1634 Ionia - owner requested demolition

[JaxUnicorn]

As relayed earlier in this thread, the Historic Preservation Commission approved the owner-requested demolition COA 15-606.  As we also communicated, today Preservation SOS filed the appeal of COA 15-606.  A copy of the appeal is below.  The appeal should be introduced to City Council in November.  We appreciate all community support in our effort to save this historic structure.

[CooperJax]

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty sad that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

[acme54321]

Someone is a little sour that their demolition is getting some opposition.   

[Steve]

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty said that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

Well, there's only two historic districts in Jacksonville-your statement makes it sound like there's 15.

My feeling is that if you don't like the rules of a historic district, don't invest in one.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty said that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

Well, there's only two historic districts in Jacksonville-your statement makes it sound like there's 15.

My feeling is that if you don't like the rules of a historic district, don't invest in one.

Hello.  Why is this so difficult for a certain segment of the population to wrap their minds around

But the historic district would be so much nicer if there were newer, nicer looking homes instead of the dilapidated shells that are there now. 

You don't think that R/A looks the way it does because of shitty old homes, do you? 

[mtraininjax]

You don't think that R/A looks the way it does because of shitty old homes, do you?

What does R/A have that springfield does not? A thriving commercial! 5-points, Park and King, Shoppes of Avondale, they all do well. Springfield needs to get with it on commercial before more owners self-implode like this instance.

[strider]

Appeal hearing scheduled:  LUZ Committee, Tuesday, February 2, 2016, 4:00 PM, City Council Chamber, 1st Floor City Hall, St. James Bldg, 117 W. Duval. Resolution #2015-786. Questions, Legislative services at 904-630-1404.

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty said that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

Once again, as some are slower than others to get it:  The only reason a Historic District is formed is for the contributing HOUSES.  ALL OF THEM.  If it wasn't, just a few "interesting" houses would be landmarks instead of all of them being declared landmarks.  The house in question was declared a contributing structure therefore deserves all of the protections of any other landmark.

Did you know that Springfield was Jacksonville's first National Historic District?  That it contains some of the oldest structures left in Jacksonville? (Thanks to the 1901 fire.) That in the 70's it was Jacksonville's intention to bulldoze everything from 1st street to 20th?  That it was regular people who stopped it and have been fighting the "it's ugly, tear it down" mentality ever since?   That ten years ago, condemned houses in Springfield actually brought in a higher property tax revenue that the average homesteaded house in all of Jacksonville? Springfield has had it rough and some of the houses show it.  But as long as people are interested in preserving the assets of the community, we stand a chance of being the best and most valuable historic district in Jacksonville.

Yes it is pretty sad (not said) that adults find reasons to blatantly lie or perhaps just don't bother to find the real facts.  No one ever said that a developer or someone from PSOS offered to buy it.  It was said that someone did at the meeting and that is true.

You don't think that R/A looks the way it does because of shitty old homes, do you?

What does R/A have that springfield does not? A thriving commercial! 5-points, Park and King, Shoppes of Avondale, they all do well. Springfield needs to get with it on commercial before more owners self-implode like this instance.

R/A was never as bad off as Springfield was. I think the larger houses on the river kept people more interested in it's future and I also believe that for the last couple of decades R/A had better leadership.  At least the leadership was not trying to tear down house after house and they were not doing their best to control the who, what and where of it's only real commercial corridor so that their favorite developer could try to end up with all the land. And I think that is part of the issue, one commercial corridor that is a state highway that is intended to lead people from one part of Jacksonville to another efficiently and nothing else.  Of course, the decisions the city made to cut off the Springfield area from downtown and the rest of Jacksonville certainly played into the loss of it's commercial base.

