Is The Wilmont Building History?

John over at Goodnight Raleigh is following the fascinating story about The Wilmont, a beloved residential “landmark” to some but the city thinks otherwise. The Wilmont has been the site for many Alley Cat finish lines, has very animated balconies and many locals love its historical charm of the Hillsborough Street building. Follow the full story here.

The move by the city puts residents (many of whom have lived here for many years) in a very precarious situation. The owner of the building has 30 days to bring it up to code. He states he has every intent of addressing code violations within that time frame.

Despite ongoing maintenance problems and cosmetic issues, most residents are very fond of The Wilmont.

Maybe the residents will get the needed repairs in time.

The U-shape Wilmont was built in 1930 and is named after the surrounding neighborhood. It includes 24 units, 13 of which are occupied. The city has prohibited House, who purchased the Wilmont in 2002 for $1.45million, from bringing in new tenants until he fixed the problems its inspectors identified.

photo by John Morris

VaNC04/27 08:05 AM

In the City’s defense, the codes are there to protect people. If this place caught on fire, people would be blaming the city for not enforcing the code. I think the City seems to be doing the right thing.

roi04/27 10:07 AM

VaNC’s comment makes sense.

luke04/27 11:52 AM

I don’t think anyone blames the city for enforcing the codes. Though, with all the new condo’s going up all over town, i wish someone would step up and renovate this truly awesome building.

RaleighRob04/27 12:29 PM

^Certainly doable if the owner is willing to put in the investment. The Boylan Apartments down the street are the same age, and they got a rather impressive renovation a couple of years ago.

Miles04/27 12:34 PM

http://savewilmont.com/

Elizabeth Sappenfield04/27 01:13 PM

The Wilmont Building is a contributing structure to the West Raleigh National Register Historic District, so there are both Federal (20%) and State (20%) tax credits for historic rehabilitation available to the owner.

arthurb304/27 02:59 PM

Those balconies have always frightened me!

Jim04/27 03:44 PM

What an old, ugly building! It needs to be razed and in its place ought to go a wood-framed 4 story condo faced with EFIS over chicken wire. Starting price should be $200K and some change for a 750 sf 1BR unit. See dawson on morgan, hue, and 222 glenwood for design precedent. It should be painted with pastel and/or earth tones that really go well with its context. There needs to be a gargantuan parking deck ideally facing hillsborough street that is ‘actively wrapped’ with sweet chain retail and restaurants like panera and an at&t store. The bricks from the demolished wilmont should go straight to the south wake C&D landfill to be buried forever because they’re dirty and used, but not before the developer pees on them first out of spite.

WiseOne04/27 04:20 PM

Right on Jim…let’s Meeker style it.

Betsy04/27 04:58 PM

High five to Jim. That was perfect.

Betsy04/27 05:00 PM

(And might I add that two-thirds of the Raleigh Planning Commission would agree with what Jim said, except they would be dead serious.)

art04/27 05:56 PM

Wow. I was unaware that the Mayor was actually designing condo buildings now. Such power he has!

TSnow2760404/27 07:07 PM

“Is The Wilmont Building History?” Is anybody actually talking about tearing it down or by “Save the Wilmont” we mean the Wilmont community?

VaNC04/27 07:18 PM

I have read all the news stories and the City’s notice and don’t see anything about any proposal to tear it down. People posting on the Save the Wilmont site seemed to think that is going to happen, but no idea why. As I said, looks to me like the CIty is just trying to protect them from injury, as there seem to be some pretty substantial violations, starting with unsafe balconies.

Miles04/27 07:53 PM

Hey VaNC. about 25 of us have a week to move. Can we come stay with you?

NCGUY3204/27 10:33 PM

It’s amazing to me that people think the city is somehow wrong in this case. The only way to get the owner to do the needed repairs is to threaten eviciton thus cutting off his money. Otherwise the owner would drag his feet for years (which appears to be what he has been doing for the past 7 years). VAnc is right. If somebody were to get hurt everyone would blame the city for not enforcing its codes. The city has not “targetted” the wilmont building, the owner of the building has simply allowed such disrepair as to attract the city to take action.

