Executive Director of SPAR Council "Comes Out"!

[sheclown]

As I posted yesterday:

You may want to get all the facts before you start accusing, Stephen. But that doesn't seem to be your MO.

I don't have any personal knowledge about the circumstances of the demo or the letter and neither do you.

Just a suggestion.



Sheclown,

yes, I know who Joel is. Very well, actually. Personally. 

From someone who is actually involved in the process and has done some research on it......

"The majority of the demos that have been brought up recently have been done so by the owners. The city is cracking down on negligent property owners and the ultimatum is, bring the property up to code or demolish it. They either don't want to spend the money for needed repairs or can't afford to and ask for demo as the cheaper option. I hear a lot of complaining about the situation but lets hear some solutions. This issue is not in the hands of SPAR, RAP or the city. The property owners are the ones responsible, at fault and in control. The way the laws are now the city cannot force someone to repair or keep up their property.

How long is long enough for a house to sit, 5, 15, 30 years? I don't know one person who would choose demo over restoration but the fact is restoration in some cases is not happening. The Lampru Apartments were a perfect example. They sat in disrepair for years until they finally started to cave in on themselves. It wasn't SPAR or the city's fault. It was the owner who allowed the demolition by neglect and no one else had any control of stopping the process. My point is, it is unproductive to wring our hands and blame those that have no control to stop the problem.

A demo was recently granted to an owner/developer (not SRG!!!) so he could build a new home on the property. He had a contractor and engineer's report saying that the property was not structurally sound, along with a report from the city's property safety dept. So how can we fight that?

I think that people don't understand the roles of the Historic Commission, Property Safety Dept., General Council and Special Master. The Historic Commission can enforce the interiors guidelines for alterations and additions but is trumped by Property Safety and The Specciall Master when it comes to safety, non compliance and demolition. I am on the HPC along with 3 other new members and we are working with General Council to change the laws but it won't happen overnight.

And way to go Joe for trying to make me look bad. I have been on the Commission for 11 months now and I have not seen you at a single hearing. If you had been in attendance you would know that I have been the most outspoken member against demolition, on many times the one dissenting vote and the initiator with General Council and staff to get changes made to the laws. Go figure.".

Joe, in this letter, is Strider. Who has a small coalition to rid the world of the plague that is SPAR. A crusade, of sorts...

This was Joe's response to her post dated Friday October 2, 2009 (on a different forum).

This issue has been discussed many times. The problem isn’t that an owner won’t sell, it is and was that there was no one to buy it. And no money to fix it. I know that you’ve heard that people were greedy and were asking too much for the houses in question, but were do you think those prices came from? Try the developers who pushed the prices up on empty lots to make their own lots that were bought cheap worth more. Try the realtors who liked the commission on 50K much better than that 10K. And yes, some where probably just “greedy”. In the end, once the house hit the “system”, it was doomed unless luck brought a buyer in time. I know of one case where a buyer was brought to the table a month before the demo and the city still said too late.

This wasn’t an issue until some decided that the rest of the houses had to be done or else. We have seen the or else. As far as houses being structurally unsound, yes, even I have passed that judgment on some of them. But the vast majority of ones that came down in the last two years I feel were very salvageable. Try one that had a three year old roof and the sills replaced and that 50% of the structure was new and to current code. It came down at the foreclosure’s banks request because it was structurally unsound. No, it came down because the city didn’t care, the HPC didn’t understand and the community organization had made the original complaints against it anyway. The cheaper solution for all, I guess. Another had no leaks in the roof, except the front porch. It used to be the front porch would be taken, but the sound house would be saved. Today, the entire house goes. But of course, Dan has said the problem seems over so why worry?

And Lisa, you know that I have more time downtown and in front of the historic commission than you do and you have been on the commission 11 months now. As far as making you look bad…I simply repeated something you said on this very forum. Do you feel differently today than you did when you made that comment?

Lisa, to those “owner requested” demos….you do admit that they are being requested because the house are in the system and will be demo’d anyway so the owners are simply trying to save themselves a few grand by doing it themselves.? So I have to ask, is the commission saving the house or by default, just making more money for the city (if the city ever happens to get paid)?

I guess we could listen to Dan and Lisa and not worry anymore about the old houses. After all, it isn’t like they are important anymore, is it? So what if we do nothing now because it is much better to worry about things like a thrift store on Main or even rooming houses, even if that means no one is looking while a few more historic houses go away for good.

