1609 ANGIER AVENUE

/sites/default/files/images/2011_6/1700Angier.jpg/sites/default/files/images/2011_6/1700Angier_after.jpg/sites/default/files/images/2011_6/1609Angier_051411.jpg

1609 ANGIER AVENUE

1609
,
Durham
NC
/ Demolished in
2007
Architectural style: 
Construction type: 
National Register: 
Neighborhood: 
Type: 

Comments

  • Submitted by Red Lady on Monday, June 13, 2011 - 2:00am

    So much for the revitalization of Durham. I've never seen a city do so little with open space.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Monday, June 13, 2011 - 2:00am

    Terrible! Though, to be fair, most likely the house was covered in lead paint, which is quite toxic.

  • Submitted by Red Lady on Monday, June 13, 2011 - 8:23pm

    So much for the revitalization of Durham. I've never seen a city do so little with open space.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Monday, June 13, 2011 - 8:24pm

    Terrible! Though, to be fair, most likely the house was covered in lead paint, which is quite toxic.

  • Submitted by John Martin on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 2:00am

    @Anon: Are you telling us that you're "confident" that they carefully scraped off all the lead paint and then removed the chips for special disposal? I'd like to know why you're confident. I've seen lots of houses get bulldozed in Durham, and I've never s

  • Submitted by Natalie on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 2:00am

    and did the lead paint just magically disappear when the house was demolished? Is there a lead paint fairy blessing East Durham with demolitions to rid the scurge of lead paint?

  • Submitted by Rob Gillespie on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 2:00am

    I'd rather have lead paint professionally removed by a containment crew than thrown into a dump that can possibly drain to a water source.

  • Submitted by David Jeffreys on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 2:00am

    I'm sure that a lot of that lead paint was pulverized into lead paint dust for the breathing enjoyment of all passers-by. Just another bad AIR day. PS: My word verification is "exylar" -- the new name for lead paint dust!

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 2:00am

    Guys, I'm confident that appropriate lead abatement measures were followed during demolition (unlike when the house was abandoned and lead chips were most likely drifting all over the neighborhood).

  • Submitted by Natalie on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:25pm

    and did the lead paint just magically disappear when the house was demolished?

    Is there a lead paint fairy blessing East Durham with demolitions to rid the scurge of lead paint?

  • Submitted by Rob Gillespie on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:26pm

    I'd rather have lead paint professionally removed by a containment crew than thrown into a dump that can possibly drain to a water source.

  • Submitted by David Jeffreys on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:26pm

    I'm sure that a lot of that lead paint was pulverized into lead paint dust for the breathing enjoyment of all passers-by. Just another bad AIR day.

    PS: My word verification is "exylar" -- the new name for lead paint dust!

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:27pm

    Guys, I'm confident that appropriate lead abatement measures were followed during demolition (unlike when the house was abandoned and lead chips were most likely drifting all over the neighborhood).

  • Submitted by John Martin on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:28pm

    @Anon:

    Are you telling us that you're "confident" that they carefully scraped off all the lead paint and then removed the chips for special disposal? I'd like to know why you're confident. I've seen lots of houses get bulldozed in Durham, and I've never seen anything like that happen. The bulldozers come in, knock down the house, throw the debris in the backs of trucks and haul it off to the landfill.

    Environmentally sensitive, it ain't.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - 8:29pm

    Yes; new lead hazard management rules were introduced in 2010 which require certified contractors to follow specific practices to prevent lead contamination.

  • Submitted by John Martin on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    @Anon There is nothing on the demolition permit that talks about lead or lead paint. RACM refers to asbestos.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    Durham City-County demolition permit requires NC HHCU permit for removal of RACM, including use of accredited workers, supervising air monitor, abatement designer, and transport of waste to an approved landfill.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    That owner from the 50's sounds familiar. Frederick Stell? Fred Stell sounds like a guy in the real estate business around Durham back in the early 90's when I first got started. Not a common last name so it could be he or his family. Seth Roberts

  • Submitted by John Martin on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    @Anon These houses were demolished before 2010 so no such requirements were in place. As Natalie says, I wouldn't bet a lot on people following those rules after 2010. The EPA can make rules, but it's rather like DOT setting speed limits on highways: enfo

  • Submitted by Natalie on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    Certified contractors following specific practises... HA! This is the best laugh I've had in a little while. Have you ever looked at the demolition permit or process required by the city?

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 2:00am

    Yes; new lead hazard management rules were introduced in 2010 which require certified contractors to follow specific practices to prevent lead contamination.

  • Submitted by John Martin on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 8:30pm

    @Anon

    These houses were demolished before 2010 so no such requirements were in place.

    As Natalie says, I wouldn't bet a lot on people following those rules after 2010. The EPA can make rules, but it's rather like DOT setting speed limits on highways: enforcement is an entirely different matter.

