Thursday, January 03, 2008

Missing portion 3.D - 4 of the proposed "Premises Interim Use Agreement" offered by the City of Springfield to Finochiarro of the Pythian Castle

I don't have all the information I need to comment on the Pythian Castle issue, I'm still gathering some of it, but I want to go ahead and post what I found to be missing from the City's proposed "Premises Interim Use Agreement" with Tamara Finochiarro from Jason's posting at Life Of Jason. Now, to be clear, Jason tells me he did not intentionally omit this information, rather he said when his copy was hand delivered this page, page 2, was missing from the document. I have no reason to believe that Jason intentionally omitted this portion of the document and I don't know why he would, he has no reason to omit it, but for the sake of the public having all the facts, following is the missing portion of that document:

3. D. Pursuant to the contemplation of this agreement for the interim use of the premises, Ms. Finochiarro was to allow an inspection of the premises to determine items deemed necessary for public health and safety. Said inspection was to determine what items are immediately required to be addressed as part of any continued limited use, and until final plans and development has occurred. On October 30, 2007, Ms. Finochiarro's agent allowed a first floor only inspection of the premises. Said inspection resulted in the attached list of items ("Exhibit A" herein), each of which constitute immediate actual or potential problems involving the life, safety and health of members of the public accessing the premises. As such, all of the items stated within the Exhibit A, unless otherwise directed therein, must be completed immediately for the continued interim use of the premises. Ms. Finochiarro must address each requirement, and have them completed no later than 5:00 pm Monday, November 5, 2007, or the interim use of the premises will be immediately ceased until all items are completed and inspected. Upon completion of the items identified in Exhibit A, Ms. Finochiarro will be required to notify Ms. Cecelia Copeland of the City Building Development Services Department and arrange an inspection to confirm compliance. Ms. Copeland may be reached at XXX-XXXX (phone number omitted at my discretion-Jacke).

E. Ms. Finochiarro may request a building permit and proceed in advance of the phase one final development plan approval to install the water line and fire hydrant called for in the phase one final development plan, and for the performance of any item contained upon Exhibit A which requires the issuance of a building permit. The City agrees, in response to a proper application for each such permit, to issue a separate permit or permits for the construction of these items.

F. The existing fire hydrant on the premises will be upgraded as deemed necessary by the City for current usage, and the hydrant and water flow rate and pressure shall be upgraded to comply with current applicable codes, and with the terms and conditions of Planned Development No. 277.

4. Ms. Finochiarro must obtain administrative approval of phase 1 final development plan by December 31, 2007. Ms. Finochiarro and her architect have the obligation and shall take the lead in providing information as reasonably required by City for the completion of the ARC approval process. City staff will reasonably
assist Ms. Finochiarro and her architect and/or attorney in defining what information and items remain uncompleted with respect to the ARC approval process. It is understood that these items include, but may not be limited to, clarifying ownership of or easement granting rights to the strip of property shown on the eastern boundary of the premises, and clarifying any outstanding issues regarding the flowage and direction of stormwater off the premises.


Jason said...

I posted what I was given to me in a manila folder by a supporter of Pythian Castle who was in the group with Tamara that night. That page was not in the folder with the rest of the document.

tom said...


A few of us were privy to a tour of the castle on Saturday as to what has been happening with this bureaucratic nightmare. I won't say who was in attendance but those that were came for research purposes to determine how this all occurred.
It appears that to paraphrase: if the city and the owners of this castle were playing football, the owners of the castle keep moving down the field towards the end zone, however the city keeps extending the field to which makes scoring a touchdown that much harder. I'm not completely on anyones side because mistakes have been made on both sides and attitudes have become the norm instead of the exception in this case. Cooler heads should've prevailed but we are beyond that point so something must be done.
In many ways city presents itself in the manner of this needs to be done because we say so. In all the paperwork of which I have been allowed to look at I can't find any city regulations or state statutes mentioned as to why some of these items need to be completed. If local government wants compliance then they need to do a better job of explaining why. Not everyone cow tails down to pressure NO matter what the outcome might be.

Jacke M. said...

Thanks for your insight, Tom.

Jason said...

Apparently that page was missing from the folders given to council members as well according to the city's formal response.