Solving abandoned property problem will be worth effort

The problem of abandoned properties in Florence, as in most any other community in the Pee Dee, is a complex and costly one to solve.
It involves not only property owners and neighbors, but also city officials and law enforcement officers.
And there are myriad causes. Some property owners move away, while others inherit properties they rarely have occasion or inclination to visit. Other property owners simply lack the means to provide for maintenance, especially during these difficult economic times.
The results are blighted communities, plummeting property values and a host of safety concerns. Many properties are home to houses that are structurally unsafe; some become havens for crime.
But Florence officials and residents alike have a renewed interest in cleaning up the city’s estimated 2,400 abandoned properties, and are exploring many different approaches to tackling with the issue.
Relatively new to the effort is Florence Mayor Stephen J. Wukela, who ran for office on a platform of cleaning up abandoned properties.
At the end of 2008, Wukela had a press conference to announce the city was taking action against eight properties to demonstrate his commitment to the cause.
The action relied on existing city ordinances — which Wukela said he is working to clean up, as well.
Some changes involve defining “owner” for the city’s purposes and could include taking a portion of homeowner’s insurance settlements to pay for cleanup following house fires in the event the home owner doesn’t handle cleanup or restoration, he said.
Prostitution and gangs are the activities most associated with abandoned houses, Florence Police Chief Anson Shells said. There also have been several recent slayings in Florence that took place in or around abandoned houses.
Shells said his officers also are at risk when they have to go in and clear out such houses. There, he said, they face danger from the people in the house, as well as the house itself.
“The ideal solution would be one of two things: either fix the properties or remove the properties,” Shells said. City leaders agree each option would increase property values of surrounding homes and add tax revenue into the city’s coffers.
How to achieve those solutions is the tricky part, but city leaders and residents are trying.
Scotty Davis, the city’s community development director, has been dealing with the issue for years. He frequently works through community organizations to help the property owners — often elderly residents with limited income — who need and want a helping hand to make necessary improvements.
Abandoned houses, Davis said, are a hindrance to the city’s affordable housing program, which offers prospective homeowners down payment and closing cost assistance. It’s for that reason he targets neighborhoods rather than individual properties, and he enlists the help of church and civic organizations who have a vested interest in neighborhoods to clean and spruce up them up.
“When we start cleaning up, the neighbors start cleaning up around their houses,” Davis said.
Density bonuses for builders to construct additional units in a higher yield area such as south Florence or west Florence, provided they reinvest in north Florence or east Florence, is another possible solution in addition to legal and grassroots action. Yet another possible solution is the anchor tenancy of facilities that could attract others to build or locate in specific areas of the city that could be revitalized with an infusion of new development. Tax incremental funding (TIF) districts, too, would allow increased tax revenue generated by improvements to neighborhoods to be spent for additional improvements in those neighborhoods.
We think taking multiple approaches is the way to go toward solving the problem of abandoned properties in Florence.
While it will take time, lots of funding, trial and error, and — most importantly — consistent work by both city leaders and residents to reach that goal, the payoff will be well worth the effort.