Abandonded Buildings & Homes

[sgrizzle]

While I understand that people should be able to do what they want with what they bought, but should "nothing" be an option?

The camerlot hotel is the most recent example of an eyesore that just sits around. A woman in my neighborhood keeps a mortgaged house "in case she wants to move back" although supposedly she hasn't seen it in about 12 years.

Is there a way to deal with these eyesores?

[Wilbur]

The Mayor's Office for Neighborhoods is usually a good place to start.

[sgrizzle]

The Mayo's action line said that since the building seems externally sound (it is largely rock) then nothing can be done about the insides since an inspector can't see them.

Gives termites and squirrels a good place to live..

[cannon_fodder]

Once people start breaking in and or windows are missing it becomes a safety issue and you can work on getting it condemned.  If it is just empty, structurally sound, and looks OK from the outside it is none of the cities concern. I had the same issue on one side of me (remedied by a brand new home) and HAVE the same issue on the other (come on act of god, blow that thing down!).

You could always buy it...

[tulsa1603]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

While I understand that people should be able to do what they want with what they bought, but should "nothing" be an option?

The camerlot hotel is the most recent example of an eyesore that just sits around. A woman in my neighborhood keeps a mortgaged house "in case she wants to move back" although supposedly she hasn't seen it in about 12 years.

Is there a way to deal with these eyesores?

I used to live in the area SW of 21st and Harvard.  Neat little neighborhood.  We had three houses in the area that were dilapidated eyesores.  The very active neighborhood association, along with concerned neighbors basically started a campaign to get them condemened, and it worked.  I called neighborhood enforcement at least 5-6 times myself on the one nearest to me.  It had broken out windows and a yard that was never mown.  Finally got the place condemned.  OF course, it never got torn down, the owner suddenly came up with some cash to fix the roof, paint it, etc. and started renting it out.  The other two were owned by the same person and she actually died during all the condemnation process, so they were eventually sold and remodeled anyway.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Once people start breaking in and or windows are missing it becomes a safety issue and you can work on getting it condemned.  If it is just empty, structurally sound, and looks OK from the outside it is none of the cities concern. I had the same issue on one side of me (remedied by a brand new home) and HAVE the same issue on the other (come on act of god, blow that thing down!).

You could always buy it...

What about the Tulsa club building? The guy won't sell it and people want to buy it and turn  it into apartments. The state that building is in is an absolute scandal.

I wish there was a way the city could seize the building then auction it, then give him the money minus costs. If that building burns to the ground or becomes unusable due to it have squatters, he deserves to be shot.

Sorry my rant.

[cannon_fodder]

I hear ya Si, but if we allow the city to take property because they think they can do better with it; its a short road to taking my house because someone richer wants to move in.  Property rights are the foundation of our society.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I hear ya Si, but if we allow the city to take property because they think they can do better with it; its a short road to taking my house because someone richer wants to move in.  Property rights are the foundation of our society.

I would disagree, I think its fairly long road. The building is empty, leaking, not properly secured and a Goff creation. The owner is turning down very good offers on the property. I think people have a responsibility for property, its not just like buying a carpet and not looking after it, a prominent building is for all to see. It ruins that street, makes the area feel unsafe and the fact is occupied is a public danger. If the heating is off in the building, which I'm guessing seeing as it leaks come winter people will be lighting fires in it.

As a society we continually compromise with the powers we give up. We give the police powers to protect us recognising that taken too far we will end up in a police state. In the same way, while I recognise that you could take property preservation to the extreme, but it is unlikely. You can't just say we can't do anything, because, gee wiz, who knows what could happen down the road. Any policy can be taken to some illogical extreme, but we don't stop producing laws.

[Conan71]

Si, have you relocated here yet?  You seem to have a pretty good idea of what's happening w/ property here from 4,000 or so miles away. []

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Si, have you relocated here yet?  You seem to have a pretty good idea of what's happening w/ property here from 4,000 or so miles away. []

Not yet. I was over in Tulsa a few weeks back though. (and I have my sources). I won't be over until I've finished my masters and paid back my student debt. (I don't fancy earning dollars and repaying pounds at the moment).

[jdb]

"I think people have a responsibility for property."

