Demolishing Youngstown, house by house. (Columbus: 2013, credit, houses)

[SorryIMovedBack]

I find this mindboggling! 3000 vacant houses have been demolished, and WKBN says there are another 3000-4000 vacant homes there yet?!

Youngstown News, Expert will examine Youngstown's demolition program
Jan 12, 2012

Although 3,000 vacant houses were demolished in Youngstown in the past seven years, even city officials question its impact on neighborhoods.

^ Yeah, like maybe the entire city could disappear?


Youngstown News, Youngstown may exceed mayor’demolition expectation
Jun 7, 2013
Youngstown may exceed mayor’s demolition expectation

YOUNGSTOWN
It looks like the city will reach — and possibly exceed — the mayor’s expectation at the beginning of the year to have 1,000 dilapidated houses in its neighborhoods demolished in 2013.
As of Thursday, 581 houses were demolished in the city with an additional 212 planned to be taken down in the next couple of months, said DeMaine Kitchen, the mayor’s chief of staff/secretary and the city’s point-man on demolition.
It was less than three months ago that Kitchen reported that only 121 houses were demolished with an additional 177 expected to come down by mid-May.
The difference is the significant increase in the number of houses taken down by their owners, Kitchen and Mayor Charles Sammarone said.
Between the first of the year and mid-March, only five homeowners paid to have their structures demolished and 37 more received permits to take down the vacant houses.
As of Thursday, owners of 169 vacant houses had the structures taken down themselves so far this year with an additional 40 receiving permits to demolish their houses in the next two months, Kitchen said.
Kitchen and Sammarone credit housing-prosecution hearings that require owners of houses in poor condition to work out time lines with the city prosecutor’s office to improve or demolish their houses.

NE Ohio city speeds up rundown house demolitions | WKBN First News

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio (AP) — The pace of demolitions involving dilapidated houses is speeding up in a northeast Ohio city.
Youngstown says demolitions have already passed the halfway point of this year’s goal of 1,000. There are 4,000 to 5,000 vacant houses in Youngstown.
The (Youngstown) Vindicator (bit.ly/ZxODjq) reports that as of Thursday 581 houses have been demolished this year with 212 more planned in the next couple of months.
City officials credit hearings that require owners to work out schedules with prosecutors to improve or demolish rundown houses.
It costs Youngstown $7,500 to have a contractor demolish a house. With more owners paying this year, the city has saved about $1.27 million on 169 of the demolitions.
Last year there were 412 houses demolished in Youngstown, with owners paying for about 70.

Oh well, they are getting some help from arsonists. Two more houses burned to the ground last night. Maybe the last person out forgot to turn out the lights.
Youngstown News, Youngstown firefighters battle vacant home blazes

[JR_C]

I have strong feelings about demolition in Youngstown. I do think that demolition needs to occur, to bring the amount of housing stock and related infrastructure in line with the size the city is now. But, the city isn't going about its demolition with any sort of plan; they're just tearing houses down willy-nilly.

In the historic Wick Park neighborhood, we've successfully saved 3 houses from the wrecking ball, and we're working on a few others. But most people throughout the city have come to the conclusion (mistakenly, IMO) that demolition is a good thing, even in neighborhoods that are still intact.

I sometimes wonder if the increased rate of population decline from 2000 is related to the increased focus on demolition.

[jbcmh81]

That is an amazingly large amount of homes to me. There were only 900 homes in all of Columbus that were deemed too far gone to save from demolition.

I get the reasoning behind it, I'm just not sure if it's going to produce the desired results. I think there needs to be a greater emphasis on renovation/restoration rather than just bulldozing so much to save money.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by JR_C

I have strong feelings about demolition in Youngstown. I do think that demolition needs to occur, to bring the amount of housing stock and related infrastructure in line with the size the city is now. But, the city isn't going about its demolition with any sort of plan; they're just tearing houses down willy-nilly.

In the historic Wick Park neighborhood, we've successfully saved 3 houses from the wrecking ball, and we're working on a few others. But most people throughout the city have come to the conclusion (mistakenly, IMO) that demolition is a good thing, even in neighborhoods that are still intact.

I sometimes wonder if the increased rate of population decline from 2000 is related to the increased focus on demolition.

Yeah, there needs to be some sort of plan involved. Obviously some neighborhoods are going to be in better shape than others (and more intact). It would seem to be a better idea to work on revitalizing those areas that can be saved the easiest, and demolish what is in the worst shape that has the least chance of being brought back. If you have to go house by house, that's what you have to do.

[JR_C]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

That is an amazingly large amount of homes to me. There were only 900 homes in all of Columbus that were deemed too far gone to save from demolition.

I get the reasoning behind it, I'm just not sure if it's going to produce the desired results. I think there needs to be a greater emphasis on renovation/restoration rather than just bulldozing so much to save money.

"Too far gone" and "blighted" are 2 different things, especially in Youngstown. Any house that is vacant, has tall grass, and boarded windows, is fair game for demolition in Youngstown.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by JR_C

"Too far gone" and "blighted" are 2 different things, especially in Youngstown. Any house that is vacant, has tall grass, and boarded windows, is fair game for demolition in Youngstown.

It's probably a bit subjective and depends a lot on the individual city's plan and budgets. Certainly, I could see Youngstown having a much broader definition than other places.

[Natural510]

Flint had a solid plan to shrink its city size to concentrate its public services, and other cities have adopted it. Is the Youngstown plan not following the same plan?

[JR_C]

Originally Posted by Natural510

Flint had a solid plan to shrink its city size to concentrate its public services, and other cities have adopted it. Is the Youngstown plan not following the same plan?

Flint got the idea from the Youngstown 2010 plan. Unfortunately, Youngstown hasn't had a city planner to orchestrate/execute the Youngstown 2010 plan since 2009, so the plan hasn't really been adhered to. (the current mayor doesn't even agree with the plan )