City Beautiful…Part deux…(Follow those comments:)

When we put up the photo of the cesspool on Hounsfield Street we intentionally left out the realtor signs on the property. Chances are the realtors don’t own the property but are merely acting as sales agents. We cut them some slack. Well, we did include their phone number. 🙂 Sometime this afternoon (June 10) they pulled their signs. Why? Are they just trying to save themselves the embarrassment of having their name associated with this garbage dump or have they terminated their contract with the owner? I’m inviting a representative of The Sutton Group to post here and explain why the signs were pulled a mere 24 hours after the photo of the property was posted on this blog. Do you still represent this client? Is the property going to be cleaned up?


  1. Anonymous
    Posted June 12, 2009 at 12:47 am | Permalink

    Apparently The Sutton Group have nothing to say. They have left their for sale sign up on the adjacent property with the vacant new home on it. I suppose they figure nobody will connect them with the cesspool next door if the signs are gone. They're wrong of course.

  2. Anonymous
    Posted June 12, 2009 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    This is a building lot. Anyone with any sense would know what a building lot looks like. It's hardly the fault of the real estate agents. Do you remember what was on this property before?

  3. Anonymous
    Posted June 12, 2009 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    It's not a building lot. It's a filth pit and in a neighbourhood full of kids it's an accident waiting to happen. If it was next door to any of our city councillors it would have been cleaned up long ago.

    As a mater of fact I do know what was on this property before. Are you suggesting this is an improvement? It was a cesspool before and it's a cesspool now. The fact that the signs disappeared proves the point. The realtor is so embarrassed by the condition of the site that they pulled their signs. By doing so they've also acknowledged that they are aware of the condition of the site. If some kid does get injured on that site the parents will be one step closer to being able to sue the ass off the bottom feeder that owns the property.

  4. Anonymous
    Posted June 13, 2009 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    "It's hardly the fault of the real estate agents."

    Really? Not their fault? They are acting as paid agents of the owner. They are aware of the condition of the property and as mentioned above they ducked for cover at the first opportunity.

    I have no sympathy for the realtors.

  5. Anonymous
    Posted June 16, 2009 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    To the anonymous dolt who referred to this mess as a "building lot" (if you're not our Mayor you're doing a convincing imitation) –

    It's not a building lot. It's a VACANT lot. It's been sitting VACANT for over a year as a result of the demolition of the crack house development that once occupied the property. The debris on the property is not construction debris. It is demolition debris. The owner(s) were simply too cheap and irresponsible to finish the demolition job by cleaning up the debris. They gave no thought to either the safety or appearance of the property. Why should they? They don't live next to it.

    For those of you that aren't familiar with Hounsfield Street you might be more familiar with its other name. James Street. Hounsfield is the two blocks between Wilson and Norwich before the name changes to James. The City Engineering complex is on James. Every day city vehicles and management and staff pass by this festering pile on their way to and from work. The City cannot claim they are unaware of the situation.

    Chapter #771 – Property Maintenance

    771.3.1 Property – maintained – clean – clear
    Every owner, lessee or occupant shall keep his/her grounds, yard or vacant
    land clean and cleared up.

    771.3.2 Yard – free of debris – hazardous conditions
    Every yard shall be kept clean and free from rubbish or other debris and
    from objects, including fences or conditions that may create a health,
    fire or accident hazard.

    771.3.5 Land – clear of waste – exceptions
    Except as provided in Sections 771.4.1 and 771.4.2, no owner, lessee
    or occupant of any property shall permit the accumulation of any garbage,
    refuse, domestic waste, industrial waste and waste material on
    such property. By-law 8247-06, 7 September, 2006.

    Why has the Corporation of the City of Woodstock turned a blind eye to this mess? Maybe we'd know the answer to that if we knew who owns the property.

Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: