Historic Springfield Demolition COA signed today: 1647 Pearl

[Debbie Thompson]

Stayed means for now.  Now the work begins to find long term solutions. But at least this house may still be around to benefit when we do.  CM Lumb and his exec asst, Donna Barrow (dlbarrow@coj.net.)  Please send a thank you email and let them know you look forward to their upcoming meeting.

[Timkin]

will do!!!!

[sheclown]

from Code's case recap:

03/05/2012 N The pending demolition of this structure was placed back on "hold" this
morning, and an e-mail was sent to Michael Lloyd Hauling notifying them
of the "hold". whamilton
E. Wayne Hamilton

03/05/2012 N I contacted Ms. Pam Cowden with Atlantic Engineering Services, and
requested a structural engineering report on the two story house at 1647
Pearl Street North. Ms. Cowden agreed to submit her written report to us
no later than close of business on Wednesday, 3/7. whamilton
E. Wayne Hamilton

03/09/2012 N Received the Structural Condition Assessment report on 3/7/2012.
whamilton
E. Wayne Hamilton

04/28/2010 S 1998-4990- Approved by HPC on 4-28-10 after July 30, 2010. E.Lancaster Voria Lancaster

you may read the entire case file by going here:

http://forum.preservationsos.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=896&p=9781#p9781

[ChriswUfGator]

Wait, so they're just now getting around to ordering a structural engineering report AFTER it was already supposed to have been demolished? You gotta be kidding me.

[Timkin]

Wait, so they're just now getting around to ordering a structural engineering report AFTER it was already supposed to have been demolished? You gotta be kidding me.

I guess I'm not following.... are they doing this structural engineering report now to have an angle to proceed with demolition?

[Debbie Thompson]

Could be.  We would like to see the report. 

[Timkin]

Nothing funny about it!   Derelicts  running that department.  Unbelievable.

[Debbie Thompson]

It may be the engineer says the house is perfectly stable.  But it may also be that the engineer was steered in the direction of "we'd like to know if you think think the house is 'unsafe' or not" so tell us if it is. We really don't know if it's an unbiased report or not...no way to know.

Remember, just because a house may be unsafe, and I'm not saying this one is, but if it is, that does not mean a few simple repairs would not set things right again.  This one is simply not the hazard to public safety it's being painted to be.

We would like to see the report.  We would like to assess its validity and draw our own conclusions about it.

[Timkin]

It may be the engineer says the house is perfectly stable.  But it may also be that the engineer was steered in the direction of "we'd like to know if you think think the house is 'unsafe' or not" so tell us if it is. We really don't know if it's an unbiased report or not...no way to know.

Remember, just because a house may be unsafe, and I'm not saying this one is, but if it is, that does not mean a jack and a few posts would not set things right again.  Or that it is so 'unsafe' that it has to come down or is in danger of falling down.  Because clearly this one IS NOT.

We would like to see the report.  We would like to assess its validity and draw our own conclusions about it.

Agree.. There can be a variety of reasons a house is condemned or deemed unsafe.. The home I now reside in was condemned and had multiple issues.... but it sure as hell didn't have a death threat the way the Springfield area has been dealt. 

I would like to believe the Engineering report states the house is stable , end of discussion.  Given the track record of Code Enforcement and the non-stop demolitions, forgive me if I am suspicious of this report, given that it is requested after demolition was granted , then stayed. I will hold on to hope.

I would like to see the report as well and would need to see a pretty good reason the house should not be saved.  I have seen MUCH worse than this one, spared.   My grandparent's home in Ortega would have been a prime example. But it was , with much expense and incredible speed, saved.

[iloveionia]

I guess I'm not following.... are they doing this structural engineering report now to have an angle to proceed with demolition?

