I gbe 11erattl MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA • WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1989-PAGE 21 . 1 : ,:I, 4 +I 2,/ 480 M ----7$.4* 44 ., 4 ..UL-,4 ¥2# 2 Illic . *--.+1*4: -/.f# . m-I" fir; 44 4 * 1 (Herald Photo by Alan MeEw·en) THIS BULLDOZER TURNED 1905 PACIFIC GROVE HOUSE INTO PILE OF RUBBLE ON SATURDAY Vintage house demolished in P.G. By Ken Peterson Herald Staff Writer Pacific Grove officials have slapped a stop- work order on a Pacific Grove remodeling project and are considering civil and criminal penalties against the owners and contractor after an historic home in the city was demol- ished over the weekend without prior city approval, Planning Director Tony Lobay said Tuesday. The vintage 1905 house at 514 Lot)os St. was torn down Saturday after contractor Jeff Davis said he and his crew found that the floor and walls were rotting out, plumbing and electrical wiring was substandard or illegal and the fireplace so unstable that a single employee on the roof toppled the brickwork with a push of his hand. "If the inspectors had come out, they would have condemned it," Davis, of Davis Custom Homes in Seaside said. "Nobody with any shred of common sense could have looked at it differently." Remodeling permit Lobay, who said that the city has frequently approved demolition of older buildings that cannot be salvaged, said Pacific Grove is concerned about the procedure followed by the contractor in using a remodeling permit to tear down a building. "This is serious because of the city policy toward preserving these historic structures," he said, and because "we don't want to get a repeat" of a private individual deciding - without consulting the city - that an older building isn't worth saving. "I don't doubt that (Davis) may have found stfuctEal jlamage," Lobay said. "The city is i] to improve property, not to keep something that's rotting. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do it." According to Lobay, homeowners Terry and Candace Dunn obtained a permit in November to expand and remodel the living room of the house to square off the building. The older one-story building has a newer two-story ad- dition at the rear. Davis said he interpreted the permit, which allows for removal of siding to complete the addition, as a demolition permit. What he said he found was single-wall construction, a floor "sitting on the ground City officials consider civil, criminal penalties and rotting" and a generally "unsanitary and unsafe" building. "It was not our intent originally to remove quite as much as we did," Davis said. "Sure, I would have liked to have saved a portion of the building." Demolition took down not only the living room but a kitchen area that was also part of the original structure, he said. In the end, he said, "It was a big favor to the city and to all concerned to get rid of it. To me, it was a substandard shack sitting there. It was not a historic monument." , Davis, who has been a contractor, since 1971, said this was his first experienge work- ing on an historic building in Pacifig: Grove. He said the city should give contractplrs a fact sheet about how to deal with olde buildings instead of coming in "after the fach." Lobay said that contractors are required to know all the rules and regulations of the communities in which they work, "more than how to tear something down and pound nails. If he didn't know (the regulations), he shouldn't have been working here." Lobay said that Davis knew prior to Satur- day's demolition that there was cohsiderable damage to the Lobos Street house. Knowing that, he should have consulted the city about what to do with the building, Lobay said. After meeting with Davis and the project architect on Monday, Lobay said, the city decided to halt all future work and will void all permits granted for the project. He and the city attorney still must decide what civil and criminal penalties to seek in the case, he said. He also said that he will recommend that any house built on the property now conform to modern zoning codes - which means it may not be allowed to cover as much square footage as the demolished older home. Won't be living there In the meantime, the Dunns will not be living in the house. Davis said he had origi- nally hoped the couple could move back within 30 days. As a result of this incident, Lobay said, the city will prepare a special fact sheet about historic structures. Pacific Grove maintains a list of historic homes (the demolished house was on the list) and has, since 1985, required a demolition permit for historic buildings. Lobay said that the city has granted 23 of 25 demolition requests since 1985. One was denied and in the other case the owner was asked to relocate the building, he said. In another case, a building collapsed as it was being remodeled. V- , OCR Text: I gbe 11erattl MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA • WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1989-PAGE 21 . 