Historic Bostwick Building Demolition Meeting Tonight
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-2636-p1040966.JPG)
After letting their property fall apart for decades, the owners of the historic Bostwick Building are urging the City Council to allow them to demolish the structure. For those interested in not seeing another vacant weed downtown lot, the City Council's Land Use and Zoning Committee will be having a public hearing on this topic tonight.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-jan-historic-bostwick-building-demolition-meeting-tonight
Good article. The bottom line is, do we protect our historic structures or do we not? The experts in the city have determined this is a building worth saving. It is up to the city council to agree.
If this building is allowed to come down......I have no words.
Maybe we should just raze every building pre 1970 and just cross our fingers and hope someday someone will build something on the weed infested, littered empty lot.
The City Council can show their true colors with this decision.
It should have been placed under historic protection long ago. I thought that is why we had a historic department within the city. I'm not sure what is it called. All of the historic buildings in Duval county should be protected, not just downtown, or just Springfield. Much of the blight is caused by allowing these great buildings to be demolished, or demolished by neglect.
If the property is only worth 76K, 150K is more than fair. The owners are being unreasonable, and should have sold 10 years ago when the market was high, and the building in much better shape.
Waiting until the very last minute to try to save a building takes a great deal of effort. Maybe this is one that could be mothballed.
Quote from: mbwright on January 15, 2013, 08:37:46 AM
It should have been placed under historic protection long ago. I thought that is why we had a historic department within the city. I'm not sure what is it called. All of the historic buildings in Duval county should be protected, not just downtown, or just Springfield. Much of the blight is caused by allowing these great buildings to be demolished, or demolished by neglect.
If the property is only worth 76K, 150K is more than fair. The owners are being unreasonable, and should have sold 10 years ago when the market was high, and the building in much better shape.
Waiting until the very last minute to try to save a building takes a great deal of effort. Maybe this is one that could be mothballed.
It is very frustrating, indeed!
FWIW, the historic planning department lead by Joel McEachin, is working very hard to save the Bostwick building. They are the ones, on behalf of the Historic Planning Commission, who are pushing for landmark status.
IMO the bottom line is...the bottom line. Money. I realize this building has great historical value but equating that value to how much should be spent to preserve it is very difficult. I try to put myself in the shoes of the owners and think about it as if the restoration money was coming out of my pocket. I know they have turned down offers from potential buyers but again it's hard for me to know what I would do in their place.
mbrwright, you have an interesting point. Perhaps, there should be additional measures placed to preserve the urban core's remaining building fabric. For example, should the rest of what's left of historic LaVilla, the historic heart of the Northbank and some neighborhoods like Brentwood and Durkeeville be designated as official historic districts? I guess those are questions we can work on resolving after making sure the Bostwick isn't mowed down.
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on January 15, 2013, 08:50:50 AM
IMO the bottom line is...the bottom line. Money. I realize this building has great historical value but equating that value to how much should be spent to preserve it is very difficult. I try to put myself in the shoes of the owners and think about it as if the restoration money was coming out of my pocket. I know they have turned down offers from potential buyers but again it's hard for me to know what I would do in their place.
I'd say money is an important part of it but the core issue seems to be greed mixed with stubbornness, resulting from a maintenance/code enforcement situation that should have been addressed, one way or the other, decades ago. I've also tried to put myself in the owner's shoes and at the end of the day, I'd take a $150,000 bail out as opposed to paying $40k to demolish and be left with a small plot of land worth half that. If they can't afford to refurbish it, they sure can't afford or will look to build something up from the ground. The historical elements of that building are the most valuable thing on that site and that's what they value less.
I think we should have a demolition fee in the core. I would love for it to be $50,000, but anything that would make somebody think twice before knocking something down would be great. Why hasn't code enforcement been fining them out the wazoo for letting this property fall into such disrepair?
Quote from: thelakelander on January 15, 2013, 09:00:19 AM
mbrwright, you have an interesting point. Perhaps, there should be additional measures placed to preserve the urban core's remaining building fabric. For example, should the rest of what's left of historic LaVilla, the historic heart of the Northbank and some neighborhoods like Brentwood and Durkeeville be designated as official historic districts? I guess those are questions we can work on resolving after making sure the Bostwick isn't mowed down.
Durkeeville YES...Brentwood No.
Excellent article Ennis.
The building needs to be preserved, period.
As mbwright said, the city should be mothballing.
They should be stepping in an being proactive when dealing with derelict owners.
Code has the funds to do so.
Unfortunate that there is a buyer who is denied the sale.
Ignorance and greed seem to be blinding the owners.
Preservation SOS sent an email to LUZ (addresses of council folks above) yesterday in support of landmark status and preserving the structure.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on January 15, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
I think we should have a demolition fee in the core. I would love for it to be $50,000, but anything that would make somebody think twice before knocking something down would be great. Why hasn't code enforcement been fining them out the wazoo for letting this property fall into such disrepair?
This is the part I keep thinking about. Why do property owners sit and let the buildings fall into despair instead fixing them as needed? Im sure they wont let their home fall into despair. Why own a building and you can afford the up keep?
