however, first they must do the battle of the windows.
At the HPC meeting last night, I listened while a business owner talked about his plans to move his thriving business from Mandarin and relocate to Springfield's warehouse district using the landmark located at 2111 Liberty St (the brick building south of the railroad tracks).
This building is significant, architecturally and historically. It is important b/c it is located in the graveyard of empty warehouses. This business is important b/c it will be filled with hungry people needing to eat lunch, buy gas, shop at the antique stores, and perhaps buy houses to live in nearby.
But we are getting all tripped up in the old steel windows which yes are important architecturally and yes are covered under all sorts of historic guidelines and yes we all love the old glass BUT, the owner does not want to change the brick facade, does not want to make any changes to this building he appears to love, he just wants to be able to run the heat and the AC without killing him.
We must look at this differently.
If we don't use these buildings, we will lose these buildings. We must (yes, while honoring the past and the important features as windows) allow businesses a reasonable way to repurpose. They do not buy these buildings to open a museum.
We have made many mistakes in the past allowing developers to tear down historic structures. Let's have a sustainable plan to deal with development in our significant structures which both encourages growth and respects preservation. I believe this man's plan does.
I URGE the HPC to help, not hinder, in the development of the warehouse district.
This is crazy talk sheclown. You can't maintain the 'architectural relevance' of a historic building if you start throwing in energy efficient windows all willy-nilly. I mean, look at the John Gorry re-use / re-fit. All the money that Delores threw at that old school could have been better spent on hookers and cocaine. See how the new windows absolutely destroy the historic fabric of a building that is part of a neighborhood's heritage. All I hear from people is how much they wish that instead of replacing all of those 80 yr old windows they would have like to have seen the building come down and replaced with a nice stucco, boxy tri-story apartment.
I'm sorry. The only way to properly do this is to tear a building down and replace it with some out-of-place stucco and fake stone structure that you find in your typical office park. The past is just that - the past. We're trying to live in the here & now - this is new architecture at it's finest.
Non-redneck Westsider, I get your post. Unfortunately for Springfield, if not all of Jacksonville, way too many actually feel that way. Mow down the old and put up the less significant new. This is why historic guidelines exist. However, common sense must come into play and compromises must be made or no one will utilize those great warehouses.
The HPC has to realize that if this owner had just moved a block or two away, he could have purchased a historical warehouse just as cool, but we would not be having this conversation. And this landmark would still be sitting there, one more window broken out of it every day until none were left and the bulldozers showed up with MCCD em-brazened on their sides.
It has been explained to me that the best compromise is one that has both sides leaving the table unhappy. Neither got exactly what they wanted.
It is time that HPC stopped hindering a project like this by over discussing the windows and started helping by offering the owner a window solution that may not be as historically correct but gives the nod to the needed efficiency. If they can't do that, they need to let the owner have his way.
SPAR's design and review team sided with Joel's office in opposing window replacement even though it is outside of the historic district.
God - I do not wish to get involved in this discussion and hopefully will not have to be further involved in HPC matters, but thank you Red Neck you are absolutely correct.
This building is an incredible Jacksonville landmark. Go read Wayne Wood's book page 203 (and also pages 228 and 363). The architect - I quote "Albert Kahn was one of America's foremost architects and this (2111 Liberty) is one of three projects he is known to have designed in Jacksonville. The straightforward exterior reveals the structural system of the building and provides large bands of windows to light the interior".
2111 is a very significant building not just to Springfield but to all of Jacksonville, Kahn also designed the Ford Motor Building.
Preservation is not just about keeping a building's age it is about keeping and protecting its fabric. What have we preserved if we have destroyed the character and the original architect's ideas and designs? If not you may as well demolish the building and start afresh.
Jennifer Mansfield was correct in what she said and suggested last night. Repairing the windows and keeping the designs are important issues.
It occurs to me that the use of new windows fitted within the opening, and inside the existing windows would allow for energy efficiency while allowing the original facade to remain intact.
Not the absolute cheapest way out, but certainly a cost effective compromise.
Quote from: chris farley on January 26, 2012, 09:08:59 AM
God - I do not wish to get involved in this discussion and hopefully will not have to be further involved in HPC matters, but thank you Red Neck you are absolutely correct.
This building is an incredible Jacksonville landmark. Go read Wayne Wood's book page 203 (and also pages 228 and 363). The architect - I quote "Albert Kahn was one of America's foremost architects and this (2111 Liberty) is one of three projects he is known to have designed in Jacksonville. The straightforward exterior reveals the structural system of the building and provides large bands of windows to light the interior".
