Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
Letters to the EditorTuesday, November 13, 2007 12:32 AM CST
Coachman question mark raises other questions
Advertisement

The pink question mark in front of the Coachman brings to mind the questions historic-neighborhood champions are asking.

Why was the city even thinking of purchasing the Coachman for more than half a million dollars, as reported in the Pantagraph in early 2006, when now they reportedly have permission from the owner to just demolish it and get even demolition costs back when it is sold?

How on Earth was it allowed for years to become such an eyesore, even housing people in early 2006 with a rental inspection program and a code enforcement division in our city?

Why are other such blighted toxins still allowed to devastate the potentially beautiful inner city neighborhoods? Is the city's attitude ``If you don't like it, you can move'' - like downtown: ``If you don't like revelers, noise, public drunkenness, move away''?

What is taking so long when the Bloomington City Council approved demolishing it months ago? Will asbestos abatement be prohibitively expensive?

Why was the water bill allowed to climb over $15,000 before being shut off, as reported in the Pantagraph in 2006? Could you get by with that?

Why is the burned out mess on Evans and Mulberry streets still standing? Was this, the Coachman, and other blighted properties managed by the some of the same individuals? Why tolerate it?

To me, it appears to be an abandonment of our inner city, which is, after all, the heart of District 87's tax base. What is the cost to the taxpayers for not dealing properly with these problems in the first place? If these values decline, won't we need more taxes from others?

Just asking.

Mary Jane Curry

Bloomington

Video stories
Most commented stories
Community calendar
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 19 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Landlord wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:15 PM:

" Inspection is totallyat the whim of the inspector. I was told to fix a rental house up better than the house I live in, and still fined when the work was not completed on the city's schedule. "

To: Lindini wrote on Nov 14, 2007 9:37 AM:

" I agree. I was fortunate to live in a beautiful, hundred year old Victorian home. It was divided into three spacious apartments. I loved the character and little nooks and crannies that you wouldn't find in an ordinary apartment. However, it is a shame when a beautiful old home is "chopped" into 7, sometimes 8 efficiency apartments. And they are maybe only $20 cheaper per month than a more spacious apartment. Pretty soon you get the wrong kind of people living there, landlords that refuse to maintain the integrity of the old home, and soon it's in disrepair and in risk of being condemned. I have one pressing question about the Roachman, perhaps someone may be able to answer: Remember when the owner was going to make renovations, and the city told him to hold off because they were probably going to buy it? So the owner holds off for a while, only to learn that the city has not only changed it's mind about buying, but now is also going to fine the owner for all the changes he didn't make because the city told him to stop. Why? "

dwarf wrote on Nov 14, 2007 8:40 AM:

" One more question... Why is this letter written as a series of questions rather than simple statements about her beliefs? I don't know about anyone else, but I find that rhetorical style completely irritating. "

W wrote on Nov 14, 2007 8:12 AM:

" Great point - things stand around drawing rats and such for years - what about the buildings next to the Center Street viaduct - many more examples. Yes, I'm very worried about District 87's tax base - could become an 'inner city' district - Why does Unit 5 get all the new annexation? I believe all public schools in the state should get equal funding - local funding just perpetuates the poverty cycle. However, state-wide funding involves more rules and regs for the community which may not be so good. No good answer. "

TO: I think Mrs. Curry has wrote on Nov 14, 2007 7:01 AM:

" We got this way because too many people wait until after things are decided and/or done to complain about them. They should have gotten involved early in the debate/decisionmaking process...i.e. by voting responsibly, or voting at all. I know a lot of compaliners who don't even participate in the process by going out to vote. I know they're all crooks, but we have to pick the better of two evils. Participate people; VOTE! "

I think Ms. Curry has.. wrote on Nov 13, 2007 8:16 PM:

" posed some very good questions here. Many of her questions are ones I have had for years; not only in relation to inner cities but with our own federal government. How did we get so far as to let our so-called 'administrators' of our cities and even our government rule over everything as though they are Kings and their ideas are the only right ideas? "

FYI wrote on Nov 13, 2007 7:42 PM:

" Actually, some of the rooms have already been redone quite nicely. A facelift on the front and relatively minor remodeling is all it really needs. Gutting a hotel room is pretty cheap and easy, as is the plumbing and electrical during that phase. The only reason it didn't make it is the neighborhood, and the fact that too many sleazes were regulars and often caused more damage than they paid. It could be a decent place, but you'd have to frame in the entrances to the rooms, to provide a secure environment(also easy). It's probably still worth $50-100k. Responsible management is needed also, as that's not been there in the past. "

madcap wrote on Nov 13, 2007 6:04 PM:

