Monday, February 13, 2012

Mr. Slummy's Buildings Registered as Vacant, Condemned

Post and photos by the Hawthorne Hawkman.

Wait, they weren't already?

The foreclosure process hasn't yet finished up over at 2515 3rd St N, but now the building has been listed as condemned.  The collective response to that development is shock that it took over two years from the point where the property was open to trespass to the date when condemnation was posted at the property.  The wheels of regulatory services do turn, albeit ever so slowly.

Its partner to the north, 2519 3rd St N, has several boards over openings along the side and rear of the house.  This property was condemned in October of last year, and continues to go downhill.  It's too bad, because Amro seemed to be doing at least slightly good work over here.

There aren't too many homes out there that I would celebrate their demolition, but these two are among them.

7 comments:

  1. Dyna sez: It's a lost battle... My house got broken into and the copper stolen, so add $10,000 to the cost of rehab. It needs rewiring, a roof, and foundation too, so the cost of rehab to Minneapolis standards is now over $70,000. Out here in the country, I could do the whole job for $20,000.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This really looks like a great building with little structural damage.

    I notice that the Vacant/Boarded Building fee for 2009 was canceled, no fee imposed in 2011, and the 2012 fee is pending. Those $6000+ fines are what separate the men from the boys in the rehab industry and prevent the phoneys from buying up in other neighborhoods. The City needs to stay on top of this!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I didn't like the direction Mr. Slummy was taking these buildings, but if the "bones" are good (which they appear to be), why not rehab it?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The structure at 2515 (which is not pictured here but can be readily found on this site and JNS) is most likely damaged beyond any repair. The one pictured here, 2519 3rd, could possibly be saved. There has been fire damage, but maybe that's not bad enough to warrant demolition.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Maybe these would be ripe candidates for the Occupy Homes campaign. Put some homeless persons in those buildings. Occupy them and have a GA or a dance party. Lets not let these sit lets OCCUPY EVERYWHERE!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry but it is just not realistic to put the homeless in vacant homes. Many are unsafe and would cost considerable dollars to make safe for them to be inhabited.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So the Occupy Homes movement wants to put TRANSIENTS in the homes they are occupying?

    Sounds more like the Occupy Squatter Space movement.

    Also, my neighborhood has already had problems with the whole "let's get an old beat up house and use it as a party house" thing. Are there really people who still think my neighborhood is wide open for WHATEVER, that there are no rules, and we welcome ANYTHING as long as it's putting warm bodies in houses? Not! NOT! NOT!!!!

    I sincerely hope the comment by Occupy Homes represents only the radical fringe of the movement or merely comes from some right-of-center person trying to discredit the movement.

    ReplyDelete