Springfield won’t back down on demo order

The Springfield Select Board remained convinced Monday night that 21-23 Valley Street was unsafe and a hazard to the community.
http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20150930/THISJUSTIN/709309911

Springfield won’t back down on demo order By Susan Smallheer Staff Writer | September 30,2015 SPRINGFIELD — The Springfield Select Board remained convinced Monday night that 21-23 Valley Street was unsafe and a hazard to the community. The board voted unanimously, after hearing from building owner Don Bishop, his attorney and his contractor, to uphold its earlier decision to order repairs on the building. The board went behind closed doors for a “deliberative session” before coming out and making its decision. “We find the building remains unsafe,” said Select Board member Walter Martone. The board first ordered the building repaired on July 20, but so far no work has been done on the building because Bishop has appealed the order. Town Manager Thomas Yennerell said the town wanted the front porch and the back shed removed, and the foundation under the house rebuilt. It is the third building owned by Bishop targeted by the town under its unsafe building ordinance. The decision came after the board heard from Bishop and his contractor that they could fix the dilapidated building, which was already seriously damaged by fire more than 20 years ago and repaired. Another building, which was next door to 21-23 Valley Street, was torn down in the spring. Another, on Wall Street, which had been damaged by fire a couple of years ago, has seen its demolition order appealed to Windsor Superior Court. But the board said Bishop and his contractor, Dan Barber, weren’t able to shift their conclusion that the building was unsafe. Barber and Bishop said two-thirds of the shed in the back of the building has already been removed. Bishop’s attorney, Richard Bowen, said because the building was only used for cold storage it didn’t fall under the town’s unsafe building ordinance. But the town’s structural engineer, David “Todd” Hindinger, of Perkinsville, said anyone entering the building for storage — including Bishop himself — would face unsafe conditions. Barber said the building had a “brand new roof” and lots of new timbers, and he could fix the building to satisfy the town. “It’s been like that for 50 years, and that building’s not going anywhere,” Barber said. “I didn’t find any rot,” Barber said. Neither did he see any signs of rodents or vermin, he told the board. “There isn’t even scat under there,” he said. Barber later said he found a few isolated cases of rot that could easily be fixed. But Barber conceded that the building’s foundation was in need of repair. One corner of the building had nothing holding it up, he said. Barber warned against “tightening the building up too much” because it would make the building and its contents subject to mold, given its location right next to a brook. Yennerell said Bishop has 60 days to do the work required by the town.