  • Submitted by Natalie on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 8:30pm

    Certified contractors following specific practises...

    HA! This is the best laugh I've had in a little while.

    Have you ever looked at the demolition permit or process required by the city?

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 8:31pm

    Durham City-County demolition permit requires NC HHCU permit for removal of RACM, including use of accredited workers, supervising air monitor, abatement designer, and transport of waste to an approved landfill.

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 8:32pm

    That owner from the 50's sounds familiar. Frederick Stell? Fred Stell sounds like a guy in the real estate business around Durham back in the early 90's when I first got started.

    Not a common last name so it could be he or his family.

    Seth Roberts

  • Submitted by John Martin on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - 8:33pm

    @Anon

    There is nothing on the demolition permit that talks about lead or lead paint. RACM refers to asbestos.

  • Submitted by David Jeffreys on Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 2:00am

    Well, anonymous (& just who are you, hiding behind the "anonymous" tag), just why are you reading this blog??? It's about preservation!!! Take the old structually unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty. Happens all the time, even in Durham. That why Gary writes and shows this stuff. Ask John Martin about his home that was in such disrepair, torn in half, moved across town, and now is the model of beauty that outshines even its original existence. If you are ready to just accept demolition of Durham's homes, you need not be reading this blog! You are in the wrong place!

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 2:00am

    Regardless of lead and asbestos, the house was a fire hazard and most likely structurally unsafe. Some may miss it, but the city can't allow something to exist that's going to be a danger.

  • Submitted by David Jeffreys on Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 8:34pm

    Well, anonymous (& just who are you, hiding behind the "anonymous" tag), just why are you reading this blog??? It's about preservation!!! Take the old structually unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty.

    Happens all the time, even in Durham. That why Gary writes and shows this stuff. Ask John Martin about his home that was in such disrepair, torn in half, moved across town, and now is the model of beauty that outshines even its original existence.

    If you are ready to just accept demolition of Durham's homes, you need not be reading this blog! You are in the wrong place!

  • Submitted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 8:34pm

    Regardless of lead and asbestos, the house was a fire hazard and most likely structurally unsafe. Some may miss it, but the city can't allow something to exist that's going to be a danger.

  • Submitted by Ari aka Anonymous on Sunday, June 19, 2011 - 2:00am

    This house has already been demolished, but even if it wasn't, why would I want to "take the old structurally unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty"? It was a pretty ordinary house to begin with, and I don't have time or interest for such a project (obviously no one else did either...)

  • Submitted by Renee on Saturday, June 25, 2011 - 2:00am

    The thing I can never fathom -- and it's truly a rhetoric comment since there is no one answer -- is how so MUCH of Durham gets in that decrepit condition to have to be torn or fall down. A lot of the places Gary has shown us over the years seem like victims of willful neglect. Oh, I don't believe for a minute that any one gave a second thought about lead paint or it's disposal when blading the place. Until municipalities start showing concern for the environment in their building practices, I honestly can't believe they are going to show any in their demolition practices regardless of what they put on paper.

Add new comment

In tours

Last updated

  • Fri, 07/08/2011 - 11:53pm by gary

Location

35° 59' 3.7716" N, 78° 52' 59.4444" W

Comments

1609
,
Durham
NC
/ Demolished in
2007
Architectural style: 
Construction type: 
National Register: 
Neighborhood: 
Type: 

 

1609 Angier Ave., looking west-northwest, late 2006.

1928: Clements, EP
1934: Clements, E Pate
1940: D_____, H___P
1945: Lloyd, Mack N.
1950: Stell, Fredrick
1955: “
1960: Sineath, Troy


Looking northwest, 2007, after teardown by NIS


Progress, 2011.

Find this spot on a Google Map.

35.984381,-78.883179

Comments

So much for the revitalization of Durham. I've never seen a city do so little with open space.

Terrible! Though, to be fair, most likely the house was covered in lead paint, which is quite toxic.

and did the lead paint just magically disappear when the house was demolished?

Is there a lead paint fairy blessing East Durham with demolitions to rid the scurge of lead paint?

I'd rather have lead paint professionally removed by a containment crew than thrown into a dump that can possibly drain to a water source.

I'm sure that a lot of that lead paint was pulverized into lead paint dust for the breathing enjoyment of all passers-by. Just another bad AIR day.

PS: My word verification is "exylar" -- the new name for lead paint dust!

Guys, I'm confident that appropriate lead abatement measures were followed during demolition (unlike when the house was abandoned and lead chips were most likely drifting all over the neighborhood).

@Anon:

Are you telling us that you're "confident" that they carefully scraped off all the lead paint and then removed the chips for special disposal? I'd like to know why you're confident. I've seen lots of houses get bulldozed in Durham, and I've never seen anything like that happen. The bulldozers come in, knock down the house, throw the debris in the backs of trucks and haul it off to the landfill.

Environmentally sensitive, it ain't.

