Blight committee ponders razing sound structures --

[Bill Hoff]

Any building 50 years or older will be reviewed by JHPC to determine if it should be considered historic.  If it is determined to be so then it will not be demolished.  It does not apply to only to historic districts or current landmarks.

I fear that is not exactly the case:

Historic Structure shall mean any structure, fifty years old or older, and that is designated a City of Jacksonville landmark; a contributing property in a City of Jacksonville historic district; listed on the United States Department of Interior, National Park Service's National Register of Historic Places or a contributing structure in a National Register district; or has been determined as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, individually or as contributing to a potential district based on the Florida Master Site File (which is why Elena Flats is going before the commission)  or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.

I suspect that last part will only work if they must do a 106 review to use of Federal Funds. That does not necessarily stop the demolition.  And any structure can be taken as an emergency with the paperwork filed after the fact.  Even designated Historic ones.

or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.
How this part is supposed to work is that if someone wanted to demolish it, JHPC would review, and if they determine it is "historic", then it is not supposed to be demolished.  That was the intent of Jones, Boyer and others on the committee. 

Yup. Hopefully this will be demonstrated as intended.

[JaxUnicorn]

Yup. Hopefully this will be demonstrated as intended.

It won't.  Period.  The news story also stated Warren Jones hopes the city will begin to see these homes begin being demolished as soon as 5 to 6 months.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/2015/01/28/city-fights-blight-with-new-legistation/22487467/

[ChriswUfGator]

Any building 50 years or older will be reviewed by JHPC to determine if it should be considered historic.  If it is determined to be so then it will not be demolished.  It does not apply to only to historic districts or current landmarks.

I fear that is not exactly the case:

Historic Structure shall mean any structure, fifty years old or older, and that is designated a City of Jacksonville landmark; a contributing property in a City of Jacksonville historic district; listed on the United States Department of Interior, National Park Service's National Register of Historic Places or a contributing structure in a National Register district; or has been determined as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, individually or as contributing to a potential district based on the Florida Master Site File (which is why Elena Flats is going before the commission)  or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.

I suspect that last part will only work if they must do a 106 review to use of Federal Funds. That does not necessarily stop the demolition.  And any structure can be taken as an emergency with the paperwork filed after the fact.  Even designated Historic ones.

or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.
How this part is supposed to work is that if someone wanted to demolish it, JHPC would review, and if they determine it is "historic", then it is not supposed to be demolished.  That was the intent of Jones, Boyer and others on the committee.  You also could advocate to get money to historic planning staff to survey more neighborhoods. 

That's not what it says though. For that to be the case, where's the part requiring the planning department to review it? The actual language only protects properties 50 years old that have already been determined to be eligible for listing. There is nothing in the ordinance requiring that the city review each property for eligibility prior to demolition. This is what we refer to as an illusory promise...

[I-10east]

People always wanna talk about Detroit, when it comes to tearing down neglected structures; The homeless breaking in places to stay warm causing fires, and arson like below (first link) is why Detroit did it. The people in these neighborhoods (second link) are far from sad that these eyesores with no hope are being torn down. Keep in mind, as long as property is historical or is being MAINTAINED it will NOT come down, I have no problem with that bill at all. 

http://www.news4jax.com/news/teen-charged-with-setting-4-house-fires/30987184
http://www.news4jax.com/news/new-law-could-help-clean-up-blight-in-jacksonville/30974450

[JaxUnicorn]

Any building 50 years or older will be reviewed by JHPC to determine if it should be considered historic.  If it is determined to be so then it will not be demolished.  It does not apply to only to historic districts or current landmarks.

I fear that is not exactly the case:

Historic Structure shall mean any structure, fifty years old or older, and that is designated a City of Jacksonville landmark; a contributing property in a City of Jacksonville historic district; listed on the United States Department of Interior, National Park Service's National Register of Historic Places or a contributing structure in a National Register district; or has been determined as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, individually or as contributing to a potential district based on the Florida Master Site File (which is why Elena Flats is going before the commission)  or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.

I suspect that last part will only work if they must do a 106 review to use of Federal Funds. That does not necessarily stop the demolition.  And any structure can be taken as an emergency with the paperwork filed after the fact.  Even designated Historic ones.

or with respect to any other structure over fifty years old as determined by the Jacksonville Planning and Development Department to be eligible for such listing.
How this part is supposed to work is that if someone wanted to demolish it, JHPC would review, and if they determine it is "historic", then it is not supposed to be demolished.  That was the intent of Jones, Boyer and others on the committee.  You also could advocate to get money to historic planning staff to survey more neighborhoods. 

That's not what it says though. For that to be the case, where's the part requiring the planning department to review it? The actual language only protects properties 50 years old that have already been determined to be eligible for listing. There is nothing in the ordinance requiring that the city review each property for eligibility prior to demolition. This is what we refer to as an illusory promise...

In my opinion, it is unconstitutional for the City to demolish houses for this reason.  They must foreclose first.  The news story stated "Jones says a process will now be put in place to turn the properties over to a non-profit agency or adjoining property owner who will renovate the property or the city will demolish them."  The City cannot turn properties over that they do not own!  And I would think they cannot tear them down unless they own them either in this case.

[ChriswUfGator]

The city is banking on that most of the owners won't litigate, which is probably true. Most people don't know their rights.

[I-10east]

Maintain your property (city ordinance) and you'll be okay. It seems like a mountain is being made out of a molehill here...

[vicupstate]

Maintain your property (city ordinance) and you'll be okay. It seems like a mountain is being made out of a molehill here...

Given the VAST number of homes demolished within even HISTORIC neighborhoods, AND violating federal codes in the process, it is very understandable that this would be viewed skeptically to say the least.  Jaxunicorn makes some very salient points about constitutionality/ownership too.

LaVilla is proof positive that this strategy can be a miserable failure.   Given Jacksonville's history, anything that gives the city more leeway to do demolitions is scary.   

I would hope that at a minimum, there would be an ongoing inventory of the demolitions with a two year follow up, to see which ones actually get something built on them.  If nothing is actually happening after the demolition, that alone is enough to repeal it.  Perhaps a sunset provision or 'mandatory review' could be added to the ordinance before final passage.   

[strider]

Maintain your property (city ordinance) and you'll be okay. It seems like a mountain is being made out of a molehill here...

Not entirely true... Maintain your property, be able to do whatever MCCD decides it needs, don't piss of the wrong people and maybe, just maybe, you will be alright.

Yes, too many properties are not being properly maintained.  Some of that is certainly on the owners of those properties.  Some of it is due to the horrendous way MCCD handles things and while that should not make as much difference as it does, if you are not savvy or not able to afford the repairs, you end up on a downward slide that ends with demolition. In some case within Springfield, some did not like who was renting the house and so MCCD made sure no one did when in fact, the majority of the issues the house had in the end were caused by MCCD making it all but impossible for relatively easy original repairs to be made. If the right people want what could be thousands of houses effected by this ordinance torn down, the odds are they will succeed.

[JaxUnicorn]

Code Enforcement is not wasting any time!!!  Demolitions are coming!!!

See this thread:  http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,23641.msg402614.html#new