INC NEWS - question regarding city agencies

Thu Jul 10 16:45:39 EDT 2008

For those still wondering, the official word is that the contractor suffered injuries on this job 6 weeks or so ago, and has not been able to continue working. Both the property owner and manager have been contacted by the city; proper permits are expected to be obtained, and the work is expected to resume when the permits and the contractor's health allow.

Barry Ragin
---- Barry Ragin <bragin at nc.rr.com> wrote: 

=============
I did open up a One-Call ticket earlier this afternoon.

Driving by the property just now, i see that a stop-work order has been 
issued as of today. That's all well and good for the time being, if it 
gets the owner's attention.

But what i'd really like to see is a finish-work order. For all i know, 
the property owner is content to leave the property in the condition 
that it is now.

Barry Ragin

RW Pickle wrote:
> OneCall is a departmentally funded (to some degree) operation whereby the
> various departments (Solid Waste, Water Sewer Billing, etc) pay OneCall to
> be their central information clearinghouse. Also to be a "one call" number
> for what ever issue one might have. They generate a "electronic trail"
> that can be tracked (you get a service request number from them).
>
> What OneCall lacks (and has since it's inception) is the authority to make
> the departments to whom it sends these "requests for service"  actually
> respond and clear them off the records (as in show they were completed or
> what actions were taken). They take the info really well, but they have no
> way to know what happens to the problem once it leaves their office. At
> one time, I understood that after 3-5 days, a red flag would be added if
> no  action had yet to have been taken. I have items there that must look
> like the UN building with so many flags because they were reported so long
> ago and nothing was done... It's not the fault of OneCall, it's that there
> is little participation from the departments in which the actions are
> directed. That's been the case since the beginning. There is no
> accountability for the dealing with the issues that they send out to the
> various departments. But they (OneCall) do a great job in cutting through
> some of the red tape!
>
> RWP
> 27 Beverly
>
>   
>> Not sure it works that way all the time but my understanding of One Call
>> is you describe your problem or issue and they either direct you to the
>> appropriate area or they resolve internally how to handle it and get back
>> to you.
>>
>> Should work well with something like the issue below which is slightly off
>> center from what would be a clear cut case.
>>
>> But this is just my opinion of how I see the City trying to make this
>> work.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: bragin at nc.rr.com [mailto:bragin at nc.rr.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:02 AM
>> To: Reyn Bowman
>> Cc: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>> Subject: RE: INC NEWS - question regarding city agencies
>>
>> No, i have not. I don't know which agency to have my call directed to.
>> That's why i wrote to the relevant department heads first. Since all three
>> have disclaimed responsibility, i can't imagine how a One-Call request
>> will be answered.. But i may go ahead and place one just to get it in the
>> system.
>>
>> Barry Ragin
>> ---- Reyn Bowman <Reyn at Durham-cvb.com> wrote:
>>
>> =============
>> Have you tried going through "Durham One Call"...
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On
>> Behalf Of bragin at nc.rr.com
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:29 AM
>> To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>> Subject: INC NEWS - question regarding city agencies
>>
>> Hi all - there is a rental property on my block that has raised some
>> questions. After having to evict his last tenants, the owner has allowed
>> the property to sit unoccupied since October 2006. Fair enough. It's his
>> property, and if that's what he wants to do with it i suppose he can.
>>
>> The question is, about 6-8 weeks ago, he hired a contractor to do some
>> exterior work. The contractor has busted up the driveway, removed the
>> front porch, and opened up some gaping holes in the brickwork just above
>> the foundation.
>>
>> And not returned for 6 weeks. I've left a message with the contractor
>> trying to find out what his plans are for finishing the project, but it
>> has not yet been returned. I've also emailed the directors of Neighborhood
>> Improvement Services, City and County Planning, and City and County
>> Inspections, trying to determine which if any city agency would have
>> jurisdiction in not allowing this property to sit in a state of disrepair
>> for much longer. I've heard back from Planning and NIS that this is not
>> their responsibility, but have not yet heard back from Inspections.
>>
>> I was wondering if the collective wisdom of this group would be able to
>> suggest an answer to the questions, first, which agency is the appropriate
>> one to contact, and second, what other courses of action are available.
>> Our previous attempts to dialog with the property manager and property
>> owner (who lives in Massachusetts) have not yielded any results.
>>
>> I'm attaching photos of the house in its current condition. In case they
>> don't go through, you can view them here:
>> http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v181/bragin/neighborhood/1700Shawnee1.jpg
>> http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v181/bragin/neighborhood/1700Shawnee2.jpg
>>
>> Barry Ragin
>> 1706 Shawnee St.
>>
>> --
>> OnPar ExchangeDefender Message Security: Click below to verify
>> authenticity
>> http://www.exchangedefender.com/verify.asp?id=m6ADmCaR023133&from=reyn@durham-cvb.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> OnPar ExchangeDefender Message Security: Click below to verify
>> authenticity
>> http://www.exchangedefender.com/verify.asp?id=m6AFXuLW008123&from=reyn@durham-cvb.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>
>>     
>
>
> ====================================================================
> This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
> entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
> dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this electronic  transmission in error, please notify
> me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail (pickle at patriot.net)
> immediately.
> =====================================================================
>
>   
_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list