image description
The structure at 89 Daniels Ave., a four-bedroom and two-bath multifamily, has an absentee owner with multiple potential heirs who have not been responsive.

Pittsfield Health Board Votes Demolition for Multifamily Properties

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Board of Health voted for the demolition of two condemned properties and discussed how to preserve other housing stock from this fate.

"It's so unfortunate that we end up kind of with houses that if we could get in somehow much earlier we wouldn't have to take them down," Chair Roberta Elliott said on Tuesday. "It seems like such a late approach."

A house at 135 Lincoln St., a four-bedroom and two-bath multifamily built more than a century ago, has been condemned for a year with no improvement made to the property.

Code Enforcement Officer Andrew Gagnon said it started with an anonymous complaint about a vacant unsecured building and a few days later, it was condemned after an inspection.  

"The owner did secure the property from unlawful entry," he added. "It's since been a year since that original condemnation. There's been no improvement to the property so we are going to issue a demolition order."

Public Health Director Andy Cambi explained that after a year of non-compliance, and if the department sees a threat to the community because it is unsecure and blighted, the department can move forward with the demolition request.

He reported that the property appears to be structurally sound.

"When the board approves that, we give the owners nine days," he said. "There have been opportunities where owners have gotten their request to demolish and have made some movements whether it was to sell the property or rehab the property."

After 90 days, the city can enforce the request by court order or it can go into the city's demolition list, as two or three are knocked down each fiscal year in conjunction with the Department of Community Development. Because this property has active owners, the court order would be issued after that time period.

The structure at 89 Daniels Ave., a four-bedroom and two-bath multifamily also built more than 100 years ago, has an absentee owner with multiple potential heirs who have not been responsive.

"Back in January of 2022, there was an emergency medical call, Pittsfield Police called us out. The house is deteriorating, structural issues, no running water hoarding, unsanitary conditions, no utilities so it was condemned," Gagnon explained.

"A year later in preparation for the order to demolish, the city solicitor's office was contacted to see if there were any potential additional heirs. Some more were found so the process pretty much restarted and that leads us to just this week or last week when I went out to take the photograph where the property is still vacant, still unsecured, and has further deteriorated."



Cambi added that if the property were to catch on fire, it would not be safe for first responders to enter.

Board members urged health officials to have the building secured as soon as possible since the demolition may take some time. They wondered if there were ways of intervention that could prevent properties from reaching this state, such as offering options alternative to demolition like donating the property to Habitat For Humanity.

Cambi explained that it usually takes a couple of years of vacancy before properties end up with requests to demolish. The city cites the state sanitary code and approaches that will make the unit habitable.

"And that constant enforcement that we do keeps these properties as maintained as possible," he said.

He said the Health Department pushes programs offered by the city as much as possible while keeping the balance of code enforcement and reminding owners that the property will get worse if it regular maintenance needs continue to be neglected.

Elliott asked Cambi to provide the board with the communication sent to owners to see if there is an opportunity to strengthen it, offering to continue the discussion at the next meeting.

"I do like the idea of trying to do something before we get to the point where we're condemning it," she said.

Cambi said there is definitely room for some outreach services, whether it is a flier outlining programs through the Department of Community Development, the bank, or other entities.

In other news, the city received a $5,000 stipend through the state Department of Public Health for a gambling disorder screening day.

This will be used for screenings that will then identify individuals who can be referred to further resources. The Health Department will not be treating the disorders.

"We've seen an increase with the mobile online gambling that is available, with the closeness to the fairly new casino in Springfield," Cambi explained. "So that has an impact on everybody as far as housing insecurity, food insecurity so I think it's a good activity for the social worker to work on."


Tags: blight,   demolition,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Is the Select Board Listening to Dalton Voters?

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

A reasonable expectation by the people of a community is that their Select Board rises above personal preference and represents the collective interests of the community. On Tuesday night [Nov. 12], what occurred is reason for concern that might not be true in Dalton.

This all began when a Select Board member submitted his resignation effective Oct. 1 to the Town Clerk. Wishing to fill the vacated Select Board seat, in good faith I followed the state law, prepared a petition, and collected the required 200-plus signatures of which the Town Clerk certified 223. The Town Manager, who already had a copy of the Select Board member's resignation, was notified of the certified petitions the following day. All required steps had been completed.

Or had they? At the Oct. 9 Select Board meeting when Board members discussed the submitted petition, there was no mention about how they were informed of the petition or that they had not seen the resignation letter. Then a month later at the Nov. 12 Select Board meeting we learn that providing the resignation letter and certified petitions to the Town Manager was insufficient. However, by informing the Town Manager back in October the Select Board had been informed. Thus, the contentions raised at the Nov. 12 meeting by John Boyle seem like a thinly veiled attempt to delay a decision until the end of January deadline to have a special election has passed.

If this is happening with the Special Election, can we realistically hope that the present Board will listen to the call by residents to halt the rapid increases in spending and our taxes that have been occurring the last few years and pass a level-funded budget for next year, or to not harness the taxpayers in town with the majority of the cost for a new police station? I am sure these issues are of concern to many in town. However, to make a change many people need to speak up.

Please reach out to a Select Board member and let them know you are concerned and want the Special Election issue addressed and finalized at their Nov. 25 meeting.

Robert E.W. Collins
Dalton, Mass.

 

 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories