Main Street loses its steeple?

[sheclown]

[sheclown]

By ordinance one has 21 days to appeal a COA decision. This expires tomorrow.

I say we fight this. We argue that the steeple, by its very nature, is contributing and that the COA be rescinded. Let's go on record fighting this.

It will cost $300. to fight it. If you are interested in contributing or in fighting, let me know, PM me.

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

[carpnter]

By ordinance one has 21 days to appeal a COA decision. This expires tomorrow.

I say we fight this. We argue that the steeple, by its very nature, is contributing and that the COA be rescinded. Let's go on record fighting this.

It will cost $300. to fight it. If you are interested in contributing or in fighting, let me know, PM me.

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

I guess you haven't spoken with the church to see why the steeple was removed instead of repaired. 

[Timkin]

By ordinance one has 21 days to appeal a COA decision. This expires tomorrow.

I say we fight this. We argue that the steeple, by its very nature, is contributing and that the COA be rescinded. Let's go on record fighting this.

It will cost $300. to fight it. If you are interested in contributing or in fighting, let me know, PM me.

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

I guess you haven't spoken with the church to see why the steeple was removed instead of repaired.

And this would be important for what reason?

Would the Steeple NOT need to be taken down to be repaired? ( Assuming this is actually what is being done)  Would it not be much more expensive to repair it in place?

[sheclown]

This is what non-contributing looks like folks...

[sheclown]

There are no plans to repair the steeple and replace it.  The COA states DEMOLITION.

[iloveionia]

I cringed:
"Demolish Steeple"

Man.  That's a serious red flag.
Only in Springfield, only in Springfield.

I am waiting patiently to hear if the church is rebuilding.
We ought to start a fundraiser to rebuild that steeple. 

$$$  Help them make money. 
Bring back that steeple.

[Timkin]

I cringed:
"Demolish Steeple"

Man.  That's a serious red flag.
Only in Springfield, only in Springfield.

I am waiting patiently to hear if the church is rebuilding.
We ought to start a fundraiser to rebuild that steeple. 

$$$  Help them make money. 
Bring back that steeple.

How much are we talking to replace said steeple?   Never heard of a Church removing one permanently, and the only thing that makes sense in this case is that they could not afford to fix it?

Still .. it had to be expensive just to get a Crane to take it off. 

I would contribute to a replacement .

[carpnter]

By ordinance one has 21 days to appeal a COA decision. This expires tomorrow.

I say we fight this. We argue that the steeple, by its very nature, is contributing and that the COA be rescinded. Let's go on record fighting this.

It will cost $300. to fight it. If you are interested in contributing or in fighting, let me know, PM me.

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

I guess you haven't spoken with the church to see why the steeple was removed instead of repaired.

And this would be important for what reason?

Would the Steeple NOT need to be taken down to be repaired? ( Assuming this is actually what is being done)  Would it not be much more expensive to repair it in place?

Someone said there was a steel structure supporting that steeple, if that is the case then it was a permanent attachment and not something you can buy and add to the building.  That steeple was nearly as tall as the church itself was so there was some significant structural framing supporting it. 

The reason someone should ask is because they could have had the steeple inspected (there could have been a problem inside the building below the steeple) and discovered that there were severe structural problems with it and the cost to repair it may have been significantly higher than removing it. 

[ChriswUfGator]

By ordinance one has 21 days to appeal a COA decision. This expires tomorrow.

I say we fight this. We argue that the steeple, by its very nature, is contributing and that the COA be rescinded. Let's go on record fighting this.

It will cost $300. to fight it. If you are interested in contributing or in fighting, let me know, PM me.

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

I guess you haven't spoken with the church to see why the steeple was removed instead of repaired.

And this would be important for what reason?

Would the Steeple NOT need to be taken down to be repaired? ( Assuming this is actually what is being done)  Would it not be much more expensive to repair it in place?

Someone said there was a steel structure supporting that steeple, if that is the case then it was a permanent attachment and not something you can buy and add to the building.  That steeple was nearly as tall as the church itself was so there was some significant structural framing supporting it. 

The reason someone should ask is because they could have had the steeple inspected (there could have been a problem inside the building below the steeple) and discovered that there were severe structural problems with it and the cost to repair it may have been significantly higher than removing it. 

You're guessing at excuses.

Meanwhile what we know for a fact is they've demolished a contributing historic structure.

[sheclown]

What is at issue here is

1.) the fact that such a huge defining feature of the neighborhood was demolished without any notice or public hearing and

2.) the fact that this feature could be classified as non-contributing when it clearly "stands out" as the epicenter of Springfield.  And if this structure is non-contributing, what else is out there and classified as such without any protection whatsoever?

All COAs are appeal-able and as such ought to be properly noticed.  This one clearly was not.

The neighborhood is not without its resources.  Come out on any volunteer day and you will be run over by folks ready, able and willing to help.  We could have helped with fund-raising, labor, volunteer work anything had we been given an opportunity -- notice of the impending doom of the steeple would have been the right thing to do.

The city should have noticed the community.

[vicupstate]

Furthermore, the neighborhood was robbed of its ability to save the steeple by due process of appeal. The work should not have begun until after the appeal period.

Like the Seinfeld episode, 'holding' a reservation is a very important part of 'making' a reservation.  Without 'holding' a reservation, you don't really have a reservation.

This is a huge gap in the ordinance and in the effort to protect historic structures, should be remedied ASAP.

I do think it matters what the church has to say as to their reasoning, that should be done pronto if an effort is going to be made to rebuild/replace the steeple.   Also, any building over 50 years old should be considered 'contributing'.     

[sheclown]

From my talk with Joel, clearly the church did not have funds to repair the steeple and the contractor stated (with pictures I have not seen yet) that the damage was more extensive than first believed.

Be that as it may, there should have been a public notice.

[fsujax]

Extensive damage because of lack of maintenance. It was negelected by the owners. Just look at the soffit, that was rotting off and falling on the sidewalk, I mean they couldnt even keep the church cleaned, it needs a good pressure washing and new paint.

[sheclown]

Extensive damage because of lack of maintenance. It was negelected by the owners. Just look at the soffit, that was rotting off and falling on the sidewalk, I mean they couldnt even keep the church cleaned, it needs a good pressure washing and new paint.

I'm sure that many a good church has been very hard hit during the past couple of years.  Any church worth its salt has put its money into helping those hurt by the economy.  I can only imagine the draw on the resources that this economic crisis has caused.

I don't think we need to attack the church.

The problem is that the neighborhood was not given notice by the city and the city did not protect the historic fabric "contributing" or not.

With notice, there could have been fund-raising attempts, volunteering, help from people willing to do so. 

Now, after the fact, repair and replacement is much more difficult and expensive, if not impossible.

This is what is so disturbing to me.