Read all about it- 2nd chance home – see it and don’t believe it

January 14, 2013 at 1:44 pm 20 comments


Take another pictorial walk over to
and read all about the house that is getting a 2nd chance by the demolition board—– well worth the “trip”


Entry filed under: blogs, city of lorain, hell is other people, Link -ups, Lorain Multi Property Owners, notorious opponents of exactitude. Tags: , , , , , , , , .

You be the Judge???? Welcome to Lorain Judge Mihok and George Schneider The Judgement- The Community- The Criminal- The Cost

20 Comments Add your own

  • 1. hammer  |  January 16, 2013 at 1:40 am

    I do believe that since the owners appealed the decision of the demo board and presented a plan, possibly unrealistic , but presented, the board had to consider their plan.

    If the city would have moved forward to demo the house, the city may have been liable because and if sued, may have been ordered to halt all demos.

    The owners have their second chance to either fix the home or prove that they made the mistake of buying a home they have no idea how to repair.

  • 2. brian  |  January 16, 2013 at 1:41 am

    Oops, I did it again!

  • 3. Loraine Ritchey  |  January 16, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    Brian maybe you can answer this for me – when you pull a building permit to do such a project does anyone come and inspect the work as it is happening??? or do you have to ask for an inspection

  • 4. Brian  |  January 19, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    The answer to both of your questions is yes. IF a building permit is pulled the owner is supposed to call for inspections when they are ready to be inspected.

  • 5. Loraine Ritchey  |  January 19, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    Thanks Brian how simple was that answer 🙂 but when I asked it at the Demolition Appeals Board yesterday the answer was patronizing ( more on that later) but after seeing George Schneider and a couple of others at the microphone pleading their “case” the situation and “the poorme speak” made me a little more than frustrated so I have “asked some questions of my own for the blog – that are more in depth 🙂 coming to a post newar you soon……….

  • 6. Brian  |  February 3, 2013 at 2:46 pm

    How come the article doesn’t mention anything about the neighboring properties? The one to the south that obviously had a fairly substantial fire that caused extensive damage to the house that while looks pretty poor, is no worse off the the other homes that surround it.

    I happened to accidentally drive by this house the other day and I didn’t see the one house sticking out on its own, the whole cluster of three homes all deserve the same considerations of either being repaired or knocking then down in my eyes.

    So… Anyone have any idea what is going on with the homes to either side?

  • 7. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 3, 2013 at 3:10 pm

    I will see what I can find out – there are a plethora of homes as you know that are on lists…and the “process” has to be adhered to 😉 do you have addresses at all that would help

  • 8. Brian  |  February 3, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    It’s the two houses to either side. The one to the south has had a major fire at on time. That is what made the siding melt in the pictures in the article.

    The discussion has focused on the house in the middle, but could the condition and the fire to the property to the south of the featured home been a larger contributing factor in the plight of these three homes?

    If the home in the middle gets razed and the two homes in as poor of condition are allowed to stand, is this real progress?

  • 9. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 3, 2013 at 4:24 pm

    th house as I understand it was empty and open to the elements for 5 years – abd was purchased for 200 two years ago …

    “f the home in the middle gets razed and the two homes in as poor of condition are allowed to stand, is this real progress?”

    that Brian is speculation and I haven’t the energy to speculate and what ifs…. as I said let me have the addresses and I will find out even if I can’t email the City of Lorain from this computer 😉

  • 10. Brian  |  February 3, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    All three houses look like they were open to the elements for the last five years and none look much better than the other.

    What are folks REALLY upset about?
    Is it that someone bought the center house for $200.00?
    Are people upset that the folks that bought the house are being allowed extra time to try to correct the property that they bought the whole time the readers are unimformed about larger circumstances that should be made part of the discussion.

  • 11. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 3, 2013 at 9:31 pm

    Brian I know how you like to delve – I will tell you what I am upset about that it took at search warrant and the threat of demoliton to get the two “cowboys” to finally do something to their property which they purchased two years previously AND DID NOTHING>>>> and LIED about how long they had it …… and didn’t pay the taxes on and then played the poor me card at the hearing…. and then they like others play the system and I have to put up with this shit time and time again .contractors and landlords and multi property owners playing the game playing the “process” whoring out their properties for the most part with cosmetic fixes and putting peoples health and safety at risk…… and then I have to live next door to the crap they leave behind until it is so bad they have to tear down.that answer your question……

  • 12. Lisa  |  February 4, 2013 at 2:22 am

    The houses on either side of 3620 Clifton are both condemned, or as the notice says “unfit for human habitation”. Those three houses are a trifecta of trash in an otherwise well-kept neighborhood. All 3 of them need to be demolished sooner rather than later.

    Brian, I don’t care that the house only sold for $200. I do not know the people who bought it, nor do I have any personal issues with them. Have you been to my blog and looked at the close-up pictures of this property? It sits crookedly on a slab, there is foundation damage all around, and the front porch slab smiles at you. The roof is a whole other mess and I was unable to see inside. The house was put on the demolition list for many many damn good reasons. It ought to take a helluva lot more than someone’s word that they have the money to fix it in order to remove it from the demo list.

