Demolitions in Springfield: the facts

[sheclown]

Joel McEachin put the number out today at 533.  That is the current number of demolitions in the neighborhood since the neighborhood was declared a Nationally Recognized Historic District.  That is also almost 30% of the historic fabric of this neighborhood.

We have the addresses of the properties and will use this information as we assemmble the results of our survey.

[Springfielder]

and people were trying to say it was less....

[jcjohnpaint]

that is terrible to hear! 

[avs]

Is there a potential that that high of a number jeopardizes our designation?

[peestandingup]

Is there a potential that that high of a number jeopardizes our designation?

I'd like to know this as well. There has to be a breaking point. I'd imagine at 30%, it can't be far off.

But then again, it's not like having that historic neighborhood moniker has made any difference with this stuff. Especially since the neighborhood is located in demo-happy Jacksonville. Seems like anything goes.

If the city doesn't come up with a solid plan to start turning a lot of these problems around (and actually stick to it), I fear that Springfield will slip into the abyss. I'm not holding my breathe though. Like I said, its Jacksonville.

[iloveionia]

Stephen: It will take a bit, but yes.  The years of the demolition are noted in the COA on the chart.

Pee: No one should seek out the NPS and see if we have lost too much since designation to be de-designated.  The less they know the better.

Propertly and well used redevelopment funds are a wonderful thing.  See my metrojacksonville article on "The East Village."

[iloveionia]

Also: when were COAs the norm?  There appears on the doc to be only 1 demolition b/w 1985 - 1991. 

[strider]

I believe that while the various historic Districts are older, like Springfield being designated in 1987 (Riverside sometime before that?) the laws governing things like COA's were not passed until 1990/ 1991.  At least that is the date I see associated with them.   On the list, the oldest COA is 1991.

Other areas with Historic Designation have indeed at least been placed on a "watch list" of sorts.  I think we have been lucky not to have had that happen with 30% plus of the structures gone and most of those lost since the Historic Designation. 

[avs]

Having the historic designation is VERY important to my family and many people I have sold homes to over the years.  One of the reasons we made the decision to sell our house in Maryland and move to SPR is because it is a historic district, and there is supposed to be value and protection in that.  We would not have moved here if SPR had just been a neighborhood of older homes.

The city has jeopardized all of out investments allowing this to happen.  30% is a LARGE number.  Heck, I would be fine paying a little more in property taxes if the money would go back into a SPR fund that would offer facade grants or something.  SPR residents have to make the city understand we value our neighborhood, what it has been, and what it can be again.

[DuvalHusky]

Does the list provided by Joel include breakdowns as to those homes that were salvageable or not?

[iloveionia]

^ no.
Of course that is the point of contention: savable.

[peestandingup]

Having the historic designation is VERY important to my family and many people I have sold homes to over the years.  One of the reasons we made the decision to sell our house in Maryland and move to SPR is because it is a historic district, and there is supposed to be value and protection in that.  We would not have moved here if SPR had just been a neighborhood of older homes.

The city has jeopardized all of out investments allowing this to happen.  30% is a LARGE number.  Heck, I would be fine paying a little more in property taxes if the money would go back into a SPR fund that would offer facade grants or something.  SPR residents have to make the city understand we value our neighborhood, what it has been, and what it can be again.

Oh I agree. It certainly makes the neighborhood more attractive to potential buyers & people who have already invested their time/money in it. But obviously that alone hasn't been enough. Its good that its technically historic though.

I think really in order for Springfield to save itself, everyone in the neighborhood has to get on the same page & really embrace a niche (having a tug-o-war match between residents & organizations the last decade certainly hasn't helped). And the city HAS to go along with it too.

Now, I don't know what that niche is. But I wouldn't look towards places like Riverside or Avondale for the answer. Let them do their own thing, Springfield do theirs. But I think the community gardens, some livestock, fish farming & the whole urban farming/self-sustaining movement in general could be something that would certainly set it apart. And also embracing any kind of startup that wants to open in the area on a shoestring budget. Make it stupid-cheap & they'll come.

At this point, that's really the kind of stuff ya'll need. Don't worry about chain stores & that Starbucks just yet. Keep Springfield weird.

[iloveionia]

^^^
+1

[Miss Fixit]

I'm about to get off track a little and talk about Springfield's need to carve out a niche. 

Regarding demolitions:  Historic Designation is critical to this neighborhood.  Way too many houses and commercial buildings have been demolished.  There are may more that have been neglected and need love.  Let's stop worrying about the exact number of demolitions, agree that it's been waaay too many, and follow Preservation SOS lead in trying to protect what we have left.

Following on PSUs comments above:

Yep, there's no rational basis for believing Starbucks or any other upscale chain is going to move to Main Street Springfield any time soon.

While I agree with keeping Springfield wacky and wonderful, Austin already has the claim to weird (you knew that  ) - we do need our own distinct identity.  We are NOT San Marco or Avondale or even 5 Points, and never will be. 

Definitely should leverage what Sustainable Springfield has started with community gardens and other educational programs; carry on SACARC's support of pets. Help neighbors and save houses like Preservation SOS, and help businesses like SAMBA.  Clean up alleys and abandoned buildings like the block captains.  Love the parks like the Springfield Improvement Association. 

I have lived in Riverside, in Avondale, and in San Marco.  Springfielders are passionate and fight about a lot of things, but I promise you that no  other neighborhood comes together and physically works as hard on community projects as Springfield does.  And there is no other neighborhood that is as social, welcoming and inclusive as Springfield is.

Maybe we need to think bohemian, as someone suggested over on mySpringfield.

According to Wikipedia:

"Bohemianism is the practice of an unconventional lifestyle, often in the company of like-minded people,....involving musical, artistic or literary pursuits. .. .This use of the word bohemian first appeared in the English language in the 19th century[1] to describe the non-traditional lifestyles of marginalized and impoverished artists, writers, journalists, musicians, and actors in major European cities. Bohemians were associated with unorthodox or anti-establishment political or social viewpoints, which were often expressed through free love, frugality, and voluntary poverty."

Cheap, unique, working together to move forward.  Getting off the grid a little more.   I'd love to hear other folk's thoughts on how Springfield should identify, and market itself. 

[ChriswUfGator]

Well...you guys will recall for years I've been saying 1/3'rd of the neighborhood was demolished. Turn out my well-observed educated guess was right on the money. And before that, Stephen had 3 businesses up and running to generate the bohemian arts type business you're referring to. That was 2003, nearly 10 years ago. SPAR ran everyone out.