After a terse confrontation that stayed the demolition of an old, unoccupied house in Aberdeen home at the 11th hour last year, city officials are hoping for a more peaceful resolution regarding Janice and Woody Grant's property on Edmund Street.
Aberdeen leaders want to change the city's process of addressing cases such as homes proposed for demolition, taking the owners through the legal system rather than dealing with them internally.
Public works director Kyle Torster said the city's code has defendants like the Grants going before a board that includes the public works director, city manager and police chief.
Last year, under that process, city leaders addressed the controversy with the Grant house on Edmund Street.
The Grants have asserted the boarded-up home figured prominently in the regional history of the Civil Rights Movement. A demolition order was halted by a judge in March 2014 right as a bulldozer was on standby to tear down the house.
"We felt it's not a fair system for the prosecution and for the resident to go through," Torster said Wednesday.
He said the city administration hopes to bring new legislation to the City Council in April or May, with the goal of making it official by the summer.
"We want a third-party, independent judge, and under the current system, you don't have that independence," Torster said. "You have the perception that there is not an impartial decision made."
Torster said he believes the city is hoping to ultimately have the Grant building demolished, but is not certain of what the resolution will be.
"That is probably the intention, is to continue forward with that," he said regarding demolition.
"At the end of the day, what I am really looking for is that we address ... for the neighborhood that the buildings are safe and that they protect the people who reside in them, and if they don't, then the city has a legal and vetted process to address them so that they can be remediated, and if that remediation is to demolish the building or if it's to upgrade it, it is immaterial to the outcome. It is to make sure the structure is safe and fit for use," Torster said.
"We have some residents who care about the building and they care about the area they want to live in, and then we have some other residents who don't have the same standards," Torster added. "We just want to make sure we have the same minimal standard across the board that is fair and consistent."
Aisha Braveboy, the Grants' attorney, said a structural engineering firm confirmed in the summer of 2014 that the building does not need to be demolished.
"It was determined the home was structurally sound," she said Wednesday.
Braveboy said the results of that assessment were provided to the city and its lawyers. She was glad to hear of the city's plans for taking such cases through the legal system.
"I think it's really good that they are moving in this direction to avoid situations like this," Braveboy said. "I think that is the best."
Braveboy said she could not speak to any possible plans the Grants have for the house.