    What “larger circumstances” are you referring to? If you know something about this situation that would explain why a house like this gets a second second chance (to infinity) while a structurally sound house (inspector’s words) on 17th is set for demolition because the inside has been stripped, please feel free to fill in the blanks for us. Kinda surprised your boss didn’t pick up the one on 17th to make up for what he’s lost in that ‘hood.

  • 13. Brian  |  February 4, 2013 at 12:18 pm

    The point of my post is that while the house in the middle is being discussed, what about the two other homes?

    After seeing that the house to the south is heavily damaged by fire, maybe if that home was addressed when it caught on fire years ago that maybe the two other houses wouldn’t look so bad.

  • 14. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 4, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    Maybes”s aside I think we have to stick to what is and how to deal with that aspect of Lorain

  • 15. Brian  |  February 5, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    I am sorry I even mentioned anything. I guess that when I see a home with all the windows broken out for children to climb into it isn’t something that should worry about. The $200.00 house is the reason why the two other homes are in the condition that they are.

    I do remember a few years back when I mentioned a house on Long Avenue that was unsecure and within days a young child was molested in it.

    Lastly. Lisa, what business is it where I work and who I work for? I work every day to EARN a paycheck that is used to support me and my family. If you have an issue with who I work for I would appreciate it if you would keep it out of the discussion unless there is some sort of merit to bringing it up.

  • 16. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 5, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    Brian you alluded to the fact that ( at least that is way it has been taken) that we who have written sbout this house may have an agenda or more to the story-

    as Lisa’s reaction to your comment

    “What “larger circumstances” are you referring to?
    If you know something about this situation that would explain why a house like this gets a second second chance (to infinity) while a structurally sound house (inspector’s words) on 17th is set for demolition because the inside has been stripped, please feel free to fill in the blanks for us.

    You see it seems everyone has an agenda so when people ” try to make a change” we look for an agenda. 9 THERE IS NO TRUST LEFT )… My agenda is that I am totally sick of people playing “cards” from race to the system to Poor me…in order to get their way. I feel dimished by the lifestyle that is now Lorain… that is my agenda- I can’t do much but I can publicize the problems

    I was on Lisa blog having diaglogue with a person who was obviously against Point of Sale – and made some valid points- he also knew a lot about the situation next door to me – well he would wouldn’t he he had a vested interested represented Lake Erie Landlords on a couple of committees and also is one of the “businesses of rental”….. so his points though valid to Lisa’s readers were tinged with ” Oh he has an agenda here to negate POS and the business of rentals _ and it was Kent Sutton who declared it as a business in the MJ article on this blog) so his points were tainted with agenda for me… I knew thew backstory

    So when comments come from such as you who from time to time do “play the devils advocate” for what people are trying to point out in their neighborhoods there is also on this side of the situation .. the questions—–“who is the devil? being advocated and is there an agenda…… tainted with the backstory I am afraid…..

    I think that is why Lisa mentioned your employer.. sorry…. but he is an issue and a problem and his position for me as well as the other people who are in this “business” of dimishing the worth of my home is indefencible ……

  • 17. Brian  |  February 6, 2013 at 12:18 am

    When I see the pictures of the $200.00 house, my reaction is that it looks like shit. When I see three houses in a row that look like shit, my reaction is who would want to live on this street, let alone in the neighborhood.

    Now that my children are grown, and I have small grandbabies, would you want your children to live near that? How far away is far enough to be safe?

    Larger circumstances?
    1. A possible fire to a home that was allowed to continue without being repaired. Fire department would probably have the record of the fire, but I am not going to ask a question that most likely is an answer that it was years ago.
    2. Don’t like the “condition” of the home? What is the standard and who sets it? City says missing shingles is a violation as it has numerous park structures, salt domes, and related properties that are hardly up to the standard that everyone else is expected to follow.
    3. I believe that the condition of our schools has much to do about the quality of working families that would consider moving, let alone stay here in Lorain. This factor I believe is a largest factor that is destroying Lorain.


  • 18. Lisa  |  February 6, 2013 at 12:24 am

    Brian, I didn’t mention your employer by name, so I don’t know what you’re getting all bent out of shape about. But since we’re on the subject, who inspects your work? Do you call City Hall when you’re done with a job that a permit was pulled for and request an inspection? Or do you report back to your office that the job is complete and let them take care of scheduling the inspection?
    Just curious.

  • 19. Brian  |  February 6, 2013 at 3:22 am

    I am an employee. Not the boss, or the homeowner. Making calls to city hall is above my pay-grade. That should answer your question. Most of my work does not necessitate inspections, but I believe that the work that has required inspections where permits had to be pulled have been inspected. I would see no reasons why any work that I would perform would be substandard.

  • 20. Loraine Ritchey  |  February 6, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    Brian it is the “process” we are reviewing….. – your work I am sure would meet requirements but what about the cowboys…. like the ones that caulked the basement leaks witrh bathtub caulk and painted the walls to cover it up….. we are dealing with the process and in my opinion the way we inspect in this community ( or don’t) depending upon the “honesty ” of the property owner and or cowboys is truly laughable………. Desvari was right about one thing it is a system set up to fail!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Recent Comments



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 190 other followers

January 2013
« Dec   Feb »