Yes; new lead hazard management rules were introduced in 2010 which require certified contractors to follow specific practices to prevent lead contamination.

Certified contractors following specific practises...

HA! This is the best laugh I've had in a little while.

Have you ever looked at the demolition permit or process required by the city?

@Anon

These houses were demolished before 2010 so no such requirements were in place.

As Natalie says, I wouldn't bet a lot on people following those rules after 2010. The EPA can make rules, but it's rather like DOT setting speed limits on highways: enforcement is an entirely different matter.

Durham City-County demolition permit requires NC HHCU permit for removal of RACM, including use of accredited workers, supervising air monitor, abatement designer, and transport of waste to an approved landfill.

That owner from the 50's sounds familiar. Frederick Stell? Fred Stell sounds like a guy in the real estate business around Durham back in the early 90's when I first got started.

Not a common last name so it could be he or his family.

Seth Roberts

@Anon

There is nothing on the demolition permit that talks about lead or lead paint. RACM refers to asbestos.

Regardless of lead and asbestos, the house was a fire hazard and most likely structurally unsafe. Some may miss it, but the city can't allow something to exist that's going to be a danger.

Well, anonymous (& just who are you, hiding behind the "anonymous" tag), just why are you reading this blog??? It's about preservation!!! Take the old structually unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty.

Happens all the time, even in Durham. That why Gary writes and shows this stuff. Ask John Martin about his home that was in such disrepair, torn in half, moved across town, and now is the model of beauty that outshines even its original existence.

If you are ready to just accept demolition of Durham's homes, you need not be reading this blog! You are in the wrong place!

Terrible! Though, to be fair, most likely the house was covered in lead paint, which is quite toxic.

So much for the revitalization of Durham. I've never seen a city do so little with open space.

@Anon: Are you telling us that you're "confident" that they carefully scraped off all the lead paint and then removed the chips for special disposal? I'd like to know why you're confident. I've seen lots of houses get bulldozed in Durham, and I've never s

Guys, I'm confident that appropriate lead abatement measures were followed during demolition (unlike when the house was abandoned and lead chips were most likely drifting all over the neighborhood).

I'm sure that a lot of that lead paint was pulverized into lead paint dust for the breathing enjoyment of all passers-by. Just another bad AIR day. PS: My word verification is "exylar" -- the new name for lead paint dust!

I'd rather have lead paint professionally removed by a containment crew than thrown into a dump that can possibly drain to a water source.

and did the lead paint just magically disappear when the house was demolished? Is there a lead paint fairy blessing East Durham with demolitions to rid the scurge of lead paint?

@Anon There is nothing on the demolition permit that talks about lead or lead paint. RACM refers to asbestos.

That owner from the 50's sounds familiar. Frederick Stell? Fred Stell sounds like a guy in the real estate business around Durham back in the early 90's when I first got started. Not a common last name so it could be he or his family. Seth Roberts

Durham City-County demolition permit requires NC HHCU permit for removal of RACM, including use of accredited workers, supervising air monitor, abatement designer, and transport of waste to an approved landfill.

@Anon These houses were demolished before 2010 so no such requirements were in place. As Natalie says, I wouldn't bet a lot on people following those rules after 2010. The EPA can make rules, but it's rather like DOT setting speed limits on highways: enfo

Certified contractors following specific practises... HA! This is the best laugh I've had in a little while. Have you ever looked at the demolition permit or process required by the city?

Yes; new lead hazard management rules were introduced in 2010 which require certified contractors to follow specific practices to prevent lead contamination.

Well, anonymous (& just who are you, hiding behind the "anonymous" tag), just why are you reading this blog??? It's about preservation!!! Take the old structually unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty. Happens all the time, even in Durham. That why Gary writes and shows this stuff. Ask John Martin about his home that was in such disrepair, torn in half, moved across town, and now is the model of beauty that outshines even its original existence. If you are ready to just accept demolition of Durham's homes, you need not be reading this blog! You are in the wrong place!

Regardless of lead and asbestos, the house was a fire hazard and most likely structurally unsafe. Some may miss it, but the city can't allow something to exist that's going to be a danger.

This house has already been demolished, but even if it wasn't, why would I want to "take the old structurally unsound fire hazard, and return it to its glory days of beauty"? It was a pretty ordinary house to begin with, and I don't have time or interest for such a project (obviously no one else did either...)

The thing I can never fathom -- and it's truly a rhetoric comment since there is no one answer -- is how so MUCH of Durham gets in that decrepit condition to have to be torn or fall down. A lot of the places Gary has shown us over the years seem like victims of willful neglect. Oh, I don't believe for a minute that any one gave a second thought about lead paint or it's disposal when blading the place. Until municipalities start showing concern for the environment in their building practices, I honestly can't believe they are going to show any in their demolition practices regardless of what they put on paper.

Add new comment