State-Journal.com - Neighbors tire of the smell

Photo By State Journal/Kelly Mackey

A log cabin and carriage house stand behind the main house at 311 W. 3rd St. The property has been condemned and neighbors have petitioned to have it torn down.

Photo By State Journal/Kelly Mackey

A makeshift bed and chair abandoned inside the log cabin suggest that someone has been living there. Torn-out magazine pages of models and perfume ads decorate the wall near the bed.

The city of Frankfort is investigating the cost of demolishing three condemned structures on a lot on West Third Street.

The vacant house at 311 West Third has a carriage house behind it, along with a small log cabin, age unknown, city officials say.

The owner, Annette Shuntich, of Cocoa Beach, Fla., will be held responsible for the costs of demolition, said Gary Muller, director of Frankfort's Department of Planning and Building Codes.

The building's condemnation was renewed in January of this year.

The lowest current demolition bid is $21,800, Muller said. The 2008 Property Valuation Administrator's assessment is $115,000.

If the demolition fee is not paid within 30 days, Muller said, the city would place a lien on the property.
Shuntich, originally from London, England, said she suspected the property has historical merit and she's trying to save the buildings. Shuntich said she believed the cabin was a servant, slave or "horse boy" house.

Shuntich, a real estate agent, said she's had personal setbacks in restoration. She said she worked on the property in the past.

"It's just hard when you are not there," Shuntich told The State Journal in a telephone interview today.
"When I was there, we'd have Christmas parties, all the poor as well as the wealthy, and we'd have cider and Bible studies." Shuntich said she's open to any potential buyers.

Muller said he is unsure of the cabin's age, but said all three structures on the property are "very old."
Littered on the porch of the main house are water-damaged college textbooks, a tattered copy of a Sue Grafton mystery N is for Nose and debris.

Inside the house, broken pieces of drywall obstruct entry for all but the most enterprising building inspectors.

Doors and windows to the carriage house are open, revealing sagging floorboards and children's toys strewn about. "This is our family" is written on a wall above photos.

The smell of urine emanates from the structure, which neighbors say vagrants inhabited on and off.
Muller confirmed transients had used one room in the carriage house as a toilet. Muller also said someone lived in the cabin through the winter with no water or electricity.

Though the log cabin isn't much more than a few dozen square feet, a makeshift bed rests near a stone fireplace beneath advertisements for perfume and photos of fashion models cut from magazines and pasted to the wall.

Neighbors say the dilapidated buildings are odiferous, particularly when it's hot outside.

Muller said the building's state of disrepair has been prohibitive for potential restorers. "It was a beautiful home," Mueller said.

While not much is known about the historical significance of the cabin or the carriage house, Muller said the main structure's architectural merit is dubious.

"From my recollection, there wasn't architectural significance to the main structure," Muller said.
Muller said the Planning and Zoning Commission has gone so far as to bring prospective buyers to the owner, but the parties could not agree on a price.

"We truly went out of our way," Muller said.

"I need to be up there, really, to manage the construction," Shuntich said.

Shuntich said she loves her Frankfort neighbors, "but I know it's been a huge eyesore for them."

While city commissioners requested information about the possibility of demolishing the main residence and the carriage house and leaving the log cabin, Muller said they'd likely recommend all three structures be torn down.

"You can't save them all, unfortunately," Muller said.