Quote from: Coolyfett on January 15, 2013, 10:48:54 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 15, 2013, 09:00:19 AM
mbrwright, you have an interesting point. Perhaps, there should be additional measures placed to preserve the urban core's remaining building fabric. For example, should the rest of what's left of historic LaVilla, the historic heart of the Northbank and some neighborhoods like Brentwood and Durkeeville be designated as official historic districts? I guess those are questions we can work on resolving after making sure the Bostwick isn't mowed down.
Durkeeville YES...Brentwood No.
Why? Brentwood has a great collection of historic architecture and is just as significant to the city's history as the more popular neighborhoods.
Brentwood is awesome. Great structures tucked in and around the area.
I just got word that the Bostwick's have requested deferral of tonight's agenda items. It will be up to the LUZ to grant this deferral, but there is a strong chance that any action will be deferred until the next meeting (February 5th). There will still be a public hearing at tonight's meeting regardless of whether action is taken.
Boyer and Jones are the only decent ones that I know of in the group. Don't know enough about Carter. But Redman, Gulliford and Shellenberg are some of our most anti urban council members we have! Not very optimistic about this I'm afraid.
I am glad to see that the Historic department is working on issues like this. I don't think that was how it has been historically.
One concern I have is how Historic Districts are defined, and enforced. Springfield is Historic, but demos, until recently were encouraged and fast tracked, often without any comment, or consideration of the whole neighborhood. It's great that Preservation SOS and others are working to change this. There is a fine line between keeping a neighborhood in check, and trampling property rights. I do feel that if you do have a historic property, you really have an obligation to maintain it, and not butcher it. Restoration and integrity are key. I grew up in a historic neighborhood, but it seems each is defined differently, and each designation (Historic, Landmark, etc) means different things, often significant. Just because it is 'historic' does not mean demo is not legal. I think there needs to be some sort of standard, at least within a city, or area.
I'm against designating historic districts wholesale as it seems to create fantasylands where not only buildings can't be changed, the neighborhood perceived historical character can't change either. I'll never understand the appeal or rationale behind forcing new construction (that doesn't involve demolition) having to fit some predetermined architectural style. Form-based zoning is one thing, but to me a 2005 building designed to look like it's from 1925 is just as artificial and unappealing whether it's built in a historic district or exurb.
I uderstand that the owners feel they have an albatross around their neck. Howevr, they have an offerTake the damn money and run.
Let the building have new llife.
^^ Yes. $150,000 might be "pennies on the dollar", however they'll be done with the building and it will be Preston Haskell's headache.
Then, maybe, this building from the past can have a future.
Let's see. They want $350,000 for the building and land. The land is appraised at less than $80,000.....and they want to tear the building down? Kinked thinking!
Sell the building to Haskell, people!
Oh damn! Has I-10 East weighed in on this? Which way will it go? MJ is trashing Jacksonville because some of it's readers want to save a very historic building? OR? MJ is trashing Jacksonville because some of it's readers wish to leave the fate of the building to the owners?
^^ ROTFLMAO!! :D
If they want to hear from the public, I say, let's give them the opportunity.
Quote from: Dog Walker on January 15, 2013, 03:57:31 PM
The land is appraised at less than $80,000
well that's a steal given the prominent corner the property is on
Not once you realize how small the lot size is and all the challenges you must overcome to put a brand new building on it. The Bostwicks should take Haskell's money and run.
The owners keep saying that saving the building is not economically feasible.
I would argue that it depends entirely on your personal economics. Read: Haskell.
Quote from: stephendare on January 15, 2013, 05:51:53 PM
Preston is up. Stately, elegant, genteel.
He has inspected the building with the chief engineer of the Haskel Corporation, he is detailing exactly how he would restore and support the building 'If I had the opportunity to rescue the building".
You can tell that every single member of the Committee is paying attention.
He forgot to say his address?
Quote from: stephendare on January 15, 2013, 05:47:41 PM
Jessie Ray Norton
"mustve been a hell of building at one time, from all the fuss thats made about it."
"What this city needs is jobs. Demolishing the building would create jobs."
I think that if we pass the resolution to destroy this building, think about the jobs that its going to create"
Wow. Just wow. I'd be too embarrassed to answer this truthfully.
Quote from: Josh on January 15, 2013, 05:59:52 PM
Quote from: stephendare on January 15, 2013, 05:47:41 PM
Jessie Ray Norton
"mustve been a hell of building at one time, from all the fuss thats made about it."
"What this city needs is jobs. Demolishing the building would create jobs."
I think that if we pass the resolution to destroy this building, think about the jobs that its going to create"
Wow. Just wow. I'd be too embarrassed to answer this truthfully.
Are you suggesting that demolishing buildings isn't a good long term jobs program?!
This must be in some kind of Tea Party manual for public comments (fill in the blanks):
Quote from: stephendare on January 15, 2013, 05:47:41 PM
Jessie Ray Norton
"What this city needs is jobs. ________________ would create jobs."
I think that if we pass the resolution to _________________, think about the jobs that its going to create"
Surely they can be a little more creative?
FWIW: Lori Boyer actually told Stephen to behave himself.
Luckily for Stephen, the lawyer and friends unwittingly supported his assertion that the city was being "held hostage".
