QuoteMs. Scott-
This email is to inform you as the Chief of the Municipal Code Compliance that the Historic Preservation Section of the Planning and Development Department has received a COA for mothballing the property located at 423 Walnut Street. We have tentatively scheduled this application for the Tuesday, November 15, 2011 meeting of the Jacksonville Historic Preservation Commission. Please consider this notification of the upcoming public hearing for this application as required under Chapter 307.303(b), Jacksonville Ordinance Code.
Sincerely,
Lisa Sheppard, AICP, LEED® AP
Senior Historic Preservation Planner
City of Jacksonville
Planning and Development Department
Ed Ball Building
214 North Hogan Street, Suite 300
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Phone: 904-255-7843
Fax: 904-255-7885
Email: sheppard@coj.net
;D
(it is court and not street, but minor details)
MetoJacksonville members;
This is the first Mothballing application ever, it is the test case. We believe we have a very strong case, with all the conditions met, and that we're entitled to the COA, having met all of the conditions precedent. However, we believe that this application will be opposed by MCCD, and as always in municipal government one thing matters above all else; (using Gloria & Nicole's term) Butts in Seats.
I would invite every concerned preservationist to appear at the November 15th 2011 HPC meeting at 3pm, to demonstrate support for this important safety measure to preserve our endangered historic structures. Butts in seats sends a clear message, any and all support will be greatly appreciated!
Municiple Code should be GRATEFUL that we took a home "off their hands" a home that we will maintain for the community and keep safe: effectively being the homes guardian. And a damn good one at that.
There is absolutely no reason they should show up other than to say "thank you" "let us know how we can help you."
Code needs to find a new path. And I'm gonna leave it at that for now.
12 is a good number.
Let's get 12 butts in 12 chairs Nov. 15th for the HPC meeting. Can't be a butt in a chair? You most certainly can email your support for the mothballing COA for 423 Walnut Court: sheppard@coj.net
PSOS needs your support on this. We need the city to realize that the neighborhood backs us on this project and has faith in our ability to do what we say.
It's not too early to send your email today.
The meeting begins at 3:00. It is a light agenda and will be over fairly soon.
Interesting things happening today.
First this:
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/coa.jpg)
And then my journey to the building inspection department.
I talked to a great guy, Chuck, assistant supervisor -- talked to him about the temporary bracing.
He would like mothballing to have to go to building department for an alteration and repair permit, in this case to do temporary bracing of the columns. Once a building permit is issued, the property's jurisdiction is the building department (who is in a much better place to determine the structural integrity of building components). They are not going to care about the color of the plywood, so the non-structural issues will still be determined by HPC, along with blight-reducing components, landscaping, painting and etc.
Even though there will be a cost associated with pulling a permit (the permit cost is probably going to be $154), I think it is well worth it to have the building department determine whether or not a building can stand without posing a threat to the neighbors and direct contractors and homeowners how to make it stable.
My next step is to draw up our temporary bracing ideas, write up a permit -- it is easy for us with my being a building contractor and all, (all mothballees will have to use a licensed contractor to pull the alterations and repair permit for the structural mothballing issues) -- and go back to the building inspection department and pull our alteration and repair permit.
After the temporary bracing is complete, the building department will come to the job and inspect. Once it has passed, it will be finalized.
HPC's inspector, Martin Kennelly, will be responsible to inspect all non-structural elements of the mothballing COA.
Perfect!
Pulled the building permit today.
It is for temporary bracing.
There will be one inspection required.
Is code still hasselling you?
We'll know more after Tuesday's HPC meeting!
APPROVED.
APPROVED!
APPROVED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We were granted the COA!
We did it!
Lisa Sheppard was beyond great
Lisa Sheppard worked very hard to make this work in spite of deadline issues. She came to Walnut Court, crawled around (including under) the house to help us make a plan that would be acceptable to the commissioners for this most important first mothball COA. Most of the work on this was off of the clock for her -- late at night and early in the mornings. She put in the extra time to make sure it would happen for us quickly as a protection against further fines from code enforcement and to protect the property in its vulnerable state.
