by fsu813 » Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:35 am I think she's quite eager to reform Code's addressing of historic & neglected properties.....it would make job much easier, and make many people happy.
Thankfully, the majority of us have our eyes open and can see what Ms. Scott is really up to and what kind of division Chief she really is.
Chris Farley wrote:FSU I agree with you. I find Kim Scott to be very sincere and has a very difficult job. She is so responsive and helpful on any questions we have had when trying to find houses. I understand some of the codes by which she has to operate are statewide. I honestly believe she will try and help find a solution, with which we may all be happy. 38 houses over a period of 5 years is a viable figure, but is far too many. A burned out house is not a demolition, they are different animals. It has to be removed due no one's fault except the person who set fire to it, and you know from the shells they are not retrievable. Even at 38 over 5 years, that is approx 1.5 houses every two months.
I was sharply told, by someone, that houses previously demolished "is water under the bridge" and you know that person was probably correct, we need to look to the future. There are two which should be of great great concern, I fear one of them at least will fall, namely 129 and 253 2nd East.
No flak please I care greatly about houses and their history and we are turning up amazing things, all will be good.
Of course, the number from Joel's office for the time period of 2007 through 2010 is 56 houses demolished. Add the demolitions in 2011, which I believe is five, we end up with 61 demolitions over the last five years, not the 38 number Ms. Scott stated. One would think that as she made a point of going to get a notebook and read those stats from that notebook that she would have gotten the number correct. However, it is in her best interest to not get that number right. It is in her best interests to down play the number of demolitions rather than have the real number out there. That 61 number gives one house per month over the past five years, also a "viable number". And a more accurate one.
As far as a burn out house not being a demolition? Is the house still here? Is it not gone from the district never to be recovered? Is that house on East 7th that burned, stood for months with the side half missing and then taken as an emergency not a demolition of a historic house? Again, trying to find excuses for the loss of a house, blaming the owners or even the people who live in the community themselves does not solve the problem, it adds to it. While we can not blame MCCD for the fire, we can certainly count the house as a demolition. In the case of 7th street, MCCD has the ability to stabilize a house that was obviously not in imminent danger of collapse rather than demolish it. Can we not blame MCCD for not exercising that ability?
Yes, we are indeed finding amazing things while we dig around in the past ten years and the role the different organizations, companies and city department played in the mess we find ourselves in here in Springfield. Some of the information that has and will come out is not pleasant. But sticking our heads in the sand and not talking about how we got here will do nothing but insure the issues continue. The past houses lost may be in the past, but they are not replaceable and so they effect the future of the community in many ways. The only reason not to talk about them or to try to forget them is if you wish the future to be the same as that past.