" I moved into an upper unit in an older house in the Franklin Park area in August. I absolutely love it. I have neighbors in the lower unit - that's it. I'm not surrounded by others on every side of me. It's private, well maintained. and quiet. You can keep your ugly, concrete surrounded apartment complexes - I'll never do it again. Now pardon me while I go sit on my private screened in porch. "

re to Lindini wrote on Nov 13, 2007 3:52 PM:

" How unimaganative and uninteresting it must be to live, breath and work beige. have fun with that. New housing today will last about 10 years. Many wonderful houses in this town are 110 and going strong. Please stay clueless though. "

lindini wrote on Nov 13, 2007 1:06 PM:

" I'm unclear what part about saying I live in an apartment in an old house makes you think I don't know that I live in an apartment in an old house. Then again it isn't painted beige and wasn't built in two days so I guess for the local housing market this doesn't really qualify as "appropriate housing". Here is an idea, lets tear down the David Davis mansion too, I mean, that old pile of bricks is just a big ramshackle eye sore on Monroe too. Forget history, it should be new vinyl siding for all! "

to Lindini wrote on Nov 13, 2007 11:33 AM:

" I pass by your old houses all the time and what you can attempt to make a silk purse out of sows ear but you still have a bunch of old houses butchered into apartments. Call it what ever you like son but you live in an apartment in an old house. You just can not come to grips with who you are and where you live. Call it what it is, that is the first step to living in reality. "

come on wrote on Nov 13, 2007 11:19 AM:

" this is the same city that has given millions to friends to build empty unaffordable condos down town. Money they have to throw away. Some these friends are the same slum lords that keep new business out of down town. And you all act surprised? "

Simple wrote on Nov 13, 2007 11:09 AM:

" Code enforcement is subjective and spotty at best. It depends on who you are, and who you know. The owner of the coachman had several properties all in the same condition and had them for years. The city only did something when it came to the publics attention. Same things happens in every area of town. "

Yes Mary there is a..... wrote on Nov 13, 2007 11:07 AM:

" the answer to the question of why they would pay half mil, is the same as why Normal paid over half a mill for a house to tear down for a unused park....Because the can!!! The city "leader" will do what ever they want for their own needs and those of their friends unless you make them do otherwise. You can give them free rein and then complain when the use it. You have to be involved and in their face to make them work "for the people.... "

In the pink wrote on Nov 13, 2007 9:23 AM:

" The Pink Question Mark seems to be accomplishing just what the artist intended (if you heard the interview on WJBC). It raises questions.................period! Seems like you all had one whether it was objective or in the form of a complaint of another poster's question. Gudos to the artist! "

lindini wrote on Nov 13, 2007 9:09 AM:

" For the record there is a great deal of beauty in our cultural district neighborhoods. I happen to live in a lovely Victorian home very tastefully divided, not "chopped up", into a few very well maintained and architecturally unique apartments which I am extremely proud to live in. For every poorly maintained property there are a dozen wonderful homes people have put a great deal of time and effort into. Stop lumping our entire neighborhood into the few neglected apartments or old hotels which stick out so badly to your critical eye. "

Near Homeless wrote on Nov 13, 2007 8:53 AM:

" Yes! Let us make housing codes so restrictive that every living unit in the Twin Cities is unaffordable for all... except those employed at State Farm or Country Companies or a professor at ISU... or unless you are receiving Section 8. "

What is this Womans Point? wrote on Nov 13, 2007 6:14 AM:

" First she talks about the city letting the coachman get to far down, and then complains about the water bill being as high as it was. Then she complains about the house at Mulberry and Evans and by her own admissions she is a regular reader of the Pantagraph and that should answer her own question as to whether or not the same person or people own both that place and the Coachman. Then she babbles on about inner city neighborhood beauty? Where is that located? Other than the old stores redone into condos most of the inner city is surrounded by old houses chopped into apartments ie Jefferson, Monroe, Praire, Mulberry, Madison, Grove, Evans, etc. I just can not understand what point this woman is attempting to make. Can someone please enlighten me? "

One more question, Mary Jane wrote on Nov 13, 2007 6:03 AM:

" Why don't you run for office and fix all these problems? "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?