We were also helped out by our attorney, Chris Wickersham, who generously donated his time for this and our architect, Robert Porter, who also donated his time taking photos and giving his professional opinion about structural matters out of a desire to save historic structures. Both of them were at the meeting as well.
This world of ours can be changed with a little elbow grease.
Now, get out there and mothball a house all of you who are contemplating buying a house in this fire-sale economy. Save them. We did. You can too!
Yup, we won.
And to be honest, it was pretty anticlimactic. We were prepared as though for trial, and there was some uncertainty where we knew MCCD was in possession of an engineering report from Atlantic Engineering, which they wouldn't acknowledge and hadn't provided to us. So our only choice was to go ahead and have an AIA inspect the property and appear live to testify. We had pictures of what MCCD had claimed were "structural" deficiencies, including the now-infamous "missing or deteriorated" foundational pier that was really an original cantilevered bay window that never had a pier to begin with.
So we show up, and saw the proposed findings and recommendations, and we were stunned. Despite all of MCCD's back-and-forth, repeatedly trying to stall the hearing, trying to redefine "unsafe" as not being eligible for a certificate of occupancy, etc., as it turned out the HPC's proposed findings and recommendations were perfectly reasonable. With the exception of a recommendation that we add vent holes in boarded windows to dissipate interior moisture, they were all things that we were going to do anyway. And the vent holes are actually a good idea, I'm glad they suggested it. The proposal followed the mothballing ordinance and was well thought out. There was nothing to argue over, we were happy with it as soon as we read it.
Code sent 3 guys to the hearing to sit in the back and stare at us, but when the time for MCCD to speak and argue their objections came, they all sat there and none of them spoke. Which threw me for a loop, as I expected them to at least give it a try, and was prepared for it. We all suspected that they'd re-read the file and probably went back out to the house, and realized it was just going to get embarassing for them. Their alleged structural deficiences were very demonstrably nothing more than make-believe, which we were actually looking forward to showing.
Once code decided they weren't going to object, there was no point in putting on the evidence, so we didn't. At that point, because this was the first-ever mothballed property, you run the risk of setting a precedential bar too high if you get into overkill. The HPC approved our unopposed application, and that was that. So it went well, and we are the first mothballed property under the new ordinance. And, at long last, it looks like MCCD is finally becoming aware that they have public relations risk. Of course that horse is already out of the barn and two states away at this point, but I suppose it's better late than never.
Yeeehaw! This is an amazing news for everyone in Jacksonville who are concerned about saving homes. This is the beginning of a new chapter especially for Springfield.
(Acting like Noone's suspenseful speech on MJ because I like how he say things)
As the history suggests... when Jacksonville was burned alive from the Great Fire of 1901, Springfield was the shining beacon that SAVED Jacksonville.
Now, it is Springfield's turn to be saved by the same city who was saved... and many more areas.
The war on the Battlefield Springfield is finally start to turn...
Thanks to our loyal army of heroes of volunteers and professionals!
BRING IT ON, GOVERNMENT!
-Josh
Quotewhat MCCD had claimed were "structural" deficiencies, including the now-infamous "missing or deteriorated" foundational pier that was really an original cantilevered bay window that never had a pier to begin with
haha love this!
Good work, guys. Do you anticipate Municipal Code's response will be in this vein in the future?
Quote from: Tacachale on November 16, 2011, 01:43:20 PM
Good work, guys. Do you anticipate Municipal Code's response will be in this vein in the future?
We really don't know whether they're finally seeing the light and are actually onboard with mothballing, or whether they just realized it just wasn't going to go well for them with the facts in this case, and decided this wasn't the one to fight about. We really have no way to know, and their behavior as it relates to this COA was definitely unexpected, and totally out of character for MCCD. We are all still speculating on why they did what they did, but at the end of the day I am not sure there is any real way to know. I suppose time will tell whether there is a long-term attitude change underway or if they realized they were boxed in on this particular one by the facts.
