 |
| 760 Main Street |
"It's Always Something - If It's Not One Thing, It's Another"
 |
| Roseanne Roseannadanna |
But, isn't it the truth? Doesn't it seem like there's always something that we deal with; something that seems to make the road at least a little bit bumpier than it needs to be?
Case in point....Windham's roofs. If it's not one roof it's another. Year after year we go from one roof crisis to another. Now don't get me wrong, Windham has had roof successes....The replacement of Kramer School and the town hall roof's have gone off without a hitch, Willimantic's Library was recently crowned with a state of the art roof. But for every success we've suffered through years of roof controversy.
Lets face it, roofs just aren't sexy and they can be an expensive proposition to repair or replace.. When was the last time a friend invited you over to see his new roof? "Wait till you see my new roof,,,.some tremendous asphalt up there." It's like changing the oil in the car. having the septic tank pumped or getting the furnace cleaned. Its something that has to be done and at some point replaced, things that the people we elect just don't seem to grasp.
Take the former YMCA. For years water has poured through the building, not because a few shingles are missing but because there is a large hole on the east side of the building big enough to allow small elephants to fly in. The YMCA has sat festering for years until private developers tightened the roof. While the building is awaiting the wrecking ball the smells emitted from the mold and mildew and the unhealthy respiratory exposures is another deterrent to Main Street's future.
The Tin Tsin Building is now a parking lot. I call it a gully where some cars happen to park. The Tin Tsin, which was once considered an architectural significant building, is a twelve year odyssey on how not to preserve an important building. After a August 25,1991 fire caused minor structural damage to the roof, east and south exterior walls,the building was condemned, tenants relocated and windows and doors boarded and secured by the town. Subsequently the town foreclosed on the building principles, Paul Ingram and Peter Rich, becoming owners of of one of the few architectural significant building in Willimantic. November,2003 Michael Paulus, Windham's first selectman. received the Tin- Tsin's impending death sentence from James Grant, structural engineer. He wrote,. "I believe there is no feasible and prudent alternative to demolition of the building. (Tin Tsin) Plans to demolish the building should proceed without delay. A demolition permit was granted on Dec.16, 2003 and demolition began shortly after. Engineers were concerned a heavy snow storm could collapse the building putting life and limb in jeopardy.
What went wrong? Why did we lose a legacy downtown building causing a psychological, physical and economic gap to an already economically depressed Main St? When the town took ownership of the Tin-Sin the building it was in relatively good condition. While there was minor fire damage, some structural problems and code violations it could have been addressed and rectified for a realistic price, far less then what the taxpayers eventually payed. The board of selectman took nearly twelve years and never could reach a decision....Mother nature and time made the final decision.
The final cost: The loss of four store fronts, a dozen apartments and town pride. From the taxpayer's pocketbook, $195,000.00 plus incidentals to bring down and haul away the Tin Tsin . What did we get? A gully for a parking lot.
The town highway garage, adjacent to Windham Airport suffered the indignity of partial roofless- ness for nearly a decade. A hole so big pilots unfamiliar to the area thought the garage roof was a hanger door. So much water poured through the roof that the highway garage could have been the headwaters of the Shetucket. Town selectman pondered the problem for years but could never reach a decision to patch, replace or build a new garage. Newly arrived town manager Beets took on the garage hole and within months the problem was resolved. Today the town garage sports a leak-less roof.
Natchaug School's roof has made headlines for nearly two years now. There is reported structural damage to the roof because of maintenance problems. Students and teachers have been relocated to other town schools for the 2012-13 school year. After dragging their feet the school board has decided to replace the roof but suffered a setback when the board of finance choose not to endorse the plan. The school board came to the table ill-prepared, not able to answer BOF questions. The BOF is skeptical of spending 1.3 million dollars to replace the roof of a 93 year old building without knowing what the total condition of the building is. They also question the future facility needs of the BOE and what role Natchaug will play. The BOE could not answer questions asked to the satisfaction of the BOF, the proposal was turned down. It appears that the school will remain vacant for another school year as the BOE needs to reassess its options for its buildings and students. One school board member stated, "If we don't start investing in our buildings and our students its going to be more expensive in the long run."
