We recently bought a bank owned house on 15 acres of land which had been vacant for 4 years. There is a pretty good sized creek running through the property, which crosses under the road across from the house. In 2007, the area flooded, and a woman and her 4 yo granddaughter drowned trying to navigate the road. We don’t know the family and we aren’t from this area, but this is a small, friendly community and everyone is really nice. We do not wish to offend anyone.
However. There is a large (maybe 4’ tall) white cross adorned with figurines and deflated balloons and surrounded by a rope fence which has been set in concrete about 75 feet from the road in our creek. It looks like shit. We are not religious people. Still, we don’t want to upset anyone. We have been here 4 months and have not seen anyone at the memorial, but it isn’t visible from the house. Obviously, we’d like to remove it, but we feel like just tearing it down is insensitive. I don’t particularly want to go track down the family and discuss it with them, either, though. I can’t imagine that conversation going well.
I’m not sure there is a right way to handle this. What would you do?
Replace it with a small tasteful brass plaque on a stone commemorating the loss of life. Then no one can accuse you of wrongdoing.
The memorial stone and plaque can be small enough not to be noticeable, but the fact that it is there deflects any criticisms that family/friends might aim your way.
I’ll third the other replies - remove it and in its place put something tasteful. If anyone asks, say that the existing memorial was rotting or otherwise damaged and had to be taken down before it created a hazard so you replaced it.
Replacing it with a smaller, more aesthetic memorial sounds like a good idea, but I wonder if simply getting rid of the original cross would still be considered . . . thoughtless (?) unkind (?) I dunno; I’m inclined to say if it’s your land you are of course within your rights to do whatever you wish, but if your goal is not to rankle the locals, could you possibly talk to the town council or mayor to have the memorial moved to city land nearby?
I would take it down. I’m sure the survivors have an appropriate place (cemetery, church) to mourn. At best, it is your private property and you have to right to improve it as you see fit. At worst, it is an insurance liability if trespassers visit without obtaining your permission first. If anyone protests, you can blame your insurance company.
IMHO you’d certainly be okay to remove the deflated balloons and anything else that’s broken/moulding/really gross, without removing the entire memorial. Maybe put a fresh coat of paint on the cross if it’ll help make it look not quite so awful.
In the long run, I like Szlater’s idea. Once you’ve gotten to know people in the area better (and perhaps met the family in question), you’ll have a better idea of what will be acceptable.
Run an ad for a couple weeks in the local paper stating that the memorial needs to be moved. If no one steps up to move it elsewhere then have it removed.
That is just asking for a campaign to start to keep it in place, and then who knows what the outcome of that might be, however, my bet is that it’ll be worse tha what’s currently there.
Far better to either quietly replace it, or remove it and face the resulting short term backlash.
The dick move, though, would be to have it removed and then bill the family for the work.
[ul]
[li]75 feet from the road, that’s not on the “edge” of the road, no right-of-way is going to extend that far.[/li][li]It’s been there long enough to start to need repair. The family has had time to greive, and time to move on.[/li][/ul]
I would think the idea of a small plaque on a stone is the absolute MOST that reasonable people would expect.
Where are you located? In some states (for example Alabama IIRC) such memorials within a certain distance from a road are illegal. An anonymous call to the authorities would deal with it.
I’ve seen roadside memorials. I’ve never seen one 75 feet from the road on someone’s property. Although maybe the idea was that no one owns a creek, so it’s public property.
Like you, Renee, I have no idea what to think of it. The odds that anyone got a permit to install a monument in a creek are pretty slim. So it’s technically illeagal. It’s also pretty nervy to install something permanent and rope it off.
Also, it’s been five years and it doesn’t look like anyone is keeping it up. If you know the date that it happened, you could see if anyone is keeping the anniversary.
I guess it doesn’t matter if I come to a conclusion. I’d probably put off doing anything about it as long as I had other things I was doing to the property. And I’d use it as a topic of conversation when getting to know the neighbors. Although that assumes that you’re living on the property or going to be livning on the property, and you didn’t say that specifically.
You are definitely treading on dangerous ground, so you are right to be thoughtful about this.
I’d need to see it. Roadside memorials are always taken down after a short period of time and no one seems to mind.
But this sounds like it was built by someone intending it to be more permanent. Fences on the side and set in concrete would indicate this, even if it was a poor job.
I’d count on offending someone if you pull it down. You might offend the whole town.
Still, my inclination would be to get rid of it. You have to ask yourself: Is the juice worth the squeeze?