2111 is a very significant building not just to Springfield but to all of Jacksonville, Kahn also designed the Ford Motor Building.
Preservation is not just about keeping a building's age it is about keeping and protecting its fabric. What have we preserved if we have destroyed the character and the original architect's ideas and designs? If not you may as well demolish the building and start afresh.
Jennifer Mansfield was correct in what she said and suggested last night. Repairing the windows and keeping the designs are important issues.
Obviously, you didn't get my post at all.
I haven't really followed this debate but has the building been purchased already? If not, a simple solution for the buyer is to jump the tracks and purchase on of the other warehouses along East 14th Street. There's some great building stock there that's just as impressive, imo. Unfortunately, for the Kahn building, that means it will continue to sit vacant and decay because with this market, saving every component of the structure may not be financially feasible without public assistance. Other than that, could there be a compromise where a new historically compatible energy efficient window system be installed?
You are correct Red Neck, I did not I am sorry. I am sad about the Kahn building and will stay out of it.
"Energy Efficient" windows are a complete waste of money in this climate. We simply do not have enough cold weather. You can film and weatherstrip old windows for a lot less money and get enough savings in this climate to repay the investment very quickly. Stopping the air infiltration is the most important.
The " save money with new windows" is a con here. It would take you twenty or thirty years to recoup the cost involved. Most of them are so poorly built using vinyl that they won't last that long. Don't believe the sales pitches.
^Then seems like the easiest argument for keeping the old windows would be to have cost comparison estimates done for both, proving that its more financially feasible to keep the existing window system. The private sector is all about saving money, so if true, I can't imagine the potential owner would still want to spend the extra expense associated with new window replacement.
Lakelander that is exactly what was asked of the owners last night, it was deferred for figures to be audited. Jennifer explained explicitly the businesses that specialized in restoration of such windows - there is an industry built around it. She was excellent and she is a very sincere person who takes her position on the board very seriously.
On the issue of energy efficiency, a past chair of the HPC spoke at an awards presentation a few years back and explained why they wished to keep the old windows, this was a house mind you. She said you can replace all you old windows and wavy glass with double glazing and you will recoup your costs, in 400 years.
Or maybe 200 is JEA and TECO keep raising their rates! ;D
Interior storm windows...they'll make it more energy efficient, and leave the outside facade of the old windows intact.
+1
And it's not like a business is going to want to open all the windows and let the breezes blow through.
Debbie that is what was also suggested at the meeting. Jennifer was very thorough. No one is anti business they just wish to save what they can. I hope restoration is less expensive that removing all the others. It is exciting that there is life in the warehouse district. Funny it appears that the old windows are grandfathered in when it comes to today's code standards, change them and that changes.
You have a chance to get a thriving business owned by someone with a love for the building to move into Springfield and some of you are willing to crash the deal due to window replacement. That's foolishness. Kill the building by preserving it. Sounds like a great idea.
The main issue with keeping old windows is one of how well you can get the old windows to seal. While I have not worked on the actual windows in this particular building, I have worked on the same style. Time has not been friendly to those windows. From driving by multiple times each and every day. I know how often they get broken out. Each time a brick is lobed through one, the risk is that is hits and damages the stiles. The windows will not close properly after a time and so will "leak" air constantly. They are most likely steel and so rust starts entering into the picture. This is the main reason JEA recommends new windows when an energy audit is done, which is a growing problem in residential houses.
As one who has rebuilt many windows as well as replaced many, the cost of truly restoring an old window is higher than the cost of replacing it. This is especially true with residential windows when sash paks, new sashes and special jam lines, are available. Unless you can re-square, re-plumb and re-weather strip, which may mean pulling the window and frame out and just about starting over, you will not end up with a window that will seal properly and keep the cold out and the cool in.
Most people can't afford the expense so they opt to either replace or or put up with less than fully restored windows. In that case, some kind of storm window may be the final answer. But should that be install on the inside or outside of the window? I personally think outside is best, even though it interferes with the historic look of the windows as it protect the original glass and window structure. You can also use lexan or something similar so that you are not replacing panes every other week, which would be the norm with this building.
In the case of this building, I would hazard a guess that few if any of the windows function close to correctly and fewer than 5%, and that may be high, of the panes are still old wavy glass. So what are we giving up for the sake of the old windows if the owner gets disgusted and moves on?