Stephen's words were strong -- he pointed to a history of neglect of our historic structures by owners and by the city. Schellenburg took offense at the "held hostage" comment, but what else is it?
Of course, Stephen just smiled.
Do we need a "reprieve from the Governor"? Sell the damn building! Give others the chance to make it a viable place again
Did sh also give him a slap on the wrist??? Shame Stephen, shame! Only the coucil is allowed to show their ass! LOL
Stephen, speak up/speak out! In the words of others...This Place Matters.
that was meant as a hats off to you, She Clown!
much love Big Cheese!
Favorite line from the evening (one of the Bostwick supporters) "What's all the fuss?"
Quote from: bornnative on January 15, 2013, 05:44:18 PM
The owners keep saying that saving the building is not economically feasible.
I would argue that it depends entirely on your personal economics. Read: Haskell.
What's not economically feasible about getting $150k in cash to disappear?
Okay, back to the admonishment by Lori Boyer.
Please don't hate me, but I just couldn't help myself:
HOW DARE YOU, STEPHEN!!! lol
and... thanks She Clown. I will keep in touch
I loved hearing Preston Haskell explain, in great detail, how he would fix up the building.
I arrived from work just after the last speaker and missed it all, darn it. Sounds like all the points in favor of preservation were covered.
Quote from: BIG CHEESE 723 on January 15, 2013, 06:34:52 PM
Did sh also give him a slap on the wrist??? Shame Stephen, shame! Only the coucil is allowed to show their ass! LOL
Stephen, speak up/speak out! In the words of others...This Place Matters.
OMG don't encourage him, he'll show up as Aunt Jemima! ;)
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on January 15, 2013, 10:34:50 PM
I arrived from work just after the last speaker and missed it all, darn it. Sounds like all the points in favor of preservation were covered.
Yes!!! But you showed up just the same -- breathless as you ran from work. I'm sure February's meeting will run longer.
Thanks for the live feed. It was informative. I also liked the dscriptions of the participants. It added a bit of color to them. Humanized them. Up 'til now they were simply names. Stephen, good job!
It'll still be important to have a lot of people there on Feb 5th. This is precedent setting, and a large presence will be needed - if an arrangement isn't agreed upon prior to.
I will do my best to be there!!
Quote from: stephendare on January 15, 2013, 06:51:22 PM
Quote from: sheclown on January 15, 2013, 06:30:00 PM
FWIW: Lori Boyer actually told Stephen to behave himself.
Luckily for Stephen, the lawyer and friends unwittingly supported his assertion that the city was being "held hostage".
Stephen's words were strong -- he pointed to a history of neglect of our historic structures by owners and by the city. Schellenburg took offense at the "held hostage" comment, but what else is it?
Of course, Stephen just smiled.
lol.
She did! But like a few others, she has so much of my respect and genuine affection that I certainly didnt mind the chide. Lori Boyer has the intelligence and enough taste to be as informal as she likes with me.
After the meeting I realized that I have spent time with Karl Carter Bostwick. He's a genuinely likable fellow, I just think that he is taking a little cynical advice on how to proceed forward on the sale of this property.
To me the standout speakers tonight were Jennifer Hewitt Apperson, Preston Haskell and Carmen Godwin on the historic preservation side, and both Carl and Val Bostwick on the demolition side.
Stephen -- I'm a little confused . . . what exactly are the Bostwick's appealing? Are they saying that the building should not be a historical landmark, or that they should be able to demo the building, or both?
Both. They don't want landmark status because that adds a layer of protection. And thanks to short sighted COJ daily fines, they want to demolish. Silly. Sell it to Preston Haskell.
February 5th is Tuesday. LUZ should take action.
The hearing for the Bostwick Building has been deferred to Feb. 20th.
Thanks for letting everyone know. I was planning to attend. What I do need to find out is where is a safe place to park? That is my only obstacle. I am a a bit unsure of being down there after dark.
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on January 18, 2013, 06:35:48 PM
Both. They don't want landmark status because that adds a layer of protection. And thanks to short sighted COJ daily fines, they want to demolish. Silly. Sell it to Preston Haskell.
The City commonly fines DT buildings when they want action; most of the time they agree to waive most or all in conjunction with a sale that includes rehab.
Crap! I missed it? Was thinking the postponed meeting was tomorrow. ): What happened? Anything good happen?
Bostwick before the LUZ has been deferred twice. Apparently it will be heard next Tuesday night.
Political and Financial maneuvering.
Ben- JCCI, we need to kayak Downtown before 2025
Hoping preservationists will lose track and miss the meeting. Be there if you can and surprise them. :-)
Any update on this?
I believe it keeps getting deferred at the owner's request.
Until it becomes one of those "city emergencies" ?
Wondering if that offer to buy is still on the table?
Guess one can't force an owner to sell.
