Patterson Apartments: They're Coming Down

[iloveionia]

As a reminder.  There are two options that are given from Code Compliance in regards to our homes in Historic Springfield that are not livable:
1.  Repair
2.  Demolish

And you basically have 6 months to do so as all the homes going before the HPC are being put on the Formal Track which means at around the 6 month mark if the home is still "condemned," the demolition process will be started, which means the house will go down in about 3 months.

It is evident Code Compliance makes the decisions, and HPC just rubber stamps with approval their requests.

[02roadking]

Keep them off formal track one way or another.  My motto

[sheclown]

DERAIL THE FORMAL TRACK

[iloveionia]

That means going head to head with Code Compliance and Safety. 
Formal Track for Demolition. 
Keep in mind that is the full name of formal track.

Oh, and by the way, the "head to head" part?  Necessary.

[02roadking]

I might be prepared for that with a little support.

[sheclown]

Many are onboard.

[iloveionia]

A relentless pursuit.

Board, secure, monitor.  It's simple.

[Timkin]

A relentless pursuit.

Board, secure, monitor.  It's simple.

Ionia... This should be an option, instead of repair or demolish, especially if the home is structurally sound, but not inhabitable for whatever reason.

If every major city in the US implemented "repair or demolish" there would be nothing left.  It is absurd.

[iloveionia]

Timkin,
I agree 100%
But somewhere along around 2007 Code Compliance took over and their solution became to 'abate by demolition' most recently, home after home has been requested to be put on the formal track for demolition. 
Code Compliance is following a policy they created. 
I honestly don't understand. 
I won't understand regardless. 
Continuing to demolish what is left in Springfield is wrong.
HPC, well, HPC, where are they?  Historic Preservation Commission?
Definitely not.

[Timkin]

I could not agree more.  For all we know, HPC is directed to abstain from participating in this.. It would not surprise me if some of this took place around or after the time PS4's demo request was struck down , by HPC , and presented to Council.. By that time, I had the Florida Trust and the National Trust breathing down their backs.. Who is to say if the School will be saved, but at least at that point, the developer backed off on the demo.. As everyone knows, Council kept deferring the bill, it finally was kicked out , and was sent back to HPC.   I would suggest getting at least the Florida Trust on to these properties. What can it hurt?

[sheclown]

I could not agree more.  For all we know, HPC is directed to abstain from participating in this.. It would not surprise me if some of this took place around or after the time PS4's demo request was struck down , by HPC , and presented to Council.. By that time, I had the Florida Trust and the National Trust breathing down their backs.. Who is to say if the School will be saved, but at least at that point, the developer backed off on the demo.. As everyone knows, Council kept deferring the bill, it finally was kicked out , and was sent back to HPC.   I would suggest getting at least the Florida Trust on to these properties. What can it hurt?

Uptown...do you know anything about this???  Seems promising.  

[uptowngirl]

That was the link to contacts I posted earlier.

[sheclown]

Whatever happens to Springfield, can happen in Riverside and Avondale.  San Marco for that matter.  

[Timkin]

This is why, Stephen , I maintain that the players in Code Enforcement , HPC and Council need to change..  This is beyond absurd..

If anyone needs my contacts w Florida Trust, PM me,.. would be more than happy to provide that..

[stjr]

Reading the minutes, I find several disturbing issues.

First, not one question or discussion by the commissioners.  Surely, they could have probed this a bit more.  Are they automatons or thinkers?  If they are supposed to safeguard historic structures, they should demand to know a lot more before letting one go away.

Elaine may be a noble servant, I don't know.  But, based on the transcript, she doesn't sound very convincing in her knowledge of structures and is relying mostly on superficial appearances.  Did she even go inside this building?  Shouldn't a contractor and/or engineer be requested to provide information on what it would take/cost to stabilize or mitigate the issues?

If there are prostitutes, that is a JSO issue.  Where are they?  Demolish the building, let the weeds grow, and the druggies, homeless, and prostitutes will just move back in.  They aren't interested in the building as much as a neighborhood that lets them live without harassment.  I don't see where a demolition is going to change that.

Lastly, why doesn't the City have the authority to stabilize the property and lien it just like when they cut the weeds, do the demo, etc.?  Did anyone see if the cost of stabilization is cheaper than demo?  The companion part to this is when the City is forced to do the stabilization or consider a demo, it should have the power to seize the property and immediately put it up for an auction sale to hopefully attract a more caring owner.  Any proceeds left after paying off City liens, fines, fees, interest, etc. can revert to the exiting owner.

I guarantee you that if owners knew the property could be swiped from them at a bargain price, they might be a bit more motivated to preserve the property.  Right now, you have a system that rewards them with a loophole around historic preservation by letting the property rot in place.  This makes no sense.

The Springfield and Riverside/Avondale City Council reps should be requested to write legislation along the lines of what I just suggested.