Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

417SKCFAN t1_ivia3to wrote

Reply to comment by KrazolS in University Heights “Save our homes” signs: what is going on? by Jimithyashford

Look it up yourself, 1755 S National Ave

https://www.cityutilities.net/Usage/CU_UtilityUsageReport/

1

Wyldfire2112 t1_iviwtk2 wrote

>1755 S National Ave

Yep, it's power only and not enough to match up with actual habitation.

Combined with zero gas or water usage, that tells me those bills are basically for having things connected.

9

417SKCFAN t1_ivjn0s4 wrote

Quite probably, but we know the developers claim they were having $800 utility bills as part of why they tore it down, the evidence through CU’s website shows that doesn’t seem to be the case.

https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/university-heights-historic-home-boarded-up-while-residents-were-at-meeting-to-discuss-saving-it/

Ralph Duda III with BK&M said the tenants that were living in the home were moved to a different property, and the building was boarded up because the house is deteriorating.

“There was issue after issue,” Duda said. “Their utility bill was close to $800 a month. The insulation is terrible. The windows are bad. There’s frequent leaks. Drains don’t drain. The HVAC air-conditioning unit blew out (and) a lot of wood rot around the house.

5

bobloblah42 t1_ivjsu51 wrote

I walked through that house 10 years ago and it was falling apart then. I don’t see any way or reason to save this house.

9

sullivan80 t1_ivk1gby wrote

Developers that want to tear down something WANT it to be in bad shape because the more of an eyesore it is the less resistance there will be in demolishing it.

I used to live in Webb City near Joplin and there were a bunch of large old homes along a road that had become very busy over the years and there was increasing pressure to convert to commercial but there was a lot of resistance in the community. People really didn't want to live in the homes on such a busy road with 4 lanes of traffic. But others didn't like the idea of losing the large trees, pretty homes etc and just seeing more strip malls and fast food.

One developer bought a bunch of the homes and to appease the town he actually MOVED several of them. He was supposed to leave the large trees in place but all of a sudden oops one day the equipment operated apparently didn't get the memo and cleared them to make way for a large strip mall, parking lot and fast food restaurant.

Over time most of the homes have sat abandoned and rotted to the point no one cared anymore and one by one they've been torn down to make way for a dollar store, car wash, dominoes, dairy queen, several strip malls. It's a long game but eventually developers can win approval through basic neglect.

5

Wrinklestiltskin t1_ivjspgg wrote

A lie is a lie. No reason to believe any of his other claims. He's demonstrated that he is dishonest.

Thanks for the info.

2

Ballyhoo-45 t1_ivkfkp8 wrote

The house has been empty for years. That’s probably just basic electricity turned on there.

0

417SKCFAN t1_ivkx2us wrote

Someone definitely had been living there this year, per the guy that tore it down.

2