Alas, here is how the story goes: 
You see once upon a time there was a cute, but struggling historic district just on the outskirts of downtown: Springfield.  Many people came to Springfield in the late 90s in hopes to find their riches in real estate by scooping up dirt cheap historic homes.  These people, guised under LLC names, forgot about the homes they purchased after they didn't make the money they had hoped.  These homes have sat in our records for many, many years, some since 1998 have racked up thousands of dollars of fines and the fine far exceed the value of the home!  And the owner hasn't done a thing to it.  They've ignorned it!  We've posted notifications on the property addresses, but to no avail, no response.  So we decided that we would put an end to that and convince HPC that this "formal track" (ssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, it's not under chapter 508 it is just an internal practice we use but don't tell the whole truth about,) well actually "formal track for demolition" will give the house a chance.  We tell HPC that the house is going to fall down and that small pieces of flapping sheet metal are going to injure or (worse yet!) kill someone.  We tell them we are going to contact the owner to get them to repair (well technically we demand that they "restore or demolish") the home and they will have an opporunity to help the house.  HPC agrees, and (thankfully) because we don't always tell the truth, and certainly we are not educated in construction, preservation, or hold engineer licenses.  We just blow it out however we can to get the go ahead to proceed and place the home on the formal track.  And alas, because the neighborhood was asleep at the wheeel, didn't care, or however you wish to call it, we got our approval.  We took the next months to continue to threaten the owner of the home, although we never actually get in touch with them.  Then we call our friends at the engineering company and pay them to say the house must be torn down, that it is "structurally unsound."  Becuase we don't want to be sued by the owner after we tear down their house.  We pay more money to remove the abestsos from the interior of the house, and more money to cut the service lines to the house.  We then pay bocou bucks for the lowest bidder to demolish the house and drop it in a landfill over off the I-10 somewhere.  We have done this so many times we often joke among inspectors and demo contractors that there should be a "Welcome to Springfield " sign over at the entrance to the landfill.  But truth is, we interpret the law as we see fit.  While I am certain we could pay contractors to make minor repairs and stablize the house, it is just not what we are going to do.  We are closed minded and preservation is NOT our job, safety is our job, and certainly you 13th hour people aren't doing this process any good.  But hey, Springfield has improved.  I've been here for many years and you wouldn't believe how much better it is.  Be glad for that.   

Editor's note: typos, poor grammar and spelling left intentionally. . . . . . .

[Timkin]

...Now I'm following     

[Debbie Thompson]

"And alas, because the neighborhood was asleep at the wheeel, didn't care, or however you wish to call it, we got our approval."

And then there were those of us who can't attend day time meetings, who trusted the City and neighborhood to protect our historic homes, only to find out our trust was misplaced.  :-)

[strider]

MS. LANCASTER:  Mr. Chairman, I know you're
all in discussion, but in one of y'all's
pictures, if you don't mind, we actually do have
piers starting at the back.  You're seeing the
crack and seeing where they're missing.  And I
was supposed to bring that to your attention.
So there is actually issues with the structure.

By the way, Ms. Lancaster, there are no piers missing on this house today.  Did they magically grow back?

The post a couple above this was fiction.  Based very much on the reality of MCCD.  Sad, isn't it?

By and by, MCCD inspectors were seen coming out of this house today ... with some guys in shorts and boots.  Wonder what Ms. Scott is up to now?

[Kaiser Soze]

Wait, so they're just now getting around to ordering a structural engineering report AFTER it was already supposed to have been demolished? You gotta be kidding me.

I guess I'm not following.... are they doing this structural engineering report now to have an angle to proceed with demolition?

I hope so.  That POS has been unoccupied for 15 years. 

[strider]

Wait, so they're just now getting around to ordering a structural engineering report AFTER it was already supposed to have been demolished? You gotta be kidding me.

I guess I'm not following.... are they doing this structural engineering report now to have an angle to proceed with demolition?

I hope so.  That POS has been unoccupied for 15 years. 

And that means what?  That perhaps MCCD has made this house, like so many others, so toxic with their hinder rather than helping in anyway tactics that no one could make the rehab work.  I know people whose heads have been empty for longer than that, should we "tear" them down?  What about those old buildings downtown, you think they all should be torn down as well? 

Many do not get it.  The old houses are what makes a Historic District important to begin with.  Unless you have those houses, there will be no Historic District. No tax abatement for the owners.  No resale that is higher (normally) than other areas.  We have lost between 20 and 25% of the housing stock since 1985 (per the Historic Planning Department) and we can not afford to lose anymore from the moronic behavior of a few people and the city departments