7% battery life. Let's hope the iPad doesn't die too soon. I'll try my best to be as good as Ashley and her live blogs.
As the elevator door opened I heard a women yell " can you see if that door is open?!" she was pointing to the door across the room from where she was standing , holding another door ajar. The door was open. And like the rabbit from Alice in Wonderland she ran past me and hollard back "sometimes we get " she is the court recorder.
Meeting started. Upwards of 70 people in attendance. Crowd encouraged to speak loudly and to not be repetitive. The purpose of the meeting is only to assess the architectural compatibility of the proposed mellow mushroom.
Images are being shown of where mellow mushroom wants to be opened.
Comparing original plans to revised plans.
They are okay with not having an open store front as mellow mushroom proposed. Its not s historical sttribute. They understand the brick restaurant has the same open front. But somehow Brick's exception makes sense and mellow mushrooms does not.
"shaking head in annoyance." They are requesting that the sign be over the door not on the right hand side of the building above the windows. Why? Because it might create confusion as to the location of the enterence.
LMAO!
To clarify...I'm shaking my head in annoyance.
So, ultimately, mellow mushroom wants to create a more open space and they are wanting a more closed space.
3% battery life...we may not make it.
Quote from: TheCat on September 19, 2012, 06:38:35 PM
"shaking head in annoyance." They are requesting that the sign be over the door not on the right hand side of the building above the windows. Why? Because it might create confusion as to the location of the enterence.
imagine the lawsuits of broken noses and stubbed toes!
Quote from: TheCat on September 19, 2012, 06:38:35 PM
"shaking head in annoyance." They are requesting that the sign be over the door not on the right hand side of the building above the windows. Why? Because it might create confusion as to the locate of the enterence.
Don't even get me started on signage. I will have a meltdown, but believe me if there is ONE thing wrong with America it has to be the fact that every municipality has overzealous signage codes and a governing authority that goes wayyyy too far in exerting their amazing authority to enforce those codes. Some signage folks literally have as much power to shut down your operation as the flipping president of the US on executive order. It's amazing.
I only deal with numbers, but I have been on one too many calls for projects I work on from Boston (Back Bay where you have multiple authorities including preservation authorities to deal with), SF, NYC, Atlanta and Miami (oh and Chattanooga when I worked on a project there was THE WORST). I have literally had to leave the room because I couldn't bear to hear about the authority signage code enforcers have and the harassment they put private property/business owners through. Is your business's logo even allowed? Probably not. Change the font. Letters are too large...no wait we just changed code and now they are too small (of course after you spend $1,000/letter to have it changed). Your sign is half an inch off where it needs to be (which then of course requires an expense to unfasten, repair, and refasten). It's amazing. Signage code to the level of detail it too often is and even worse, the enforcement, is an abomination.
Seriously if the concern is for fellow man that he'll get too confused by the placement, walk 20 ft out of his way to find no door, and then take an extra 5 seconds to find the door...really? That's what the signage folks are worried about? No. They really don't have concern for fellow man, and they HATE private property owners. Signage code enforcement allows unemployable people to be employed and overpaid, and it inflates the legal industry! Just ask Bill Brinton :) Having all that code just means more litigation. Lots of boners in the room at all the power otherwise delinquent people are now allowed to have. They can't get laid so they get off on fucking people with code.
iPad dead. iPhone in action. Go team apple. I was t able to post the mm designers pleasantly stated "you guys are idiots" response.
Wla speaks "we want walls. Lots of walls. 6ft walls. Knee walls. Oh, and the bar should not look like a bar. It might trap children by look like community bar...something you might see at the Beach
A couple of people have spoken in support of mellow.
From the last couple of speakers:
*They have the potential to destabilize the neighborhood.
* there should not be an open store front ...only one door. There are children in our neighborhood.
* mojo has ruined our streets.
* the current speaker is complaining about parking on streets.
Stephen, I'm not sure.
They want to close up the porch area even more, "is there a way to mechanically exhaust the smoke?"
Quote from: TheCat on September 19, 2012, 07:27:47 PM
A couple of people have spoken in support of mellow.
From the last couple of speakers:
*They have the potential to destabilize the neighborhood.
* there should not be an open store front ...only one door. There are children in our neighborhood.
* mojo has ruined our streets.
* the current speaker is complaining about parking on streets.
Stephen, I'm not sure.
Sorry I couldn't make it tonight. Will try to be there the 27th. CAT if you want to speak for me I will gladly send you pictures of the parking mess on my street caused by RESIDENTS and not MOJOs. I can send pics of Boone Park, which is a mess due to city not keeping it up at times, of the 'fountain' by blue fish which has no water, of Dancy St by TransFit that no one had a problem with yets is packed with cars nightly.
The mm designer "I don't understand what is so wrong...we are not doing anything illegal and not selling cheap liquor."
Jhat, thAnks for the offer but cats only have nine lives...the Wla people are angry.
Post the images here though.
One person on the board " I hate to condition something that actually detracts from the aesthetic."