The September 24, 2012 Willimantic Chronicle brought us more bad roof news.760 main St, former home to Sweeney Stationery, Willimantic Instant Print and Poya Printing had been condemned do to "severe structural and water related damage." According to the town building inspector Donald Schultz, " holes in roof and floors and water coming through the roof has caused extensive damage to the structure as well as mold and mildew problems" Schultz and the town has only known of the problem for the past few weeks and found out from several customers from the only existing tenant, Treasures Clothing Store. According to Schulze. "what the owner (of 760 Main) chooses to do is up to him at this point. The owner may choose to fix the building or may choose to do nothing as long as the deterioration does not endanger those out side the structure,"
Holy Crap! Another Tin -Tsin ? Another gap on Main Street, another "gully parking lot, another nail in the coffin of Main Street's economic fortunes? I made a visit to Windham town hall and found:
Correspondence between myself and Manager Beets:
From Manager Beets:
his Letter pronounces the demise of the Tin Tsin Building on Main St. As of Thursday, Nov 16th, when it's published, there will be a link to the Tin Tsin report. Thankyou
James K Grant
Structural Engineers
November 20, 2003
Michael Paulhus, First Selectman
Town of Windham
979 Main Street
Willimantic. CT 06226
Re: The Tin Tsin Building
Dear Mr Paulhus
On Tuesday, November 18, 2003, I inspected the Tin Tsin Building withTown Engineer, Joe Gardner. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the curent structural condition of the building. My most recent prior inspection was in June during preparation of plans to stabilize the building. My earliest inspection was in August 2000 when I was engaged by the town to conduct a structural condition survey.
Over the more then the three year period that I have been inspecting this building it has quickly deteriorate from a structure with a few problem areas to one with widespread structural problems. The facade of the building was, and still is, the most important and structurally sound part of the building Since June, however, the condition of the interior of the building has spiraled downward. There are more collapsed floor and roof areas and I believe that the exterior walls have lost a great deal of lateral support that the floors and roof once offered. Without sound structural support at each framing level, the walls can become unstable and subject to collapse without warning. With the possibility of heavy snow load now upon us,it is imperative that the conditions be addressed at once. Furthur collapse of an already weakened roof would lead to progressive collpse of additional floor levels and likely collapse of some exterior walls.
The stabilization project that was recently bid would have provided the necessary corrective work, but the lowest responsive bid exceeded the available funds. Unless the funding shortfall is satisfied so that the stabilization, I believe there is no feasible and prudent alternativeto demolition of the building. Plans to demolish the building should proceed without delay
Sincerely
James K Grant, P.E.
Copy: Susan Chandler, State Historic Preservation Office
2074 Park Street, Hartford CT 06106
Tel:860-236-5236: Fax: 523-7967
Case in point....Windham's roofs. If it's not one roof it's another. Year after year we go from one roof crisis to another. Now don't get me wrong, Windham has had roof successes....The replacement of Kramer School and the town hall roof's have gone off without a hitch, Willimantic's Library was recently crowned with a state of the art roof. But for every success we've suffered through years of roof controversy.
Lets face it, roofs just aren't sexy and they can be an expensive proposition to repair or replace.. When was the last time a friend invited you over to see his new roof? "Wait till you see my new roof,,,.some tremendous asphalt up there." It's like changing the oil in the car. having the septic tank pumped or getting the furnace cleaned. Its something that has to be done and at some point replaced, things that the people we elect just don't seem to grasp.
Take the former YMCA. For years water has poured through the building, not because a few shingles are missing but because there is a large hole on the east side of the building big enough to allow small elephants to fly in. The YMCA has sat festering for years until private developers tightened the roof. While the building is awaiting the wrecking ball the smells emitted from the mold and mildew and the unhealthy respiratory exposures is another deterrent to Main Street's future.
 |
| Gully for a parking lot |
The Tin Tsin Building is now a parking lot. I call it a gully where some cars happen to park. The Tin Tsin, which was once considered an architectural significant building, is a twelve year odyssey on how not to preserve an important building. After a August 25,1991 fire caused minor structural damage to the roof, east and south exterior walls,the building was condemned, tenants relocated and windows and doors boarded and secured by the town. Subsequently the town foreclosed on the building principles, Paul Ingram and Peter Rich, becoming owners of of one of the few architectural significant building in Willimantic. November,2003 Michael Paulus, Windham's first selectman. received the Tin- Tsin's impending death sentence from James Grant, structural engineer. He wrote,. "I believe there is no feasible and prudent alternative to demolition of the building. (Tin Tsin) Plans to demolish the building should proceed without delay. A demolition permit was granted on Dec.16, 2003 and demolition began shortly after. Engineers were concerned a heavy snow storm could collapse the building putting life and limb in jeopardy.
What went wrong? Why did we lose a legacy downtown building causing a psychological, physical and economic gap to an already economically depressed Main St? When the town took ownership of the Tin-Sin the building it was in relatively good condition. While there was minor fire damage, some structural problems and code violations it could have been addressed and rectified for a realistic price, far less then what the taxpayers eventually payed. The board of selectman took nearly twelve years and never could reach a decision....Mother nature and time made the final decision.
