Neighbors want fire-damaged home demolished in Sunbury [The Daily Item, Sunbury, Pa.]

Dec. 28--SUNBURY -- Eight months after fire destroyed a Vine Street home, neighbors are furious and frightened over what they feel is a lack of concern by city officials to keep them safe.

Smashed glass, collapsed porches and a sunken roof are all that is left of 313-315 Vine St. Nearly 50 firefighters battled the inferno for almost two hours on April 28. After the smoke cleared, the fire was ruled accidental and the home condemned.

All the neighbors want to know is why no one cares that the structure has been sitting there deteriorating for 244 days.

Mayor David Persing said, "Make no mistake, we care."

He just can't do anything about it. Yet.

It was determined the property owner did not have insurance, and the city took possession of the home. A public auction was held in September, and Stan Seiple Inc., of Sunbury, took ownership but has since left the structure unchanged.

That has neighbors upset.

"This is a mess," said William Simpson, who lives directly across the street. "It is a major eyesore, and with the glass all over the place, it just isn't safe."

Councilman Joe Bartello said he is fed up with not getting answers, and he is calling on Persing and other council members to step up and do what they should be doing.

"This is disgusting," Bartello said Tuesday. "I have been mummed, not informed and the last one to know anything when it comes to this sort of stuff, and I am sick of it."

Bartello stood outside the Vine Street home and spoke with neighbors. He even made a call to city code officers demanding answers.

"They tell me they don't know," he said. "I can't even get an answer out of them."

Persing said Bartello never approached him about the property, and if he had, he would have been provided with answers.

"The problem here is after the public auction was over and Mr. Seiple bought the property, he went to the code office and wanted to build some sort of a garage," Persing said. "The code office shut him down, and this delayed the project."

Persing said he is looking into why the code office denied Seiple's request.

"They nitpicked this," he said. "They gave him a hard time about some very small stuff from what I understand, and I am looking into this."

Persing said the building is in the process of being demolished, and the work is being coordinated with other demolition projects.

"We have contacted Mr. Seiple, and they are going to tear it down," he said. "Now because of the code office, they aren't going to build anything on it."

Councilman Jim Eister took offense at Bartello's statement and said his colleague needs to attend more redevelopment meetings or bring up issues to other members.

"From my understanding, they were in the process of having it torn down," Eister said. "We discussed this, and they were going to tear it down in conjunction with another project."

Eister said he was unclear as to why the building hasn't been demolished yet, but said he would speak to Seiple.

It is the responsibility of the owner," Eister said. "This isn't something that Mr. Seiple would just let go, and I do know that the main issue is they wanted to do the two projects at once as a cost-cutting measure."

Neighbor Karen Ray said she has been patient, but her house is roughly three feet from the burned structure and she can't even replace siding because the contractor she hired is afraid of getting injured.

"I have not even been able to get heating oil," she said in an email. "What will it take to get this torn down?"

Ray said she has seen people go in and out of the home and is afraid someone will try to sleep inside it to stay warm.

"Someone will use it to stay out of the elements," she said. "I am sure if this house was next to the mayor's or any city council members, it would have been torn down long ago."

In June, Persing announced that the city would be looking at properties in order to "clean up Sunbury."

The mayor went as far as saying all the city needed was proof of how many letters and calls were made to homeowners about cleaning up their properties, and if nothing was done, the city could gain control of the land and have auctions.

Persing kept to his word. As of June 28, the city had acquired four properties by court order: 144 South St., 83-85 N. Eighth St., 1031 N. River Ave. and 810 N. Sixth St. All have been granted to the city at no cost by Northumberland County Court.

It would cost the city about $25,000 per structure to demolish the homes, Persing said.

Stan Seiple did not return phone calls for comment.

n Email comments about this article to [email protected].

___

(c)2011 The Daily Item (Sunbury, Pa.)

Visit The Daily Item (Sunbury, Pa.) at www.dailyitem.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services