Several homes slated for demolition
By Sam ShawverArticle Photos
Fact Box
About the homes
Seven dilapidated homes located in the Marietta and Harmar historic districts are slated for demolition after the city completes a memorandum of understanding on the properties with the Ohio Historical Society.
- 603 Virginia St.., circa 1902, Rod Cody, owner.
- 401 Lord St., circa 1900, Peggy Bland, owner.
- 120 Ward St., circa 1920, Roger Clark, owner.
- 142 Franklin St., circa 1870, George McIntire, owner.
- 136 1/2 Harmar St., circa 1920, Theresa and Jason Erb, owners.
- 807 Front St., circa 1900, Tom Dillard, owner.
- 532 Fifth St., circa 1890, Cameron Collett, owner.
It's been a long time coming, but Jean Freeland, 82, of 805 Front St., will finally see the dilapidated house next door at 807 Front St. come tumbling down.
"It's just destroying the property values in this neighborhood," Freeland said. "When we moved here in 1971 it was in pretty good shape, but the family moved away and it's been broken into several times. Once we found a mattress on the floor with candles all around it and bottles where someone had been drinking all night.
"I'll be glad to see it go," she said.
The two-story structure, built around 1900, is one of seven blighted homes in the Marietta and Harmar historic districts targeted for removal through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, a three-year, five-county initiative funded by more than $1 million in federal stimulus dollars.
Freeland noted that the 807 Front St. property has been on the city's demolition list for some time.
"The owner lives out of town, and is not interested in trying to keep the property up. It's a large house, but is not suitable for human occupancy and it's beyond repair," Emily Stewart, assistant planner with Washington-Morgan Community Action, said during a public meeting at Gilman United Methodist Church Thursday.
Community Action is an administrator of a $1,065,000 grant being budgeted over three years among Washington, Morgan, Athens, Perry and Hocking counties for blighted property removal.
Thursday's meeting was to receive any public comments or concerns about tearing down the seven structures in the local historic districts.
Stewart said the owners have given written consent for demolition of all seven properties.
Another home, a Queen Anne structure built around 1890 and located at 532 Fifth St., has fallen into so much disrepair that it has become a safety hazard, according to Stewart.
"There's a lot of structural problems, a hole in the roof, and issues with the soffit and fascia," she said. "Animals are also getting into the house and the property is overgrown, creating a health and safety hazard. And the neighbors are definitely in support of demolishing the home."
Wayne Rinehart, with the city engineering department, said due to financial constraints the owner of the Fifth Street property could not take the house down.
"If the property owner doesn't tear it down, the city can do it, but if the owner does not consent to that, the city has to take it to court to get permission, then demolish the property and charge the work back to the property taxes," Rinehart explained. "But this stabilization program allows the property to be taken down at no cost to the owner."
A two-story home at 603 Virginia St. in the Harmar district, built in 1902, is also slated for removal.
"The owner had planned to restore this house, but there was a fire and the roof is now completely gone," Stewart said. "I've seen inside the home and the damage there is remarkable."
She said siding, walls and windows are also missing.
"There's an empty lot next door, and with this house down there would be a nice large, level lot to develop," Stewart said.
"Most of these property owners are at the point they can do nothing else with the homes," she said. "And this program is a great opportunity for them, as well as a good way to restore the surrounding neighborhoods."
Jim Baker, director of planning and development with Washington Morgan Community Action, said the next step will be to develop a memorandum of understanding with the Ohio Historical Society to obtain final permission to raze the structures.
He added that requests for bids to tear down seven other structures, not located within historic districts, would be going out as early as next week.
Dawn Rauch with Community Action added that the timeframe for demolition of the historic district homes would depend on how soon the state historical society signs off on the memorandum of understanding.
Demolition of each of the 14 properties is estimated to cost around $12,000.
|
rikrab
|
|
|---|---|
|
08-29-09 2:37 PM
|
Wtap has a complete list of the 14 dilapidated homes. A visit to the Washington county auditor’s website shows six of the fourteen property owners possess multiple properties but they cannot find the money to fix one of their properties. Most Government employees are paid whether they do their jobs or not..
|
|
fordman
|
|
|
08-29-09 12:03 AM
|
I too agree with marietta to a point!But all of you people need to get your facts straight .I knew the people who used to lived in one of these homes, and I know for a fact it had a new roof, new windows ,been rewired,been replumbed,and insulated ,and was warm. Only problem was they could not get assistant to get a furnace installed !and was forced out by previous owners ! So it went to auction and new owners who lives out of town decided to destroy the property !Ithink the city should be held accountable ,because they dont make it easy for people to upgrade the properties
|
|
Roscoe
|
|
|
08-28-09 10:08 PM
|
I say bill them. Let them prove in court why they haven't taken care of the properties. They pay the bill or appear in court, which will cost them more money.
|
|
Justwhatithink
|
|
|
08-28-09 10:06 PM
|
I also think it is pretty said when these slum lords don't have to pay anything to have these houses torn down, but what is even worse is the fact that these places weren't kept up for someone to live in. There are fewer and fewer affordable, decent places for familys to live. Most families can't afford to pay $600 or$700 for a place to live plus utilities. A lot of times that isn't even for a house but a smaill apartment. I don't think the property owner should make a profit on tax payers expense.
|
|
armybrat
|
|
|
08-28-09 6:02 PM
|
Geez, they missed one of the worst abandoned houses in Marietta for drug/sex/drinking happenings. It is an old yellow house at the top of Quarry Street. This house is a mess and a local hangout for alot of trouble.
