Ten Historic Springfield Demolitions

[strider]

But those photos are 28 years old.  If you wish to go after someone it needs to be done fairly.   
And I agree with save the houses.

Currently, six of the ten photos pictured in the article are indeed current pictures that at least very closely showed the how the houses appeared at the time of demolition.  Only four pictures aree from the RUDAC study used to obtain the historic designation, meaning they were 28 years old.

Perhaps it would have been best to show both, but still, the houses are gone and the question why needs to be asked over and over again.

Also, the 4th one, taken by the owner's request was technically taken by MCCD as the owner had to get them to take his house as an emergency as the owner was not approved to demolish his house. One has to wonder how MCCD "profited" by that....

[Demosthenes]

Great points Unicorn.  The article is actually meant to just document the scale of the losses, perhaps I should go back and make that a bit clearer.  Ive already edited the opening a bit to make that a little more clear.

I am 100% on board with saving every house. However, the "article" was devoid of context. Were these all demo`d by the city under nonspecific reasons? I see significant fire damage on at least two of those photos. Were they taken down after major fires? What happened to the properties afterwards? Are they overgrown lots, or have they been reused?

I think the important action would be to look to the future, and act with a purpose. Learn from the past. Don't live in it.

[mbwright]

I would like to see the " Independent structural engineer reviews later confirmed major concerns, which required immediate action"   

I would think these would be visible documents.  Who are these "independent" structural engineers?

[JaxUnicorn]

I would like to see the " Independent structural engineer reviews later confirmed major concerns, which required immediate action"   

I would think these would be visible documents.  Who are these "independent" structural engineers?

Most often it is Atlantic Engineering.

[Cheshire Cat]

In regards Lumb's letter: Well one thing that immediately jumps out is the intentional wording of the following claim:

"Upon conferring with Kim Scott, it is my understanding that within the past five (5) years, MCCD has directed over 500 board-ups and hundreds of nuisance abatements - some actions occurring more than once at individual properties "

This makes it sound like MCCD has actually gone out and boarded up houses that have been abandoned.  In reality this refers to the resolution that they send out to the property in the form of a complaint letter.  This is something that they tell whoever they are sending the letter to to do.  Not something that they do themselves.

Interesting use of semantics in Scott's statements about boarding up properties.  Yup, she has been working within the city government structure for a long, long time. 

[m74reeves]

Lots of semantic and general poopoo here

The City of Jacksonville (the “City”), via its Municipal Code Compliance Division (“MCCD”), plays an integral role in preservation of local historic structures.

can someone check to make sure that lightning hasn't struck city hall?

Upon conferring with Kim Scott, it is my understanding that within the past five (5) years, MCCD has directed over 500 board-ups and hundreds of nuisance abatements ....

Love the passive voice here. he has not checked this, it's just his understanding.

It is also my understanding that responsibilities assigned to MCCD do not include rehabilitation and renovation of residential structures.  Further, it is my understanding that MCCD does not have the authority to enter into any agreements that limit or impair any of its obligations authorized under city ordinance.

passive passive

[JaxUnicorn]

Lots of semantic and general poopoo here

The City of Jacksonville (the “City”), via its Municipal Code Compliance Division (“MCCD”), plays an integral role in preservation of local historic structures.

can someone check to make sure that lighting hasn't struck city hall?

Upon conferring with Kim Scott, it is my understanding that within the past five (5) years, MCCD has directed over 500 board-ups and hundreds of nuisance abatements ....

Love the passive voice here. he has not checked this, it's just his understanding.

It is also my understanding that responsibilities assigned to MCCD do not include rehabilitation and renovation of residential structures.  Further, it is my understanding that MCCD does not have the authority to enter into any agreements that limit or impair any of its obligations authorized under city ordinance.

passive passive

He has to respond this way because he does not know for certain.  Because if he did know, he'd have told us so.  IMHO

[Debbie Thompson]

“Sec. 307.113. Unsafe Structure Abatement.
In the event a structure that has been designated as a landmark or contributing to an historic
district under the provisions of this Chapter is declared to be an unsafe structure or
condemned…. In determining the appropriate manner to remedy emergency conditions
affecting a landmark, landmark site, or a property in a historic district, the remedy shall be
limited to the least intrusive means to minimize the impact to the historic fabric. Consideration
shall be given to bracing or other stabilization alternatives if such would be sufficient to abate
the emergency conditions”

Not only is stabilization required over demolition, it is more cost effective, thereby saving taxpayer’s money.

