In a unanimous vote, the Sioux Falls Historic Preservation Board has voted against demolishing a Sioux Falls home.
The board says destroying the historic home in the 400 block of North Spring Avenue would be “adverse to the neighborhood.” The home was built in 1891.
I was kind of on the fence about this, but I think the Historic Board made the right decision. I think if the right person gets involved with the rehabilitation it is possible. I live in a home that was built in 1889 and added on to several times. It’s possible to fix these places up and keep them up. Ironically, it will be probably cheaper to fix the place than to demolish and build new. Over the past couple of years I have seen two historic homes in the McKennan Park district lifted from their foundations and rehabbed. Hopefully the property will get in the right hands.
When I addressed the Sioux Falls city council last night about the EC siding report, I asked who authorized putting the flat panels instead of curved panels on the EC.
At the press conference, Argus Leader reporter, Joe Sneve asked the same question of the mayor. Mayor Huether said it has already been addressed several years ago, yet still would not answer the question. Not sure ‘what’ was addressed?
The authorization would have had to be signed off by somebody, most likely the mayor or Public Works director Mark Cotter or one of the city project managers involved with the EC. Even if it wasn’t the mayor, it would have been under his directive. As I said last night, the panels didn’t just magically appear on the building.
It is pretty clear from reading the report that oil-canning of flat panels on a curved surface is causing thermal buckling due to heat which will cost the city a lot of money in maintenance replacing panels and rivets.
I also asked why the weather barrier part of study was taken out of the report and why the council can’t see the draft of a report they commissioned and taxpayers paid for.
I guess we will find out more on January 16th, hopefully.
I know, I know, I know. I have completely failed in all my predictions about Huether’s future. I truly believe though that he did want to run for governor, but I think he did some internal polling on support ($$$) and saw there wasn’t a lot out there for him. I also think the siding settlement LIE has caused the public to lose all trust in him. While he may deny he lied or that people don’t trust him, I think he knows deep down inside that losing in Supreme Court didn’t look good.
So what will he really be doing?
Sure, he will probably take a few weeks off for a little R & R, but he will be right back at it as soon as he can, guaranteed.
I suggested a few months ago there has always been a Plan B, while I don’t know the deets of that plan, I do know this;
He encouraged Jim Entenman to run for mayor, not only to continue the developer boondoggle on the city, but to open up an opportunity for Huether to run in 4 years, or sooner. While he hasn’t ‘endorsed’ anyone, it is NO secret that Jim and Mike are good friends. As I understand it, Mike officiated Jim’s daughter’s wedding last year.
Jim barely showed up to meetings when he was a ONE-TERM city councilor, spending a entire month in Mexico each winter. I really don’t think Jim wants the job or wants to do it for 4 years. He simply wants to reap the insider information the mayor has on development deals.
I think Entenman will either resign in 2 years (he’ll have some strange family reason) which would open up a special election for mayor and put Huether in the running, OR he will appoint Huether as his Chief of Staff and just have him continue to run the city.
This of course means Entenman would have to win Mayor, a scary, dreadful scenario. It would be bad enough as Entenman as Mayor, imagine Entenman and Huether running the city together as a team?
I think this LETTER would tell us what kind of TEAM that would be;
If his (Huether’s) administration knew and didn’t reveal to the citizens what they knew, that’s corruption. If they didn’t know, that’s incompetence.
l3wis 