This latest approval of the demolition of this house implies that while it is wrong to remove a deteriorated window because it a loss of historic fabric it is now OK to take the entire house for the same reasons. With an average of one contributing historic house demolished every single month since 1985, every house left is important. Every house left must be saved or at least, every possible attempt at saving the remaining houses must be made.  We have given up the right to say this house is ugly so why bother, especially on Ionia Street where we have already lost 45% of the housing stock.

[CCMjax]

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty sad that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

All historic homes look run down before they are restored, no matter what neighborhood you're in.  There are run down looking historic homes in San Marco, Riverside and Avondale right next to beautifully restored homes.  Same thing throughout much of Springfield.  If you are in favor of demolition because it is vacant and the back portion is burned out, and a credible engineer has submitted a report stating it is unsafe, then that is one thing.  However, if you are in favor of it simply because it looks run down then you shouldn't be living in an historic district or even have interest in any of them.

Springfield has come a long way in the last decade and let's hope people continue to invest in restoring the old homes.  But for crying out loud, Main Street is what needs the most help!  How many huge vacant lots right on Main Street are there?  The beautifully restored homes make people want to move to the neighborhood . . . the horribly neglected Main Street makes people think twice.

[NaldoAveKnight]

I am in FULL SUPPORT of the Demolition of this house. Houses like this is why Historic Springfield is the only Historic area in Jacksonville that looks ran down, especially in certain areas. Furthermore its pretty said that adults make comments on blog and blatantly lie. Not one developer nor did anyone from SOS offer to buy the property. IT NEVER HAPPENED!  Only thing that was mention was it could be donated.

Well, there's only two historic districts in Jacksonville-your statement makes it sound like there's 15.

My feeling is that if you don't like the rules of a historic district, don't invest in one.

So Ortega and San Marco aren't historic districts?  The historic district of Ortega is on the national register of historic places.

[Gunnar]

This latest approval of the demolition of this house implies that while it is wrong to remove a deteriorated window because it a loss of historic fabric it is now OK to take the entire house for the same reasons.

Very good point - it seems like restoring a historic building is made more difficult than simply razing the structure. That's not how it should be.

[strider]

Well, there's only two historic districts in Jacksonville-your statement makes it sound like there's 15.

My feeling is that if you don't like the rules of a historic district, don't invest in one.

So Ortega and San Marco aren't historic districts?  The historic district of Ortega is on the national register of historic places.

There are four National Historic Districts in Duval, Springfield, Avondale, Riverside and Old Ortega.

There are three recognized Historic Districts at the City level:  Springfield, Riverside/ Avondale and St John's Quarter.

The reason most people think there are only two is the city listing.  St John's Quarter is sort of an add-on to Riverside.

The oldest is Riverside at 1985 (I apparently had bad info in stating that Springfield was the oldest Nationally recognized district at 1987) and I think the newest is Ortega at 2004. As far as the city designation, St John's Quarter is probably the newest and maybe Springfield was before Riverside/ Avondale, I can't easily tell from what is on line. Springfield was designated by the City in 1991.

As you can see, it is far more complicated than one would think.  In short, the National designation forms a Historic District and offers some protections and benefits.  The City designation is what sets up the COA processes, ETC.

San Marco is not a Historic District but is a conservator?  It follows some of the same rules but really does not have any protections for the houses. 

This latest approval of the demolition of this house implies that while it is wrong to remove a deteriorated window because it a loss of historic fabric it is now OK to take the entire house for the same reasons.

Very good point - it seems like restoring a historic building is made more difficult than simply razing the structure. That's not how it should be.

Yes one would think that the HPC would be more willing to work with people trying to preserve rather than destroy. 

[CCMjax]

The fact that an engineer (and a reputable one) has submitted a report with very strong language stating that this is an unsafe structure in its current condition is part of what is making this one a difficult home to save. 

[strider]

The fact that an engineer (and a reputable one) has submitted a report with very strong language stating that this is an unsafe structure in its current condition is part of what is making this one a difficult home to save. 

Actually, it was not a report, it was a letter of opinion. No structural calculations were done as they were not asked for, as you know.