The final cost: The loss of four store fronts, a dozen apartments and town pride. From the taxpayer's pocketbook, $195,000.00 plus incidentals to bring down and haul away the Tin Tsin . What did we get? A gully for a parking lot.
The town highway garage, adjacent to Windham Airport suffered the indignity of partial roofless- ness for nearly a decade. A hole so big pilots unfamiliar to the area thought the garage roof was a hanger door. So much water poured through the roof that the highway garage could have been the headwaters of the Shetucket. Town selectman pondered the problem for years but could never reach a decision to patch, replace or build a new garage. Newly arrived town manager Beets took on the garage hole and within months the problem was resolved. Today the town garage sports a leak-less roof.
Natchaug School's roof has made headlines for nearly two years now. There is reported structural damage to the roof because of maintenance problems. Students and teachers have been relocated to other town schools for the 2012-13 school year. After dragging their feet the school board has decided to replace the roof but suffered a setback when the board of finance choose not to endorse the plan. The school board came to the table ill-prepared, not able to answer BOF questions. The BOF is skeptical of spending 1.3 million dollars to replace the roof of a 93 year old building without knowing what the total condition of the building is. They also question the future facility needs of the BOE and what role Natchaug will play. The BOE could not answer questions asked to the satisfaction of the BOF, the proposal was turned down. It appears that the school will remain vacant for another school year as the BOE needs to reassess its options for its buildings and students. One school board member stated, "If we don't start investing in our buildings and our students its going to be more expensive in the long run."
The September 24, 2012 Willimantic Chronicle brought us more bad roof news.760 main St, former home to Sweeney Stationery, Willimantic Instant Print and Poya Printing had been condemned do to "severe structural and water related damage." According to the town building inspector Donald Schultz, " holes in roof and floors and water coming through the roof has caused extensive damage to the structure as well as mold and mildew problems" Schultz and the town has only known of the problem for the past few weeks and found out from several customers from the only existing tenant, Treasures Clothing Store. According to Schulze. "what the owner (of 760 Main) chooses to do is up to him at this point. The owner may choose to fix the building or may choose to do nothing as long as the deterioration does not endanger those out side the structure,"
Holy Crap! Another Tin -Tsin ? Another gap on Main Street, another "gully parking lot, another nail in the coffin of Main Street's economic fortunes? I made a visit to Windham town hall and found:
- The town spent $29,945.00 plus incidentals replacing the 760 Main Street building roof (Currently the Poya Building) as part of a buyers agreement when Mr Poya purchased the building for $5,000.00 in 2003.The town earlier had foreclosed on the building.
- A building permit was was issued on June 3, 2003 and a certificate of compliance was awarded a short time after. The roofing was supervised and designed by professional engineer, James Grant. (Same engineer that was involved with the Tin-Tsin project) A certificate of occupancy was issued May of 2006.
- After the final roof inspection there was never another inspection until the latest episode of Sept. 2012
- The present roof, completed in June of 2003, had a "shelf life" of nine years or less, an extremely short life span for an engineered roof built with approved materials.
- Neighbors report that homeless people have been seen entering and exiting the building via the east side fire escape.
- There are signs posted on the 960 Main St building that it's condemned and unfit for occupancy but in fact there is a retail store,Treasures. still operating as of Oct 15,2012, ten days past the time given to move out.
- A partial tax payment was made in 2008 but nothing since. There is an outstanding balance owed to the town of $17,500.00 (November, 2012)
- Was it a design flaw or faulty material that made a nine year roof fail?
- Why wasn't the building inspected in nine years and why was Fire Marshall Licata(along with three deputies) allowed to shirk his responsibilities?
- Why did Windham choose not to foreclose on this commercial taxpayer while they claim to have or are in the process of foreclosing on others?
Correspondence between myself and Manager Beets:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:21 PM, John Monaghan <frames224@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Manager Beets.I have been looking into the roof problems of 760 Main ST. I have found that the town spent $29,000.00 to replace the roof on this building. I have found that after the final roof inspection, approx nine years ago there has never been another inspection. I found that the fire marshal has the responsibility of inspecting commercial buildings and has not done so. I have found that neighbors report that homeless people have been seen entering and exiting the building via the east side fire escape. There are signs posted on the 960 Main St building that it's condemned and unfit for occupancy but in fact there is a retail store, Treasures. still operating as of Oct 15, 2012. According to the town building inspector the building owner, Emir Poya, may choose to do nothing to resolve this problem.What is the town's position on rectifying this problem? Why has a nine yr roof deteriorated in such a short time? Why hasn't 760 Main been inspected in nine years? If the fire marshal has the responsibility of inspecting commercial buildings, why has it not been done
John Monaghan
John,
My understanding is the Fire Marshall inspects for compliance with the state fire code. Roofs can deteriorate without there being a violation of the fire code. As for homeless persons entering the building, with this reply to you I am copying the Police to let them know of possible criminal trespass issues at this location. As for the operation of the retail business, with this message I am copying Code Compliance and the Building Official so they can make sure the tenants know their business is not supposed to be operating in a condemned building. We have had language problems communicating this message to the tenants.
