Year: 2015

Movement at condemned house

Belfor Property Restoration was at 208-210 Locust Street for most of the day today constructing a plywood barrier around the front of the condemned building there. A little over a month ago, the building was thought to be in danger of imminent collapse. (Go HERE for more info.)  The building was since shored up inside the front wall. For over a month, wooden barricades and caution tape were placed around the front of the property to direct pedestrians away from the building – but unfortunately into the street. A few weeks later, wire construction fence was added along the sidewalk.
Belfor was there this morning.
Pedestrians had to walk in the street to get around the construction fence and workers today.
 As work progressed, this couple had to walk in the street to get around the construction site . . .

 . . . and in the process had to dodge a cavalcade of cars traveling up Locust.

Shortly after 7 p.m., the work appeared to have been completed, producing this unsightly structure. Although it will undoubtedly keep pedestrians away from the building in question, it does nothing to increase its safety.  In fact, we wonder if the daylong drilling and hammering may have added to its instability. 

A preliminary report indicated there would be a sort of “tunnel” through the wooden structure to accommodate pedestrians on the sidewalk.  Unfortunately, this turned out not to be the case, as one of the workmen locked a makeshift plywood “door” at the lower end.
The property is owned by Samuel and Cynthia Bigler, who were recently cited by the code enforcement department and face a hearing before Magisterial District Judge Robert Herman in the near future.
(Click on the images below to see them more clearly.)

Road work on the southern end

Streets are rough in a few places on the southern end due to road work. Currently, work crews are continuing a paving project on Manor Street between Fourteenth and Fifteenth, where the street was milled recently. 
(From Wikipedia:
“Pavement milling (cold planing, asphalt milling, or profiling) is the process of removing at least part of the surface of a paved area such as a road, bridge, or parking lot. Milling removes anywhere from just enough thickness to level and smooth the surface to a full depth removal. There are a number of different reasons for milling a paved area instead of simply repaving over the existing surface.”)

And Twelfth Street is rough to drive on between Barber and Manor, due to recent milling.

LASA is making the rounds around town

From the Columbia Borough website:
“On May 27, 2015, the Columbia Borough and Municipal Authority sold the sewer collection system in the Borough to Lancaster Area Sewer Authority (LASA). LASA is now responsible for operations and maintenance of the sewer collection system.”

LASA trucks and personnel have been seen around town, checking sewer pipes, over the past few days. The following photos show activity on Avenue J last week.

Shown below is a photo taken today on Barber Street. A resident, whose Grinnell Avenue property abuts Barber, is apparently experiencing sewer problems.  A private contractor was enlisted to excavate the backyard, and LASA personnel were present today to inspect the connection to the main sewer line.  Interestingly, the residence did not display a permit, and it’s not known if one was applied for – the responsibility being that of the homeowner and contractor. We also wonder if the contractor received permission from the borough to barricade the block of Barber between Washington Street and Eleventh . . .




An extension of occupancy for a condemned building?

The notice shown above was seen this morning posted on the property at 421 Walnut Street rear, which borders Avenue G. Basically, it is a notification forbidding occupancy of the building beyond a specific date.  But what is that date? The first date written on the notice is June 29 of this year, which obviously has come and gone.  The date was apparently then revised by JMH to August 2. However, at Columbia Borough Council’s June 22 meeting of the whole, the original date of condemnation was announced to be June 26.  So, why does the date keep changing?

Is this building safe for occupancy or not?  If it is, why has this notice been posted? If it’s not safe, then it should be condemned immediately and the tenants moved to another property at the expense of the landlord. An unsafe structure won’t necessarily abide by arbitrary dates.

Part 2 – Resident alleges selective enforcement by codes department

(For Part 1 of this story, go HERE.)

At last Monday night’s Columbia Borough Council meeting, Gerald Maurer of 518 North Third Street read to council from a prepared statement outlining his complaints regarding the Columbia Codes Department.  Maurer stated that he was cited for violations even though he was not told by code officials what codes he was violating. He further asserted that code officials had not inspected the projects supposedly in violation – a kitchen addition and a deck atop it.

“To this day, nobody has shown me any codified documenting of written code that I am violating,” he told council. He added that he was initially informed in a telephone conversation with the codes office that no permit was needed for the project.

The deck as seen from the rear of 518 North Third Street.

Maurer said code officials told him the deck is not strong structurally and does not meet code, even though they did not specifically cite which code.  Maurer also alleged that code officials refused his repeated invitations to inspect his property. He further claimed that the codes department often does not conduct its own inspections, despite its $300,000 a year budget (according to Maurer), but instead sends work to another agency, Commonwealth Code Inspection Services in Manheim.

518 North Third Street

Maurer said a search warrant was issued for his property after he had appealed the violation. When he questioned why the citation was not held in abeyance until after his appeal was completed, he said he was told by a borough official it was because he had not paid a $600 fee to file the appeal.  Maurer said he had received no notification of such a fee.

This is page one of an enforcement notice Mr. Maurer received recently which he says does not include notification of a $600 fee.

Maurer also accused one code official of stating “an outright lie” on the affidavit of probable cause. He also said he observed the official trying to break into the rear of 516 North Third Street.

Maurer informed Columbia Spy that he has recently received an email from Andy Nelson, of Commonwealth Code Inspection Services, informing him that he has until July 27 to pay any fees associated with the permit before any action is taken up with the borough attorney “to compel compliance.” If payment is not made by then, the borough could fine Maurer $500 a day, every day, since each subsequent day of non-payment would be considered a separate violation.

MORE TO FOLLOW ON THIS STORY