Ritz presents vision of GT superstructure as council questions efficacy of its work so far

A before and after of the Grand Trunk superstructure, according to Ritz’s vision of the site. With his firm, Ritz has been independently developing a plan for the revitalizing project, which is being directed by Stratford city council.

CONNOR LUCZKA, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Local architect Robert Ritz wants the public to start thinking of the Grand Trunk building as the solution, not the problem.

That was his thesis on Nov. 25, when he presented his vision for the Grand Trunk site in a packed hall of the Army Navy and Air Force Veterans building. Wall to wall were blueprints his firm R. Ritz Architect has been working on and, after his presentation wrapped, renderings of what his vision may look like, which includes a full revitalization of the building with space for a new library, the YMCA, luxury apartments, a pool and room to grow.

Central to his work was preserving the site’s heritage. The Grand Trunk building was opened in 1871 as a locomotive repair facility, eventually growing to employ 40 per cent of Stratford’s workforce, before being shut down in the 1960s and abandoned in the mid-1980s. Once the lifeblood of Stratford, it has been dormant since then, with redevelopment ideas rising and falling for the last 40 years.

As part of his personal redevelopment plan, Ritz has tracked down the last locomotive which came from the old shops in a museum in Fort Erie, claiming that the organization agreed to donate the locomotive if stored properly.

Locomotive 6218, as it is called, would be a focal point of the Grand Trunk superstructure, displayed in a mezzanine that overlooks a fully realized library, community space, concourse and more.

The project could be done in seven phases, Ritz said, moving from east to west. Phase one would be rehabilitating and modifying the existing structure. Phase two would develop a parking garage and concourse level that will cut through the centre of the superstructure. Phase three would be the McKenzie Entrance (as he would call it) and Locomotive 6218. Phase four would be the Argyle Entrance and eastern concourse. Phase five would be the Stratford Entrance and central concourse. Phase six would be a new YMCA facility within the superstructure and an eight-storey luxury apartment building attached to the western portion of the superstructure, complete with a shared pool. Finally, phase seven would be the renovation of the original YMCA building into a new police station for the Stratford Police Service, which has been operating out of the severely undersized George Street headquarters.

Phase by phase, level by level, Ritz detailed how it should be constructed with council and the City of Stratford leading the project. Recently there has been discussion about handing the project to a developer; however, Ritz thinks that the city has all the tools to steer the revitalization of the superstructure itself – with a project lead hired on to do it.

He also addressed some key desires and concerns expressed by the public over the years.

On affordable housing, Ritz argued that the site and building itself are not suitable. He argued that there are other more cost-efficient parcels in the city that could be used for affordable housing, while the luxury apartments would go a long way to mitigating the costs of developing the project.

Furthermore, if parking spaces increased at the site – and council adjusted its zoning for the immediate surrounding area – then area homeowners could add an addition onto their homes for extra, affordable units, he argued.

During the question period of the evening, one concerned resident asked about the restrictions of building so close to the rail line. In the March 7 edition of the Times, it was reported that CN Rail objected to the much-discussed Krug factory redevelopment project due to the proximity to its line.

The caveat for this site, Ritz said, was the line on the south side of the building is not owned by CN Rail, rather the Goderich-Exeter Railway (GEXR). He has been attempting to reach ownership of GEXR but has not been able to discuss his ideas with them yet.

CN Rail may comment on any development a kilometre from one of its yards, which is why he placed the housing portion of the site as far away from the Stratford yard as possible.

Currently, the City of Stratford has invested $27 million into the project. According to consulting firm Svec Group, which is currently investigating more detailed costing, developing the superstructure could cost between $43 million and $126 million.

While Ritz discussed self-financing opportunities this vision would have, he did not have a price tag.

“That's what I'm working on right now,” Ritz said, saying he’ll be meeting with chief administrative officer (CAO) André Morin and corporate initiatives lead Emily Robson to further investigate his plan.

For those interested, a Youtube video of Ritz’s presentation will be posted by Ballinran Entertainment at a later date. His renderings, likewise, will be posted as well.

Ritz’s presentation came at an opportune time. Just the night prior, Morin and Robson gave an update to Stratford city council. Not much has developed since last they gave an update in July (Svec Group is expected to come back to council with a costing update in Q1 of 2026), but they did spark a spirited discussion amongst councillors about the project’s past and future.

Many councillors expressed frustration in how the project has been directed and the lack of a centralized vision, as well as concerns over the financial viability of the project.

“One of the problems that I have … is scale,” Coun. Larry McCabe argued, saying that council and the public need to be aware it is a municipality of 35,000 people – not 500,000. “When we are looking at this analysis, often people are using scales which don't apply to this municipality. And that is what scares me about this site, is that when we use those sort of frameworks we are setting ourselves up for the catastrophic position that puts the city in a position of bankruptcy in 20 years, when it puts all of this money into this site and it doesn't have the taxes to pay. So that's why I'm very cautious about the idea of developing the site without some sort of economic analysis of what needs to be on that site to drive economic viability.

“… We could have benefited by this being a task force that was struck, as opposed to an ad hoc committee, because then we would have really identified these things now,” McCabe had earlier said. “And we are two and a half years into it, coming up to an election. I have some concerns about where we're at.”

“The real problem here is the money,” Coun. Mark Hunter agreed. “If we had bags and bags of the stuff, we could do whatever we want, but we don't have that. And I don't see a financial way for the city to do this project by ourselves. We can do little pieces. … I think we can probably do a Y and or a library, but that might be it. We might not have enough money left over for the superstructure.

“… We can dream and plan all we want, but if there's nobody out there that wants to invest money, nothing's going to happen.”

Coun. Brad Beatty, who has long advocated to demolish the building and start with a fresh slate, once again got on his soapbox, as he called it.

“The conversation we’re having now is Groundhog Day. We’re having the same conversations,” Beatty said. “… We have 18 acres in our city centre that's going to cost a significant amount of money. I don't care who you ask. You ask three developers, you will get three different answers. And we will sit here and say, ‘Well, which one's the better choice?’ And we will get befuddled, and we will get paralysis through analysis, and we will not make a decision. I will tell you – guaranteed – that when we finish our term one year from now, we will not be any further.”

That was not the first time “paralysis by analysis” has been commented about the Grand Trunk site, something that Ritz agreed with. Speaking with reporters after his presentation on Nov. 25, he said that it’s time to move forward.

When asked about another idiom – “too many cooks in the kitchen” – Ritz disagreed.

“It’s not that. I'm trying to say that maybe the chefs you have aren't doing a good job,” Ritz said. “Let's get a chef to make a meal. That's how I look at it.”