All done
What was the result?
What are the tweaks
I have been out of town and not up to speed on this. I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).
What a waste.
It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.
To who do we owe thanks for this move?
Quote from: KEGreene1 on September 19, 2012, 10:37:05 PM
What are the tweaks
Most of the discussion was around the open seating area facing Ingleside. HPC wanted to eliminate one of the openings facing Ingleside, but MM countered that state smoking-area regs required them. Solution was to require openable windows in that area instead of just big openings. Beside that it was just minor stuff like requiring them to build a new wall in the rear of the parking area in the event that the existing wall (on the adjacent property) ever comes down, and preferring brick or stucco on the building exterior instead of the stone MM spec'd.
Quote from: Timkin on September 19, 2012, 10:41:37 PM
I have been out of town and not up to speed on this. I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).
What a waste.
It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.
To who do we owe thanks for this move?
"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?
The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.
Quote from: Timkin on September 19, 2012, 10:41:37 PM
I have been out of town and not up to speed on this. I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).
What a waste.
It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.
To who do we owe thanks for this move?
Isn't demolished, but will be. Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation and the good people at We Love Avondale (But Hate Competition, And 60 Year Old Gas Station Buildings.)
That is just ABSURD. That building is nice. GENIUS !!
W T F ??????????
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 19, 2012, 10:45:41 PM
Quote from: Timkin on September 19, 2012, 10:41:37 PM
I have been out of town and not up to speed on this. I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).
What a waste.
It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.
To who do we owe thanks for this move?
"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?
The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.
I looked up "contributing structure" on the COJ website, and the definition is any building which was 50 years old when the term was coined, which I think was like '94. So anything that pre-dates 1944 or something like that. The Gas Station building was built in '64, and so it isn't a "contributing structure" by Jax statute.
Wow :(
That building could make an amazing restaurant.
What a POS statute.
* shakes head :(
Quote from: Pinky on September 19, 2012, 10:51:31 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 19, 2012, 10:45:41 PM
Quote from: Timkin on September 19, 2012, 10:41:37 PM
I have been out of town and not up to speed on this. I understand the Gas station is now being demolished. ( or may have already been).
What a waste.
It had really nice looking Hardwood ceilings in it. Would have made an excellent conversion.
To who do we owe thanks for this move?
"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?
The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
The gas station stands for now 9/19/2012.
I looked up "contributing structure" on the COJ website, and the definition is any building which was 50 years old when the term was coined, which I think was like '94. So anything that pre-dates 1944 or something like that. The Gas Station building was built in '64, and so it isn't a "contributing structure" by Jax statute.
RAP is a BULLY plain and simple back in 2005 here is what they said about the Riviera Parkway Apartments. "The existing Riviera Parkway buildings have been renovated and altered sufficiently in the past that they are not worth preserving as historical structures, Grissett said."
"They're non-contributing structures because of the changes they've made [over the years]," she said. "And Grissett went on to say "Grissett said Midland officials came to RAP to get the community's input before completing their plans.
"Of all the developers I've ever worked with, I'd rather work with them," Grissett said. "They're not used car salesmen." Here is the website I would this info on. http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2005/06/20/daily20.html?jst=b_ln_hl
QuoteIsn't demolished, but will be. Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation
Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
Quote from: mtraininjax on September 20, 2012, 03:17:02 AM
QuoteIsn't demolished, but will be. Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation
Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
Yep, when RAP was more concerned about preservation rather than use, lots of good was done. That was the past, what about today?
So it is all MM's fault the gas station is going to be torn down? Of course that forgets that MM's original and best proposal used the gas station, re-purposed it for a new and better use today. Preserving, I might add, a style of building that could be as historically contributing as anything else in Riverside/ Avondale. The gas station is being demolished not by MM"s choice, but because of the interference of RAP and WLA, folks you seem to support.
Quote from: mtraininjax on September 20, 2012, 03:17:02 AM
QuoteIsn't demolished, but will be. Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation
Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
"What happened to the original plan to save a historic building? Isn’t RAP supposed to preserve buildings?
The former gas station building is not a contributing historic structure to our district. According to the City of Jacksonville’s Historic preservation staff, the 1924 Sanborn map shows a commercial building with two storefronts of approximately the same size as the adjacent ‘town/Emly Benham building. A service station first appeared on this site in 1951, and the existing building was constructed in 1964. Non-contributing buildings are not under the protection of the Historic Commission." This came from the RAP website.
Quote from: mtraininjax on September 20, 2012, 03:17:02 AM
QuoteIsn't demolished, but will be. Thanks to the preservation minded folks at Riverside Avondale Preservation
Hold the phone, RAP has restricted a number of people from tearing down "contributing structures" over the years. I do not always agree with their tactics, but they do our community A LOT of good. When the attorney who owned the Christmas Cottage on Stockton, between Oak and Riverside, wanted to tear it down and build condos, RAP stopped it, as it was a contributing structure. Many of the mansions along Riverside are gone because they were torn down with nary a whiff of regulation before RAP was created. Before you throw RAP into the crapper, drive up and down Riverside and Avondale and look at all the properties that look, "out of place" and pickup Dr. Wood's book and review what we have lost, and could still have!
