Author Topic: Losing Springfield Plastics  (Read 22645 times)

mbwright

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #60 on: June 20, 2013, 01:47:37 PM »
The city had the steeple on Main St as part of a non-contributing structure (on the wrong building).  They don't know, and don't care.  They will use any excuse. 

A Historic district, is just that, an area, not individual buildings here and there. 

strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #61 on: September 08, 2013, 08:44:39 PM »
I have been involved in the permitting process for this repair for over two months now.  It is a process that has been very tedious, very enlightening in a way and as basically been sending me in circles.  A meeting last week did finally get things moving forward again, but there are huge hurdles left to get past.   There are huge issues with the way things are handled because MCC is involved and in how MCC is requiring various codes to be interpreted.  It makes it next to impossible to repair a building like this once it is condemned.

One thing I find very interesting is that once again, a person new to the conversation was told that this building was not a contributing structure.   It is indeed contributing and frankly, I am getting tired of correcting the city on this one.  This time, I went to the Historic Department and got it in writing.

Why am I wondering if that will be good enough?  That one designation is one of the most important factors that effect the permitting process.  Without that designation, this building will be soon on it's way to the land fill because the designation triggers things that make the repair of this building affordable enough to get it done.

But someone keeps telling the people involved that it isn't historic and does not have those protections.  Makes one wonder who it is that wants this building gone?
"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

DDC

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #62 on: September 08, 2013, 11:08:28 PM »

  Makes one wonder who it is that wants this building gone?

And I think equally important is why? What could that piece of dirt be good for with that building gone? On that corner? What gives?
Growing old is mandatory. Growing up is optional.

chris farley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #63 on: September 09, 2013, 12:50:16 AM »
This building is contributing.  It was picked up in the 1985 survey, see 1948-56 North Pearl Street on SHEC

strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #64 on: December 12, 2013, 06:32:51 AM »
Just an update.  We did finally get a permit (took 3 months) and along the way learned a lot. It is a risk the city and MCC takes when they become obstructionist, we have to go learn the codes perhaps better than they do.  Structural repairs are underway and the first inspections passed.  On to windows right now.  Financial concerns will keep it moving a bit slow perhaps, but it is getting done.

This week we did something else new. We got a mothballing Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to mothball the two second floor apartments. This is a first for a mixed use structure and it was not met with positive energy on the part of Municipal Code Compliance. The rep walked up  and stated NO Comment on the mothballing but did make a point of stating that they knew our goal is to get the first floor out of condemnation and in use again while the second floor remained Mothballed, and then stated that MCC would never allow that to happen. Nice.  But what do we expect from a department that refuses to follow federal guidelines and puts millions of federal money at risk?  They obviously consider themselves above all of us so what is right and what the actual ordinances and building codes say means nothing to them.

I was also handed a package of paperwork that was not included in the required report.  It was copies of the various building permits and e-mails about the mothballing.  It also came out that the department heads were involved and asking questions about this little COA. This is a bigger deal than what it would seem to be.  It is helping to set a precedent that commercial spaces can be mothballed and it is another jab at the power MCC has over the historic structures.

As a side note, three MCC employees were there for an hour plus on the tax payer dime.  One spoke for 1 minute tops and after the vote, all three left.  Great use of their time, Kim Scott.  What did you tell them to put on their time cards, 1 hour at attempted intimidation?  It didn't work by the way, the mothballing is legal and is approved.  Wait until you see what we do next.
"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34972
    • Modern Cities
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #65 on: December 12, 2013, 06:58:41 AM »
Great update!
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

mbwright

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #66 on: December 12, 2013, 08:02:33 AM »
Please add pictures.  Glad to hear about the success of this.  It is very positive to see.

strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #67 on: December 12, 2013, 06:16:20 PM »
I'll add some pictures of the work when I get a chance.  Not much to look at now as it is just repaired framing.  The big change will be when the front windows go back in.

The mothballing actually helps with the issues a lot as the windows on all sides on the second floor need attention and so being able to board them rather than totally fix them keeps this phase affordable. After all, MCC did close down the mans business that he needs to afford repairs.

To be honest, the biggest challenge to date and ahead of us seems to be getting the city to act on what the codes really say and mean rather than what MCC wants them to say and mean. Very frustrating.
"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

ricker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #68 on: December 12, 2013, 06:55:17 PM »
This IS indeed happy news!
Joe, Gloria, Kathy, Kevin, Tom, you all are deserving of the peace and excitement this hurdle in the rearview provides.

May I offer to help reglaze the upper sashes?

Debbie Thompson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #69 on: December 13, 2013, 02:04:50 PM »
That's awesome of you, ricker.

ricker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
Re: Losing Springfield Plastics
« Reply #70 on: December 14, 2013, 04:00:47 AM »
I am certain that YOU ALL have done SO much more than I have to actively help save Tom's life and sanity.
I love the man.
PM me please and let's exchange digits.
Looking forward to getting my hands dirty!