Being heard tomorrow night
Thanks sheclown! You beat me to it :)
Not all can attend (especially at the last minute like this); however, all can email in support to LUZ for Bostwick. Please take a moment this morning to do so
"Lori Boyer" <LBoyer@coj.net>,"Matthew Schellenberg" <MattS@coj.net>, "Doyle Carter" <DoyleC@coj.net>,"William Gulliford" <Gulliford@coj.net>, "Warren Jones" <WAJones@coj.net>, "Denise Lee" <EDLee@coj.net>, "Don Redman" <Redman@coj.net>
Quote from: sheclown on April 16, 2013, 08:45:48 AM
Not all can attend (especially at the last minute like this); however, all can email in support to LUZ for Bostwick. Please take a moment this morning to do so
"Lori Boyer" <LBoyer@coj.net>,"Matthew Schellenberg" <MattS@coj.net>, "Doyle Carter" <DoyleC@coj.net>,"William Gulliford" <Gulliford@coj.net>, "Warren Jones" <WAJones@coj.net>, "Denise Lee" <EDLee@coj.net>, "Don Redman" <Redman@coj.net>
And be sure to focus on the issues at hand: building exceeds criteria for landmark status, owners have created a self-imposed hardship, demolition by neglect should not be rewarded with a demolition permit, Code Enforcement has been trying to work with the owners to bring the building into compliance since 2005. "Substantial competent evidence" is going to be key.
Quote from: riverside planner on April 16, 2013, 08:58:37 AM
Quote from: sheclown on April 16, 2013, 08:45:48 AM
Not all can attend (especially at the last minute like this); however, all can email in support to LUZ for Bostwick. Please take a moment this morning to do so
"Lori Boyer" <LBoyer@coj.net>,"Matthew Schellenberg" <MattS@coj.net>, "Doyle Carter" <DoyleC@coj.net>,"William Gulliford" <Gulliford@coj.net>, "Warren Jones" <WAJones@coj.net>, "Denise Lee" <EDLee@coj.net>, "Don Redman" <Redman@coj.net>
And be sure to focus on the issues at hand: building exceeds criteria for landmark status, owners have created a self-imposed hardship, demolition by neglect should not be rewarded with a demolition permit, Code Enforcement has been trying to work with the owners to bring the building into compliance since 2005. "Substantial competent evidence" is going to be key.
Even further than the above (+1 for all that), CM also have been giving credence to the argument that there remain legitimate offers on the table and competent qualified buyers remain interested. From the LUZ & CC perspective, this needs to not just be a "preservationist vs. owner" argument, it is and needs to remain a commercial argument as well. There are qualified buyers that are willing to engage with the Bostwicks to purchase the building and save/reuse it, and these potential buyers (at least two that I know of) are well aware of the costs and intricacies of doing so.
So the owners don't want the building designated as an historical landmark in 2013, but they touted it as "the most visible Historic Landmark Building" in the heart of Downtown Jacksonville" just 4 years ago??
I'd be happy to post a copy of the sales flyer from 2009, but I'm not quite smart enough to figure out how to upload images or attachments :-[
send it to edavis@metrojacksonville.com and I'll upload it for you.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Other/mi/i-dVc892q/0/XL/101%20E%20%20Bay%20Street%202009%20for%20sale-XL.jpg)
It might be helpful to have copies of this flyer to give out to members of council at this afternoons meeting as to show proof that the building owners themselves consider the building to be "Historic". It really does make an important statement as to changing rhetoric to meet changing agenda's regarding this structure.
Where has the city's preservation office come down on all of this? Are they attending meetings?
Boom.
Also, the listing is still up on Coldwell's site :D
http://www.cbcworldwide.com/media/listing-fs/8/1/2/1416812_2.pdf
Interesting, so when the building was expanded it must have narrowed the street there?
^No. One of the bays from the building next door was removed for the bank's expansion.
Some more historic photos . . .
(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/bostwick2-1_zpsae459162.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/bostwick2-1_zpsae459162.jpg.html)
(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/bostwick3_zps5e467dd5.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/bostwick3_zps5e467dd5.jpg.html)(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/bostwick1-1_zps8a20d285.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/bostwick1-1_zps8a20d285.jpg.html)(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/bostwick4-1_zpsa0c38fc9.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/bostwick4-1_zpsa0c38fc9.jpg.html)
And here's what it COULD be!!(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/BostwickBuildingPowersDesign1copy_zpsd4e59616.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/BostwickBuildingPowersDesign1copy_zpsd4e59616.jpg.html)
This is deferred again
Are they going to defer it for ever in hopes that it Will just go away?
Just saw asomething on facebook about the building being under contract? anybody know anything? The Bostwicks have agreed to sell to someone interested in restoring the building.
Quote from: GatorNation on April 16, 2013, 04:25:44 PM
And here's what it COULD be!!(http://i1365.photobucket.com/albums/r756/JaxGatorNation/BostwickBuildingPowersDesign1copy_zpsd4e59616.jpg) (http://s1365.photobucket.com/user/JaxGatorNation/media/BostwickBuildingPowersDesign1copy_zpsd4e59616.jpg.html)
That looks familiar. I know the guy who took the pictures and created the graphic..... ;)
From today's Daily Record.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=539336
It will be awesome if that works out.
A little more info from Jax Business Journal... Potentially restored for retail use? Interesting....
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/04/26/bostwick-building-under-contract-for.html
I really do not want to get to excited about this, because the buyer still has a due diligence report to complete. Would be a cool location for a CVS or Walgreens, urban style of course.