Sure, but it's theirs to ignore be it throw rug or a Goff.


"...a prominent building is for all to see. "

And in a happy World people would see a nice looking prominent joint owed by a prominent person. Reality say's it's good to blink on occassion.


"It ruins that street, makes the area feel unsafe..."

Na, it makes the lot it sits on an eyesore compared to the rest of the block, but if it only takes one unlived in place to create a feeling of "danger" then I'd start looking at the person instead of the little house.

2cents, jdb

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by jdb


"It ruins that street, makes the area feel unsafe..."

Na, it makes the lot it sits on an eyesore compared to the rest of the block, but if it only takes one unlived in place to create a feeling of "danger" then I'd start looking at the person instead of the little house.

Little house? I'm talking about the Tulsa Club building. I've never heard it referred to as a little house.

So what do you suggest, some arsewit owns a brilliant building and wilfully lets it degrade. Do we rely on their good will? They haven't shown any so far. Or should we just have a prayer meeting and hope that god intervenes?

[jdb]

Didn't mean the "little house" crack the way it popped off.

Prayer might be a swell idea for some people, but if there's a god he don't care - otherwise termites would have stayed on the drawing board.

Important Places need people who can pool their money. Several ways to go about it...that or the place rots.

Still some places can be brought back to life after 80 years of rot.
jdb

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by jdb

Didn't mean the "little house" crack the way it popped off.

Prayer might be a swell idea for some people, but if there's a god he don't care - otherwise termites would have stayed on the drawing board.

Important Places need people who can pool their money. Several ways to go about it...that or the place rots.

Still some places can be brought back to life after 80 years of rot.
jdb

The thing is that these people won't sell at a market rate. They want more than the building is worth. Am I right in saying the Lortons turned down good offers on the Skelly building and wanted $1m for it? $1m which is probably a minimum of three times its value. What if we had all pooled together and bought the building, would that have helped? I think it would have made things worst. You are rewarding people who essentially ransoming buildings, if the Lortons were smart (which I doubt) and had received $1m for the Skelly, they would just buy three buildings and ransom them too. People who let buildings fall into disrepair shouldn't be over compensated or rewarded. I think at the moment the lack of teeth that exists in dealing with this issue of disintegrating buildings means that people have a hard time telling if the city is ravaging them or merely blowing them off.

While I recognize that buildings can be brought back to life. I think in Tulsa with such low land values and what can be shown to be a demonstrated lack of regard to old and beautiful buildings it is unlikely that all the ruined buildings can be saved on a large scale. While some are being brought back to life, lets not forget all of those that have already been lost. And remember that the reason they are lost is not that people won't buy them, but that some of downtown is owned by Philistines.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

quote:Originally posted by jdb

Didn't mean the "little house" crack the way it popped off.

Prayer might be a swell idea for some people, but if there's a god he don't care - otherwise termites would have stayed on the drawing board.

Important Places need people who can pool their money. Several ways to go about it...that or the place rots.

Still some places can be brought back to life after 80 years of rot.
jdb

The thing is that these people won't sell at a market rate. They want more than the building is worth. Am I right in saying the Lortons turned down good offers on the Skelly building and wanted $1m for it? $1m which is probably a minimum of three times its value. What if we had all pooled together and bought the building, would that have helped? I think it would have made things worst. You are rewarding people who essentially ransoming buildings, if the Lortons were smart (which I doubt) and had received $1m for the Skelly, they would just buy three buildings and ransom them too. People who let buildings fall into disrepair shouldn't be over compensated or rewarded. I think at the moment the lack of teeth that exists in dealing with this issue of disintegrating buildings means that people have a hard time telling if the city is ravaging them or merely blowing them off.

While I recognize that buildings can be brought back to life. I think in Tulsa with such low land values and what can be shown to be a demonstrated lack of regard to old and beautiful buildings it is unlikely that all the ruined buildings can be saved on a large scale. While some are being brought back to life, lets not forget all of those that have already been lost. And remember that the reason they are lost is not that people won't buy them, but that some of downtown is owned by Philistines.

Yeah, the lortons turned down offer(s) on the skelly. They weren't interested at any price really.