| TOP STORIES AROUND THE COUNTY |
 |
East Main Houses Taken Down in North Adams10:29AM / Tuesday, February 03, 2009
 Now you see them, now you don't
When iBerkshires left for Pittsfield on Monday morning, the two tenements on East Main Street declared public nuisances nearly a year ago were still standing. When we got back, they were gone.
Their disappearance provides a new bird's-eye of Union Street for residents and travelers along East Main.
Above, the tower of one of the buildings before it was demolished. Below, the old mill on Union Street (the tannery?) can be seen in the distance.
The two apartment houses at 223-225 and 229-231 East Main St., were owned by tenement mogul Charles "Rusty" Ransford. The buildings were on a list of blighted properties handed to the City Council last year by Mayor John Barrett III.
The propertyowners were given 60 days to rehabilitate or raze the structures, including the two massive East Main apartments.
Another apartment building on Arnold Place owned by Arthur Perras was taken down last year. The Arnold Place structure's demolition was the only one to which the Historical Commission seriously objected.
The East Main buildings had been vacant for several years and in extremely poor condition. Workers began dismantling parts of the buildings last week. Their demolition was done fairly quickly Monday afternoon.
 |
Your Comments
iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary. Comments are closed for this article. If you would like to contribute information on this article, e-mail us at info@iBerkshires.com |
Ummm...EAST Main Street!?
Editor: Yes, I keep getting my East and West mixed up. That's what happens when you're trying to be in three places at once. You don't know where you are! | | from: Geographically Challenged | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
I am glad you ran this article, because I saw the gap on East Main St. However, I'm disappointed in the lack of depth in this article. Who owned the houses? What efforts were made to rehab and save them? Was the Historical Commission involved? While all may have been done thoroughly and properly, the story left much unsaid.
Editor: I posted the pictures then, as noted in the previous comment, had to be in two other places. I've posted the links to back stories about buildings and added more information. | | from: North Adams architecture Fan | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
When are the residents of North Adams finally (after decades of slums) going to WAKE UP open your eyes, and realize that Mr. Ransford has done nothing, and will continue to do nothing for the city of North Adams except provide garbage dumps to live in, and have the state pay him for their usage.
Main Street, Spring Street, Union Street etc etc.... DUMP after DUMP owned by Mr. I hate North Adams.. Charles "Rusty" Ransford.
North Adams....please stop the peeing contests every year and take every single one of his properties. Even his own home is a slum!
Enough Of This Already!
Or... just continue... and let Mr. Ransford hold us all back! | | from: Enough of this already!!! | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| I am so glad I do not live there anymore. I went back recently and all you see is vacant lots everywhere. That looks just as bad. STOP worrying about Mass Moca. Its not the answer to revitalize that city! Do something NOW before it gets worse and its a complete ghost town! I can't belive the politicians in that city. Grow up! | | from: Paul | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| ransford is the big winner in this deal. he no longer has the liability of two non-performing buildings and the city tears them down on their dime. now the city liens up the vacant lots for the cost of demolition, goes through land court to gain title for non-payment of taxes and liens and is eventually awarded title to two non-conforming, unbuildable, worthless lots. all in, it will probably cost the city $50-$60,000. who wins? | | from: advantage ransford | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| While it is nice to see some of these properties go, it is not so nice to see so many vacant lots. In the 60's and 70's many building were torn down but, not much rebuilding was done. I say if the city is going to take the step to get rid of the trashy buildings at least have a plan to put the property to use other than parking lots. I grew up in North Adams and it wiil always be my hometown, there is not much pride at looking at an ariel photo of North Adams and seeing the only expansion going on is vacant lots. there needs to be a plan to at least try to rebuild. Jjust a thought. | | from: Rick | on: 02-03-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| I think 246 houghton st can be put on the list of dumps to go I do not know way the city lets anybudy live in there that can get a big x | | from: jag | on: 02-05-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| Rusty is a terrible landlord.You thing those places are bad go check out his building on Webber St in Adams.I lived there.My toilet exploded and he wouldn't fix it.I had to pay out of my own pocket to have it fixed.The paint was peeling off the walls,and the refridgerator was full of food from the old tenants.I had so much cleaning to do before I could move in there.I took the appartment because it was close to my job and cheap.But in the end it wasn't worth it to me.Rusty never returned any of my calls either.I don't think he should be allowed to own property and rent it ever again. | | from: JJ | on: 02-10-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| in every town there will be people who cannot afford to live, that is communism you cannot have rich people, especially millionaires and billionaires without people being extremely poor. Rusty ransford houses many poor people who need a roof over their heads and he should be praised for taking in so many people all the time. And it is because of half if not more of these people do not have jobs (look at the unemployement rate before you think jobs arent a problem) and are behind on rent that rusty owes alot of money. He has done something no one else dares to do, help people and take a fall for it, I am one of his tenants, and he is very nice, the people that work for him may be another question, but we are talking about rusty here. All you richies should thank him for taking homeless people off the streets, otherwise you'd have to deal with them and your taxes would have to pay to shelter them... | | from: | on: 01-11-2010 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| Just because people are are not financially stable, unemployed, or "poor" does not mean they need to live in squalor. Many of the apartment buildings that are demolished in this area are demolished because they are uninhabitable. I do not think anyone deserves to live like that. I think it is the landlord's responsibility to take care of their properties. They do charge rent to their tenants don't they? | | from: RH | on: 03-24-2010 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
|
Advertise on iBerkshires.com
|
