Photos By Connie Nompelis There was an alarming and sudden demolition of an old Victorian house in South Minneapolis, and though it may be a case of "mission creep" for this North Minneapolis blog to report on the matter, I am concerned that what happens in South may not remain in South, but could become a pattern in North.
Connie Nompelis (pronounced NO-bliss) forwarded me these pictures, and a firsthand account from a neighbor, David Piehl, as follows:
Imagine my surprise, yesterday evening, when I drove down 3rd Avenue and found 3216 to be completely gone...
...except the front porch base, a hole in the ground, and a backhoe near the alley.
This property is not on the most recently published 249 list at all, and certainly had not been approved for demolition by CPED or CANDO. Nobody in the neighborhood, as far as I can tell, received ANY notice of a potential demolition for this property. The house itself was attractive on the exterior with the exception of some bad updates on the rear that have been there (for longer than 16 years).
I've since learned that GMHC at some point purchased the house, and according to city records applied for a demolition permit on March 12, 2009. GMHC did not make any notification to the neighborhood at all.
In the 1990s, the neighborhood group asked GMHC to develop certain lots, and the block clubs as well as the housing committee had input not only into site selection, but also design of the new construction from a list of options provided by GMHC. I am appalled that GMHC circumvented the neighborhood altogether, particularly since they are relying on OUR tax dollars to do so!
Central Neighborhood's resident-approved plans call for renovation of older homes and NO demolition unless absolutely necessary. So, while a burned-out home on the 3100 block of Columbus Ave. languishes, 3216 3rd falls to teh backhoe with no notification whatsoever. This demolition flies in the face of the city's efforts to drastically reduce demolitions, demolishing only where necessary...not just because it is cheaper to demolish than fix the existing construction.
This has to stop. So far the private market has been addressing most of the foreclosed homes in Central; GMHC should only be called in to deal with properties that the private market leaves behind, thereby spending scarce tax revenue only where most needed.
Please support a moratorium on GMHC demolition permits until notification processes and standards can be worked out. As far as the vacant lot that was created, I hope we do not have to endure the construction of another GMHC "Milk Carton." The privately developed new construction on this same block (2nd Ave. side) is the model that should be followed, whether or not it is privately developed.
Yesterday, 3216 3rd Ave. S. was hauled to a landfill. By the looks of what was left in the hole, not even the hot water registers were salvaged.
(JNS says: clearly, no attempt to salvage bricks, either)
Remember that the greenest housing is what's already here. The demolition of 3216 is a slap in the face to the block club, the neighborhood group, the city, preservationists, and the green movement. Please address this with all due expediency.
(Piehl's communication was sent to the following city officials: Elizabeth A. Glidden, Council Member Gary Schiff, Robert Lilligren, and Lisa Goodman)
6 comments:
I have been wondering when this would start happening. It's happening in other cities. Banks and finance companies own some houses. They are not owned by the city or the county and the taxes are paid up. They don't want to take the trouble or they just have too many to sell. (Or in the case of St. Paul and other cities with new laws that say they must bring the place up to code BEFORE sale they don't think it's worth it to put money into the house). So, they tear it down. It's not a city teardown, it's privately contracted. They don't plan to build anything there. They would rather hold the property as a vacant lot than as a house with all the liabilities that brings. Like a lawsuit from the neighborhood (Citigroup case) or fines due to excessive police calls. They don't want to have to winterize a bunch of old houses.
I am not pointing fingers here, just trying to say that this is a problem and ultimately the owner is responsible for dealing with it. This is one way that they have begun dealing with it. In some cases, it may be the best way. For a preservationist like Connie, her job just became much harder. If they pass a law like the one in St. Paul, you can kiss a lot of old houses goodbye.
uuugggg... this gives me a heartache on my heart.
Uhhhm... "demolition permits"? What happened to "property rights". If I bought property somewhere, I'd be *pissed* if I had to get permission from the neighborhood to actually improve the land I just bought.
Maybe someone can explain the rationale behind the whittling away of the freedoms of an American landowner...
Can somebody clarify WHO OWNED THIS VICTORIAN?
Because Mr. Undiluted Libertarian ala Ron Paul, above, is going on about property rights, but the word I heard was that a government entity--GMHC--was the owner of this structure, and that's what the fuss is about, because GMHC had agreed to act DIFFERENTLY than this.
I am a block club member of the 3200 block of 3rd ave s for 11 years, we have been asking for the demo of this home for years. We have asked several time for Elizabeth Glidden's (city council member) help. So the block club was involved in this matter. I think people who are obviously not aware of the level of dry rot and black mold 16 years of exposure to the elements have done to this property should calm down. I have been in this property previously owned by the Jasmine's, and could see water staining coming down the interior walls and in some places could put my finger right through the wood itself.
Most everything had been removed from the property by the Reuse It people as far as what was still usable.
I for one do not want to see all the history stripped and removed from this neighborhood but in the case of the 3216 it was appropriate and justified. There needs to be a level of understanding that every old building needs to be saved. If you would like to save it buy it yourself and fix it up in your spare time. Leaving properties abandoned and boarded forever in the hope that someday someone will come along and save these properties is not reality. You seem to forget families have to live in the mean time, along side a structure that could fall at anytime of burn due to frequent break-ins and vandals.
We try live here, vacant house bring higher crime and police calls. Prostitution is a big problem for this area and when the houses get boarded the prostitutes and john's follow.
Personally I think the biggest issue here is the lack of communication with the neighborhood group. I am aware of the fact that neighbors have been (justifiably) concerned about the condition of this property, but I don't see how that changes the fact that GHMC just razed a structure without so much as letting the Ward office know, much less CANDO which has REPEATEDLY requested notification on ALL potential demolitions within its boundaries.
Post a Comment