Louise's email proves that Lisa is not in a hurry about the demolition of these houses.  After all, Louise states that she needs to "light a fire" under Lisa over it.  However, it does indicate a certain level of control by Louise over Lisa, as if she is able to force the Historic Commission to do her bidding.

FSU813, if you are going to post one, you need to post the response as well.

OOPPSS!  Wrong Lisa.  The Lisa in Louise's email is Lisa Sheppard in Joel's office.  Not Lisa Simon of the historic commission.  I really don't know where that leaves us.

[Ethylene]

The structure at 1430 N Liberty has had a green demo sign for weeks! There is an open C.A.R.E. request in the system but it makes no mention of demo! Is that standard? Frankly, this house has been languishing uninhabited for a few years now. Obviously, it's so neglected it's almost as if it isn't even there as it just blends into the trees and bushes.

[sheclown]

no green tag means its days are numbered.

[fsu813]

I DEMAND A FULL INVESTIAGTION!

HEADS WILL ROLL!

[strider]

Stephen, posting this particular e-mail was not an easy decision.  I knew there would be some who would defend Louise no matter what.  I actually thought you would as you have before. I also knew others would attack me over it. I can take it.  However and unfortunately, this is indeed the Louise I have known for years.

FSU813... you should know that the person you quoted as "is actually involved in the process and has done some research on it......"  has been involved in Springfield far less time than I have, has less experience in the process than I have and is the person who spoke out on the SPAR Council forum a while ago and said that all the houses worth restoring in Historic Springfield have been done already. I hope she has changed her mind, but at this point, I don't know.

As to the e-mail itself?  Well, I thought about it and realized that based on other facts that I know and the actual wording of the document, it was not just a one time thing, it was not just about these two particular houses and this was indeed how she felt about the issue.  I can't call Louise myself, but someone else certainly can and ask her to comment.  Meanwhile, we have the two e-mails that have been posted and they say it all in black and whilte and can not be retracted nor dismissed.

[Springfield Girl]

The "Lisa" referenced in the email was Lisa Sheppard. Anyone who knows me well knows I have strong principals and cannot be swayed from my beliefs without facts. I have to agree to disagree with many people I like and respect. Joe you may have more years involved as a contractor, rehabber or member of SPAR or HSCC but that is different than sitting on the Code Enforcement or HPC Boards. I attended meetings for years and I can assure you that sitting behind that table is much harder than I ever imagined. Bottom line is I'm sure most properties could be saved with will and enough money but we don't have the right or the power to make that decision for an owner. The way the laws are now we can stave off demo until a property is deemed unsafe then we have no more authority. Property safety trumps every other division. The biggest problem as I see it is that many property owners do nothing for years, sometimes decades, ignoring requests from Code Enforcement or Property Safety to clean, maintain or repair their property. When the City finally enforces the laws the owners cry foul, with no plan to remedy the situation or they want the property demolished themselves. I love historic homes. I've restored a few and won an award from the HPC for the restoration of my personal home, so I don't understand the mindset of allowing a historic property to deteriorate to the point where demolition is even considered. I have a hard time though blaming city employees for the situation when the owners are at fault for allowing the deterioration to occur. Many cities have laws on the books to take properties from neglectful owners and I would agree with that process but I'm sure there are many on the other side who would say government had overstepped their boundaries and should not tell people what they can or can't do with their properties. The historic staff and commission follow guidelines set by the Secretary of the Interior for designated Historic Districts. They are doing the best they can but for every historic minded person who saves doors or windows willingly there are those who send hate letters, call the staff and commission stupid, complain that historic guidelines are outdated and not "green" and appeal to City Council or the Mayor that HPC is stepping on property rights. I used to get so mad when I watched hearings in the past but I realized my passion, anger and bitching weren't helping the situation. I do my best now to work for positive change. I try to encourage and educate people to do the right thing and I focus on the successes not the failures.

[vicupstate]

WHy are all of these demolitions occurring in Springfield but not Riverside or San Marco?  All three are in the same city and under the same government jurisdictions.  Are there simply no houses in Riverside or San Marco that are in the same supposed 'poor condition' as the properties that have been demolished in Springfield?

There seems to be a vicious cycle going on in Springfield.  The city CAN and SHOULD levy fines for neglect BEFORE the building becomes borderline unsafe.  If they were as aggressive on THOSE fines, then the owner would remedy or sell before it is at the point of 'supposed' no return.

