Flanders Mansion
Mission Trail Nature Preserve
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA.
For an interesting update on the status of the Flanders Mansion property, click on the post title above for the Monterey County Weekly article, “History Rots: Preservationists Say Carmel Is Purposely Letting Flanders Mansion Deteriorate,” by Jessica Lyons.
The Monterey County Weekly article quoted William B. Conners, the attorney representing the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, as stating that the City and Flanders Foundation agree that the Flanders Mansion “needs some repairs. The city of Carmel says, ‘We don’t have the money to do this.’”
COMMENTS:
Contrary to Attorney William B. Conners assertion that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea says “We don’t have the money” to rehabilitate the Flanders Mansion, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea does indeed have the money to rehabilitate not only Flanders Mansion, but ALL of the city’s cultural and historical assets.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea intentionally misleads residents about the city’s financial situation; the city has an annual budget of $12 million AND reserves of nearly $10 million. Ergo, the City can and should not only budget “upwards of $1 million to fix the mansion,” the city should budget for the rehabilitation of the Forest Theatre and the Scout House, for the use of residents, user groups and the public.
Citizens expect their local government to honor their obligations of stewardship. In this instance, the obligation of stewardship of this National Register of Historic Places resource includes “maintenance and upkeep,” per Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code 17.32.210. And it involves making the Flanders Mansion available for public use.
For perspective, the city council has budgeted over $700,000 annually to Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. for their management of the Sunset Center (over $2 million from July 2004-June 2007), yet the city council cannot summon the commitment to maintain the physical infrastructure of the Forest Theatre and the Scout House for far less of an expenditure over time. The city council’s unequal and discriminatory treatment of Carmel’s cultural and historical assets is not is the interest of current residents or future generations of Carmelites!
Reference:
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Municipal Code
Chapter 17.32
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
17.32.210 Maintenance and Upkeep.
A. Minimum Maintenance.
1. All resources included in the inventory shall be preserved against decay and deterioration, kept in a state of good repair and free from structural defects. The purpose of this section is to prevent an owner or other person having legal custody and control over a property from facilitating demolition of a historic resource by neglecting it and by permitting damage to it by weather and/or vandalism.
2. Consistent with all other State and City codes requiring that buildings and structures be kept in good repair, the owner or other person having legal custody and control of a property shall repair such building or structure if it is found to have any of the following defects.
a. Building elements so attached that they may fall and injure members of the public or property.
b. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation.
c. Defective or deteriorated flooring.
d. Members of walls, partitions or other vertical supports that split, lean, list or buckle due to defective material or deterioration.
e. Members of ceilings, roofs, ceilings or roof supports or other horizontal members which that sag, split or buckle due to defective materials or deterioration.
f. Fireplaces or chimneys that list, bulge or settle due to defective material or deterioration.
g. Deteriorated, crumbling or loose exterior plaster.
h. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations or floors, including broken windows or doors.
i. Defective or lack of weather protection for exterior wall coverings, including lack of paint, or weathering due to lack of paint or other protective covering.
j. Any fault, defect or deterioration in the building which that renders it structurally unsafe or not properly watertight.
3. If the Building Official determines that a historic resource or any other property is being neglected and subject to damage from weather or vandalism, the Director and/or Building Official shall meet with the owner or other person having legal custody and control of the historic resource to discuss with them ways to improve the condition of the property. If no attempt or insufficient effort is made to correct any noted conditions thereafter, the Building Official may issue a notice to comply requiring the owner or other person having legal custody and control of the historic resource to take action to require corrections of defects in the subject property in order that such historic resource may be preserved in accordance with this section.
3 comments:
It seems clear that the Mayor and City Council are unwilling to spend Carmel's money on things that they are required by law to do, on the basic upkeep of the city, on hiring enough staff to properly run the city etc. They claim there isn't enough money, which obviously is nonsense, but are very willing to spend money on unnecessary studies, things that violate the City Code etc. that they hope, maybe even believe,will support their political philosophy however far from practical or realistic that may be. Why they are doing this seems generally to be a mystery, except possibly to other local neo-conservatives. Flanders, The Scout House et al are an exception. It is clear that the Mayor and City Council hope that if such properties are allowed to deteriorate enough it will no longer be practical to restore them and they can be sold off and/or torn down with less public opposition. In the case of Flanders a strong majority of the public sees the mansion as a white elephant so such tactics would seem unnecessary. Perhaps the Mayor (because of her background?) is unable to do anything in a manner that doesn't involve subtrefuge even when it is in her interest to do so.
It is nice to have the improved theater in the Sunset Center but it is a drain on the city's budget of about $1,500,000 a year and will continue to be a major drain as long as it exists. It may well be regarded in the future as the crowning disaster of this era's city councils in much the same way that Iraq will define the Bush Administration for future historians. Sunset has always cost Carmel money but residents used to be able to afford to go there and it was available to many local organizations and presenters. This is less and less true. City residents are less and less able to afford to go to the Sunset Center and historic users have either been forced out or soon will be. For a million and a half dollars a year Sunset is no longer a community asset. It is a failing business enterprise costing Carmel huge sums of money that are needed for the basic operation of the city not to mention for the Scout House, which was a real community asset, and the Forest Theater, which continues to be but needs an infusion of significant funding.
Speaking of the Scout House, do you know anything about the following?
CITY COUNCIL
Tour of Inspection
&
Closed Session
Monday, January 8, 2007
III. Adjournment to Closed Session at City Hall
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 et seq. of the State of California, the City Council will adjourn to Closed Session to consider the following:
B. Property Negotiations – Gov’t. Code Section 54956.8,
Between City Administrator and Carol Richmond regarding a property located on the northeast corner of Mission Street and Eighth Avenues.
Note: Carol Benton Richmond, owner of the Carmel Ballet Academy next to the Scout House, filed an appeal to the HRB for removal of her building. It appeared on the 20 November 2006 agenda, but was continued and was not on the 19 December 2006 agenda.
I am in agreement with the writer who expressed the idea that the mayor probably would not have to resort to her clandestine tactics to achieve the same results. Her obvious predilection for secrecy and her use of others as fronts/accomplices to achieve her desires is an engrained, hardened, character-defining attribute. Even if the etiology of the mental pathology was known, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to alter the behavior. That is why people with a background and predilection for secrecy are not people citizens should elect to public office. They soon become the archenemy of good government.
Post a Comment