Owner of Realty Building: Demolition is 'correct' and 'final' decision

[@riesenbuhai]

take the insurance money and run... ? get those tricksters in jail.

[@TigerDominic-uh1dv]

Exactly, If there was a Will to save the Building.

[@Gordy-fj1jy]

It has nothing to do with will. It’s a matter of time and money. The engineers still had to do more testing to ensure that it was even salvageable. Then, the process of restoring the structure would take several years. It’s not happening.

[@lynette8918]

If the loss of one building is enough to destroy downtown, taking the money and running is absolutely the best decision!

[@Subgunman]

I will be harsh in my opinion, the owners / managers of this building probably arranged the explosion to rid the building of its tenants so that they may demolish it and build something more up to date with no residential units in the building. The question is, Will the local economy support an office only structure in todays age?

[@groovy1937]

The amount of repairs would invoke the building to be retrofitted/updated in its entirety to the latest building code, which every municipality has adopted the international building code. It would be cost prohibitive and a liability to try and retro fit. Demo is the only wise financial and safe answer. A rebuild of modern code is the answer but I doubt that will happen. I've been down this road with an old historic building I owned (commercial building from 1903). Insurance companies hate old buildings and customers love to find mistakes and sue.

[@MCat360]

How do you know it’s the right decision if you won’t let a structural engineer in to take a look?

[@Rhodeygirl]

They won't let a engineer team in from a third party. The insurance company would have already sent in their structural engineers before they would be willing to sign off on demolition.

[@Dog.soldier1950]

His insurance company must have signed off on FYI they need a demo permit….

[@willie346]

They own the building. Even if the sole motivation to demolish the building is to collect the insurance money, it's perfectly within the rights of the owners to do so.

[@Qwerty-y9h]

Pretty sure that's called insurance fraud.

[@jeffreysantner3717]

Take that insurance money and run Tito, that's how Detroit happened.

[@Steelers2841]

THE OWNER is a coward they forget that 1 person was killed

[@nilpo]

So you think they should risk more lives in a building that, in all likelihood, wouldn't be successful anyway?

[@Steelers2841]

@@nilpo Not even that those 6 people who were badly injured he didnt think about there needs either or not even say i am sorry for the that cause of the explosion if i would own that building i would made sure that those people who were hurt need any thing and the one that was killed i would paid for his burial and paid for anything for the family that he lost his life an pain that it cause them he should took some type of accountability

[@nilpo]

@@Steelers2841 It wasn't the owner's fault. The city was doing the work in the building.

[@Steelers2841]

@@nilpo it was the Gas company For what i hear City dont do do any gas work that is taken care by gas company which cause the explosion the gas pipeline if was the water pipeline then that is the city work

[@nilpo]

@@Steelers2841 The city hired a contractor to move old infrastructure.

[@B82-h5z]

I agree with what that man named Scott at the end.

[@Gordy-fj1jy]

Unfortunately he’s just shooting himself and his organization in the foot by openly fighting with the mayor. The owner of that building effectively has the final say in the matter. The city would be wasting more money by claiming eminent domain and fighting the owners decision. Ultimately, The city can’t afford to save the building.

[@Gordy-fj1jy]

A complete restoration of the building would be a long process, possibly years and it would cost tens of millions of dollars. Meanwhile, the insurance company would see it as a high risk structure and either refuse to insure it or raise their premium. Nobody would be able to live inside the structure or pay rent until the entire building was deemed habitable and safe. I don’t want to see a historic building demolished but I don’t see how it can be feasibly saved either.

[@PhilMoskowitz]

Let it go.

[@Invisableme39]

I am absolutely against people telling property owners what to do with their properties. If Demo is necessary, demo the building, historic or not. Destroyers of downtown..😂 get outta here..

[@gameconsumer2517]

Well you just wouldn’t get it

[@Invisableme39]

@@gameconsumer2517 oh I get it trust me.

[@lablaine1981]

Took the $$ & 🐾

[@kennixox262]

‘“Jewish lighting”

[@syntheticfuture1718]