What difference does a year make in the demolition of houses?

[strider]

An interesting comparison  of HPC meetings - the first from April 2009 with three houses up for Demolition and then one year later, April 2010, also with three houses up for demolition


April 2009 - note that all three houses were indeed placed on the formal track for demolition.

   1st House - Address unknown (minutes cut off)

         Louise De Spain spoke FOR the demolition of this house

         Lisa Simon spoke AGAINST demolition and voted Nay on the formal track

   2nd house - 1948 Hubbard Terrace
         Louise spoke FOR the demolition of this house.

         Lisa Simon did not speak and voted Aye.

   3rd house - 1626 Ionia Street

         Louise spoke FOR the demolition of this house.

         Lisa Simon did not speak and voted Aye.

April, 2010 - note that all three houses were indeed placed on the formal track for demolition.
      In two cases, extra time was given to the house before the actual “formal track” began.

      It was also stated by Eliane Lancaster that five (5) houses were scheduled to come down soon
that had been placed on the formal track a year earlier.

   1st house - 342 West 10th Street
      
         Brenda Boydson  did not speak

         Lisa Simon did not speak and voted Aye.

   2nd house - 1925 Liberty Street

         Brenda Boydson at first spoke for the house and then seemed to change her mind and spoke   for formal track to demolition as a way to force the owner to do something and seemed concerned that Elaine Lancaster was happy.
         
         Lisa Simon spoke AGAINST demolition and initiated a conversation about policy and procedure.  This was a house with the delayed start on formal track. She voted Aye with the delay.

   3rd house - 1647 Pearl Street

         Brenda spoke FOR the demolition of this house.

         Lisa Simon spoke AGAINST demolition again and initiated a conversation about fixing    rather than demolition.  Still voted Aye with a delayed start of formal track to demolition.

Also of note is that during the conversations Brenda stated that “they” were forming a new committee to try to sell these houses for the owners.   The actual minutes of these meetings will be posted later.  Sheclown is also trying to get pictures up of these houses as well.

[sheclown]

This page from the minutes explains the rationale behind the FORMAL TRACK:

[sheclown]

Let's hope there is a drastic policy change in the near future.  The Formal Track to demolition is a reckless attempt to force property owners to rehab their properties. 

We need to find a plan "B", 'cuz plan "A" isn't working.

[CS Foltz]

sheclown..............I'm not sure the City could spell Plan B! Jacksonville Historic Commission appears to be more interested in demo rather than renovation, so I would guess preservation is not their mandate but their desire! Maybe they wish to have wall to wall asphalt, but I don't see much in the way of preservation taking place!

[Timkin]

Demolition is not a solution. There should be some legal way to take these properties if the owner refuses to do anything to them to make them stable or at least secure them.. The flipside of the law is someone can come on your property, fall and break their leg  or go in your structure without permission, fall and break their leg and sue you.  To me, thats ridiculous.

[sheclown]

Apparently, the city has the power in eminent domain to reclaim some of these historic properties.  They do this in other cities.  I don't know much about it, but it seems like something worth investigating.

[ChriswUfGator]

Nice to see SPAR in these meetings speaking in favor of knocking down all these historic houses...

Truly sickening.

[Timkin]

Apparently, the city has the power in eminent domain to reclaim some of these historic properties.  They do this in other cities.  I don't know much about it, but it seems like something worth investigating.

I would tend to agree to agree with you, Sheclown.. EXCEPT that this city seems to have a passion for demolishing these places.  Hence, we have No LaVilla left, very little Brooklyn left, and now they seem to be whittling away Springfield.   The players of this game need to go... and be replaced by players who want to play a FAIR game.   The only ones making out are the people tearing down and hauling these places away.. And I don't like that at all, but I believe that is how it is .

[Timkin]

Nice to see SPAR in these meetings speaking in favor of knocking down all these historic houses...

Truly sickening.

Seems like SPAR needs an overhaul as well.  City Council, Planning, HPC .. Whatever it takes to get the mentality pro-saving , and not on a continuance of a 40-year demolition track record.

