An Emporia church’s quest to buy an older house next door and demolish it to use as green space has been derailed so far.
The Emporia Presbyterian Church is considering buying a house at 803 Mechanic St. that is divided into five apartments, at least three of which are currently rented. The state has denied the request because of nearby historic buildings and an appeal to the city of Emporia has been tabled because of a lack of information about the house’s condition and what it would cost to fix.
Tenants said while the house is old and has flaws, they feel it’s safe and a decent low rent place to live.
The house in question is in back of the church at the corner of 8th Avenue and Mechanic Street. Kent Heermann, a member of the church’s governing board, said they don’t want to build a parking lot or activities center. The intent is green space.
“It would provide a buffer around the church property,” he said.
The house is located in the neighborhood of three buildings on the National Historical Register. It shares the same block as the Harris-Borman House at 827 Mechanic though the houses are on separate ends of the block. The Granada Theater, 809 Commercial and Kress building, 702 Commercial, are also close by.
To read complete story see the print edition or the online print edition.
tangoarmy (anonymous) says...
Keep telling the church no.
September 7, 2010 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Mayor Kessler
After all the blighted [also read inexpensive] housing has been gotten rid of in Emporia, where are all of those pesky poor people to live that can't afford five hundred to a thousand dollar per month rent? Or do we just load them on cattle trucks and haul them away?
My hovel does not have a fireplace....nor does it qualify for "preferred service", but it would certainly qualify as blighted. It is however warm and dry and relatively safe. In a word it is what I can afford. Doing away with it and opening more upper end rentals in this town would not make them anymore affordable to me and my low end income..
I am familiar with the building in question and am certain you could find a lot worse place to live in this town for the same money.
September 7, 2010 at 3:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Luke 6.20 "And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God."
NOW get out of that blight on our church so we can bulldoze it!
I just love hypocrites.
September 7, 2010 at 4:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seadog14 (anonymous) says...
The landlords should be forced to rehabilitate these houses. I have seen one in Emporia that is an accident waiting to happen--start charging the slumlords for violations--make it so they cannot raise the tenants rent---(have the original tenants grandfathered in)--this church needs a green space like God needs another disciple. Emporia is not the greenest place on earth, I would worry more about the economy, jobs, and living conditions than I would a "green space" Keep telling them "no"--these churches think they are so special--they are not, why isn't the church helping the poor, feeding the needy, etc.? Nah, they would rather have a "green space" Oh, spare me.
September 7, 2010 at 4:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Let me see ... Kent Heerman, where have I heard that name before ?????????
Ah, yes ! Sales Tax extension and the RDA . Didn' t he have something to do with those ?
Is this man, Kent Heerman a bane to Emporia and its people or what !
First a sales tax extension, the almighty RDA and now wanting to put his churches neighbors out of their home.
What ever happened to 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' or ' Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets'
Since when is it o.k. for a church or its members to judge others and put themselves up as judge and decision makers.
Why doesn' t this church man and its " Flock " help these people to either repair the home, put preassure on the owner of the house to make the repairs or do the repairs themselves instead of trying to kick these people out of their home. After all wouldn' t that be the " Christian " , religious or scriptural thing to do ?
I saw my parents go thru a bad experience with a Church and its "self-righteous " elders and so called " Christian Flock " !
This sort of thing is exactly why I am not to keen on churches or for that matter organized religion .
Again this is JMO.
September 7, 2010 at 5:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
irishemporia (anonymous) says...
A bane to the people? I don't know since The People who cared enough about the issue to vote approved the sales tax exemption.
September 7, 2010 at 6:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kublue2007 (anonymous) says...
Are you people serious???? Drive by that house and look at it. Just because a person is poor....doesnt justify having to live in those type of conditions. Praise for the Church to try and help clean up that neighberhood and make it safer for our whole community!!!
September 7, 2010 at 6:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...
i've noticed that jeremy shapiro is always jumping into housing issues. i also agree with methulsa. why not help the property owners fix the property, or be hypocrites and tear down the whole town!
September 7, 2010 at 8:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
That was an extension, but beings we are talking about a church issue perhaps exemption was the right term.
September 7, 2010 at 8:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
Holy Cow! All they want to do is tear down the building. This is crazy that they have to conform. If this is declared a historical site I well kiss your buns in the middle of 6th avenue.
