THURSDAY, AUGUST 29, 2019
THE CHRONICLE — 27
COMMUNITY
FROM
THE FRONT
At left is an inside look
of the Whistle Stop
building on Mill Street in
June 2019.
Below shows the
building’s state as of
Aug. 27
The building was
considered a complete
loss after a November
2017 fi re, and council
next month will vote on
whether or not to abate
the property.
ERIN TIERNEY/THE
CHRONICLE
WHISTLE continued from 1
A LONG HISTORY
Precision Tune-up!
119 00 SPECIAL
$
Make sure your heating and air
conditioning system is dependable, safe
and running at optimum performance
for energy savings.
Tune-up includes identifying existing or
potential problems that can cause an
unexpected breakdown!
Take advantage of our no-risk guarantee
and schedule your appointment today!
541-746-9743
115 Lawrence, Eugene, OR 97401
CCB# 47396
There have been least four
fi res in the building since it
was built in 1897, including
a fi re in 2014 and another
in November 2017. City
Manager Michelle Amberg
said in a memo that there
were several people living
in the building for the ’17
fi re, despite it having been
rendered uninhabitable from
the 2014 fi re.
Amberg also noted that the
owners did not have a certif-
icate of occupancy for the
building. They were working
on the building to bring it up
to habitable standards when
the 2017 fi re occurred.
After that fi re, the structure
was considered a complete
loss as well as a “danger-
ous building” by South Lane
County Fire & Rescue Fire
Chief John Wooten.
Rocky Garton said in
a 2017 interview that the
rebuild was expected to be
completed in a minimum of
two years. The plan was to
build a cider pub and retail
shops and keep with the
historical signifi cance of the
building. The building was
used to package, grade and
ship fresh apples and pears
around the country in the
early 1900s, according to the
book, “The Blue Valley: A
History of Creswell.”
Within the fi rst six months
after the fire, at a meet-
ing between the Gartons,
Amberg, Code Enforcement
Officer Shelley Humble
and City Planner Maddie
Phillips, Phillips advised that
the building be completely
removed. The foundation,
however, can be left in place.
Humble said at a previ-
ous council meeting that the
Gartons wanted to demolish
the second story and care-
fully remove the old beams
from the fi rst fl oor to use in
the rebuild, “so it is more
labor-intensive than demol-
ishing.” The Gartons agreed
to remove the building after
salvage was completed,
the memo reads, which the
owners estimated was to
be completed by the end of
summer 2018.
It wasn’t.
At the end of summer
2018, little progress had
taken place, and the Gartons
asked for an extension in
anticipation of winter rain
so that they could completely
remove the second story and
tarp up the fi rst story.
Winter rain came and little
had been done.
Garton was instructed to
give Humble monthly prog-
ress reports of their clean-up
efforts to complete the demo-
lition of the second story and
provide fencing and screen-
ing. Large piles of debris
were made on the property
and fencing and screening
was eventually added, but
not in a timely matter.
“If it is willful igno-
rance we are dealing with, it
doesn’t mean (the Gartons)
don’t have to do what they
have to do – this affects all
of us,” McReynolds said,
noting that they missed their
window to mitigate that cost
of demolition themselves.
AIR QUALITY
CONCERNS
A general air quality
complaint was filed with
LRAPA on Aug. 15 concern-
ing suspected asbestos on
the property. The investiga-
tion reveals that an inspector
visited the property and spoke
with Beau Garton, who said
he initiated the demolition
process as per the request of
the City, but then realized
an Asbestos-Containing
Material (ACM) survey was
required.
Carlton Garton briefly
showed the investigator an
ACM survey completed by
environmental remediation
company ATEZ, in which
the survey identified two
materials that contain asbes-
tos. The Chronicle was unable
to obtain a copy of the ATEZ
completed survey by press
time.
According to the investiga-
tion, Beau Garton asked the
inspector if they could demol-
ish the structure around the
two materials containing
asbestos. The inspector said
that they could not, that the
asbestos-containing mate-
rial would first need to be
removed. Garton said that
was a problem since the City
expected the building to be
demolished in a couple of
weeks. That deadline came
and went on Aug. 26 and the
building remains erect.
NEXT STEPS
Demolition has been
started, but is far from
complete. Garton has pulled
a demolition permit, but
not any paperwork related
to the disposal of materials
containing asbestos, Humble
said.
Business neighbor Bill
Spencer, owner of the Union
76 and co-owner of Point
S Tire & Auto, said that he
would rather see the City
work toward abatement than
to see the Gartons fi ned by
the City. He said abatement
would be a chance to get
the job done, and would be
a kind way to go about the
situation.
“The Garton young men
desire to remove the eyesore
and have hit a barrier that is
fi nancial in nature,” Spencer
said. “If the City can fi nd a
no-risk way to assist them it
would be a real service to our
community.”
If council were to vote to
abate the property, due to the
possible exposure to asbes-
tos or lead, the City will
contract with a professional
demolition fi rm to complete
the demolition, clean the
property and dispose of the
debris, Amberg’s memo
states.
City funding for this abate-
ment may be paid through
the City’s general fund, but
the property owners’ total
amount owed to the city will
equal costs for the abate-
ment, plus an amount equal
to $10 or 10% of the abate-
ment costs for administra-
tive overhead, whichever is
greater.
Once the abatement is
completed, a notice for the
total amount owed to the city
would be sent to the property
owner; unless paid within 30
days, the amount assessed
would become a lien against
the property and a hearing
would be held Oct. 14.
“I’m kind of done with
it,” Amberg said at a previ-
ous meeting. “It is an atro-
cious mess.” Noting that the
owners had a year and a half
to clean up the property, she
said she would like to “move
forward on whatever needs to
be done with it.”
Council will vote Sept. 9
whether or not to abate the
property.