Are Real Estate Investors and Neighborhood Preservationists compatible?

[thelakelander]

Lake makes a good point about the proliferation of the Prairie Style in and around Jax after the Great Fire and it's an interesting topic.  Does a particular architectural style make the character of a neighborhood?

It can be a strong part of an area's character.  New Orleans, Savannah and St. Augustine all have a certain character partially defined by age and proliferation of a certain type of vernacular architectural style.  Locally, certain architectural styles contribute to the character of neighborhoods within Jacksonville.  Examples include the ranch homes of Cedar Hills, craftsman style bungalows in Brentwood, frame shotguns in the Eastside and Mediterranean in San Marco and San Jose.

Does uniqe architecture work best when it's clustered?

I think this one is debatable and ultimately comes down to personal opinion.

Can contrasting styles mix?  If contrasting styles can in fact mix, what are some best practices to create a sense of place when there are a mix of styles?

Yes.  Some good examples can be found in Chicago's urban neighborhoods like Wicker Park and Lake View.  Several contrasting styles, yet they all fit within a certain setting due to building scale, front setbacks, materials and surrounding streetscape.

[jason_contentdg]

It was tough to get the financing where it needed to be for the home to be built at the time. Extensions have been filed to keep the COA active every year and we've been told that the time is getting closer to actually build the home. Thanks for the kind words about the design, and yes the Klutho home was a huge inspiration the home. It was our thought that to have a modern home approved in the historic neighborhood we needed to use a strand of DNA that was familiar to the fabric as a jumping off point....and not to push the envelope too far...but also not to mimic history. There's a place for thoughtful modern design in historic districts as long as they are developed with care in regards to scale, proportion, and the existing fabric and there is certainly an audience for them. We're certainly not going to be giving up any time soon.

[Dog Walker]

Scale and setback are the important factors.  Go for it!

[JFman00]

Wish something like the content DG Walnut House were built in Riverside. I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

[strider]

While you sort of imply that the new infill was more affordable than purchasing and restoring an old house, when the bulk of the newer infill was built, it was quite the opposite.  The new SRG houses were well above the average selling prices of the older homes.  It should also be noted that SRG had a campaign to force up both land values and the needing restored house values so that the new construction seemed a better deal and, as we found out later, they were making money off sort of a shell game with the empty lots.

In addition, prior to the advent of the SRG decade, all of the attention was indeed on buying and restoring the older houses.  As a small contractor back then, we had 8 to 9 houses going at once.  Banks were lending more than enough to get the houses done and the majority of our projects were condemned homes being brought back.  SRG having it's real estate people driving up prices on condemned homes started putting a stop to that. Then at the height of the market, the costs to rehab were going out of sight as materials costs often more than doubled,  insurances were through the roof and everyone wanted this larger piece of the pie.

Of course that all changed when the market crashed.  Today, many of the SRG houses have sold for a fraction of the new selling price, the nicely restored homes are competing well with the infill and the old homes still needing restoration are getting attention again too.  The crash also drove down material and labor costs to make redoing a house more affordable again.

The investors certainly helped with all this.  While once they were part of the problem, more recently they were a large part of the solution.  They had cash to do the houses when the banks were not loaning money.  They didn't go overboard on the work so that in most cases (OK, at least the smart ones) the original features were preserved.  The investors know that it will be a few years before they can cash out and are willing to wait.

As things continue to improve, what I am seeing is a return to how things were in 1998 to about 2003.  Slow, positive growth with renewed interest in the old homes and banks once again becoming willing to loan money.  The people coming into Springfield no longer seem to have the expectation of moving into this gated community and are willing to work and live within the urban climate. They seem to enjoy the diversity and know that while things will improve as more people move in, it will be a slow process and they are OK with that.

I think right now, Springfield has it's best chance at living up to it's potential.  We just have to be smart and not force the wrong issues.  And perhaps keep more of the old houses around.