Big Quick Update: Demolition 'Mortatorium'
In the first positive sign of progress on this issue, Councilman Woodard emailed me last night to let me know that, after discussions between Patrick Baker, Wanda Page, NIS, and himself, they have agreed that after these properties are demolished (which he states cannot be averted)
3690 Guess Road
2511 Dearborn Drive
318 East Umstead Street
3018 Ruth Street
there will be no further demolitions until a stakeholders meeting can be conferred to
"discuss the City’s policies and practices related to the demolition and rehabilitation of properties [and] consider more active methods of communicating the status of targeted properties."
As a tangible sign of progress, the in-process list is, for the first time, available on the web at
http://www.durhamnc.gov/departments/nis/
in the left-hand menu, as an Excel file. If you are familiar with Excel, note that there are multiple worksheets.
While these may seem like small steps - available information and engagement with the community, they are huge. As residents of Old North Durham experienced yesterday with another demolition - of 711 North St., neighbors felt they were working with the city to try to get the property repaired - they had no warning that it was actually going to be demolished.
Piggybacking on this good news is the good news that, after discussing the matter with NIS, Constance Stancil informed me that NIS
"ha[s] no intentions to demolish 1620 Duke University Road. [They] have been working with the owner and the prospective buyer for sometime."
Several residents of the SW Durham neighborhoods wrote to me to tell me how opposed they were to demolition of this property.
Obviously, as with all of these properties, none of us want persistent vacant and abandoned property in Durham; we want vibrant, healthy neighborhoods for all residents of Durham. Rehabilitating historic properties meets goals of preservation, sustainability, and health-promoting urban design.
Posts
9 comments:
That's good news. And congratulations: I imagine your efforts were a big part of making this happen.
Thank you.
strong work!
Excellent. As a fellow Durhamite, this is wonderful progress indeed!
All
I'm just glad that there is some possibility of change. After fighting this battle for years with very little evident progress, it's just nice to see something.
GK
Good news indeed. That NIS spreadsheet is a sobering read - 194 demolished buidlings in essentially two years. Wow.
Forgive my ignorance, but, in this context, who and/or what is a stakeholder?
Anon
Indeed - you get a sense of why I keep harping on this issue. Sorry for the jargon - "stakeholder" comes from those who have stake in the process, i.e. stand to win or lose if the policy changes. In this context, it could be pretty much anyone who wanted to be - neighborhood reps, city, county, preservationists, slumlords, developers
GK
one particularly telling part of that spreadsheet is the graph on the second to last sheet. add the demolition bars into one bar; look at how short the rehab bar is. that's a *pathetic* track record.
spacegrrl
Thanks for your comment
Definitely doesn't bespeak a commitment to preserving structures, I agree. At least if we can get some in-advance knowledge as to which properties are in the crosshairs, we have something to work with in pressuring for a better future for these properties.
GK
Post a Comment