Devin04/27 10:44 PM

I don’t get what everyone is so confused about… the issue is that the people don’t like being forced to move in two weeks. it’s a tremendous hassle to move if you have two months to do it. you have to find storage for all your shit, and a new place to live, and get all of your shit into storage, on top of exams (for a lot of people) and work (for everyone). I say just repair the vacant units, and then let the people move into a vacant unit while their unit is repaired. it’s not about the building being torn down, it’s just an issue of springing this onto the residents

smitty04/28 08:54 AM

The story says 30 days, not two weeks. The spin on this story is horrible. I’ve been there, the building is a slum. Slumlords often don’t fix anything unless they are forced to by the city. Any of the residents who were caught by surprise by this are delusional.

Devin04/28 02:31 PM

smitty, miles lives there and says he has a week to move. i think i’ll believe the person who lives there.

Grif04/28 02:51 PM

Miles may have been exaggerating a bit. The eviction notices posted on the savewilmont.com website show a May 10th move out date. Not 30 days, but not a week either. I understand the frustration of current Wilmont residents, and I’m glad I’m not in their situation, but I think most of the anger should be directed towards their landlord and not the city. From what I’ve read it seems that the landlord was given ample notice to comply with city ordinances and chose not to. I don’t see what choice the city had. I think this is a bad situation for everybody involved, and I hope for a good outcome, especially for the current residents. Hopefully it will be sorted out quickly.

smitty04/28 06:10 PM

I agree, the city has been more than lenient in this situation. This whole process was put into motion by tenant complaints about the landlord. Either blame your landlord or your whiny neighbors.

Miles04/28 07:44 PM

The greatest spin is coming from the property owners. VG Murray & Co told us to ignore the condemned sign, then a few days later that we have a week to move. David House LLC says two weeks. The City says three.

Yes. We are angry at David House and VG Murray & Co. Trust me. After paying rent on time for three years I am very VERY angry. However Karl Coates has sawdust for brains (he wasn’t even aware that the building was condemned Friday, and when I mentioned this he told me to ignore it) and David House is completely unreachable, (has never left a phone number or address on any of his letters to the tenants).

At the same time the city isn’t doing us any favors either, unless you are a strong believer in “tough love”. Perhaps holding the property owners accountable for more than just the building, but their contract to safely house Raleigh residents would be nice. Potentially requiring our landlord to assist in finding new places to live or storage to help in the sudden vaccating process.

Yes we are mad. but it is at the circumstance we have been put in by David House, VG Murray and the City. Not the city exclusively. So please don’t invalidate the situation or ask us to blame our neighbors and peers. All we want is to not lose our home… please try to imagine yourself in the same situation. That tomorrow after coming home from work you have 30 days to leave with nowhere to go. It sucks, it really does. I just want you to understand.

Todd Morman04/29 08:41 AM

30 days to leave your current dwelling is ridiculous. The city decision is absurdly short notice. 60 days would have been more thoughtful - and far more do-able for the residents - while still covering the city’s ass.

It’s astonishing to me that folks like VaNC can completely ignore the reality of the resident’s concerns.

VaNC04/29 10:57 AM

It is not the City’s job to fix this building. It is the City’s job to protect the tenants from an unsafe building. It looks like they gave the landlord lots of time, but he did not render the building safe, so they had no choice.

If I or my kids were living in that building, that the City deemed unsafe, then, frankly, I would get the heck out. If I was a resident, that would be “the reality of my concern”.

Matthew Brown04/29 12:12 PM

“Unsafe” is a relative term. As far as I can tell, the worst that has actually happened is that some plaster has fallen off of the ceiling. This doesn’t happen quickly; it takes years for a piece of plaster to detach and fall, and all one need do is not stand under it when it is about to fall. But if it should fall on you, so what? It will hurt a little bit.

No, the residents of the Wilmont are much safer in the building than in their cars hauling their belongings to their new place of residence.

If a building is in violation of the code, the City should fine the owner, not kick out the residents.

