Live Blogging: Mellow Mushroom & Historic Preservation Comittee

[thelakelander]

What was the result?

[Pinky]

What was the result?

Approved with minor tweaks.

[KEGreene1]

What are the tweaks

[Timkin]

I have been out of town and not up to speed on this.  I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).

What a waste.


It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.


To who do we owe thanks for this move?

[Pinky]

What are the tweaks

Most of the discussion was around the open seating area facing Ingleside.  HPC wanted to eliminate one of the openings facing Ingleside, but MM countered that state smoking-area regs required them.  Solution was to require openable windows in that area instead of just big openings.  Beside that it was just minor stuff like requiring them to build a new wall in the rear of the parking area in the event that the existing wall (on the adjacent property) ever comes down, and preferring brick or stucco on the building exterior instead of the stone MM spec'd. 

[If_I_Loved_you]

I have been out of town and not up to speed on this.  I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).

What a waste.


It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.


To who do we owe thanks for this move?

"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?

The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.

[Pinky]

I have been out of town and not up to speed on this.  I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).

What a waste.


It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.


To who do we owe thanks for this move?

Isn't demolished, but will be.  Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation and the good people at We Love Avondale (But Hate Competition, And 60 Year Old Gas Station Buildings.)

[Timkin]

That is just ABSURD.  That building is nice.   GENIUS !! 

W   T    F  ?

[Pinky]

I have been out of town and not up to speed on this.  I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).

What a waste.


It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.


To who do we owe thanks for this move?

"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?

The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.

I looked up "contributing structure" on the COJ website, and the definition is any building which was 50 years old when the term was coined, which I think was like '94.  So anything that pre-dates 1944 or something like that.  The Gas Station building was built in '64, and so it isn't a "contributing structure" by Jax statute. 

[Timkin]

Wow

That building could make an amazing restaurant.     

What a POS  statute.



* shakes head 

[If_I_Loved_you]

I have been out of town and not up to speed on this.  I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).

What a waste.


It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.


To who do we owe thanks for this move?

"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?

The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.

I looked up "contributing structure" on the COJ website, and the definition is any building which was 50 years old when the term was coined, which I think was like '94.  So anything that pre-dates 1944 or something like that.  The Gas Station building was built in '64, and so it isn't a "contributing structure" by Jax statute.

RAP is a BULLY plain and simple back in 2005 here is what they said about the Riviera Parkway Apartments. "The existing Riviera Parkway buildings have been renovated and altered sufficiently in the past that they are not worth preserving as historical structures, Grissett said."

"They're non-contributing structures because of the changes they've made [over the years]," she said. "And Grissett went on to say "Grissett said Midland officials came to RAP to get the community's input before completing their plans.

"Of all the developers I've ever worked with, I'd rather work with them," Grissett said. "They're not used car salesmen."  Here is the website I would this info on.  http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2005/06/20/daily20.html?jst=b_ln_hl

[mtraininjax]

Isn't demolished, but will be.  Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation

Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!

RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!

[strider]

Isn't demolished, but will be.  Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation

Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!

RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!

Yep, when RAP was more concerned about preservation rather than use, lots of good was done.  That was the past, what about today?

So it is all MM's fault the gas station is going to be torn down?  Of course that forgets that MM's original and best proposal used the gas station, re-purposed it for a new and better use  today.  Preserving, I might add, a style of building that could be as historically contributing as anything else in Riverside/ Avondale.  The gas station is being demolished not by MM"s choice, but because of the interference of RAP and WLA, folks you seem to support.

[If_I_Loved_you]

Isn't demolished, but will be.  Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation

Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!

RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!

"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?

The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.

[simms3]

Isn't demolished, but will be.  Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation

Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!

RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!

I guess we know where you stand, LoL.  Talk about minority opinion on this topic on this site.