is awesome. I like melonite and if you use the proper stainless it holds its hardness because the tempering temperature is higher than the melonite processing temp, where a carbon steel like 4140 or 4150 would loose some internal hardness because the tempering temp. of those steels are lower than the melonite processing temp. Melonite is great for surface hardness, and with the mechanism on the block I need hard surfaces within the part. Melonite gets in holes.
i have to agree, having seen what a PWS [Primary Weapons Systems] barrel can do, 1MOA after 20,000 rounds melonited stainless is the sh*t.
When asked how to initially dial the rifle in, Adams described his procedure this way (also from AR15.com):
"This is how I adjust my personal rifles:
The type of ammo you shoot through your rifle can and usually will make a difference on where you set the gas setting. I start by determining what ammo I am going to use to shoot through that rifle. Or you can use the lowest pressured ammo that you will shoot in the rifle. Using the lowest pressured ammo assures that the rifle will cycle with whatever you put in it. If you set it for the low pressured ammo and run high pressured ammo it might run faster than you want (more recoil). That is why I set it with specific ammo; The ammo I am going to usually shot through that rifle. The great thing about the gas block is that you can adjust it in the field to adjust to the ammo you are using.
I set it while the rifle is dry (no oil). This way when you are shooting it and it gets dirty it will have a bit more force to run. If you set it when it is wet (oiled) and it drys out or gets dirty because of high fired rounds it can slow the carrier down and cause function issues. So, I initially set it while it is dry. The gas hole in the block is totally open when the gas screw is showing three thread out of the front of the gas block. This is your starting position for the gas screw. Three threads showing.
Make sure the rifle is unloaded. Remove the magazine and visually inspect the chamber to make sure there is not a round in the chamber before you attempt to adjust the gas screw!! Remove the magazine, and visually clear the chamber every time you adjust the gas screw.
1. For the first adjustment of the gas screw, screw the screw IN three revolutions. If you need to repeat step 1, as defined in the following steps, then turn the screw IN one revolution. Make sure the screw is locked into place every time you adjust it.
2. Load the rifle with one round in the chamber and the magazine empty but locked in the mag well.
3. Fire a single shot. If the bolt locks back then screw the screw in a half a turn and repeat step 1 thru 3 until the bolt does not lock back. If you need to repeat step 1, then screw in the gas screw in ONE revolution. If the bolt did not lock back go to step 4.
4. If the bolt did not lock back then UNSCREW the screw one quarter of a turn. Load the rifle with one round in the chamber and an empty mag locked in the mag well.
5. Fire the single round. If the bolt locks back you are finished. If the bolt did not lock back then repeat 4 and 5 until the bolt locks back.
6. You can repeat steps 1 thru 5 with an oiled rifle to get the cycle rate down as low as possible.
As mentioned above, Brownells is now carrying the Syrac Ordnance AR lo-pro gas blocks, so check 'em out.
The following information comes directly from the Brownells product page:
"For [Easy] Adjustment Of Gas Flow In The Field Or At The Range
Adjustable gas block enables the shooter to fine-tune gas flow and rifle performance in the field. Designed to fit under free-floating handguards, the block secures to the barrel with two setscrews. Adjustment screw on the front of the block accepts the included hex wrench; a detent locking mechanism keeps the screw securely in place without the need for thread-locking compound, providing smooth and consistent cycling."
Company Contact Info:
Brownells Inc.
200 South Front Street
Montezuma, Iowa 50171
General Office: 641-623-5401
Ordering: 800-741-0015
Technical Support: 800-741-0015
Fax: 800-264-3068
Email Contact Page: http://www.brownells.com/aspx/general/Contact_Us.aspx
Website: http://www.brownells.com
Syrac Ordnance
6614 Osteen Rd., Unit 337
New Port Richey, FL 34653
Phone: 727-849-8899
Email Sales: [email protected]
Website: http://www.syracordnance.com
© Copyright 2013 DefenseReview.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without receiving permission and providing proper credit and appropriate links.
