Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Demo decision

Council approves start of process

August 5, 2014

The possible demolition of three buildings in the city of Dunkirk moved a step closer Monday, but the Common Council was not unanimous in approving the needed resolutions....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(15)

Eagles

Aug-06-14 7:38 AM

Rural living and its local governments aren't typically about money, so they're more able to work with one another. Most don't have money so that frees them up about that.

I see it in Pomfret a more rural community that's in the area. Neighbors are friendly with one another and that works.

Poverty in rural America is a different situation, so trailers with septic problems, for example, are repaired with help from the neighbors, and the help is returned in favor.

In the city of Dunkirk, properties that have been abandoned suggest a level of poverty that needs to be taken care of by the local gov't because it's about money and not community.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FedUpTaxpayer

Aug-05-14 10:06 PM

What is a dangerous building? That word is somewhat severe in it's usage, imo. You could have a perfectly habitable building or trailer, like in Cassadaga, but it's septic was not up to code so the house was condemned. Is that a dangerous building? Should it be demolished?

If the property owner is hassled enough, he could just abandon it. If the town demolishes it and places a lean on the property, that would end up being null and void upon a tax foreclosure as all liens are. Not a good solution either way.

I just have to say, I see a big difference between Chautauqua County and say North Carolina. In this county, we see many articles over property not up to code, owners hassled to death and no prosperity. In the south, people are left alone and not hassled as much and there is prosperity all over. Imo, the government should stay out of peoples business and stop being a nanny. It costs money and raises taxes and that is why people have been leaving this area in droves.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Eagles

Aug-05-14 7:59 PM

I guess I'm not so sure that the building inspector doesn't already know who owned / owns these properties and their subsequent situations.

I would think most of these properties have similar sad stories that don't need to be proven to anyone in order to tear them down.

Taxpayer dollars are used for these types of situations when a neighbor has fallen because it's a community and that's what communities do.

If a paper trail and a procedure of steps are needed to show that most if not all of these neglectful situations are poverty based then it's a waste of taxpayer dollars to pay these gov't people to do this work of letters, etc.

Unsafe abandoned properties should be torn down just because it's the right thing to do, sooner than later.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

timetochange

Aug-05-14 6:32 PM

It matters not who owns the property. The city can place a lien on the property and after a certain time the house comes down. Those elected to office don't want to be burdened by this. The city attorney should be writing a law to adress this issue instead of walking the halls of city hall. But then again what can you expect from a mayor that holds no one responsible.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Eagles

Aug-05-14 4:38 PM

I did a quick search at *******gis.co.chautauqua.ny.us:8080/parcelviewerflex/index.html# and it appears the owner of 107 Lord died on 7/12/12, the owner of 165 W Fourth owns a lot of property in Jamestown but he too appears to have passed away on 6/5/12 if it's the same fellow. The sale in 2/23/2007 for 220 Franklin Ave under the historical section of the website said it wasn't a valid sale yet there was a Star B exemption for $25,580. It appears these properties are or were owned by locals.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Eagles

Aug-05-14 4:36 PM

I did a quick search at *******gis.co.chautauqua.ny.us:8080/parcelviewerflex/index.html# and it appears the owner of 107 Lord died on 7/12/12, the owner of 165 W Fourth owns a lot of property in Jamestown but he too appears to have passed away on 6/5/12 if it's the same fellow. The sale in 2/23/2007 for 220 Franklin Ave under the historical section of the website said it wasn't a valid sale yet there was a Star B exemption for $25,580. The property sold for $55K.

It appears these properties are or were owned by

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Eagles

Aug-05-14 12:13 PM

I find that hard to believe, but I could believe it, that the failed property owners are out-of-towners, unless you meant that they're living in the surrounding area.

Buying real estate is a means locals use to gain capital, typically.

I guess you'd have to know what kinds of building these are and who owns them before making any decisions about who realistically can afford to tear them down.

Neglect usually comes out of poverty and not out of being a bad neighbor, typically.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Aug-05-14 10:04 AM

Just push all of Dunkirk into the Lake and get rid of all the problems.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Aug-05-14 9:17 AM

Tear them down and send the bill to the property owner. The city has been negligent in enforcing property maintenance. We need laws that are clearly defined as to what is not acceptable. A poor pain job is not acceptable. Trash accumulation is not acceptable. Junk cars are not acceptable. The steel plant wire mill on Lucas Ave. should have been torn down a long time ago - what is the problem? When we invited low income housing and career poverty we asked for this problem now we are paying the price for poor leadership.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

timetochange

Aug-05-14 8:29 AM

I have to ask. Why would the city council have any problems tearing down dangerous buildings and in the process cleaning up the city? Is the council there just to show they have power? Perhaps the duties of the council have gotten to the point that some members cannot carry out their duties. There did not seem to be a problem finding the money to send the Mayor on vacation with Cuomo.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Aug-05-14 8:15 AM

Good one concerned!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

concerned

Aug-05-14 7:38 AM

PC that's to prevent them from turning up the heat and opening the windows in the winter!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Aug-05-14 6:44 AM

Unfortunately, some of the worst properties are owned by out of town landlords. Those are the first ones to go after. By the way, why are some of the low income apartments on Courtney boarded up?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Eagles

Aug-05-14 6:38 AM

If you can keep your garage from falling down you naturally do because you have the resources.

Telling the bank these bad people are poor because they're not taking care of their crap is not meaningful.

Letters are a waste of time if there aren't any resources to keep the garage from falling down.

A dilemma for the beast.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Christopher

Aug-05-14 5:04 AM

More need to come down, and the biggest issue is in how long it takes.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 15 of 15 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web