Washington council discusses demolition of downtown building
Katie Anderson/Observer-Reporter
The redevelopment authority will begin demolition of this building at W. Chestnut and North Main streets.
“Keep out” was spray painted on the door of this building in Washington that may soon be demolished.
The windows of this Washington building have been boarded up.
Washington Councilman Joe Manning wants to move forward on the demolition of the dilapidated building at the corner of Main and Chestnut streets.
He added a motion to today’s City Council agenda to allow the county’s Redevelopment Authority to begin the demolition process for the building, at 8-22 W. Chestnut St. and 93-95 N. Main St.
“It’s sitting in the middle of our downtown,” Manning said in an interview Tuesday. “It’s a hazard, it’s a danger, and I want to get it taken down.”
Manning made it clear at council’s agenda meeting Monday night that he’s tired of talking about the building, which he said has been vacant for 30 years.
“I think we’ve been talking about it for 30 years,” he said during the meeting. “I want it down.”
Councilman Ken Westcott responded to him Monday, “I think you better own it first.”
The city’s been dealing with ownership issues with the building for years. It’s changed ownership several times since 2017, and the only contact information for the owner is the address of the building.
“That building has gone back and forth so many times,” Manning said. “At one point, it was owned by some investors from Moscow. I have no idea who actually owns this building.”
For that reason, the city struggled to cite the owner for the dilapidated state of the property, which now has a $1 million federal tax lien.
“We all want it torn down, but we don’t own it,” Westcott said in an interview Tuesday. “There’s a $1 million federal lien on that property – it would be stupid and irresponsible for the city to take that on. If it was that simple, we would have torn it down two years ago.”
The city has $300,000 in Community Development Block Grant funding through the county’s Redevelopment Authority for the demolition of the building, Westcott said. He wants the city to have “site control,” or ownership, before they knock it down.
“Why spend $300,000 on a property I don’t control?” Westcott said.
Westcott said he’d rather first seek ownership of the building through the state’s Property Conservatorship Act, for which the city would need to apply with the name of a willing developer and a “best use” for the property. He said the city is also working to try to eliminate the lien, but it can’t so without ownership.
“Those things are being worked on,” Westcott said. “We’re not sitting around waiting for the building to fall down.”
Westcott doesn’t believe the $300,000 will cover the entire demolition, considering the size of the building, the time it’s been vacant and the grade on which it sits.
Rob Phillips, assistant community development director for the redevelopment authority, said the demolition will include removing any mold and asbestos, demolition and “making sure it’s not hazardous afterwards.”
“Until we get into the building and investigate all that’s required, it’s difficult to have a cost estimate,” Phillips said.
Westcott said he’d be willing to vote on a motion that allows the redevelopment authority to pursue requests for proposals on the demolition, “just to see what we’re looking at for the cost.”
The council members all agree that when the building is torn down, they’ll bring in an engineer to make sure it goes smoothly and doesn’t affect neighboring structures.
In December 2017, the city erected a fence around the building after first responders voiced concerns about the building’s structural integrity. Mayor Scott Putnam said the city recently took down the fence after an assessment was done on the building’s structural soundness.
“It’s not an imminent concern of it falling on the sidewalk,” Putnam said.
Manning doesn’t want to take that chance and let it remain there any longer, he said.
“A green space can’t fall down,” he said.
Putnam also said he’s concerned that the owner or a potential buyer could take advantage of the city’s investment by skating on that fronted $300,000, then building up the property for private use and profit.
Manning said should that happen, the city would provide that owner or buyer with “a bill for the demolition.”
“Nobody’s going to get a free ride out of this,” Manning said.