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
I guess we know where you stand, LoL. Talk about minority opinion on this topic on this site.
Quote from: Pinky on September 19, 2012, 10:44:23 PM
Quote from: KEGreene1 on September 19, 2012, 10:37:05 PM
What are the tweaks
Most of the discussion was around the open seating area facing Ingleside. HPC wanted to eliminate one of the openings facing Ingleside, but MM countered that state smoking-area regs required them. Solution was to require openable windows in that area instead of just big openings. Beside that it was just minor stuff like requiring them to build a new wall in the rear of the parking area in the event that the existing wall (on the adjacent property) ever comes down, and preferring brick or stucco on the building exterior instead of the stone MM spec'd.
We all know what this means. RAP has forced MM to build a bland stucco or bland modern brick structure that does not fit in whatsoever.
Also the whole bit about FL smoking regulations and having openable windows...talk about a state that is really far behind the times on smoking laws. Either it's an 18 & up establishment in jurisdictions elsewhere that still allow smoking in certain places (I remember being carded my freshman year in college at a restaurant because it allowed smoking on its deck) or smoking is banned plain and simple. I guess in FL all you need is to be able to open the windows and you can smoke? Eww
^ The garage allows smoking in their front bar, but the walls are completely comprised of windows that are continuously left open during operating hours. I don't love that smoking is allowed in there, but with the circulation it isn't that bad. I don't know how many people will actually smoke at MM, but open windows will make the space better either way.
I agree with Simms in regard to Stucco and Brick vs Stone. What is historic or architectually significant about Stucco? I think it is boring and bland and it stinks of a southside strip mall. Stone with some nice detailwork on the crown and around doors would have been a great way to improve the strip. This just shows another way that the city is trying to make MM fail, but in the end it is still going to do well despite looking like crap.
Wow, did Mellow Mushroom change their menu and start selling ambiance by the stucco or brick? I don't care if its a food truck, if its good, I'll take a bite of it. Forget the ambiance, just get the damned thing open!
QuoteAlso the whole bit about FL smoking regulations and having openable windows...talk about a state that is really far behind the times on smoking laws. Either it's an 18 & up establishment in jurisdictions elsewhere that still allow smoking in certain places (I remember being carded my freshman year in college at a restaurant because it allowed smoking on its deck) or smoking is banned plain and simple. I guess in FL all you need is to be able to open the windows and you can smoke? Eww
We all know about the Utopia that resides in Atlanta, GA. Stop reminding us. 8)
Quote from: mtraininjax on September 20, 2012, 03:17:02 AM
<SNIP>
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
I can't figure out if you're being serious, like, you actually believe the batshitcrazy things you write, or if you're goofing around...? Is it like a Borat-kinda-thing, theater of the absurd, like satire or something?? Because really, no reasonable person could ever manage the level of cognitive dissonance associated with statements like this. I mean, this isn't a difference of subjective opinion, this is a willful disregard of clearly established fact and in its place a total substitution of complete and utter falsehoods. It's bizarre.
Mellow Mushrooms original plan was to reuse the existing gas station building. They filed site plans to begin that process, and your pals at WLA objected and obstructed, forcing Mellow to tear down that building and build a new structure. The pending demolition of the gas station is 100% WLA and RAP's doing.
See I wish this could be stopped. The Gas station needs a facelift. its not a dump. Very Structurally sound and could be an amazing space for a restaurant.
A similar Gas Station was converted to an Al's Pizza at the Beaches, and that place WAS a dump when they started on it.
It may be too late,but WLA and RAP are forcing the demolition of a structure that DOES NOT NEED TO GO!!
This is not on John , M-train. and I'm not picking a fight here but you have stated it is a dump.
If this decision can be reversed, I think it should be. That old Shell station is cool, especially the ceilings of it.
Control freaks trying to muzzle competition out of a neighborhood. How Mayberry! ;)
Quote from: Pinky on September 20, 2012, 02:35:18 PM
Quote from: mtraininjax on September 20, 2012, 03:17:02 AM
<SNIP>
RAP does a lot of good in our community, and nothing is torn down yet, if John wants to tear down the gas station, that is on HIM, to do so. His local franchise owns the gas station, its his choice. No one is forcing him to tear down the gas station, again free will here folks!
I can't figure out if you're being serious, like, you actually believe the batshitcrazy things you write, or if you're goofing around...? Is it like a Borat-kinda-thing, theater of the absurd, like satire or something?? Because really, no reasonable person could ever manage the level of cognitive dissonance associated with statements like this. I mean, this isn't a difference of subjective opinion, this is a willful disregard of clearly established fact and in its place a total substitution of complete and utter falsehoods. It's bizarre.
Ahhhhh, just check the 3AM time-stamp Pinky.... sounds like the scotch talking. Mmmmmmm, Scotch.