Code is probably painting this address on the bulldozers and excavators even as we speak.
It might also be helpful if everyone who is concerned with saving those old windows made a trip through Springfield and they looked at the other commercial historic structures and what kind of new windows those owners were allowed to install.
I get it. I do. You can buy historically correct-looking new windows if windows absolutely must be replaced. And frankly while I'd rather see everything kept original, I'd also rather see the building saved if replacing windows will save it. When I first moved to Springfield, I heard people complaining about the work some of the contractors did to some of the old homes...bad remodeling. And that's bad, but as I said at the time, you can un-do a bad remodeling job. You can't undo a demolition.
That said, I don't want to see all out "ignore the historic guidelines." That would further deteriorate our property values. But there must be a way to find a compromise before this business owner (and others) decice to move a couple blocks north or east and ignore our warehouse district.
Save the houses (and other historic buildings.)
QuoteYou can't undo a demolition.
good point
-----------------
the lofts on 10th and Market
Baker and Klien on Walnut
gorgeous commercial spaces now in use -- both buildings have new windows
I just heard about Florida Statute 163.08. Are any of you legal-types familiar with this? Could this be a partial solution?
Sounds like you can apply to have certain types of improvements made and have a voluntary lien filed against your property that would be similar to ad valorem taxes. If you're approved the money comes from the state or local government - I'm not sure of the funding mechanism. Should be easier than going through a private lender (theoretically).
Obviously I'm not a lawyer. :)
Quote from: Ajax on February 10, 2012, 11:06:37 AM
I just heard about Florida Statute 163.08. Are any of you legal-types familiar with this? Could this be a partial solution?
Sounds like you can apply to have certain types of improvements made and have a voluntary lien filed against your property that would be similar to ad valorem taxes. If you're approved the money comes from the state or local government - I'm not sure of the funding mechanism. Should be easier than going through a private lender (theoretically).
Obviously I'm not a lawyer. :)
Effective: May 27, 2010
West's F.S.A. § 163.08
163.08. Supplemental authority for improvements to real property
(1)
(a) In chapter 2008-227, Laws of Florida, the Legislature amended the energy goal of the state comprehensive plan to provide, in part, that the state shall reduce its energy requirements through enhanced conservation and efficiency measures in all end-use sectors and reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide by promoting an increased use of renewable energy resources. That act also declared it the public policy of the state to play a leading role in developing and instituting energy management programs that promote energy conservation, energy security, and the reduction of greenhouse gases. In addition to establishing policies to promote the use of renewable energy, the Legislature provided for a schedule of increases in energy performance of buildings subject to the Florida Energy Efficiency Code for Building Construction. In chapter 2008-191, Laws of Florida, the Legislature adopted new energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction comprehensive planning requirements for local governments. In the 2008 general election, the voters of this state approved a constitutional amendment authorizing the Legislature, by general law, to prohibit consideration of any change or improvement made for the purpose of improving a property's resistance to wind damage or the installation of a renewable energy source device in the determination of the assessed value of residential real property.
(b) The Legislature finds that all energy-consuming-improved properties that are not using energy conservation strategies contribute to the burden affecting all improved property resulting from fossil fuel energy production. Improved property that has been retrofitted with energy-related qualifying improvements receives the special benefit of alleviating the property's burden from energy consumption. All improved properties not protected from wind damage by wind resistance qualifying improvements contribute to the burden affecting all improved property resulting from potential wind damage. Improved property that has been retrofitted with wind resistance qualifying improvements receives the special benefit of reducing the property's burden from potential wind damage. Further, the installation and operation of qualifying improvements not only benefit the affected properties for which the improvements are made, but also assist in fulfilling the goals of the state's energy and hurricane mitigation policies. In order to make qualifying improvements more affordable and assist property owners who wish to undertake such improvements, the Legislature finds that there is a compelling state interest in enabling property owners to voluntarily finance such improvements with local government assistance.
(c) The Legislature determines that the actions authorized under this section, including, but not limited to, the financing of qualifying improvements through the execution of financing agreements and the related imposition of voluntary assessments are reasonable and necessary to serve and achieve a compelling state interest and are necessary for the prosperity and welfare of the state and its property owners and inhabitants.
(2) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Local government†means a county, a municipality, or a dependent special district as defined in s. 189.403.
