Engineer who complained about hotel demolition found guilty of misconduct
Admits he had no right to interfere, says he was only thinking of public safety
KITCHENER — The retired Kitchener engineer who lodged complaints against three engineers involved in the structural assessment and later the demolition of the Mayfair Hotel has been found guilty of professional misconduct.
John Lee pleaded guilty to professional misconduct at a disciplinary hearing last month held by Professional Engineers Ontario, the body that regulates professional engineers in Ontario. Bernie Nimer, the owner of the Mayfair, had filed the complaint against Lee.
The 1905 Mayfair Hotel, a heritage building across from city hall, was declared unsafe after a water main break in April 2015 damaged the building.
Two engineers separately concluded that the building was structurally unsound, leading to the demolition of the building that June.
Lee, a retired geotechnical engineer, spoke at Kitchener council to seek a delay in the demolition.
He also spoke out publicly about his concerns that the plans to demolish the building without first strengthening its foundation would pose an even greater danger to public safety.
He filed complaints with Professional Engineers Ontario against the two structural engineers who had recommended the demolition, and against the engineer hired to supervise the demolition.
Lee also issued what he called an “engineer’s instruction,” ordering an immediate halt to the demolition work to the engineering body, members of Kitchener council and the media.
An agreed statement of facts said that Lee has no direct knowledge of the structural condition of the Mayfair and that his views were “based solely on his own street-level observations of the exterior conditions of the building and its surroundings, reading other engineers’ reports and the publicly available municipal documents” related to the Mayfair.
The statement went on to say that Lee “had no right or authority to express any engineering opinions,” and that “there is no such thing in Ontario as an ‘engineer’s instruction’ and Lee had no authority to order a work stoppage.”
“His conduct, including most importantly his attempt to coerce the CBO (chief building official) and others by threatening civil and criminal liability if they failed to follow his ‘engineer’s instruction,’ was disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.”
The statement did note that had Lee testified at a hearing, he would have said that he acted out of concern for public safety and did not stand to gain financially or otherwise from his actions around the Mayfair.
In an interview Wednesday, Lee said he spent $40,000 defending himself in the complaints process, and stressed that he had acted solely to protect what he believed was the public interest. He wouldn’t comment further, for fear his comments might be deemed criticism of the engineers’ organization.
The professional body ordered Lee to pay $7,500 in costs within a year, ordered him to pass the organization’s professional practice exam or face suspension, and said a reprimand will be registered with the organization for three years.