Don't you just love what Val Bostwick said? "A preliminary inquiry suggests the cost of stabilizing and restoring the structure would likely exceed the value of the finished product," Val Bostwick said in September. "That's the situation we're faced with, the situation anyone buying the building is faced with."
Like the building just happened to be that way, and the Bostwicks, who have owned the building for 100+ years, had absolutely nothing to do with the building's deterioration. They just woke up one morning, the building was fine the day before, and suddenly it had no roof and structural issues. Just sayin...
Hoping this is good news for this historic building.
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on April 26, 2013, 12:36:15 PM
Don't you just love what Val Bostwick said? "A preliminary inquiry suggests the cost of stabilizing and restoring the structure would likely exceed the value of the finished product," Val Bostwick said in September. "That's the situation we're faced with, the situation anyone buying the building is faced with."
Like the building just happened to be that way, and the Bostwicks, who have owned the building for 100+ years, had absolutely nothing to do with the building's deterioration. They just woke up one morning, the building was fine the day before, and suddenly it had no roof and structural issues. Just sayin...
Hoping this is good news for this historic building.
+10000 Ive been saying that all along. They are the reason the building is falling apart, and act they have nothing to do with it and want the city to feel sorry for them. NOT!
If you left your car windows down, and let it run out of oil, it would not be the manufacturer's fault if it broke down, or got mildew. The Bosticks are the sole reason this building is in the condition it is in. There might be additional factors, but this did not happen over night, as a surprise.
Big Huge THANK YOU to the historic planning department.
Joel, Lisa and the crew. You guys did it!!!
You made it possible for alternatives to demolition to be found.
Yes, absolutely. Duval Dude, the building needs to be preserved. And thank goodness for this news. I was merely commenting on the irony of Val Bostwick's comment.
Ovinte partners want to buy the Bostwick Building for restaurant development
The Bostwick Building, located at Bay and Ocean streets Downtown.
Tuesday, May 7, 6:47 PM EDT
by David Chapman, Staff Writer
Jacques Klempf, Chad Munsey and Fraser Burns, partners in the Ovinte wine, cocktails and tapas lounge at the St. Johns Town Center, have been identified as the purchasing group under contract for the Bostwick Building.
Building representative Karl Bostwick announced Friday the historic building Downtown at Bay and Ocean streets was under contract, but did not identify the potential buyer. The Bostwick family has owned the building since 1902.
It has been closed and vacant for some time and faced demolition.
The partners attended the City Council Land Use & Zoning Committee on Tuesday. Klempf and GrayRobinson attorney Terry Moore spoke at the public hearing on two pieces of legislation.
Klempf said the group was "aggressively moving forward" in addressing its side of contract-related conditions and has engaged an architect and other professionals to assess the building.
The due diligence portion of the contract ends June 14. The committee continued the legislative issues until June.
The buyers said they haven't developed a concept for the building, other than it will be restaurant.
"We just think it's a great venue and it just has great access, visibility and we feel like we can put a concept there that will really be great for the city," Klempf said.
Munsey said the concept will not be the same concept as Ovinte.
"We're going to restore the building … and put what I think is going to be the nicest restaurant in the city," Klempf said.
He said the group wanted to restore the building to its natural façade. Burns said the partners wanted to "do something really special."
"Whether or not that's 50 seats or 150 seats, we have no idea. We won't know until we really get in there," Burns said.
The group declined to discuss financials of the contract.
Val Bostwick, Johnson Enterprises Inc. senior sales associate, who has handled the building's marketing, also declined comment.
Klempf said the largest hurdle would be the due diligence period.
Moore told the committee the group has hired an architect and structural engineer to assess the building and will hire a water intrusion specialist.
"We need some time to assess this building," Moore told the committee.
Klempf said after the meeting that a lawsuit filed on behalf of a Bostwick Building neighbor regarding water damage intrusion must be addressed by the Bostwicks before the deal is complete.
Known as the "jaguar building" for its window murals, Klempf said the features will not be a part of the building under its ownership. He said the Bostwicks will take them.
dchapman@baileypub.com
The new owner spoke tonight at the LUZ workshop meeting. He was asking for a bit more time (2 weeks) -- to do what I'm not really sure. He has negotiated with the city for the rolling fines, has hired Elkins construction and the company is working on a detailed time line. The owner has anticipated 18 months for completion, but hopes it will be done sooner. CM Redman asked about the corner issue and the owner politely told him that his contractor is aware of the problem.
Other than Redman, the LUZ wanted to kiss him.
Appeal of demolition of structure and landmark status will finally be heard tomorrow, Tuesday November 19th at LUZ.
Does that mean it's back on the chopping block to get torn down??
Quote from: Doctor_K on November 18, 2013, 12:56:26 PM
Does that mean it's back on the chopping block to get torn down??
Yes.
Here's the article from the jaxbizjournal concerning tomorrow night's meeting on the Bostwick's fate.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/11/18/bostwick-buildings-fate-to-be.html
They need to deny this permit and not set a precedent that we will accept demolition by neglect.
Need a good turnout at the LUZ meeting tomorrow night in opposition to demolition.