Related Articles:
Rainier Arms Raptor Ambi Charging Handle (Ambidextrous Charging Handle) by AXTS Weapons Systems for AR-15 Tactical Carbine/SBR's and AR-10/SR-25 Tactical Rifle/Carbines
Legion Firearms LF-4D Orion Design Group (ODG) Edition: Signature Series High-End Tactical AR-15 Carbine with ODG Lupus Camouflage Pattern Finish (Video!)
Legion Firearms LF-10D 14.5″ 7.62mm NATO/.308 Win. DMR-Type Tactical AR Carbine/Rifle for Dynamic CQB/CQC Gunfighting and Medium-Range Engagements (Video!)
ROSCH Works (RW) SL1 Sight Light Integrated Weapon Light/Front Sight BUIS: Making the Most of Your AR-15/M4/M4A1 Carbine/SBR's Tactical Real Estate
Bravo Company Manufacturing BCM KeyMod Handguard/Rail (KMR): Ultra-Lightweight Aluminum-Magnesium Alloy Free-Float Modular Rail System/Tactical Handguard for Tactical AR-15 Carbine/SBR's Gets a Little Range Run Courtesy of Mike Pannone/CTT-Solutions (Photos!)


text:
"The Joneses", a social commentary on our consumerist society. Perfect couple Steve and Kate Jones, and their gorgeous teen-aged children Jenn and Mick, are the envy of their posh, suburban neighborhood filled with McMansions and all the trappings of the upper middle class. Kate is the ultimate trend setter - beautiful, sexy, dressed head-to-toe in designer labels. Steve is the admired successful businessman who has it all: a gorgeous wife, big house and an endless supply of high-tech toys. Jenn and Mick rule their new school as they embody all that is hip and trendy - cool clothes, fast cars and the latest gadgets. But as the neighbors try to keep up with the Joneses, none are prepared for the truth about this all- too perfect family. Written by Publicist
Watch Episodes
The Joneses (2009): แฟมิลี่ลวงโลก
2009 96 min
Country: United States
Director: Derrick Borte
Actors: Amber HeardBenjamin HollingsworthChris WilliamsChristine EvangelistaDavid DuchovnyDemi MooreGary ColeGlenne HeadlyLauren HuttonRobert Pralgo
Genres: Uncategorized
Movie plot
Show less...


text:
Ukrainian police on Thursday arrested five people thought to be the brains behind a scam using the Zeus Trojan to siphon money from small businesses in the U.S.
The operation is part of an ongoing effort to take down a criminal empire that stole $70 million from victims' bank accounts over the past few years. Many of those hit were small businesses or local organizations that ended up having to absorb the costs of the fraud.
Ukraine's national police force, the SBU, made the arrests as part of a joint effort with the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, police in the Netherlands and the U.K.'s Metropolitan Police Service. Those detained are "key subjects responsible for this overarching scheme," the FBI said in a statement.
Ukrainian SBU agents also executed eight search warrants in an operation that was staffed by about 50 police officers.
Series of Arrests
Law enforcement officials believe they arrested a "top-tier group" of organizers of the widespread operation, FBI officials said at a press conference Friday. The operation used an estimated 3,500 money mules, people who transferred money back to the organizers, FBI officials said.
"We believe we've dismantled the operation" with the recent arrests, said Gordon Snow, assistant director with the FBI's Cyber Division.
The Ukraine arrests are "far more significant" than the earlier actions in the U.K. and the U.S., said Gary Warner, director of research in computer forensics with the University of Alabama at Birmingham. "These are five ringleaders," he said. "All roads lead back to these five guys. The people that were arrested in the UK and the people that were arrested in the U.S… all were piling their money back to these guys in Ukraine."
Zeus is considered to be the most lucrative piece of malware ever created, and it took a network of operatives to manage the operation. On Tuesday, the Metropolitan Police Service in London arrested 20 people, and that was followed up by more arrests in the U.S. on Thursday. Both operations dismantled the "money mule' system used to move funds overseas.
U.S. officials have charged 92 people with crimes related to the operation and arrested 39, the FBI said. The operation targeted small businesses and other organizations in the U.S., with the criminals often focusing on treasurers or chief financial officers of the organizations, the FBI said.