|
|
Finallap
|
|
|
08-28-09 3:08 PM
|
Why in the heck don't they tear down that one at s.6th and wayne before it falls down
|
|
BillMitchell1
|
|
|
08-28-09 3:06 PM
|
If public funds are being used to demolish these blighted properties, then ownership should revert to the local community. If the home owner refuses to relinquish ownership, they should be liable for the costs. This is another example of slowly giving up our rights "in the interest of change". Where does it give the owner the right to retain the property for future sale or development at the communities expense. Habitat for Humanity and other community based organizations should be given those properties to develop. The home owner should be given the opportunity to take care of the problem first and if they are unable, then the property should be forfeited to the Community Action committee to demolish and disburse.
|
|
asknot
|
|
|
08-28-09 1:22 PM
|
How about using some of that money to paint some of our neon green/purple/orange houses? I agree that the lots should be put up for sale and the money going back to someone other than the property owner. I'd rather see it given to charity though. Or at least the school system.
|
|
CHAsMOM
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:58 PM
|
A slum lord is someone who knows how to work the system. They collect the checks and let the government do any of the clean up, etc. Blame our government for allowing slum lords to continue their practices, don't blame the slum lord. They are actually the smart ones. They just don't have any ethics. There are sooooo many eye sores in this town that it would be hard to know where to stop bulldozing! Our city leaders have let this continue for WAY too long.
|
|
Ann1947
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:44 PM
|
A Slum Lord ........Gets his Slum house torned down with tax payers money... Something worng with with this picture....
|
|
deerwatcher
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:34 PM
|
Where is the code enforcement? How can houses sit empty for 35 years? Did the mayor say that he would make it easier to remodel? When you drive up and down the streets of marietta look up at all the empty space? That could be living space. If more people lived in town the city would get more taxes. Oh by the way we got the money for this clean up from China! We can do better. A city council that does their job. Who is going to pay for the architect so they can get a demolition permit?
|
|
Butterfly48
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:16 PM
|
As I understand, if you don't maintain your lawn the city will send someone to do it for you ~ and then bill the property owner. But you can let your entire house fall apart and then we not only pay to tear it down but if you sell the property you profit? The property located on 5th St. should bring a nice price as a building lot and we foot the bill to have that happen? Doesn't seem fair and might encourage others to do the same....
|
|
mrhomer
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:14 PM
|
i agree with morris....most of the trashiest houses on main streets are rentals owned by companies or individuals who only care about the next rent check...they are locals who dont have to live beside their "messes" and when they are done with them will sell to the next uncaring person hoping to squeeze a few more checks out of them. Of course they are allowed to do this because no one enforces any of the city codes.....what ever happened to the house on Third that was supposedly a "bio-hazard"......looks to me like its still there rotting farther into the ground....and smelling about the same.
|
|
Butterfly48
|
|
|
08-28-09 12:11 PM
|
I agree with MariettaGuy to an extent. These homes are eyesores to all, not just the immediate neighbors. Rebuilding of new homes will mean jobs during construction. However, I strongly feel that the cost to demolish the home should be reimbursed back to the city if/when the now vacant properties are sold. Why should a property owner profit after allowing their property to fall into such disrepair?
|
|
MariettaGuy
|
|
|
08-28-09 11:29 AM
|
I hate it when people say they dont want houses torn down because of history. The houses are trash, cost too much to heat and cool, and arent up to current codes electrical, or pluming wise. I say flatten the houses and make nice new homes and give people jobs rebuilding them.
|
|
smokehouse
|
|
|
08-28-09 11:25 AM
|
We could have used the money being spent on the mayor's Friday night parties,second part of the walking path and fixing the armory. Why don't they apply for grant money to tear down the properties? This administration should get their prioritys straight.
|
|
TheBridge
|
|
|
08-28-09 10:44 AM
|
Once again Government as "Big Brother" thinks it knows best. The property owners have a legal obligation to the community to maintain their property. Shame on Marietta if our elected officials don't enforce those laws. I agree with Butterfly48: should the property be sold the cost should be recovered by the city/county.
|
|
Butterfly48
|
|
|
08-28-09 10:14 AM
|
Correct me if I'm wrong ~ We, the taxpayers will foot the bill for demolishing these homes. But then if the vacant property is sold the property owner profits??
|
|
Morris
|
|
|
08-28-09 10:13 AM
|
...Interesting and notable that the crumbling homes along Muskingum Drive are not on this list- could it be that many are owned and rented out by none other than our former mayor? How about the crack houses on Seventh street? Oh wait, those are also rentals. Nevermind that they affect house values for those of us who maintain our homes, pay taxes and live nearby. Lets see, if it took several years to get these eyesores just scheduled for demo- guess we can call do the math for the rest.
|
|
JamesEddy
|
|
|
08-28-09 9:58 AM
|
sad to see old houses not being keep up over 100 years of history gone
|
|
KetteringMariettaTransplant
|
|
|
08-28-09 9:50 AM
|
Why don't they tear down some of the trash along Muskingum Drive while they are at it?
|
|
Lizard
|
|
|
08-28-09 9:27 AM
|
If taxpayer money is being spent to demolish these homes, when are the properties going to be put up for Sheriff's auction for us to bid on if the owners are destitute enough not to be able to pay for their removal?? Should the taxpayers be charged for the demolition through higher property taxes?
|
|
Roscoe
|
|
|
08-28-09 9:25 AM
|
Couple of names on that list that have the money to do what they want but they won't take care of these properties?
|