Can't make it tomorrow. Won't the Bostwick's have to deal with the water intrusion suit either way, so why not settle it and get the restoration under way?
DIA Board meeting is the next day at 5 pm. The Bostwick guys did get added to the OED list that was voted away by DIA. Should be an interesting meeting.
I'm confused. I thought there was a serious offer to buy the building pending law suit settlement. Granted it did lapse, but from the articles I read it seemed like Klempf was still open to it. But then I see someone on Facebook claim that they haven't had any serious buyers?
LUZ on right now.
Oh boy this should be interesting. Wish I was a fly on the wall there listening.
Jim Bailey sticks around to work on 11th hour Bostwick deal
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/11/19/movement-on-the-bostwick-building-but.html
If someone could live blog or recap tonight's meeting that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. :)
Bostwick was first on the agenda, but immediately got pushed to last on the schedule. There are now 30 hearings preceding. We are currently on 9. Look forward to a loooong night at council chambers.
7:00PM - Lori Boyer begins 2012-720, the landmark designation of the Bostwick building. Expartee disclosure by the LUZ board.
Mr Bostwick begins his 15 minute objection against the landmark designation.
In summary - "My family is influential, and my children deserve their right to an empty lot downtown"
Bostwick family lawyer - "What you are effectively doing to my client is taking his property away from him"
"The Bostwick family has always believed that historic designation limits the property owner's ability to renovate a property" - Bostwick
Bill Bishop "If this building has been in your family for as long as it has, why has it been allowed to deteriorate to the point it has?"
Bostwick "When we purchased it in 1996, it was condemned and in its current state"
"I believe that the real property owner's rights exceed those of the Historic Preservation Commission" - Bostwick
"So you're suggesting that we change our laws to accommodate you?" Lori Boyer
Thanks for live bloging this joshuataylor.
Quote from: joshuataylor on November 19, 2013, 07:44:13 PM
"So you're suggesting that we change our laws to accommodate you?" Lori Boyer
Its hard for me not to get upset when pinheaded nimwits in power make statements like this.
"The city has found, via Historic Preservation inspector, that the building meets 6 of the 7 requirements for Historic Designation" Jason Teal
Quote from: FSBA on November 19, 2013, 07:50:21 PM
Quote from: joshuataylor on November 19, 2013, 07:44:13 PM
"So you're suggesting that we change our laws to accommodate you?" Lori Boyer
Its hard for me not to get upset when pinheaded nimwits in power make statements like this.
The sentiment is mutual, I'm sure
Speaker cards have begun. Wayne Wood is the first speaker.
"Back in the 70's, I spoke with the Bostwick family about securing and salvaging the building, and they denied. I tried again in the 80's, and was denied again." Wayne Wood
Emily Lisska is next to the podium.
Stephen Dare has just joined myself, Ashley from the Daily Record, and Daniel Austin in the peanut gallery section of the council audience.
Terry Lorrince is next to take the podium.
"This one block of downtown is the most important block of historic architecture that we have in the downtown district" - Terry Lorrince
Josh, thanks for live blogging this for those of us who could not make the meeting in person. Referring to the Bostwick's purchasing the property in 1996, are they saying they've put zero dollars into the building in the last 17 years?
Gloria Duvall is next to take the podium.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2013, 08:07:49 PM
Josh, thanks for live blogging this for those of us who could not make the meeting in person. Referring to the Bostwick's purchasing the property in 1996, are they saying they've put zero dollars into the building in the last 17 years?
And prevented others from putting renovation dollars into it.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2013, 08:07:49 PM
Josh, thanks for live blogging this for those of us who could not make the meeting in person. Referring to the Bostwick's purchasing the property in 1996, are they saying they've put zero dollars into the building in the last 17 years?
I think so.
They should be embarrassed.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2013, 08:07:49 PM
Josh, thanks for live blogging this for those of us who could not make the meeting in person. Referring to the Bostwick's purchasing the property in 1996, are they saying they've put zero dollars into the building in the last 17 years?
Basically, this was the case.
Public Hearing was just closed to Committee
Terry Lorrince from Downtown Vision has been wanting, heck needs that property to be properly redeveloped. Lori Boyer I believe is in the preservation corner too and of course MJ's very own SheClown being there I hv a good feeling about the outcome here tonight. Would love to see a restaurant/art gallery/performance space/something/anything come here. But even the Big Cat is better than a vacant lot, IMO
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:18:32 PM
It looks like the historic status is going to be unanimous. seven in favor of historic landmark status.
Historic Designation Passes 7-0
Jason Teal has now begun his 15 minutes on the demolition bill, 2012-657
Stephen, do you find it odd to not see Jim Bailey in attendance? This and Hemming Park are his two pet projects. Or am I somehow overlooking him?
Now 15 minutes begins for the Bostwick Trio and what I imagine will be a very intricate soft shoe routine
Thank you Joshua and Stephen, this is great news. Now hopefully they can clear up that lawsuit matter and start taking action.
"Does demolishing the building in some way eliminate the lawsuit that has been pending for seven years?" Matt Schellenberg
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:35:11 PM
well, (and consider this is grudging for me, this is a collection of my most pilloried councilmen) its nice to see the response of the council as they are siding on the side of the right, and the good lord.