[iloveionia]

Brenda, Executive Director of SPAR has stated their stance is AGAINST demolitions.  This is why you see a chance of attitude brewing from SPAR at the HPC meetings.  Brenda took on this position around February 2010 I believe.
She needs the advocacy of the neighborhood to support this. 
This is why the S.O.S. group, a preservation group has formed. 
This does not discount the fact that everyone who believes in the importance of saving our historic structures should not voice their opposition to demolition. 

[sheclown]

It is clear there is a change of attitude toward demolition from both Brenda and Lisa.

However, we are in this mess because of SPAR's reckless pursuit of gentrification plain and simple.  That coupled with no elections, and zero transparency, wild goose chases, scapegoats, and here we are wondering "wasn't there a house there...?"

So yes, SPAR appears to have changed with the new ED.  Why an Executive Director of an organization is setting policy is beyond me, anyway.  Whose idea was it to demolish the historic district?  Louise's?  Who is minding the store?  Who is behind the curtain?  No one??  If not, what has the board being doing?  Did they know what Louise was up to?  They either supported her or were kept in the dark.  Neither seems acceptable since they are speaking for the neighborhood at HPC meetings.

I seem to remember a story a board member once told about being at a SPAR board meeting.  He stood alone for preservation and was told "all of the houses worth restoring have been restored -- not interested in saving any more of them." 

This is where we find ourselves, with 200(?) houses ready to be knocked down at any time.

I'd like to hear what the board has to say about the demolitions.

EDs are suppose to follow policy set by boards.

And face it, we don't even know who is on the board, where they stand, what they said.

Yesterday is gone and with it are the houses. 

Ionia, I adore your spirit and I will stand behind you.  I will nod to Brenda and Lisa when they stand up for the homes. 

I will not stand behind SPAR in any fashion on this because, frankly, I don't even know who SPAR is.

[strider]

April, 2010 -

   1st house - 342 West 10th Street
      
         Brenda Boydson  did not speak

  2nd house - 1925 Liberty Street

         Brenda Boydson at first spoke for the house and then seemed to change her mind and spoke for formal track to demolition as a way to force the owner to do something and seemed concerned that Elaine Lancaster was happy.

3rd house - 1647 Pearl Street

Brenda spoke FOR the demolition of this house.

What I see here is of three houses, Brenda’s “score” is 2 ½ FOR DEMOLITION and ½ AGAINST.  When looking at SPAR Council and Brenda as the Executive Director, I do not see a radical shift.

If Brenda Boydson wishes to get up and  truly speak against demolition as a Springfield resident, I will support her.  SPAR Council needs to stay away as the Executive Board, which is the place policy is supposed to be set, has not changed since the issues with SPAR Council began. I believe they have lost the right to represent the community in the area of restoration, if not everything else as well, and need to make major management changes to even begin to earn back that right and the trust that goes with it.

[02roadking]

Show up at the meetings if you want to make a change. Don't depend on other people or groups to do it for you,  jeeesh

[iloveionia]

Yes, there is lots of work in the "kitchen" that needs to be done in regards to SPAR.

I don't want to make this out to be a SPAR thing, as Springfield residents, business people, and genuinely concerned folk who stand for preservation, we need to make ourselves heard.  Attend HPC meetings and send emails directly addressing specific homes.  Speak to the architectural elements of a home and the necessity to board, secure, and watch.

But if I must personalize it, I do agree since preservation has not been a concern for SPAR in these last years, I do believe they need to rethink, restructure, and pull it together.  In the meantime, we need to step up.  A concerned group of vocal citizens goes a long way.

[uptowngirl]

Hey I can't take every Wednesday afternoon off, sorry single mom gotta pay the bills and support the child. I would go if they were at a time normal working folks could attend. I get a little tired of the lectures to those of us that work and can't attend freaking weekday afternoon meetings. Just because I work, I do not lose my voice, except in Jacksonville.