<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 67 Julian Street</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/67-julian-street-providence-ri/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/67-julian-street-providence-ri/</link>
	<description>down and out with the city's vacants</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Sep 2010 03:22:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faust</title>
		<link>http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/67-julian-street-providence-ri/comment-page-1/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>Faust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:19:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/?p=574#comment-55</guid>
		<description>This is a configuration from before modern &quot;Euclidean&quot; zoning. The rear house is probably on what is known as a &quot;pork chop&quot; lot. This means that the rear lot is probably rectangular, with an appendage to reach the street. That might be an easement or &quot;right of way&quot;. Modern zoning no longer permits this. In most places zoning requires a &quot;side lot&quot; area, that would not permit the buildings to be so close together. In more urban areas a &quot;fire wall&quot; may be substituted for a side lot. This becomes more important in a &quot;tear down&quot; and rebuild, the old configuration cannot be &quot;grandfathered&quot;. Many inspectors will not consider it a &quot;tear down&quot; if one wall is left standing.

It is possible that the buildings are on one lot and not subdivided. That would no longer be permitted. The reasoning for this is complex and convoluted. Originally, Zoning was about public safety, i.e. fire spreading and ground pollution from septic systems. This made it not a &quot;taking&quot; as it was pursuant to the &quot;police powers&quot; of the Constitution.  Now it is universally accepted as &quot;protecting property values&quot;. Since the later is not a valid reason for zoning, and probably unconstitutional, they always resort to &quot;obstructing emergency vehicles&quot;, or some other &quot;public safety&quot; reasoning. There is no point in fighting these things, you only have one lifetime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a configuration from before modern &#8220;Euclidean&#8221; zoning. The rear house is probably on what is known as a &#8220;pork chop&#8221; lot. This means that the rear lot is probably rectangular, with an appendage to reach the street. That might be an easement or &#8220;right of way&#8221;. Modern zoning no longer permits this. In most places zoning requires a &#8220;side lot&#8221; area, that would not permit the buildings to be so close together. In more urban areas a &#8220;fire wall&#8221; may be substituted for a side lot. This becomes more important in a &#8220;tear down&#8221; and rebuild, the old configuration cannot be &#8220;grandfathered&#8221;. Many inspectors will not consider it a &#8220;tear down&#8221; if one wall is left standing.</p>
<p>It is possible that the buildings are on one lot and not subdivided. That would no longer be permitted. The reasoning for this is complex and convoluted. Originally, Zoning was about public safety, i.e. fire spreading and ground pollution from septic systems. This made it not a &#8220;taking&#8221; as it was pursuant to the &#8220;police powers&#8221; of the Constitution.  Now it is universally accepted as &#8220;protecting property values&#8221;. Since the later is not a valid reason for zoning, and probably unconstitutional, they always resort to &#8220;obstructing emergency vehicles&#8221;, or some other &#8220;public safety&#8221; reasoning. There is no point in fighting these things, you only have one lifetime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stump Blankenship</title>
		<link>http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/67-julian-street-providence-ri/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Stump Blankenship</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:22:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.forgottenprovidence.com/?p=574#comment-44</guid>
		<description>Holy Yowzers

Nice find rispvanerik. What a strange place. I have no idea what to do here because the city lists this as two properties, same address, just delineated &quot;front&quot; and &quot;rear&quot;. I didn&#039;t want to break up the photos so the link to the city&#039;s &quot;front&quot; card is in the sidebar and the &quot;rear&quot; is right here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://maps.provplan.org/ulr/detail_p.asp?plu=062-0531-0000&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;67 Julian St Providence, RI REAR&lt;/a&gt;.

What a strange pair of buildings. These look to be owned by none other than Deutsche Bank National Trust (likely - no deed confirm).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Holy Yowzers</p>
<p>Nice find rispvanerik. What a strange place. I have no idea what to do here because the city lists this as two properties, same address, just delineated &#8220;front&#8221; and &#8220;rear&#8221;. I didn&#8217;t want to break up the photos so the link to the city&#8217;s &#8220;front&#8221; card is in the sidebar and the &#8220;rear&#8221; is right here: <a href="http://maps.provplan.org/ulr/detail_p.asp?plu=062-0531-0000" rel="nofollow">67 Julian St Providence, RI REAR</a>.</p>
<p>What a strange pair of buildings. These look to be owned by none other than Deutsche Bank National Trust (likely &#8211; no deed confirm).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