[JeffreyS]

Not many homes in San Marco that you could argue for need demo.

[fsu813]

Yeah, Riverside is pretty much clean too. Not many boarded up, abandoned, walls & roofs falling in type of properties there.

[Jth]

Stephen, posting this particular e-mail was not an easy decision.  I knew there would be some who would defend Louise no matter what.  I actually thought you would as you have before. I also knew others would attack me over it. I can take it.  However and unfortunately, this is indeed the Louise I have known for years.

FSU813... you should know that the person you quoted as "is actually involved in the process and has done some research on it......"  has been involved in Springfield far less time than I have, has less experience in the process than I have and is the person who spoke out on the SPAR Council forum a while ago and said that all the houses worth restoring in Historic Springfield have been done already. I hope she has changed her mind, but at this point, I don't know.

As to the e-mail itself?  Well, I thought about it and realized that based on other facts that I know and the actual wording of the document, it was not just a one time thing, it was not just about these two particular houses and this was indeed how she felt about the issue.  I can't call Louise myself, but someone else certainly can and ask her to comment.  Meanwhile, we have the two e-mails that have been posted and they say it all in black and whilte and can not be retracted nor dismissed.

Strider, Id much rather know the truth than to fondly live a lie that lets these people destroy hundreds of thousands of dollars of other people's property in order to pump an extra 20 thousand dollars into their own pockets --in terms of 'increasing their own property values.

I have been downtown all day today and have talked to many many many people involved both directly in and around this situation and the one common theme was that people hoped that we would all finally wake up and realize that this organization is 'mean and unbelievably spiteful' (in the words of someone at City Hall) and 'no longer working in the interests of a historic neighborhood or in the interests of historic preservation" (according to someone working at Planning)

Well the scales have been lifted from my eyes, and though it hurt my feelings as well as my trust that some things should be above the fray, Im glad to know the truth.

Did you stop and chat with Sean Kelly about the "secret SPR plan" while you were at Planning? Out of curiosity who at Planning said that to you?

[sheclown]

Does anyone have a list of the houses scheduled for demolition? 

We have a green tag on 1430 Liberty.  Any more around?

[Springfield Girl]

WHy are all of these demolitions occurring in Springfield but not Riverside or San Marco?  All three are in the same city and under the same government jurisdictions.  Are there simply no houses in Riverside or San Marco that are in the same supposed 'poor condition' as the properties that have been demolished in Springfield?

There seems to be a vicious cycle going on in Springfield.  The city CAN and SHOULD levy fines for neglect BEFORE the building becomes borderline unsafe.  If they were as aggressive on THOSE fines, then the owner would remedy or sell before it is at the point of 'supposed' no return.

I agree with this completely and have asked for years why the city does not do this. We ticket people for traffic violations, heck we ticket people when they exceed the time on their parking meter or park the wrong way on the street. This city could bring in a lot of revenue by ticketing and enforcing the fines on wayward property owners. There are homes in Springfield that have sat empty and deteriorating for decades. This is why there are issues now. Most of the structures were built well but even they will not stand forever without care and maintainence.

[lindab]

There is a fine system that is applied to the owner for allowing condition problems to occur but many owners either complain to their councilman ("Oh how unfair this is to me!") and get out of it or just let it happen. By the time the city gets ready for condemnation, the building is in such a state that it costs monster dollars to rehab it. What is the answer to that - do like they do for overgrown lawns and just fix it and bill the owners? Property rights nuts would have a fit.  I don't know a good answer.

Having restored 3 buildings in Riverside, I can say that the housing stock of a neighborhood, what the buildings are made of, how big it is, and whether it has a good roof over it makes a lot of difference.  Old, 100 year old plus buildings of wood, 3000-4000 plus square feet of interior space, wooden porches, all the lovely brickabrac are hard as hell to bring back if they have gone too far down. The upfront cost is terrific. All you amazing people who have done it, know what I mean.

Springfield is a wonderland of such stock. Riverside has a little bit but mixed with smaller cottages and bungalows and San Marco is 1920s-30s stucco and block.

[GaryGJ]

 Actually I would hope that Louise gets help one way or another the first way would help the econiommy. The second...

[GaryGJ]

  For starters does anyone have about $10,000?! That would be the first check written, that would have to clear to even start somthing. But, you are propossing what?! Louise you are an idiot!!!!