Times-Picayune Editorial on the City of New Orleans’ Ravenous Appetite for Demolition
The Times-Picayune editorial staff weights in on the city governments’ ravenous appetite for demolitions. They sum it up nicely with the following paragraph.
The city is developing a process that will allow homeowners who want to fight a demolition order to appeal to an independent body. But until that’s in place, the committee should hold off on teardowns that could be contested.
That doesn’t mean that no demolitions can go forward — some aren’t in dispute. But it makes far more sense to start with the houses that everyone — including their owners — agrees need to go.
This is a watershed moment in the saga of the city’s attempt to demolish the city in order to save it. The recognition of the Time-Picayune and Jackie Clarkson’s office means that the issue is finally coming to the fore.
It is hard for it not to, as more and more stories of “accidental” demolitions come to light. Stories like the the demolition of Kelly Voight’s historic Gentilly home or the demolition of Matt Faust’s home that he could only explain as “accidental.”
The “Accidental” Demolition
But these are no accidents. These are part of the city’s Imminent Health Threat ordinance. Intended to rid the city of moldering abandoned Katrina ravaged houses, it is being used to raze houses out from under recovering families.
These are no accidents. The city fails to follow the notification channels required by the ordinance. The nonchalance with which a house is demolished is extraordinary. For example, notifications of the demolition are not sent via certified mail. The city is demolishing private homes with no record of the notification, begging for lawsuits.
Yet, once a house is on this list, the burden in on the homeowner to stop the demolition. The the city demands proof of mold remediation, contracts, etc. and demands that the evidence be sent via certified mail.
The city is razing houses that are gutted, secured and in the process of restoration, such is their zeal for demolition as urban planning.
The city has no system in place to remove a house from list list. With all the trials that a person rebuilding their home faces, from the insurance companies, to the high cost of contractors and materials, to the delinquency of the Road Home Program, they now face the threat that their house will be razed by contractors to an incompetent government, with no notice and no defined system for appeal.
No Comments | No Trackbacks