(b) “Qualifying improvement†includes any:
1. Energy conservation and efficiency improvement, which is a measure to reduce consumption through conservation or a more efficient use of electricity, natural gas, propane, or other forms of energy on the property, including, but not limited to, air sealing; installation of insulation; installation of energy-efficient heating, cooling, or ventilation systems; building modifications to increase the use of daylight; replacement of windows; installation of energy controls or energy recovery systems; installation of electric vehicle charging equipment; and installation of efficient lighting equipment.
2. Renewable energy improvement, which is the installation of any system in which the electrical, mechanical, or thermal energy is produced from a method that uses one or more of the following fuels or energy sources: hydrogen, solar energy, geothermal energy, bioenergy, and wind energy.
3. Wind resistance improvement, which includes, but is not limited to:
a. Improving the strength of the roof deck attachment;
b. Creating a secondary water barrier to prevent water intrusion;
c. Installing wind-resistant shingles;
d. Installing gable-end bracing;
e. Reinforcing roof-to-wall connections;
f. Installing storm shutters; or
g. Installing opening protections.
(3) A local government may levy non-ad valorem assessments to fund qualifying improvements.
(4) Subject to local government ordinance or resolution, a property owner may apply to the local government for funding to finance a qualifying improvement and enter into a financing agreement with the local government. Costs incurred by the local government for such purpose may be collected as a non-ad valorem assessment. A non-ad valorem assessment shall be collected pursuant to s. 197.3632 and, notwithstanding s. 197.3632(8)(a), shall not be subject to discount for early payment. However, the notice and adoption requirements of s. 197.3632(4) do not apply if this section is used and complied with, and the intent resolution, publication of notice, and mailed notices to the property appraiser, tax collector, and Department of Revenue required by s. 197.3632(3)(a) may be provided on or before August 15 in conjunction with any non-ad valorem assessment authorized by this section, if the property appraiser, tax collector, and local government agree.
(5) Pursuant to this section or as otherwise provided by law or pursuant to a local government's home rule power, a local government may enter into a partnership with one or more local governments for the purpose of providing and financing qualifying improvements.
(6) A qualifying improvement program may be administered by a for-profit entity or a not-for-profit organization on behalf of and at the discretion of the local government.
(7) A local government may incur debt for the purpose of providing such improvements, payable from revenues received from the improved property, or any other available revenue source authorized by law.
(8) A local government may enter into a financing agreement only with the record owner of the affected property. Any financing agreement entered into pursuant to this section or a summary memorandum of such agreement shall be recorded in the public records of the county within which the property is located by the sponsoring unit of local government within 5 days after execution of the agreement. The recorded agreement shall provide constructive notice that the assessment to be levied on the property constitutes a lien of equal dignity to county taxes and assessments from the date of recordation.
(9) Before entering into a financing agreement, the local government shall reasonably determine that all property taxes and any other assessments levied on the same bill as property taxes are paid and have not been delinquent for the preceding 3 years or the property owner's period of ownership, whichever is less; that there are no involuntary liens, including, but not limited to, construction liens on the property; that no notices of default or other evidence of property-based debt delinquency have been recorded during the preceding 3 years or the property owner's period of ownership, whichever is less; and that the property owner is current on all mortgage debt on the property.
(10) A qualifying improvement shall be affixed to a building or facility that is part of the property and shall constitute an improvement to the building or facility or a fixture attached to the building or facility. An agreement between a local government and a qualifying property owner may not cover wind-resistance improvements in buildings or facilities under new construction or construction for which a certificate of occupancy or similar evidence of substantial completion of new construction or improvement has not been issued.
(11) Any work requiring a license under any applicable law to make a qualifying improvement shall be performed by a contractor properly certified or registered pursuant to part I or part II of chapter 489.
(12)
(a) Without the consent of the holders or loan servicers of any mortgage encumbering or otherwise secured by the property, the total amount of any non-ad valorem assessment for a property under this section may not exceed 20 percent of the just value of the property as determined by the county property appraiser.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a non-ad valorem assessment for a qualifying improvement defined in subparagraph (2)(b)1. or subparagraph (2)(b)2. that is supported by an energy audit is not subject to the limits in this subsection if the audit demonstrates that the annual energy savings from the qualified improvement equals or exceeds the annual repayment amount of the non-ad valorem assessment.