1 : ,:I, 4 I 2,/ 480 M ----7$.4* 44 ., 4 ..UL-,4 ¥2# 2 Illic . *--. 1*4: -/.f# . m-I" fir; 44 4 * 1 (Herald Photo by Alan MeEw·en) THIS BULLDOZER TURNED 1905 PACIFIC GROVE HOUSE INTO PILE OF RUBBLE ON SATURDAY Vintage house demolished in P.G. By Ken Peterson Herald Staff Writer Pacific Grove officials have slapped a stop- work order on a Pacific Grove remodeling project and are considering civil and criminal penalties against the owners and contractor after an historic home in the city was demol- ished over the weekend without prior city approval, Planning Director Tony Lobay said Tuesday. The vintage 1905 house at 514 Lot)os St. was torn down Saturday after contractor Jeff Davis said he and his crew found that the floor and walls were rotting out, plumbing and electrical wiring was substandard or illegal and the fireplace so unstable that a single employee on the roof toppled the brickwork with a push of his hand. "If the inspectors had come out, they would have condemned it," Davis, of Davis Custom Homes in Seaside said. "Nobody with any shred of common sense could have looked at it differently." Remodeling permit Lobay, who said that the city has frequently approved demolition of older buildings that cannot be salvaged, said Pacific Grove is concerned about the procedure followed by the contractor in using a remodeling permit to tear down a building. "This is serious because of the city policy toward preserving these historic structures," he said, and because "we don't want to get a repeat" of a private individual deciding - without consulting the city - that an older building isn't worth saving. "I don't doubt that (Davis) may have found stfuctEal jlamage," Lobay said. "The city is i] to improve property, not to keep something that's rotting. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do it." According to Lobay, homeowners Terry and Candace Dunn obtained a permit in November to expand and remodel the living room of the house to square off the building. The older one-story building has a newer two-story ad- dition at the rear. Davis said he interpreted the permit, which allows for removal of siding to complete the addition, as a demolition permit. What he said he found was single-wall construction, a floor "sitting on the ground City officials consider civil, criminal penalties and rotting" and a generally "unsanitary and unsafe" building. "It was not our intent originally to remove quite as much as we did," Davis said. "Sure, I would have liked to have saved a portion of the building." Demolition took down not only the living room but a kitchen area that was also part of the original structure, he said. In the end, he said, "It was a big favor to the city and to all concerned to get rid of it. To me, it was a substandard shack sitting there. It was not a historic monument." , Davis, who has been a contractor, since 1971, said this was his first experienge work- ing on an historic building in Pacifig: Grove. He said the city should give contractplrs a fact sheet about how to deal with olde buildings instead of coming in "after the fach." Lobay said that contractors are required to know all the rules and regulations of the communities in which they work, "more than how to tear something down and pound nails. If he didn't know (the regulations), he shouldn't have been working here." Lobay said that Davis knew prior to Satur- day's demolition that there was cohsiderable damage to the Lobos Street house. Knowing that, he should have consulted the city about what to do with the building, Lobay said. After meeting with Davis and the project architect on Monday, Lobay said, the city decided to halt all future work and will void all permits granted for the project. He and the city attorney still must decide what civil and criminal penalties to seek in the case, he said. He also said that he will recommend that any house built on the property now conform to modern zoning codes - which means it may not be allowed to cover as much square footage as the demolished older home. Won't be living there In the meantime, the Dunns will not be living in the house. Davis said he had origi- nally hoped the couple could move back within 30 days. As a result of this incident, Lobay said, the city will prepare a special fact sheet about historic structures. Pacific Grove maintains a list of historic homes (the demolished house was on the list) and has, since 1985, required a demolition permit for historic buildings. Lobay said that the city has granted 23 of 25 demolition requests since 1985. One was denied and in the other case the owner was asked to relocate the building, he said. In another case, a building collapsed as it was being remodeled. V- , Heritage Society of Pacific Grove,Historical Collections,Historic Properties of Pacific Grove,Lobos,512 Lobos,LOBOS_179.pdf,LOBOS_179.pdf 1 Page 1, Tags: LOBOS_179.PDF, LOBOS_179.pdf 1 Page 1