Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Letter to the Editor details "DDA's Demolition by Neglect" -- Sun Times 10.31.12
During the public comment segment at the Sept DDA meeting Tom Girard, city resident and engineer at the U of
M, spoke up about lack of basic care and attention to the Longworth
complex that the DDA owns. The property was bought so as to improve the
appearance of the north access to Chelsea. Sad to say but action, or
lack thereof, speaks louder than words in this case, since the purchase
of this property by the DDA has left it in pretty much the condition at
the time of purchase about four years ago. Bear with me as I share some
of the history around this topic.
I was a DDA Board member for twelve
years. Last year I was replaced at the choice of the mayor. However, I
was present during the process from the beginning regarding this
property. Mark Heydlauf, a board member since the Chelsea
DDA's inception, brought before the board the need to purchase the
Longworth property. The basic reasons being: it creates a very
poor image of Chelsea to those heading south on M52 via auto, and
the flash view of Chelsea to those traveling on the train. It
was identified as a "significant" gateway structure and property that
the DDA should purchase and improve. No question, the property had been
deteriorating for years and needed attention. Years prior to this no
one was at all interested in purchasing it and the property was only
getting worse in it's
appearance and upkeep. After a series of presentations,
evaluations and visioning to the DDA Board, a decision was made
to purchase it. The costs to purchase exceeded $400,000 that included:
purchase, engineering studies, soil testing, purchase options, etc. The
vote to buy the property was unanimous. It was purchased at a price that exceeded the appraised value.
I'm formerly a restoration contractor and builder.
Rule #1 when a property is purchased is: take necessary steps to ensure
the entire exterior envelope be dry and secured. Exterior
envelope includes: windows, doors, grade for drainage, exterior walls
and roof. Studies and evaluations of the property clearly showed that
the buildings needed to be protected from the elements. Water was
coming in from the roof and parts of the foundation. Windows were
broken and access to the inside was possible. The DDA addressed the
security issues but nothing else.
Then, a visioning session was set up with the public
to show what options were being considered for the property in hopes
that improvement to the property could start within a year. Of the
options presented, Option B was selected. Option B showed the adaptive
reuse of only one of the three historic structures. Two buildings were
tobe demolished for parking and a small green space. Consideration for
saving all three of the historically significant buildings to be
adaptively reused was not offered or considered by the DDA. The fact
that one of the historic structures would be adaptively reused was a
revelation in itself. In the twelve years I was on the Board, not once
had the DDA purchased any historic property, improved and adaptively
reused it. I jumped on this opportunity in hopes this might occur. The
Board recognized "Option B"
as the option of choice at the visioning session and voted to go
forward with this choice.
Then the game changed. Mark Creswell, a citizen and
local businessman, stepped up to possibly purchase the property. Ut
oh! No one thought there would be interest in this property. Now the
DDA was presented with a dilemma: does the DDA want to get the Longworth
property off their books and allow an entreprenuer to start a business
in this space that might produce revenue or does the DDA carry on with
the envisioned plan for combination demolition/adaptive
re-use plan which keeps the property under the public domain incurring
expenses with all Option B elements they once felt needed to be there?
Through much discussion it was decided to allow
consideration of the sale of the property to other entities should the
DDA's purchase conditions be met by a potential buyer. Thus started the
long and tedious effort to possibly have the property put back on the
tax roles and it's improvement fall on the back of a possible
future purchaser. (The process being tedious because it involved:
creation of a "Request for Proposal" ["RFP"] which is a written
question/answer document of many pages, potential buyers requesting
the "RFP" because it had to be completed to be considered a potential
purchaser, completion of the RFP, committee review of the completed
version of the RFP and then, committee accepted RFP's went to the board
for their review). This is a lengthy, time consuming process.
At this point, a number of the DDA Board members
decided there would be no more monies spent on this property if it was
to be owned by someone else in the future. It was at this point that
there appeared a division amongst the Board. Some said that the
property is nothing but old buildings that should be torn down and to go
forward with the plan and others stating that if it can be purchased by
an entreprenuer for private enterprise we should allow that option to
go forward. Once the prospect of private ownership of the property was
in play, the boards commitment to protecting the structure further from
deterioration during the RFP process and thereafter all but disappeared.
Twice, I put forward a motion to spend some money to
protect the buildings. Reasonable sums of money to protect the DDA/City
investment. By role call vote the motions were defeated. Now in the
last four years nothing of significance has been done to improve the
exterior envelopes and incoming water has continued. Even the
one historic structure that was planned to be adaptively reused is in
peril. Maybe those wishing to see the old structures go and
have parking put in its place could see how this might happen.
Its known as "Demolition by Neglect". Can I say for sure this was the
plan? No I can't. Do actions speak louder than words? Demolition is
going forward as I speak.
Jim Myles
Chelsea, MI
Owners and Innkeepers
website: www.chelseahouseinn.com
email: innkeeper@chelseahouseinn.com
toll free: 877-618-4935
local: 734-475-2244
That "old, simple building" (DDA) is a nationally important--Sun Times 10.31.12
Re: Chelsea Livery
Dear Editor:
For nearly three years, I have been following the news
concerning the livery in Chelsea, a site I visited in the 1990s as the author of Great American Railroad Stations.
This 570-page book was commissioned by the National Trust for Historic
Preservation and published by John Wiley & Sons. The foreword was
written by the late U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was
responsible for the massive restoration and adaptive use of Union
Station in Washington, D.C.
My
extensive articles about historic transportation and adaptive use of
railroad stations have appeared in numerous scholarly publications. In
addition, I am the principal interviewee in two hour-long documentary
films produced for The History Channels: one on the renowned Grand
Central
Terminal and the other on Manhattan’s original Pennsylvania Station.
For Great American Railroad Stations, which
covers every state in the country, I conducted direct investigations
and held consultations with hundreds of historians, architects,
entrepreneurs, transportation specialists, librarians, and state
historic preservation officers. The book has an extensive essay on the
social and architectural history of the building type. It then profiles
more than 700 extant depots (of all sizes), the most significant in the
country. One of these is the Chelsea railroad station.
Among
the criteria for a station to be considered, “context” was extremely
important. Is the station still in its original location? Are the tracks
still there? Do trains still run on these tracks? And—very relevant to
Chelsea—do any railroad-related buildings survive in the vicinity of the
station? Such auxiliary buildings tell the story of a station and
vastly increase its historical and educational significance. Few places
retain them. Chelsea is extraordinary and, in my view, literally unique
in retaining not only the first hotel but also the livery. In my
research, I uncovered no equivalent situation. An extremely limited
number of railroad hotels remain; I know of no liveries whatsoever. A
livery was an integral and critical part of a railroad station complex
in the 19th and early
20th centuries. The loss of this building would affect not only
Chelsea, but also the history of everyday life in the United States.
Sincerely,
Janet Greenstein Potter
8425 Navajo St.
Philadelphia, PA
19118
(215) 247-1836
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