(13) At least 30 days before entering into a financing agreement, the property owner shall provide to the holders or loan servicers of any existing mortgages encumbering or otherwise secured by the property a notice of the owner's intent to enter into a financing agreement together with the maximum principal amount to be financed and the maximum annual assessment necessary to repay that amount. A verified copy or other proof of such notice shall be provided to the local government. A provision in any agreement between a mortgagee or other lienholder and a property owner, or otherwise now or hereafter binding upon a property owner, which allows for acceleration of payment of the mortgage, note, or lien or other unilateral modification solely as a result of entering into a financing agreement as provided for in this section is not enforceable. This subsection does not limit the authority of the holder or loan servicer to increase the required monthly escrow by an amount necessary to annually pay the qualifying improvement assessment.
(14) At or before the time a purchaser executes a contract for the sale and purchase of any property for which a non-ad valorem assessment has been levied under this section and has an unpaid balance due, the seller shall give the prospective purchaser a written disclosure statement in the following form, which shall be set forth in the contract or in a separate writing:
QUALIFYING IMPROVEMENTS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY, RENEWABLE ENERGY, OR WIND RESISTANCE.--The property being purchased is located within the jurisdiction of a local government that has placed an assessment on the property pursuant to s. 163.08, Florida Statutes. The assessment is for a qualifying improvement to the property relating to energy efficiency, renewable energy, or wind resistance, and is not based on the value of property. You are encouraged to contact the county property appraiser's office to learn more about this and other assessments that may be provided by law.
(15) A provision in any agreement between a local government and a public or private power or energy provider or other utility provider is not enforceable to limit or prohibit any local government from exercising its authority under this section.
(16) This section is additional and supplemental to county and municipal home rule authority and not in derogation of such authority or a limitation upon such authority.
Oh, and, no idea where those smiley face emoticons came from in the above statute. ???
Quote from: Ajax on February 10, 2012, 11:06:37 AM
I just heard about Florida Statute 163.08. Are any of you legal-types familiar with this? Could this be a partial solution?
Sounds like you can apply to have certain types of improvements made and have a voluntary lien filed against your property that would be similar to ad valorem taxes. If you're approved the money comes from the state or local government - I'm not sure of the funding mechanism. Should be easier than going through a private lender (theoretically).
Obviously I'm not a lawyer. :)
The whole problem here is the potential owner wants to replace the windows, and some folks are giving him hell about it. If he walks, the building will continue to sit empty and deteriorate and most likely be demolished eventually. He already wants to replace the windows, the problem isn't grant money or incentives, the problem the neighborhood's SPAR clown-car full of fools who'd rather see it be demolished than put up with historically inaccurate windows. It's ludicrous.
Quote from: ben says on February 10, 2012, 11:32:50 AM
Oh, and, no idea where those smiley face emoticons came from in the above statute. ???
I guess the program interprets an 8 followed by a closed parenthesis as an emoticon. 8 + ) = 8)
We're satisifed with recommendation of HPC to have the owner, a friend of Spar and Springfield, research the cost of new vs restored windows, then readdress the issue. We'll work with all parties to find a good solution. It's a great project and we look forward to Paul Davis Restoration opening in SPR.
Interested in Spar and historic Springfield? Sit in on our next Board meeting: 2/27/12 at 6pm. 1321 N. Main Street. 32206. And Like us on Facebook. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Springfield-Preservation-and-Revitalization-SPAR/307036889004 Thanks!
thank you for setting us straight on SPAR's poisition...some posters like to claim they know the whole stroy when they quite simply do not.
thanks...right back at you!
Quote from: stephendare on February 10, 2012, 02:40:35 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on February 10, 2012, 02:16:29 PM
thank you for setting us straight on SPAR's poisition...some posters like to claim they know the whole stroy when they quite simply do not.
TUFSU, how uncharacteristically self deprecating of you.
Its moments like this that remind us all that underneath all of the bluster and propaganda, you are usually a pretty standup guy.
LMAO, he just doesn't learn does he?
If Scott Baker is still head of Paul Davis Restoration then you are dealing with a good, smart person not some blowhardhead.
That always makes reaching a good solution easier.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on February 10, 2012, 11:09:30 PM
Quote from: stephendare on February 10, 2012, 02:40:35 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on February 10, 2012, 02:16:29 PM
thank you for setting us straight on SPAR's poisition...some posters like to claim they know the whole stroy when they quite simply do not.
TUFSU, how uncharacteristically self deprecating of you.
Its moments like this that remind us all that underneath all of the bluster and propaganda, you are usually a pretty standup guy.
LMAO, he just doesn't learn does he?
and right back at you too
;D
window replacement was approved at tonight's HPC meeting