However, my overall response is that this is a privately owned building for which the private property owner is legally, morally, and financially responsible. The Town has a role to play under state and local laws; so far, I think we have fulfilled our role by inspecting the property, deeming it unsafe to the public, and condemning it. The ball is now in the owner's court to appeal our actions, or not, and to make sure his building doesn't further threaten public health, safety, and welfare.
Neal
PS. I have no knowledge of why the roof failed 9 years after being worked on, but I doubt the Town or the property owner has any recourse against the roofing contractor, assuming that contractor is still in business.
his Letter pronounces the demise of the Tin Tsin Building on Main St. As of Thursday, Nov 16th, when it's published, there will be a link to the Tin Tsin report. Thankyou
James K Grant
Structural Engineers
November 20, 2003
Michael Paulhus, First Selectman
Town of Windham
979 Main Street
Willimantic. CT 06226
Re: The Tin Tsin Building
Dear Mr Paulhus
On Tuesday, November 18, 2003, I inspected the Tin Tsin Building withTown Engineer, Joe Gardner. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the curent structural condition of the building. My most recent prior inspection was in June during preparation of plans to stabilize the building. My earliest inspection was in August 2000 when I was engaged by the town to conduct a structural condition survey.
Over the more then the three year period that I have been inspecting this building it has quickly deteriorate from a structure with a few problem areas to one with widespread structural problems. The facade of the building was, and still is, the most important and structurally sound part of the building Since June, however, the condition of the interior of the building has spiraled downward. There are more collapsed floor and roof areas and I believe that the exterior walls have lost a great deal of lateral support that the floors and roof once offered. Without sound structural support at each framing level, the walls can become unstable and subject to collapse without warning. With the possibility of heavy snow load now upon us,it is imperative that the conditions be addressed at once. Furthur collapse of an already weakened roof would lead to progressive collpse of additional floor levels and likely collapse of some exterior walls.
The stabilization project that was recently bid would have provided the necessary corrective work, but the lowest responsive bid exceeded the available funds. Unless the funding shortfall is satisfied so that the stabilization, I believe there is no feasible and prudent alternativeto demolition of the building. Plans to demolish the building should proceed without delay
Sincerely
James K Grant, P.E.
Copy: Susan Chandler, State Historic Preservation Office
2074 Park Street, Hartford CT 06106
Tel:860-236-5236: Fax: 523-7967
So...does Mr. Grant speak English? He certainly does not write it well.
ReplyDeleteHe doesn't speak the best english, agreed.
ReplyDelete-Keystone Contracting Corp.
Roofing Contractor Brooklyn
You got me at “ROOFS aren’t just sexy”. I totally agree with you; but nothing beats the necessity and urgency that good roofing does to our peace of mind. It serves as a protective cover from rain, heat, snow, cold, and animal invasions. Whoever is in charge of the maintenance of this building should consider the following things: climatic conditions, roofing types and shapes, position of the building and how it can withstand the daily grind of UV rays, storm, and so on. Good riddance to roofing woes and blues. Lenore Rushford
ReplyDeleteWell, I think a roof is to house as hair is to a person; it’s a crowning glory to be bragged about when in great shape and maintained properly. But more than showing off, it’s a necessity to maintain your roof if you want to maintain the overall wellness of your house. Right?
ReplyDeleteFredda Dangelo @ Accurate Roofing & Siding LLC
Hello,
ReplyDeleteThis above article is just super and totally awesome. It is necessary to get a roof certified inspector to reconstruct the roof. Nice post... Thank you so much...
Roof Certification
Year after year of roof crisis? That must be quite frustrating. Roof repairs are messy and could bring a lot of inconvenience, depending on the grave of its damages. It’s good that you were being proactive by sending some correspondence with the authorities to move them to action. And I do hope your efforts were not in vain.
ReplyDeleteMathew Robinson @ Browns Roofing Company
Its so true that your roof should be checked yearly with a home roof inspection because it is very important to keep everyone safe
ReplyDeleteroofing companies near reading pa
roof repair reading pa
wyomissing roofing
roofers in berks county
reading pa roofing companies
Emergency Roof Repair Reading Pa