34.	Posted by doesitreallymattereddie? June 20, 2008
	Mule - Yes, you even have to get approval for removal downtown. I have had mostly great experiences with the City whenever I've had to have something done. No question we've had differences in opinions, but it is strictly business. They've got their concerns & a job to do. I've got my issues & desires to do what I want to with that which I own and pay taxes on. Essentially, we pay a portion of the salaries of those people whom we have appointed to govern us, & they also regulate/govern our historic downtown. They do get my unquestionable respect. Ultimately, the rule-of-thum is that an owner will do what is best for the home because there is usually a correlation between the benefits. The City is there to regulate. The City has been nothing, again, less than spectacular in their handling of business on-the-level (again, I can only speak for myself). But I respect that. They've respected me. When I have concerns, I voice them (obviously). I expect them to do the same. The house in the article, neighbors should know and I promise the City does. My guess is that the City is trying to keep an arms length and not take anyones side. They are a, 'These are the rules. Here's how we are governed to enforce them' entity. If there is collusion as someone previously suggested, then that person should hammer the nail home, so-to-speak, b/c no one will do it for you. The only problem I have, that the City must balance constantly, is in neighbors abusing the systems. COSTS are rediculously high. Laborers and the local construction industry is HORRI-F'n-BLE. And it doesn't help when the neighbors are fighting you too. Luckily, mine have been respectful. However, every single home downtown needs work. They're 100+ years old. They'll constantly be needing work. Disrepaired homes take only a few years to become hazardous and eye sores and beyond the economic benefit for a homeowner. However long they're left vacant or unconditioned, they take twice as long and/or $100k's to bring back. You (3rd St neighbors) have to be able to gauge your, the home owner's, and the City's intentions, interest, and abilities. I thank the City P&Z, and Code Enforcement. I thank my neighbors for being patient. And if the neighbors of this place think it's time to act, then group up and knock the thing down. I generally keep my nose in my business. My neighbors' business, on a VERY small level, is my business too. If they're dealing crack... cooking meth... destroying the home values... there is cause to demo. I do WARN the neighbors though, if it comes down, there is no telling what can & will go up. HOWEVER, if they rehab it, everyone wins regardless of the time, costs, hastles, doubts, questions, etc.,

33.	Posted by thebuzz June 17, 2008
	I live in and love South Frankfort, but the biggest problem in my opinion is the city not taking care of business before these properties become total losses. The old Y building for instance; new owner + no improvement or activity = same old Frankfort Stuff (or use your own term). I remodeled a 3000 sq ft home in Paris, KY built in 1849, with no zoning issues or permit hassles, and it ate every dollar I could throw at it and also took a huge toll in blood, sweat, and tears. I've worked in the construction / remodeling industry and the amount of work (MONEY) it takes to even modernize (plumbing HVAC Windows ect...) a building of that size can be overwhelming. And that's a building in overall good shape. I like that house on 3rd, but I'm realistic, this one should go. If the owner has a buyer, they should have to escrow the construction moneys so the city knows that the improvements will be made. (again old Y building). Stubbornasamule your building probably qualifies as a portable storage building, key word being portable.

32.	Posted by stubbornasamule June 17, 2008
	"your house is in a historic district or on a list of those with historic value, you can get public funds for restoration purposes. The reason is that you are rather restricted in what you can do and what materials can be used. And restoring/preserving those old houses it very costly. In fact in some cases it would be cheaper to just demolish parts and rebuild using newer materials and styles rather than trying to reproduce/restore/preserve what's there." "You really have to love old houses and be quite handy in doing your own restoration work to make it worth your while. Or immensely rich and attached to the location. Everything else is investing into a money pit as the average person can only afford patchwork here and there." But,and this is coming from an "outsider" since I live in the county, am I correct in thinking that if you decide to do something to the house and will be funding it yourself, you can't just go on with whatever you think is best - like siding over paint, practical windows, a different door, fence, etc. Some people downtown have had work done on a weekend to "avoid" discovery. If you do then you stand a chance of being fined because you didn't present your plan to the review board? Would the same thing apply if you'd want to tear something down would you be allowed to do it without approval? I have a shed in my backyard that was built and set on concrete blocks. If I decide I don't want it anymore I could have it moved or tear it down. Since I live in the county I don't believe I'd have to do anything but hire some help.

