1543 Market: Owner requests demolition COA

[sheclown]

Hearing in June:

[Miss Fixit]

Purchased March 31, 2006 for $80,000 by Samuel Padgett, who lives across the street at 1536 Market.

This one looks like a pretty tough project - it's hard to imagine a private investor putting a lot of money into this property given the terrible appearance / condition of the vacant commercial building immediately north of it. 

We so desperately need an historic foundation with a substantial endowment!

[sheclown]

A foundation with an endowment would be dream come true, but short of that... it could be mothballed.

I would remove the Tyvek wrap and paint the plywood.  Put up some temporary bracing.  Board the upper windows and make the door opening more appropriate.  I would add some motion lighting.  

This house recently began getting hit by rolling fines.  The mothballing would stop the daily fines as well.

It doesn't need to look this bad and it doesn't need to be penalized daily.

[Debbie Thompson]

Gone....another one....

This house was unique.  Great bay wndows.  This did NOT have to happen. 

http://www.myspringfield.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=1360

[sheclown]

photo from Bill Hoff

[sheclown]

Mothballing is fantastic, a wonderful tool to help save the houses.  However, it is a tiny piece of this puzzle.  Code enforcement rolling fines, owners without resources and desire to mothball, these are issues that need to be addressed now.

This house could have been mothballed and saved. 

1325 Laura Street can be mothballed and saved.

Patterson Apts could have been mothballed and saved.

The formal track houses can be mothballed and saved.

Demolition needs to be a less desirable option for the homeowners, for code enforcement, for HPC, for everyone concerned.  Until that is the case, they will continue to be leveled, new legislation or not.

[sheclown]

Did neighbors really cheer when it went down?

This is such sadness. 

Does this make 12 houses that have been demolished since the moratorium was announced less than a year ago?

[iloveionia]

I absolutely agree with this statement:
"Demolition needs to be a less desirable option for the homeowners, for code enforcement, for HPC, for everyone concerned.  Until that is the case, they will continue to be leveled, new legislation or not."

There were 11 demolitions in 2010, in 2011 off the top of my head:  1600 block of Market, this one on Market, Patterson Apts. on W. 10th.

About the house. I was inside about 2 weeks ago. Though gutted, it was gorgeous. The foyer of the house still had the plaster and trim, I could tell that prior to gutting it was beautiful. The rooms were big and expansive, the staircase grand (there was even a back staircase.) The floors were intact. The 3 bays were something else, they are what made the house grand. Like any of these old houses there was termite damage on the joists (I looked underneath the house,) albeit they could have been replaced. And for those of you that doubt, I went into the house on invite of the owner who I spoke with personally a number of times while in Springfield.

This house was torn down for 2 reasons: 1) Neighbor complaints and harassment and 2) MCCD harassment and daily fines. At least 3 neighbors (I have spoken face to face with each of them,) complained incessently about the house. This house was boarded and secure, they complained about its appearance, trash, and its "instability." Their complaints went to MCCD and to the owners directly. Their complaints were without a doubt harassment and undue stress to this owner, and as well all should understand MCCD was slapping daily fines on the owner and also doing their own bit of harassment threats. It IS what they do.

I would like to add that this owner really tried to donate the house to a non-profit. They went to at least 3 different groups and no one would take it on. I think if mothballing legislation would have been in full force prior to this owner's harassment, it would have saved the house for future renovation. They would have done it too: she really does love these old houses. But Springfield is a problem. We are our own worst enemy. MCCD does not help Springfield. The neighborhood organization and HPC was asleep at the wheel for years. (Let's not get on my backend for those last comments either,) the tide has changed and that is a positive thing, but it is still important to grieve for a lost house, even if some don't give a crap about our old homes in our Nationally Recognized Historic neighborhood.

I am sure some of the neighbors are having a party over the loss of this house and the addition of a vacant lot. What are people thinking? I am sorry for this house. I am sorry for those who actually care. I am grateful for mothballing legislation. And I (SOS) will focus on supporting HPC to make it work for Springfield. It's all we've got right now and we must continue to plow forward and save the houses.

Save the houses, save the houses, save the houses.

[sheclown]

It's hard to save the houses when half of the neighborhood is in tears because of the loss and another half is planning a party.

It is a divide so deep and so wide.

And sad that it is happening in a Nationally Recognized Historic District.

[strider]

To be honest, as long as there are back room deals going on, as long as there is a MCCD that believes their only mission is clearing cases, as long as local organizations believe it is OK to take houses for social reasons, as long as there are people out there who know what is really going on behind those closed doors but think it better to be popular at First Fridays, as long as the city continues to hinder rather than help the old houses, the demolitions will continue.

Mothballing is a great first step, but the efforts have already been compromised and if we are not careful, the who (wants the demolition), why (a new pool is important) and where (the old house sits) will decide whether a house is saved rather than the real condition of the house itself.  The house in this thread is a perfect example of Demolition by Reckless Policy and it was taken for purely social reasons.  The neighbors wanted it gone and perhaps even one of them wanted the empty lot.  MCCD was only too happy to help them and the HPC was not strong enough to say no.   Frankly, even Preservation SOS dropped the ball somewhat on this one.

Historic Springfield needs to decide what it really wants to be.  Does it want to be a community that has a few historic structures or one that really embraces being a Historic District with both the good (the easy) and the bad (the difficult) that entails.  As far as I can see, a select few tried to make that decision for us a few years ago but thankfully some real information was made public and now many are rethinking that decision and trying to embrace the Historic District for what it truly is.  But most are still stuck on that fence and until they publicly make up their minds, we will continue to lose house after house.  It is the easier path after all.

[KuroiKetsunoHana]

i didn't even know this one had come down--i haven't been out much lately.  makes me sad--that house was right next to me the whole time i was growing up.

[Springfielder]

Sadly, it didn't have to come down. It wasn't a public safety issue, it was a matter that some neighbors thought it looked ugly. It wasn't pretty, but neither were the majority of these houses before they were restored. It's the ignorant ones that just don't get it