Is this the apocalypse? Or does it just seem that way to Mr Bostwick and his minions?
Mr Bostwick has approached the microphone again for the remaining time, an obvious glutton for punishment.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:41:46 PM
would you characterize his current speech as 'gently testy' or just defeated and bitter sounding?
he is the proverbial deflated balloon
"Location location location" - Bostwick
It's a shame the building isn't at the Town Center...
Jason Teal returns to the microphone to take his victory lap. I wish I had a bottle of champagne to present to him.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:54:47 PM
By the way, the Business Journal certainly has an asset in the form of Ashley Kritzer. She's pretty hypercompetent.
+100
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:53:29 PM
Ashley Kritzer reporting that Bostwick is claiming that empty land downtown is being sold for 40 to 50 dollars per square foot, but that the recent fresh market land was purchased at 8 dollars per square foot.
Thats not so good.
They've always had a very 'interesting' sense of the market.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 09:06:50 PM
wow. the Klempfs (who offered to buy the building from the Bostwicks---at their asking price unsuccessfully) has already spent 60 thousand dollars doing the due diligence on renovating the building as a restaurant and business investment.
His testimony is compelling and absolutely devastating to the Bostwicks. He extended the contract for the bostwicks six times. (and his meter is still running, apparently)
He is one of the investors of Ovinte wine bar at the Town Center. it is a hugely successful business venture, and downtown would be lucky to have both he and his business partner Chad bringing a concept to downtown.
Quote from: fieldafm on November 19, 2013, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:53:29 PM
Ashley Kritzer reporting that Bostwick is claiming that empty land downtown is being sold for 40 to 50 dollars per square foot, but that the recent fresh market land was purchased at 8 dollars per square foot.
Thats not so good.
They've always had a very 'interesting' sense of the market.
More like delusional....
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 09:11:23 PM
I dont think I realized that he was part of Ovinte.
Apparently there have been a number of offers for the Bostwick Building all of which have been turned down.
All of the offers are being told that they are denied because the Bostwick's need for more money.
Almost all market valuations of the property are coming in at about 150k for the property.
Lori Boyer demonstrated that the asking price is based on about 100 dollars per square foot.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=539429
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 09:16:00 PM
apparently the city can simply foreclose on the property right now to recoup the lien against the property. Such an action would force the sale of the property to satisfy the lien.
The minimum bid would then start at the amount of the lien (60k) and if no one met the minimum bid then the city would simply take the property for satisfaction of the lien.
The back of Bostwick's neck is cherry red right now.
from my viewpoint, Stephen, it matches the purple of his face quite nicely
Why do I get the feeling if the Bostwicks don't get their way on this we in the future will see a large cement truck losing control while coming down the Main St bridge and take out that building?
It sure is a shame those nasty homeless people broke into the building, and the fire they lit to keep warm got out of control ...
I know the city won't take the property right now but perhaps it should.
Jim Overton - The selling price for the Haydon Burns Library was ~$24psf, the most recent sale of the Laura Street Trio was ~$11psf, the Property Appraiser has placed the value of The Bostwick Building between those two, at ~$14psf.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 09:32:47 PM
public hearing is closed.
Holt moves to amend the petition to deny the demolition permit, which is seconded by Bishop.
...And Bill Bishop elects to hammer a few more nails into Mr Bostwick's smug sense of pride before the vote
The Appeal To Demolish is Denied 7-0
Wow, catching up on this, is this the JACKSONVILLE City Council?
In all serious, this should tell folks that demolition through neglect is unacceptable.
And that the Bostwicks have the same understanding of value as a 2006 real estate speculator.
Good news, and thanks for covering it, guys. Man, it's really hard to have much sympathy for the Bostwicks considering that every issue they're facing is self-inflicted. Maybe - maybe - we'll finally see some action on this.
It was a wonderful evening -- Jacksonville stood for preservation tonight and stood together.
Great News :)
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:10:30 PM
and evil garden troll, Don Redman.
LMAO.
Good to hear that there were unanimous decisions for the Bostwick's historical status and no-go on demo.
Quote from: JeffreyS on November 19, 2013, 09:23:22 PM
I know the city won't take the property right now but perhaps it should.
The city, through Jason Teal, clearly threatened to take the building if the Bostwicks don't sell. And not only take it, but charge them the legal fees it will cost to do so.
They would foreclose on the rolling fines (which are at 60k and grow by $100 a day). The city council would ask general counsel to initiate a law suit against the brothers to take the property. This was no mere threat. Jason took the LUZ through the process and felt quite confident the city would win.
I don't see why these guys are being such a pain. Most people would run around naked in the streets with joy, if offered three times as much for a property you've put no money into. Bostwicks.....take the +$300k and run.
The buyer (whose contract has expired) told us that he has invested $60k in the process of purchasing the building. He dropped the contract because the sellers continually played games (my words not his). He stated that he is still interested in the Bostwick, but indicated that the price offered would be lower (presumably by $60) than he offered below.
LUZ clearly encouraging the brothers to take the deal.