The thing they will come to realize, if the latter is the case, is that the facts on almost all of the properties on the demolition list in Springfield are the same as this one. There are generally a bunch of citations for alleged structural concerns, that when you actually look at it, these allegedly life-threatening deficiencies wind up being nothing more than loose pieces of trim, or worse, total fabrications. The facts on Walnut Court were unfortunately not exceptional, they're actually pretty typical. As soon as MCCD has to explain to a bunch of outside people why, exactly, the property is unsafe, in a setting where "because we said so" isn't an acceptable answer, and where the people they are explaining it to are familiar with construction, then you may as well stick a fork in them.
This goes back to a larger problem. Over the past 5 or so years, MCCD has unilaterally changed the definition of "unsafe" from its actual meaning, and its meaning as intended by Chapter 518, to something else entirely by conflating it with "unlivable." Code's position is that, if a house isn't fit to live in, then it is "unsafe." Which is hogwash, the actual standard for "unsafe" is really whether the property poses any threat to neighboring properties or persons, not whether the house is ready to start living in tomorrow.
There has been this definition shell-game going on, I'd venture to guess, and as has certainly been documented on this forum, that 80%-90% or more of the houses demolished in Springfield by MCCD had little or nothing structurally wrong with them. Code routinely argues with a straight face that houses are safety hazards because they need wiring, despite the electricity being disconnected, or because of a roof leak, or because the doors/windows aren't secure, etc., etc., etc. Something has to be done to reverse this definition-shift, it's really the problem behind most of the demolitions.
^Well, hopefully it's a tide shift with them, and they won't push it too hard on houses of a similar condition to this one. If not, then hopefully at least they can be contended against in the meetings, and you'll eventually wear them down about salvageable properties, though that sounds like a tremendous waste of everyone's time, including theirs.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on November 16, 2011, 04:53:04 PM
The thing they will come to realize, if the latter is the case, is that the facts on almost all of the properties on the demolition list in Springfield are the same as this one. There are generally a bunch of citations for alleged structural concerns, that when you actually look at it, these allegedly life-threatening deficiencies wind up being nothing more than loose pieces of trim, or worse, total fabrications. The facts on Walnut Court were unfortunately not exceptional, they're actually pretty typical. As soon as MCCD has to explain to a bunch of outside people why, exactly, the property is unsafe, in a setting where "because we said so" isn't an acceptable answer, and where the people they are explaining it to are familiar with construction, then you may as well stick a fork in them.
Absolutely spot on.
To justify their existence they make up stories.
Walnut Court is proof and I would gather in the infamous "unsafe structure list," that comprises near 139 houses, there are dozens more houses the same.
Being safe, and being habitable are entirely different.
There's on on Pearl Street that went on "formal track" and the testimony included there's a piece of the roof it flapping in the wind, creating a danger. Really? That can be fixed in 10 minutes with a handful of nails, but the the house is on the formal track to be demolished. Ridiculous.
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on November 18, 2011, 07:27:29 PM
There's on on Pearl Street that went on "formal track" and the testimony included there's a piece of the roof it flapping in the wind, creating a danger. Really? That can be fixed in 10 minutes with a handful of nails, but the the house is on the formal track to be demolished. Ridiculous.
What amazes me is that the City seems to have a bottomless , endless supply of money to raze these places, instead of , as Debbie pointed out, taking a half hour to tack a dozen nails into a piece of roofing .
In an economy where people are laid off from jobs in the city, The City is crying broke, yet demolition continues full speed ahead, this is completely stupid reasoning. Good grief, if a loose piece of roofing is what is putting a house on the formal track , give me a call. I ll go nail it in place free of charge. Completely absurd.
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on November 18, 2011, 07:27:29 PM
There's on on Pearl Street that went on "formal track" and the testimony included there's a piece of the roof it flapping in the wind, creating a danger. Really? That can be fixed in 10 minutes with a handful of nails, but the the house is on the formal track to be demolished. Ridiculous.