September 7, 2010 at 11:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pensador (anonymous) says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
September 8, 2010 at 12:57 a.m. ( permalink )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Does anyone really believe that the removal of blight from Emporia will result in "better types of conditions" for the poor to live in and still afford to pay the rent to live there.
At present my rent equals roughly one third of my monthly income. So in our new blight-less Emporia, free of those types of condition, will I be expected to pay two thirds of my monthly income in rent. One thing is for certain. At seventy years old and in poor health my income is damned sure not going to be going up.
September 8, 2010 at 4:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
No dog in this hunt, but here is an idea for the church.
1. Buy the house.
2. do not renew leases, empty house.
3. Let vandals do their work.
4. city will site church for unsafe housing.
5. city will tear down house.
by doing it this way, it will insure countless hours of paper shuffling by government officials at taxpayer expense.
September 8, 2010 at 5:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
It may take a year or two but you would have people begging the church to tear the house down. Remember 12th and exchange?
September 8, 2010 at 5:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justaflushaway (anonymous) says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
September 8, 2010 at 8:03 a.m. ( permalink )
create (anonymous) says...
Yeah, Pensador, I too would be very interested in who made that statement.
Otherwise, I smell a rat. I agree with methusla. Kent Heerman of the RDA sitting on the board of that church and now suddenly they want "green space." For what, church picnics? They can't pave it or it won't be green anymore so it can't be for parking. Whattaya wanna bet that after the house is razed, that board will have a plan to build something there. Green space indeed.
I agree with the others on this forum who believe whoever owns that building needs to make repairs without charging higher rent. They've collected their fortune long enough without improving that place. Is it even up to code? Greedy landlords!
Who owns that place? I'll have to look it up.
Here's another thought. Is that church hoping that with enough public outcry that the landlord will just raze the place like what happened to that old derelict on 12th Avenue last year?
I live in an old house, 1892 vintage, and I keep it in good shape, always have. I wouldn't trade it for a newer one, especially some of those I saw this week that are up for sheriff's sale. Newer houses than mine, higher taxes, bad shape. No thanks. These old ladies have good bones, and that old house deserves to be upgraded.
Those church people? They're the reason I don't attend church, any church. Control freaks!
September 8, 2010 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Found it.
http://beacon.schneidercorp.com/Appli...
September 8, 2010 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
create and methusla,
Now don't get upset, but Steve Sauder mentioned your posts on this subject on the radio this morning.
It didn't sound like he was impressed with you guys.
Please don't get depressed. we all are entitled to our opinions, aren't we?
September 8, 2010 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
irishemporia (anonymous) says...
Seems to me that if you want to get the house fixed up, publish the owner's name. It's public information so why hide it.
September 8, 2010 at 11:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
So what's his gripe? Oh well, at least we know he's reading the forum. LOL
Was he upset because I posted public information? I found it on the appraiser's web site for all the world to see. Besides, I also see that the house is pictured on the front page of the Gazette.
Believe me, I've wrangled with stronger stuff than Steve Sauder a time or two.
September 8, 2010 at 12:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
booker5m (anonymous) says...
House dont look too bad from the picture? Must be a bunch of rich snobs that go to that church.
September 8, 2010 at 12:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
................................ is considering buying a house ................................... The state has denied the request
?????
September 8, 2010 at 12:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...
agrees with booker, the pic of the house looks decent. newer roof, no broken windows, no peeling paint. looks to be liveable. the presby church sounds like a whole lot of snobs! just an idea, move the church! LOL
September 8, 2010 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
joejoe2 (anonymous) says...
The reason the Church wants to buy the house is because its for sale. The neighborhood has a lot of drug traffic and deteriorating properties. They are not in the rental business. They are wanting to improve the look of the neighborhood and surrounding areas. This is the best way they could do this. It is not just rich snobs wanting to force people out of their homes. The only reason the church was interested is because the house was for sale.
September 8, 2010 at 1:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I have no personal issue with the church buying this house other than the eventual displacement of the people that live there.
My issue is with the larger question of the constant assault on older rental properties, priced where the poorest of us can afford to live, without any concern or thought given to replacing that price range housing.
Just wanted to make that clear.
