Empty buildings pull people and businesses off the street, drain neighbourhood activity, and put pressure on the businesses next door. They lock up housing and employment potential, let buildings and public spaces deteriorate, and chip away at confidence in downtown investment. London has programs, enforcement tools and individual development files — but residents can’t easily see the whole vacancy picture, which tool is being applied to which property, or whether the overall situation is actually getting better.
The Issues · Downtown Vacancy & Empty Buildings
Empty buildings are not a downtown strategy.
An empty storefront, a dark upper floor, an unsafe building and a stalled redevelopment can all look like vacancy from the sidewalk, but they are not the same problem. I want London to identify what kind of vacancy it is, what tool actually applies, who controls the next step, and whether anything is moving.
Start here
What I would bring forward — one accountable file instead of one vague vacancy number.
What I would bring forward
Create one public Downtown Vacancy Action File: separate the different kinds of vacancy, identify the municipal tool that applies, name who controls the next step, coordinate major stalled files and report progress every quarter.
Who decides
The City controls property standards, A-35 administration, municipal approvals, incentives and many coordination tools. It cannot manufacture a tenant, force a private sale or guarantee that every building can be converted.
What already exists
By-law A-35 already provides a vacant-building registry, inspections, fines on conviction and cost recovery. London also has conversion and incentive programs. The missing piece is one public file showing which tool is being used and whether it worked.
When I would start
30 days: request the baseline and action-file design. 60 days: publish the first defensible vacancy breakdown and major-file status. 90 days: publish the first stalled-file and enforcement update.
What I would track
Vacancy by category. Properties returned to use. Unsafe-property files resolved. Housing units created through conversion. Commercial spaces reoccupied. Complete applications waiting on a City decision. Stalled files with the reason.
The reality in numbers
Say what kind of vacancy it is — with a date and a source.
31.5% → 29.6%
Downtown office vacancy, Q4 2025 → Q2 2026
An improvement, but still among the highest downtown office-vacancy rates in Canada. Reported by media citing CBRE; CBRE’s own Q2 2026 figures record London’s downtown as the country’s largest vacancy improvement that quarter.
~130
Empty core storefronts (about 17% of core retail)
A separate measure from office vacancy. Source: City of London Downtown Plan, citing Tate Research 2025 (Retail Commercial Space Survey).
$5,000/day
Maximum fine on conviction under By-law A-35
The City can add a building vacant 30+ days to an inspection registry, pursue fines up to $5,000 a day on conviction, and recover the cost of securing or remediating a property on the owner’s tax bill. Source: City of London Vacant Buildings By-law A-35 (verified).
Not all vacancy is the same
Six situations, six different routes back.
An empty storefront
Needs a tenant, a fit-out that pencils out, and a reason for foot traffic to return.
A vacant upper floor
Usually a conversion or building-code question, not a retail one.
An unsafe or neglected property
A property-standards and safety file — where enforcement is justified.
A stalled redevelopment
A coordination and approvals problem, not simply an empty building.
A building awaiting approvals
Already moving, but stuck in the City’s own queue.
A property with no viable current use
Needs an honest conversation about adaptive reuse or a different future.
Why this matters
What is empty, what tool applies, and what progress should look like.
Build a defensible, dated baseline that separates office, storefront, upper-floor, registered-unsafe, stalled and in-approvals vacancy instead of one giant number. Publish a Downtown Vacancy Action File — the type of vacancy, the municipal tool that applies, who controls the next step, what’s delayed and why. Coordinate the major stalled files so a complicated property doesn’t disappear between planning, building, fire, heritage and legal. Use enforcement where a real violation exists, tie incentives to results, and connect heritage to a viable, safe use.
A quarterly public file reports a small set of measures that matter: current vacancy by category, properties returned to productive use, unsafe-property files resolved, housing units created through conversion, commercial spaces reoccupied, complete applications waiting on a City decision, incentive funding committed versus completed — and the files that remain stalled, with the reason. No arbitrary percentage promises before the baseline is verified.
Go deeper
Seven practical actions — most of them within the City’s own authority.
▹A. A defensible vacancy baseline. Separate office, street-level commercial, upper-floor, registered vacant/unsafe, stalled and in-approvals vacancy — every figure with a date, a definition and a source. No single number that mixes them all.
▹B. A Downtown Vacancy Action File. The public accountability centre for the issue: what type of vacancy is measured, which municipal tool applies, who controls the next step, what’s delayed, why, and what changed since the last update. Property-specific detail only where it is already public and legally appropriate.
▹C. Coordinate the major property files. One identified municipal contact per major stalled property, with known approvals and deficiencies, outstanding decisions, external dependencies, a recorded next step and a scheduled status review — so government’s part of the file is harder to lose.
▹D. Enforcement where enforcement is justified. Distinguish a lawfully vacant building from an unsafe one, a property-standards violation, or a documented public hazard. Enforcement addresses an actual violation — not punishment for a building simply being empty. Any daily-fine language is written to the current by-law, with the necessary legal qualifications.
▹E. Incentives conditional on results. When public money supports a conversion, repair or reuse, the public can see what outcome was purchased, what the recipient committed to, the timeline, whether occupancy occurred, and what happens if the commitment isn’t met.
▹F. Connect heritage to productive use. Heritage can’t survive indefinitely as an empty shell. Preservation needs a viable use, a credible building plan, clearly identified authority and a route toward safe occupancy.
▹G. Report publicly every quarter. A short, meaningful set of measures — returned to use, unsafe files resolved, units created, spaces reoccupied, applications awaiting decision, funding committed versus completed, and stalled files with a reason.
I will not promise a tax or enforcement power the City may not legally possess. I will put the lawful options, missing authority, costs, barriers, and implementation choices before Council and the public.
A councillor is one vote of fifteen. I can bring motions, request reports, coordinate, advocate and vote. I cannot choose a tenant, force a private sale or lease, or guarantee that any building gets converted. But the baseline, the public file, the coordination, the enforcement of real violations and the reporting are all the City’s own to use.
Where would you like to go next?
Keep moving through what matters to you.
BISSON13 · Ward 13