Board of Historic Preservation Rejects Plan to Tear Down Sanford's Beloved Historic Home

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Dakota News Now) — Sanford Health requested permission from the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation on Wednesday to demolish a property they own.

It was just in the past year that they discovered It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. They didn't come across any documents related to their purchase that mentioned it being a historic site. However, when they demolished a non-original garage, Neighborhood & Preservation Planner Diane deKoeyer notified them about this fact.

When they're not in a [historic] zone, it's quite easy to miss until you encounter a query about it," deKooyer stated. "In this instance, I believe [Sanford] noticed it around the same time as me.

The 19th-century residence located on 20th Street in downtown Sioux Falls was crafted by the same architectural mind behind the historic courthouse, Wallace L. Dow.

Key features of this house consist of a chimney constructed using stones sourced from every county within the state.

Few historic sites remain isolated from a historic district, yet this house does so, making Sanford Health’s choices more challenging as the property falls into disrepair.

Overlooking the primary Sanford campus in central Sioux Falls, there lies a neighborhood where Sanford currently possesses roughly 200 properties.

The potential growth strategies have evolved over time, leading them to focus on refurbishing and leasing properties through their firm, Cyntom Property Management.

At some point, we considered constructing a boulevard through the primary campus located on 20th Street," explained Austin Parks from Sanford Health. "This plan entailed expanding 20th Street and might have required removing many of the homes nearby—either demolishing them, relocating them, donating them, or whatever alternative was feasible.

The area is brimming with houses that have remained unoccupied for quite some time or have deteriorated.

Sanford mentioned that they've attempted to alter this by increasing their property investments by 15% over the past year, resulting in an almost 90% occupancy rate now.

Since 2010, Sanford has been the owner of 628 West 20th Street, however, they have refrained from renting it out as the expenses required for repairs would likely result in minimal profitability.

They asked for it to be demolished, but they haven’t reached a final choice about its future use yet.

"As new opportunities or community needs arise that require expansion in specific areas, it wouldn't be prudent for us to allocate such significant funds to this property," Parks explained.

As they began taking questions during the Historic Preservation Board meeting The board members inquired about exploring alternatives beyond demolition.

Some aspects of Sanford’s estimated repair costs seem unnecessary; certain flooring might still be salvageable. The assessment suggested replacing drywall throughout, but much of the initial-floor plaster appears restorable," stated Adam Nyhaug from the Board of Historic Preservation. "Why isn't a building permit being sought to begin renovations so this house can be rented out once more? At $165,000, it's an attractive property that should provide good rental returns.

In reply, Parks presented Sanford Health’s viewpoint, stating that using an estimated amount between $160,000 and $165,000 would have a greater impact across several properties rather than allocating this fund solely towards the preservation of the historic house.

If we could rehabilitate four or five houses for $160,000 and have them ready for rental again, I believe this would be much more sensible than investing the same amount in just one property," Parks stated. "This comes down to economic viability. This is precisely why we're completely willing to donate these homes or let people relocate them.

When queried regarding the possibility of relocating the home, Parks mentioned that moving the house would entail significant expenses because of its tall stature and advanced age.

The board collectively decided against the plan to demolish the historic house, stating it would, "Result in negative consequences."

There are numerous alternative choices available, yet no distinct course of action has emerged for what should come afterward.

"We have proposed donating it, allowing anyone to relocate it, or placing it anywhere they prefer, and we remain completely open to these suggestions. It brings us no joy to demolish any home, particularly one with historical significance. Currently, we have no intentions of doing so; however, we are continually evaluating our choices moving ahead," Parks stated.

Representatives from Sanford informed Dakota News Now following the meeting that the outcome of the vote aligns with their expectations, and they are eager to collaborate with the city to identify the optimal solution.

DeKooyer stated, "They're not rushing things." He added, "We do have some leeway if we manage to locate someone who might be interested in purchasing or moving the property. It would certainly be ideal if this were to occur as it would clearly benefit everyone involved."