Long Investigation
The operation — named Trident Breach — was launched in May 2009 after FBI agents in Omaha, Nebraska, began investigating a computer fraud case that involved 46 unauthorized payments made to different bank accounts across the country. This type of fraud is the trademark of the Zeus network. In a typical Zeus theft, the criminals hack into the victim's online bank account and then move money out using the banking system's automated clearing house (ACH) money transfer system.
"The cyber thieves targeted small- to medium-sized companies, municipalities, churches, and individuals, infecting their computers using a version of the Zeus Botnet," the FBI said Friday in a press release. "The malware captured passwords, account numbers, and other data used to log into online banking accounts."
According to the FBI, the scammers tried to steal $220 million in total, and actually managed to move $70 million offshore from the U.S. There were about 390 victims in the U.S., the FBI said.
Zeus' main software developer, who once went by the name A-Z, is thought to live in St Petersburg, according to Don Jackson, a researcher with SecureWorks, one of the companies that has been tracking Zeus for years.
To complicate matters, Zeus is not run by a single gang. There are perhaps five to 10 Zeus gangs that operate at the highest level, Jackson said. These are the crooks who get access to the best code, who have the most up-to-date attacks, and who make the most money.
However the Zeus code is also freely sold on the black market, and there are many others who also make their own use of the malware.
Zeus is continually updated, with developers often adding features at the request of users of the malware, FBI officials said.
Robert McMillan covers computer security and general technology breaking news for The IDG News Service. Follow Robert on Twitter at @bobmcmillan. Robert's e-mail address is email@example.com


text: Broadcast 2681 Dr. George Robinson Guest: Dr. George Robinson; Topics: Human space migration as an imperative and why. Please direct all comments and questions regarding specific Space Show programs & guest(s) to the Space Show blog which is part of archived program on our website, www.thespaceshow.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. Read more about Broadcast 2681 Dr. George RobinsonComments


text:
|From: Paul Schlie (schlie at comcast.net)
Date: Thu Sep 16 16:51:01 EDT 2004
For the hell of it, my basic thoughts are that a debugger's critical role in life to enable the programmer to more easily disambiguate between what they meant, vs. actually expressed; as we all know it's often more difficult than may appear at first glance/attempt; often because input domains are more subtlety complex than originally perceived, resulting in unintended result ranges or discontinuities which may or may not OBSERVABLY violate the input domain assumptions of dependant expressions of intended behavior. I've HIGHLIGHTED "OBSERVABLE" because the critical functionality of a debugger must be able to enable the programmer to "OBSERVE", experimentally "CONTROL", and ideally alter, any arbitrary expressed behavior within a program to aid in the identification and corresponding refinement of desired expressed behavior to increasingly comprehensive input domains, without having to alter the program itself to do so. As data invariably affects conditional control flow, which in turn affects dataflow, and therefore state; a debugger must then also ideally enable the control flow state and history to also be both observable, and controllable to aid in the programmers identification of their insufficient or erroneous expression of intent beyond the programs natural points of observably and controllability. Although contracts assist in the confinement of anticipated data domains and ranges; they are themselves expressions subject to programmer errors, nor do they attempt to typically quantify the correctness or the value discontinuities of transformations that exist between their boundaries, as if they did, would be fully redundant to the transform descriptions themselves. Although I profess to being strongly biased toward the scheme programming language/style, most/all scheme programming environments severely lack any comprehensive debugging (arbitrary program/data control/observably) facilities; as such, they often relegate the task of "debugging" to the programmer's own wits, which often limit's the commercial use of scheme to relatively simple problems, academic exercises, or the curious; as without a reasonably comprehensive means to observe, isolate, and remedy "bugs" in reasonably complex programs with correspondingly complex datasets, it's difficult to leverage in environments where programmers are use to, and rely (for good or bad) on such conveniences. I for one would love to have access to a more nimble way to arbitrarily observe, control, and refine the behavior of a scheme program, and spend less time (often invasively), making due otherwise (as if I knew how to always comprehensively express what I meant with sufficient precision, I would, but admit to not being omniscient). No prejudice, conflict, or disparity intended, just my two cent thoughts, -paul-
|Posted on the users mailing list.