Typical MCCD. Has anyone contacted the owner to see whether they want to donate, or whether they'd let us just fix the small portion of loose roofing material and request a reinspection?
The one on Pearl Street Debbie is talking about is Tarpon owned. I personally wrote (handwritten) letters to 15 homeowners, their houses I believed to be on the formal track (this was prior to MCCD giving up the full excel doc with "formal track" information.) Nada. Only Jeff Waltz ever replied to me when I wrote a letter. I've paid to do the "people search" stuff on corps and LLCs when I am certain I have the right individual. I've made those calls and nothing. Either no answer, number doesn't accept calls, out of service.
Contact was made with a local resident who owns a formal track home, but that owner is not willing to donate, sell, or fix-up. They wish only to let code take their course. This contact was made in these last 3 weeks.
On behalf of PSOS I am writing over 100 letters to homeowners with condemned homes. HPC sent out a letter in this last month to condemned homeowners regarding mothballing. We have a few doors to knock on of a few other local residents who own formal track homes. It is not an easy process. It is my feeling that owners (to some degree) are tired of code's harassment and ignore any of the good stuff that may come along. It is why I send cards, with everything handwritten, to (hopefully) encourage the recipient to open it and not toss.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/article/228954/3/Historic-structures-to-be-mothballed-in-Jacksonville
http://downtownjax.firstcoastnews.com/news/news/65513-historic-structures-be-mothballed-jacksonville
^^^this one has the TV news clip.
Whoot!
I'm not finding the news clip, just a photo of Jax and the article :(
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/framingoutwall.jpg)
Work began on the window boarding today. Nicole has planned a clever and unique way to add ventilation to the plywood. Wait until you see it.
Tomorrow we begin prepping the wood for paint. Nicole has been busy picking out paint colors -- we have decided to change the paint scheme, to brighten it up a bit with a new vibe.
Joan is ever vigilant with yard maintenance, although she will be recruited as painter on Friday (shhh...she may not know this...let's have it be a surprise).
Should you want to help out, just show up. Or just show up to check us out.
You know where we are: 423 Walnut Court.
Ha! We'll be there tomorrow, Friday, and likely Saturday. Come on out!
LOL...I'll be back tomorrow, and have no problem with painting ;)
I can come this weekend. (Hey...start from the top and save me the low places. :-) LOL)
^^^ I have cleaned completely the interior (well moved all the trim) and it is ready for you to clean and stage for the Open House. There is also stand on your feet painting to do. We remembered and thought of you. How lucky you are! LOL.
QuoteFirst House in Jax to Receive Mothballing COA OPEN HOUSE
The legislation that created a Mothballing COA is a huge win for Jacksonville's historic districts.
more...
http://intownjacksonville.blogspot.com/2011/12/first-house-in-jax-to-receive.html
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/primingatwalnutcourt-1.jpg)
and the priming begins!
it looks damn good, too!
^^^ and that is because of your water my friend. Thank you. We finish priming tomorrow and begin painting including the trim and accent. All the windows are "mothball" boarded and adorned with heart vent holes. We've got a door to frame and an original door to install, complete with transom on the second floor porch. This is indeed a great house.
Lots of activity today. Push to get it painted before the weather cools!
(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/d6488452.jpg)
Over a dozen neighbors and friends came out to help us today. The house is 1/2 painted, the boards over the windows are all up -- we are getting it done.
Once all work is completed, HPC's inspector will come out to the house to make sure we have followed the COA and we will be officially "mothballed."
We are mothballed. :D
We had our inspection today.
We saved a house.
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/walnutcourtopenhouse.jpg)
http://littleoldhouse.blogspot.com/2012 ... g-101.html
For more info on the mothballing process!
blast from the past seeing this thread again
Curious about the present condition of this house and the project in general. Did this house eventually get should? How many more houses have been preserved under this program since?
What's the address?
423 Walnut Court. It's been restored.
I'll say, and SOLD for $287,000 last year.