Rowan Street Eyesore Demolished

The sprawling, dilapidated house at 30 Rowan St., was demolished Friday.

The city's year-long effort to remove an abandoned, dangerous house at 30 Rowan St., ended Friday when the owner tore down the building.

"You have no idea how good this feels," said Rodney Stevenson, who grew up next door and was home a year ago in a storm when wind blew a piece of roof off 30 Rowan St. onto his nephew and niece's swing set next door.

The house was not only dangerous because pieces of it could blow off in the wind. Its doors had rotted off, its roof had rotted off, and the interior walls and floors were collapsing. Homeless people had lived there, and the city considered it one if its top blight problems.

"It seems like it took forever," said Danbury Building Official Leo Null, who saw the property through the demolition process at Danbury Superior Court. "It's down. We're pretty happy."

The property owner, Eugene Wendel, owes the city about $155,000 in utility costs, property taxes, interest on past debt and late fees. The city and Wendel are talking about that bill now.

The city has no plans in hand for any future development on the site.

"It's a pretty big lot, now that the house is gone. You can see it," Null said. "This will help that whole neighborhood."

Jimmy Pursey August 27, 2012 at 04:54 PM
Thanks for the info, Mark.
Sid August 28, 2012 at 02:46 PM
The City of Norwalk tears dilapidated properties down and then sticks the owner with the bill. If that owner doesn't pay it they get a tax lien placed on the property and if thats not settled their property is put up for sale. Norwalk does a tax sale fairly regularly. Once a year or so. They get a 95% payoff on all past due bills and the remaining ones are auctioned off. Now why can't Danbury do something similar?
Jimmy Pursey August 28, 2012 at 04:17 PM
"why can't Danbury do something similar?" Because like every thing in Danbury...it's who you know.
Mark Langlois August 28, 2012 at 05:02 PM
Danbury sells its unpaid tax bills periodically. It has also paid to tear down property or torn it down itself. In this case, the city was trying to avoid the expense of the lengthy process you described above. It took a year, but it only took a year. The owner paid and the house is gone.
concerndedparent August 28, 2012 at 05:08 PM
I beleive this property is "protected" because it is on a farm and falls under special rules.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »