The Demolition Continues

Following up on a prior post Is Demolition the Solution.

Old Onliner pic

Please don’t misunderstand, I DO NOT advocate saving everything. There are properties in and around town that I would gladly hold the crane operator’s coat while they do their business. There are structures that were poorly built, poorly sited or zoned and/or are in the way of needed PLANNED development. I think the city is better for the planned demolition for planned development.

That said, it would seem that demolition is frequently used as a club of last resort to try and force the issue of slum lord property maintenance.

It would seem though that on more then one occasion we’re cutting off our nose in spite.  At risk of dating myself, what comes to mind is Blazing Saddles. Cleavon Little as the new sheriff threatens to shoot himself as a means of persuasion. Mr. slum lord, if you don’t bring your property up to code we’re going to bull doze it. That’ll show you.

For a slum lord who is doing all they can to walk away from a property they’ve demonstrated they no longer have use for, this does not seem to be a compelling motivator. This is the tactic we’ve been employing for some time now. The question is… is it working? I would be interested to know.

Please, is there not a better way?

Is there not a more persuasive way to compel a slum lord who has siphoned the value out of their property in a neighborhood and left it for dead to comply with standards? Can we not intercede before the property is allowed to degrade to such a state?

The slum lord is left with the bill for demolition to be added to the citations they’re already not paying. If they’re not paying those fines what are the chances the city collects on the demolition charge as well? I would be curious to know.

The resident home owners living in the neighborhood are left with an empty lot that screams blight. Proponents would argue… it’s open space! It’s a good thing. Hmmm. I propose anyone driving down a street and sees empty lots of this sort, what comes to mind is not… Oh, good. Open space. More likely it’s, hmm, blight. Proponents would say, we’ll build something new and nice. Years ago that may have been the case. Look around, with the sole exception of the college infill at College and Clary which was well done, the majority of residential infill is jarring and… less then great… IMO anyway.

I’d be interested to know what you think. Your comments welcome. See below.