Todd Morman04/29 04:28 PM

ValNC’s a hopeless case, but to be clear for everyone else: my only point is that there was no need for the city to give 30 days notice when 60 would have been fine, esp. right before finals week. The city has suddenly forced working class and student tenants to come up with a new deposit, first month’s rent and new place to live with almost no notice. Bottom line is very simple to anyone who takes a moment to think about it: the way the city handled this was unnecessarily thoughtless. Now, of course, the owner is making it worse with a new, even more sudden deadline (which is probably illegal and will hopefully be fought), but the deadline from the city was also needlessly abrupt and should have been done with much more care.

NCGuy3204/29 11:02 PM

I guess the city should not bother enforcing building codes at all. What about every time a dead beat landlord appeals the city for more time to fix up the rat shack they have owned for 15 years but have failed to maintain. If you give the owner of the Wilmont more time don’t you need to give ever owner more time? Landlords already abuse the appeal system. It amazes me that people are lobbying the city to make this abuse even easier.

The residents should be furious with the landlord, not the city. The landlord has put them in this compromising situation, not the city.

Miles04/30 12:08 AM

NCGuy32
Please read my previous post

WiseOne04/30 10:32 AM

I agree with Matthew, is it really that unsafe? Anyone hurt yet? And if the parties involved were really looking out for your safety, all should have to move out immediately. Well, best to the tenants, I hope you find your way. And one more great election issue not to forget this fall.

VaNC04/30 02:02 PM

For a list of the violations, click here: https://www.inspectionnet.com/FLEX3/Production/InspectionNet.html?sClientCode=Raleigh&nSessionID;=-1&sApplicationCode=SoftNet&sMode=PUBLIC

This is not just cosmetic. Unsafe wiring, unsafe plumbing, unsafe fire escape, etc. etc. You can see why the CIty is trying to get you out quickly. You can also see how long they have been trying to get your landlord to act, until he left them with no other recourse.

Miles05/01 02:31 AM

VaNC. Please quit being such a chode.
Of course it’s our landlord’s fault. but the city has also forsaken us by siding with our dysfunctional landlord and actually referring tenants to the property owners attorney for “assistance” rather than anyone remotely concerned with tenants rights or well fare.

If the city wanted to “protect us” they wouldn’t kick us out on the street in less than two weeks with absolutely no where to go, or face jail time for occupying our homes.

NCGuy3205/01 06:29 AM

Miles,

I respectfully disagree with you. I don’t think the city has forsaken you. I don’t see it as the city’s responsibility to help you find residence. Did they help you find the Wilmont? The city is charged with enforcing local codes. Your landlord is charged with providing his rent paying tenants a residence that meets the codes. The city is living up to its end of the deal. The landlord is not. To expect the city to assist displaced tenants find new housing in this case or any other is unrealistic in my opinion.

RaleighRob05/01 08:19 AM

^Perhaps not. At the very least, I think the city should enact an ordinance to where, whenever a property is condemned due to the landlord’s neglect, the landlord is forced to automatically refund the deposits and last month’s rent within a week of the eviction notice, or he loses his license to operate in the city.
I think that’s fair, don’t you?

devin05/01 09:16 AM

NCGuy32: I think you are missing the point - the tenants should not be punished due to the neglect of the landlord, and the city needs to recognize that. Also, it was never stated that the city should help the tenants find new residency, more that the city should hold the landlords more accountable for their neglect, instead of siding with them.

Imagine Raleigh05/03 11:07 AM

We have torn down, ignored and built to many ugly new buildings on Hillsbourgh Street and I do fear the city leaders would like to do the same to the Wilmont. This is a logical first step to tear down the building.

Don’t kid yourself. This building has been traded for positive election results for the current City leadership.

If the city does allow this building to be torn down then I think they should rename the ugly new building “Charlotte”.

smitty05/03 12:51 PM

While we are inventing conspiracy theories: maybe the landlord wants everybody out so he can revamp the building and turn it into luxury apartments.

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.

Jedidiah Sunday, April 26, 2009