31.	Posted by cmmacdaddy June 17, 2008
	If we don't start enforcing the current Building Codes in Frankfort, we are going to see a lot more of this in South Frankfort. The Commission has to let the City Employees do their job(s). We all want South Frankfort to retain it's unique character and Historical flavor but we have to make good choices. Every building can't be saved. Some are too far gone and/or do not justify restoration. Some are in locations needed for other uses and some are just down right ugly and need to go. Other communities have a plan for this to ensure that their towns continue to be historic and beautiful. They retain the character without impeding progress and without letting the area look run down and dilapidated. Historical groups, by their nature, will never recommend destruction of any building. It's not in their nature. That is a good thing, we need groups like this this but there has to be balance on the other side. We have to pick and choose structures, based on established criteria, not politics. We need a plan for this. A plan that is based on a long range approach as to what we want our community to look like 50 years from now. A plan that future City Commissions/ Kentucky Trust for Historic Preservation/ Kentucky Heritage Council/Downtown Frankfort Inc./Developers and Citizens etc. can follow. The bottom line on the building at 311 W. Third is this, we let it go to far. The building is not economically feasible to restore. Unless we get substantial funding from a government entity, it will sit like it is, or be boarded up and sit. With all the infestation, water damage and the amount owed to the bank, it just can't be done and still be economically feasible (YMCA???). It's a reach to say that the building in the front is even historic. The building has vinyl siding on it and the inside has been severally damaged by fire. May I suggest a compromise, save the carriage house in the rear, it looks much older and is brick. Stabilize it and make it look presentable from the outside. Based on our limited research we found that the little log cabin was moved to it's current location. Move it some where and restore it. Knock down the structure in front. If someone wants to buy the property, ensure that a suitable structure is built there that matches the flavor of the area.

27.	Posted by stubbornasamule June 17, 2008
	I was downtown this morning and there is noisy activity on the 3rd Street property. Driving by you can't see anything from the front so work must be going on from the back on the roof. I have always liked old houses and looked at quite a few of them in the past. Fortunately I had a dad who played devil's advocate and he always found fault with them. He was older, had been a home owner and knew what maintenance and upkeep would be involved with any residence but it still made me mad. I ended up buying a house that was very similar to the one in which I grew up - the typical 3 bedroom, brick ranch style with a large fenced in yard. I didn't tell my dad until after I'd signed the contract. Some of his wisdom must have sunk in because when I had him inspect the house he could find very little wrong with it. Looking back at those old houses he criticized I'm thankful he gave his opinion. As interesting as they were they would have been a lot of work, money and an on-going project. I envy people who have the money,creativity and hands on talent to restore old homes and do them justice BUT being restricted in what you can do to them ends up with a more expensive and somtimes impractical project. A bit off topic: I've been on tours to many Amish communities and noticed that the houses and outbuildings in Indiana are covered with aluminum siding. Further north into Ohio and Michigan where they have much colder winters it's all painted buildings. I don't know if the difference has to do with religious or secular rules but it seemed contradictory to me.

26.	Posted by LMS June 17, 2008
	Stubborn waaaaaay back a few comments ago is right. It is oppressive to do anything in South Frankfort. I am in the gray next to the "colorful" house you all were arguing about earlier. On a single, middle class income it is hard to find someone who can do the work in my price range. I can't imagine what anyone doing economically worse would do. Quick story -- I have a metal roof...well, a partial metal roof because the 1950-ish addition is shingled. The roof when I moved in three years ago was chipping. I called at least six companies who claimed to do metal roofs. All of them told me they didn't do residential. One told me that if I'd let him do the whole house, he'd look at it. Finally found one company willing to give me an estimate. Two days work -- $3100. I had to take out a loan. My guess is that many of my neighbors couldn't have managed and would have just had to let the roof rust through. Now before everyone starts saying that I chose to live down there, I'll agree. And when I can afford it, I love working on the place. But not everyone down there had other options and a lot of the rentals are never taken care of. It's easier to let the tenants get disgusted and move out than to do the repairs.