tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post5581400958424673623..comments2023-03-29T02:35:07.711-07:00Comments on Musings on 'point.: 149 Kane StreetUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-29307547995152577912008-05-23T20:00:00.000-07:002008-05-23T20:00:00.000-07:00I didn't say it was airborne. I said it's only da...I didn't say it was airborne. I said it's only dangerous if it was "aerosolized." It could definitely be asbestos. This is not the conversation I want to have.Evan Brayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750880856434393061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-34801441049479007542008-05-23T18:38:00.000-07:002008-05-23T18:38:00.000-07:00Actually, I deal a lot with asbestos investigators...Actually, I deal a lot with asbestos investigators. A lot of flashing in old building's is ACM. What make you so certain it doesn't contain asbestos?Evan Brayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750880856434393061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-1453548710256856722008-05-23T15:35:00.000-07:002008-05-23T15:35:00.000-07:00I don't think it looks too bad. It certainly doesn...I don't think it looks too bad. It certainly doesn't pose the sort of hazard that would warrant condemnation. Clearly, Citizen Skein's comments regarding potential asbestos exposure are un-informed. You should give the poor owner a break, NIMBYs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-92127368175166255822008-05-23T14:26:00.000-07:002008-05-23T14:26:00.000-07:00The key to my argument is that the owner is the so...The key to my argument is that the owner is the sole occupant.Evan Brayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750880856434393061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-54185903033922346472008-05-23T14:09:00.000-07:002008-05-23T14:09:00.000-07:00Thanks for the comment, Brady. Lost City also beli...Thanks for the comment, Brady. Lost City also believes it constitutes a public safety hazard. I have an architecture degree and have consulted in the city on all things building code and zoning for 8 years, which involves a lot of contact with the FD also. Honestly, I agree it's a hazard, but you're not going to get much going through the building code. DOH, maybe, but that's not my forte. I'll expound on this subject in a post soon, but yesterday my wife gave birth to our second girl! I have fatherly duties to tend to. Here's how it all went down: http://cheazepeaze.blogspot.com/Evan Brayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750880856434393061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6382645900542582326.post-68465895766742916692008-05-23T10:40:00.000-07:002008-05-23T10:40:00.000-07:00The backyard is a clear fire hazard for the adjoin...The backyard is a clear fire hazard for the adjoining properties - as is likely the interior. One call to the fire department on the backyards and their visual inspection of the interior once they are in the backyard should get a citation filed pronto.Brady Westwaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324741206315152948noreply@blogger.com