[sheclown]

He argues POLICY, we argue ORDINANCE. 

[m74reeves]

as director of this department, it is my understanding [sorry, couldn't resist] that he should be able to direct interpretation of policies instead of having his chiefs go buck wild.

[simms3]

These pictures present a different Springfield than I'm accustomed to.  It's been a couple years since I've been in the hood, but I've spent enough time in Springfield to have a mental picture of buildings that are either restored, new construction, or not in this bad of shape.  Hate to have this view, but some of these pictures look like the houses have reached the point of no return...and really no offense to some because most of the houses in Springfield are architecturally significant and constructed well, some of these don't really seem worth saving IMO...especially if they are fire hazards to occupied houses next door and are not going to be saved/can't be saved anyway.

[John P]

This is not a either - or issue. It is not a 'NO demolitons ever' or 'YES to demolitions just because a house looks bad' choice. There should be a scale to which something is so far gone that it is not realtistic to expect renovation. Anything can be renovated for enough money but that is not realistic. I think Kimberly Scotts scale has been way off but I also think those that think there should be no demolitions and that everything can be restored are just as off base.

[strider]

 In the last decade or so, particularly after 2007 when the ordinances changed, we have been battling a major developer, SPAR Council and MCC to stop the demolition of historic houses due to reckless policy.  It took until 2012 before SPAR Council changed it's tune and even now, there is some resistance to doing the preservation thing. The major developer who thought you saved a historic district by tearing down the old and building new is gone but a few like minded residents are still around.  All this means is that we have given up the right to pick and choose which houses we try to save and which ones we say,OK, it's too far gone.  Historic Springfield has lost about 25% of it's total housing stock since 1985. 535 houses gone now, with the two latest.


That said, there are indeed times when houses need to be taken.  In about ten years, I have agreed with about five or six.  The rest were taken due to social not physical reasons, including the last two.  Fire is of course, a big one. But even then, one that I thought needed to go as an emergency (I would not step foot in it) sat for months waiting for funding I guess.  Another was supported by trees, the trees keeping it from sliding off it's foundation and again, at least a year for that one to go.  Yet, houses with  recent building permits get taken as an emergency and yet another that was about to be redone.

The issue with houses in the system abandoned or neglected is indeed an owner related issue.  However, the demolition of these historic house falls solely on the city and Ms Scott.

[Conrad]

Having had years of contentious losses due to the zealots in the Dept of Code Enforcement in various areas
of the county.  I can comment on one specific to Springfield.
Having been in and out of Springfield for over 50 yrs., growing up,, carrying mail at the 8th St. P. office
etc. I remember an ever changing downward spiral that Springfield has begun to finally turn around.

Having worked with RAP since it's inception in 1973 working for homeowners there and in Springfield before
it had a formal preservation organization, I remember a classic example of a long condemned boarded up
house at app. 226 E 4th St.  I remember it specifically because I was asked by reps. of a UNF fraternity had
the opportunity to invest in saving it in 1989 due to a well meaning benefactor.  I was asked to "walk it and
assess whether it was salvageable and at what cost.  We went into a house that had been completely vandalized, all the mantels, period moudings, stair rail were ripped out.  The frat boys weren't interested in
something smacking of real work so they passed on it.  As I worked in and out of the neighborhood I watched
tat house remain boardedup for app. 18 yrs. and mysteriously someone unboarded and took the care to restore that house that had for all intents and appearances sat abandoned for probably 25 yrs.

OI invite anyone to ride by there now and imagine it as a 2 story version of the worst in the pictures above,
now an eyepleasing liveable salvaged former ingot of blight (according to those who use tht rubberstamp
opinion of all they find in need of updating and repair).  Put Kim Scott at the head of that list of rubber
stampers.  She is possibly the most vindictive and ruthless of all the Chiefs of Prop. Safety I have dealt with
over more than 25 years as an owner contractor.

Conrad Markle

[sheclown]

Strider -- 33.64% of the houses gone.

1800 divided by 535 equals 33.64