Towerview Apartments

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

How much does it cost to get a vagrant to start an  "accidental fire?"

Probably a little more money than it would to hire a vagrant to plant some asbestos in that building.

Just guessing.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

A lot of things make economic sense.  Like holding this building in it's pre-fire condition, refusing to make repairs so that the building can continue to generate revenue, then mentioning plans about plans that don't really exist, and upping the ante on the City.

Hope the building didn't have any asbestos.

Yeah, the City has no interest in buildings with asbestos (ref: Camelot).

The City should get out of the mix here.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Yeah, the City has no interest in buildings with asbestos (ref: Camelot).

The City should get out of the mix here.

Or the owners.  Assuming they actually demo the building or rehab it, that would currently be their rather expensive problem.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

A lot of things make economic sense.  Like holding this building in it's pre-fire condition, refusing to make repairs so that the building can continue to generate revenue, then mentioning plans about plans that don't really exist, and upping the ante on the City.

Hope the building didn't have any asbestos.

Yeah, the City has no interest in buildings with asbestos (ref: Camelot).

The City should get out of the mix here.

Clearly correct. Other than how soon the building drops, the city's interest just went up in smoke.[]

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Yeah, the City has no interest in buildings with asbestos (ref: Camelot).

The City should get out of the mix here.

Or the owners.  Assuming they actually demo the building or rehab it, that would currently be their rather expensive problem.

It would have no more asbestos, or be any larger problem than most the buildings torn down for the arena (many of same period), or any of the many other period buildings torn down in the CBD over the last decade.

Even less now that it's burned.

But, as you say, it's 'THEIR...problem'.

The City long ago went by the public need aspect of this and entered the punitive phase on this guy, presumptively because he wouldn't cooperate. It's time to let go.

[Wrinkle]

Can't help but think that if all those other buildings demolished contained similar amounts of asbestos, then our leaders have subjected us to liabilities, from contractors and workers who both demolished those buildings and are working on the arena now, due to exposure.

When was the last time you saw anyone in an enviro-suit?

If they pull up some asbestos deal now, it would be interesting to do a film documentary on the removal process.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

The City long ago went by the public need aspect of this and entered the punitive phase on this guy, presumptively because he wouldn't cooperate. It's time to let go.

So, the ED end of it is more or less just a matter of time.  Correct?

I haven't looked into ED in probably at least a year.  I find my selective memory very useful in allowing me to forget that stuff.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

The City long ago went by the public need aspect of this and entered the punitive phase on this guy, presumptively because he wouldn't cooperate. It's time to let go.

So, the ED end of it is more or less just a matter of time.  Correct?

I haven't looked into ED in probably at least a year.  I find my selective memory very useful in allowing me to forget that stuff.

I think you misunderstood.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

I think you misunderstood.

What?  Are we still on asbestos?

quote:Clearly correct. Other than how soon the building drops, the city's interest just went up in smoke.

Oh yes, let's make that assumption.  That the City either doesn't know what's going on with this building, or that asbestos would be a deciding factor in whether or not the City would want that property.

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

How much does it cost to get a vagrant to start an  "accidental fire?"

... just wondering.

Two bottles of "Everclear"....... One for ignition and one for blast off..

Have a number of a fellow... But I warn you he has rather expensive taste..!

Here is a pic of his hang-out..



[}:)]

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

I don't know how you could speed up the process any more--it's slated to be heard by the TMAPC this Wednesday (item 6) http://www.incog.org/TMAPC/Agenda/Tmapc%20Agenda.htm.

This is an example of how the City could supplement their Tax Base.........

This one they should sell tickets to...
[}:)]

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

I think you misunderstood.

What?  Are we still on asbestos?

quote:Clearly correct. Other than how soon the building drops, the city's interest just went up in smoke.

Oh yes, let's make that assumption.  That the City either doesn't know what's going on with this building, or that asbestos would be a deciding factor in whether or not the City would want that property.

Why don't you clear it up for us. Since the building must now be razed, why does the city need to take a piece of vacant land, suitable for development, from a private owner. What is the public's need to do this? Isn't development what they want? Is it in the wrong hands? What?

[Rico]

Well it was bound to happen... The World has weighed in on the subject...

I think it rather a compliment to the writers on this Board, that much of what is said in the "World" tomorrow, is here today....!

Below is a link to the Editorial on the Towerview....

Tickets for the TMAPC meeting today are in short supply...

Ill Wind

[carltonplace]

I doubt that a building from the 20's has a significant asbestos problem. If it has asbestos at all it would have been added later. The Camelot and the Abundant Life buildings are problems because the stuff was put in during the construction process.

Anyone see the Marlette Cartoon in the paper today? It was funny, but it made me cringe a little.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

I doubt that a building from the 20's has a significant asbestos problem. If it has asbestos at all it would have been added later. The Camelot and the Abundant Life buildings are problems because the stuff was put in during the construction process.

Anyone see the Marlette Cartoon in the paper today? It was funny, but it made me cringe a little.

Actually, Carlton, it was common as early as the late teens. Many of the houses in Maple Ridge have it covering their ductwork and heating pipes. It was later used in siding and roofing. My house dates to 1919 and has it.