"Unsafe structure" is an easy definition to meet in Jacksonville.  Broken windows, one partially damaged sill, a couple of holes in the siding, a cracked pipe, one hanging electrical wire, whatever someone wanting to call a house "unsafe" wishes to use.  Unsafe refers to whether it is habitable as much as unsafe structurally. Except for in a historic district, power off for two years and it is declared unsafe and blight and can be torn down.

I believe the fact that both the owner and the engineer stated that in their opinion, only 95% of the original historic features would be left was the final excuse given for this demolition.  I have issues with that statement and while others have taken houses to the loss of that much of the historic fabric (and they are still standing and being worked on), to do that means you are doing far more than you need to. Siding can be saved but it might have some amount of gator.  You do not have to bring a historic house up to current code regardless of what percentage of structural work you must do.  Piers can be rebuilt utilizing the original foundations.  Lots of ways to keep the cost down and end up with a safe and sound historic house by simply apply the codes correctly.  Most professional engineers and may contractors do not understand the codes and how they apply to a historic house.  And the fact that this engineer was hired to help the owner tear down this house not save it....well, here we are. 

It should not be difficult to save this house, it should have been incredibly difficult to get permission to tear it down. 

[NaldoAveKnight]

Well, there's only two historic districts in Jacksonville-your statement makes it sound like there's 15.

My feeling is that if you don't like the rules of a historic district, don't invest in one.

So Ortega and San Marco aren't historic districts?  The historic district of Ortega is on the national register of historic places.

There are four National Historic Districts in Duval, Springfield, Avondale, Riverside and Old Ortega.

There are three recognized Historic Districts at the City level:  Springfield, Riverside/ Avondale and St John's Quarter.

The reason most people think there are only two is the city listing.  St John's Quarter is sort of an add-on to Riverside.

The oldest is Riverside at 1985 (I apparently had bad info in stating that Springfield was the oldest Nationally recognized district at 1987) and I think the newest is Ortega at 2004. As far as the city designation, St John's Quarter is probably the newest and maybe Springfield was before Riverside/ Avondale, I can't easily tell from what is on line. Springfield was designated by the City in 1991.

As you can see, it is far more complicated than one would think.  In short, the National designation forms a Historic District and offers some protections and benefits.  The City designation is what sets up the COA processes, ETC.

San Marco is not a Historic District but is a conservator?  It follows some of the same rules but really does not have any protections for the houses. 

This latest approval of the demolition of this house implies that while it is wrong to remove a deteriorated window because it a loss of historic fabric it is now OK to take the entire house for the same reasons.

Very good point - it seems like restoring a historic building is made more difficult than simply razing the structure. That's not how it should be.

Yes one would think that the HPC would be more willing to work with people trying to preserve rather than destroy.

Strider - So San Marco better get on the ball with a zoning overlay, neighborhood groups that fight and slander each other, and the right number of abandoned houses with no windows so it can be considered a legitimate historic area? 

Seriously, the Clifton area of Jacksonville is probably older than the rest of the Jacksonville neighborhoods, going back to 1817.  You never hear any drama coming out of that area over historic preservation and neighborhood groups.  Even Fruit Cove has history going back to the 1700's.  I'm not sure why Springfield feels that it's carrying the banner for historic preservation for the area.  There's a lot history around here, and most of it is much older than Springfield.

I'm not anti-historic, it's just that the Springfield folks need to get a grip. 

[CCMjax]

The fact that an engineer (and a reputable one) has submitted a report with very strong language stating that this is an unsafe structure in its current condition is part of what is making this one a difficult home to save. 

Actually, it was not a report, it was a letter of opinion. No structural calculations were done as they were not asked for, as you know.

Yes, I do know.  Bad choice of words on my part . . . Letter of Opinion, not Report.  Especially since I was the one that called Kim's attention to the fact that it was not a real report if you can remember, lol.