September 8, 2010 at 1:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
If I wanted to buy a house and had plans of tearing it down probably most people wouldn't have a problem with it. If "the state" told me I couldn't buy the property and do what I please with my property that I bought with my money a lot of people would be upset with the government over stepping their bounds by telling me I can't do to my property what I want(within the current laws). If it was found out that I was a "church nut"(which is true by the way) many of the people that supported my right as the land owner would quickly turn on me and praise the government for stepping in and stopping me and my "church nuttiness".
................................ is considering buying a house ................................... The state has denied the request
?????
September 8, 2010 at 1:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
create,
His gripe was with meths swipe of Kent Heerman and the RDA and then you said something like you agreed with him, or smelled a rat or something. he said something like it was a new pinnacle , or maybe a new low for the Gazette bloggers. He was a little upset that his friend was attacked, that's all really.
September 8, 2010 at 3:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
In the print version of this story it was mentioned that Commissioner Nelson said tearing a house down to make green space would mean less property tax.
I didn't hear much concern over the loss of the Fanestil building. Even if it is outside the city limits, (I'm not sure), it still affects our property tax bill.
That loss of tax money is much greater than this house.
803 Mechanic tax = $1,097.90 a year
Fanestil building tax = $13,361.78 a year
i just think the idea of some governmental entity being able to tell a property owner what they can and can't do with their property is appalling. HEE HEE! HAH HAH!
September 8, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Thanks for the update, Steve.
Since the place is up for sale, I hope it doesn't fall into great disrepair. I drove by today after all this discussion and the place doesn't look bad at all. Roof looks good. Overgrown bushes should be cut back, but overall not bad for a drive by.
I wish we had more information on the state's jurisdiction with regard to historic properties. I do know that a number of years ago I was contacted by some group that tried to convince me to put my house on the historic registry. To do so would have cost me $60 thousand to renovate the house to look exactly the way it did in 1892. They assured me that the 60 grand was totally tax deductible since it was an historic renovation for preservation purposes. Of course.
Oh yeah, and I would have to allow a once a year open house to take place.
Nah. I take care of this old lady quite nicely, thank you, and I don't have to let a bunch of strangers traipse through commenting on the wall paper every year.
September 8, 2010 at 5:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
I bought the property to my left and right and "cleaned" it up to provide a "buffer zone" around my home. I really didn't believe I should have to beg for permission so I didn't. Of course I didn't expect any contributions or tax exemptions either.
Steve, Isn't the Church Property exempt from property tax here in Kansas?
September 8, 2010 at 9:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
The following described property, to the extent herein specified, shall be and is hereby exempt from all property or ad valorem taxes levied under the laws of the state of Kansas: All buildings used exclusively as places of public worship.
I guess an apartment building wouldn't qualify for tax exemption but a vacant lot adjacent to the church would.
http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-s...
September 9, 2010 at 4:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
create,
I, like you, have also come up against bigger, tougher and meaner opponents and critics than " Mr. Emporia ", Steve Sauder and his friend Kent Heerman .
I surmise that what ticked Mr. Sauder off was the fact that some one has the " go-nads " to stand up to him and his friends and has an opinion that does not fall into line with his or any of his friends, " Royal " opinion or theory of life or how everyone should live their lives according to the " Royal " Steve Sauder and Friends " Edict " !
Seems kinda hypocrital, that the " Royalty " of Emproa and their friends can belittle or attack someone or an entitiy, e.g., Mr. Sauders attack on the County Commission and the Commissioners and yet when it comes to saying something about Mr. Sauder or any of his friends, that is entirely off limits or " a new low on the gazette blogs " !
Well, Mr. Sauder and friends there is an old proverb, " What is good for the Goose is also good for the Gander " or " What goes around, comes around " or " Turn about is fair play " !
Mr. Sauder, you have already proven that you are not above verbally attacking anyone and what puts you or your friends above the rest of Emporias' citizens or makes you or your friends any more immune from verbal attacks than any of the rest of Emporias' citizens.
No apologies coming from this sector, at this time.
Oh, and Steve, I am not upset the preceding has just been my " Opinion " .
September 9, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Right on methusla.
Let me add that this blog, like all others in this country, is for the communication of opinions, and that is exactly what I did. I don't have an editorial page nor did I inherit a radio station to vent my views. Perhaps I should start listening to Wednesday morning whatnots so I can see whether there are any new lows being reached there.
September 9, 2010 at 6:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )