Post Fire Defence By City Building Department Head

So why can't the response by City of Saint John officials take on a more empathetic tone to the concerns of the people living in the neighbourhood around Mecklenburg Street, the scene of the past weekend's devastating fire ? For a time yesterday it appeared that city officials were denying a work order had been placed against the property in 2009. Then they said there were subsequent orders; then that the 2009 order had resulted in the property owners being brought to court. And if indeed a work order against a property becomes "inapplicable" , when it becomes vacant, as stated yesterday by Amy Poffenroth, the city's manager of building inspections; then what other action can the city take ? 

I strongly support the idea that if a building owner is making timely progress on repairing a building and responding to a city work order, then flexibility should be shown in the process. But the situation at 70 Mecklenburg dragged on for nearly 4 years and the result was this devastating fire which destroyed the neighbouring building and left almost 2 dozen people on the street. The response by Poffenroth appears circuitous, defensive, and retaliatory. People living in the neighbourhood need re-assurance and the feeling that our staffers are protecting the interests of the greater good; not just getting bogged down in the "red tape". 

As I pointed out yesterday, Bill Edwards who is Poffenroth's predecessor and mentor, spent much effort several years ago stewarding a new set of laws that he felt allowed the building department to deal effectively with the issue of condemned and vacant properties. If Poffenroth now suggests that the new rules still aren't adequate, it would make everyone concerned, feel more assured if she pointed this out plainly and made some suggestions. If she feels her hands are tied publicly from this type of commentary, lets have the City Manager hold a press conference to address the issue from a cross department perspective, if indeed this challenge also includes the Legal Department, The Fire Department and others. An explanation and some reassurance would go along way this week to quell the concerns of spooked citizens of the South End. 

At the same time, the property at 134-144 Carmarthen Street has a similar work order that was placed against the property on May 15, 2009. It is still occupied and still in the hands of the same owners. It is in deplorable condition. Here is a photo of it taken Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. Why hasn't action been taken to evacuate this building and board it up.What does Poffenroth have say say about this circumstance.

 Better still why can't the laws in place provide mechanisms that force a non-compliant, non-cooperating property owner to lose the property to public auction or public stewardship. Such transfer of ownership should also require that a new owner have the capacity to post performance bonds to ensure the property quickly gets repaired and re-inhabited. If all this is impossible or fails...only then should it be demolished. Long term vacancy and boarding up should NOT be allowed to occur  This may sound intrusive to some, but the province legislates that automobile owners have insurance and are subject to vehicle inspections. A safe place to live is every bit as critical to families as a safe vehicle.