Sometimes, in situations like this, less is more. One of the Bostwicks stated last night that the family had the means to fix up the building, but never thought is was "economically feasible" to do so. Add that to the fact that the brothers met with Don Redman years ago to ask about getting it landmarked to qualify for funds to fix up the building. When they found that it wasn't available, they dropped the landmark request. This came from Redman. Last night the brothers denied asking Redman for the landmark status.
So, calling a councilman a liar wasn't a great move either.
What not to say at a city council meeting....
Quote from: joshuataylor on November 19, 2013, 08:31:48 PM
"Does demolishing the building in some way eliminate the lawsuit that has been pending for seven years?" Matt Schellenberg
The lawsuit has been ongoing since 2007. The neighboring party said it would dismiss the suit if the project gets renovated.
Interestingly enough, the answer to whether or not rolling fines are erased, per Jason Teal, is no. It stops the rolling fines, but does not remove them. This is a question PSOS has been wondering for a long time. So, there are vacant lots all around Springfield with demo liens and huge rolling fines on them. NICE. And we thought the ash dumping was toxic.
Quote from: JayBird on November 19, 2013, 08:13:46 PM
Terry Lorrince from Downtown Vision has been wanting, heck needs that property to be properly redeveloped. Lori Boyer I believe is in the preservation corner too and of course MJ's very own SheClown being there I hv a good feeling about the outcome here tonight. Would love to see a restaurant/art gallery/performance space/something/anything come here. But even the Big Cat is better than a vacant lot, IMO
Thanks JayBird. Yes, you were right to have a good feeling about tonight's outcome. And it looks like the restaurant may have a chance after all.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2013, 08:14:54 PM
Jim Love is speaking, and has apparently taken the night off from communism to speak up for the historic fabric of the building. Nicely presented, actually.
Yes, he spoke eloquently about preservation last night.
Quote from: sheclown on November 20, 2013, 07:06:24 AM
Quote from: joshuataylor on November 19, 2013, 08:31:48 PM
"Does demolishing the building in some way eliminate the lawsuit that has been pending for seven years?" Matt Schellenberg
Interestingly enough, the answer to the question, per Jason Teal, is no. It stops the rolling fines, but does not remove them. This is a question PSOS has been wondering for a long time. So, there are vacant lots all around Springfield with demo liens and huge rolling fines on them. NICE. And we thought the ash dumping was toxic.
Makes you wonder about $$539,244 in ordinance 2013-377 to Remove Property Code violations city-wide in compliance with Chap. 518 Ord. Code.
DIA Board meeting Today at 5pm 1St floor city hall.
At the 7/24/13 DIA Board meeting OED had the DIA vote away their say.
The Authorization to Negotiate and Engage on Various Downtown Projects had the Bostwick added to the Pre submitted list. This all happened prior to the start of the new guy Aundra Wallace.
Man, this is better than football. And that's as much a comment on the quality and color of the reporting here as on the outcome. Thanks, Stephen and Joshua. A victory for team preservation. Heck, a victory for Jax.
Great news.
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on November 20, 2013, 08:30:00 AM
Man, this is better than football. And that's as much a comment on the quality and color of the reporting here as on the outcome. Thanks, Stephen and Joshua. A victory for team preservation. Heck, a victory for Jax.
Second that!
Yes, yes, yes - great news, thanks to all involved. Thanks for the great posts last night, I read them all with anticipation. It looks like Jax is looking forward, and beginning to appreciate its treasures. A plan is definitely coming together.
It is to be hoped. Although I am THRILLED with this outcome, my fear is that the reason the Council is so gung ho on this building is its location right at the foot of the Main Street bridge on Bay Street. If it were tucked away in the middle of the CBD, I wonder if they would be so proactive.
That said, I'd so very much love to be wrong, and hope the Council has finally awakened to the fact we need to preserve history in Jacksonville. It's about time.
Quote from: Cliffs_Daughter on November 20, 2013, 08:51:49 AM
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on November 20, 2013, 08:30:00 AM
Man, this is better than football. And that's as much a comment on the quality and color of the reporting here as on the outcome. Thanks, Stephen and Joshua. A victory for team preservation. Heck, a victory for Jax.
Second that!
Quote from: IrvAdams on November 20, 2013, 09:17:20 AM
Yes, yes, yes - great news, thanks to all involved. Thanks for the great posts last night, I read them all with anticipation. It looks like Jax is looking forward, and beginning to appreciate its treasures. A plan is definitely coming together.
There's nothing more satisfying than filing a report when you know the outcome sides on behalf of the community and the greater good, and not the greed and laziness of absentee landlords. Maybe Jacksonville
can have nice things...
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on November 20, 2013, 01:07:29 PM
It is to be hoped. Although I am THRILLED with this outcome, my fear is that the reason the Council is so gung ho on this building is its location right at the foot of the Main Street bridge on Bay Street. If it were tucked away in the middle of the CBD, I wonder if they would be so proactive.
If it were in a less profile location it would have been torn down years ago. Buildings like this have been coming down in neighborhoods like Durkeeville, Phoenix, Eastside, etc. for years. Zora Neale Hurston's family's Eastside flower shop was taken out by code enforcement a few months ago. Not a peep was heard across this city and I'd argue it was just as historically significant as the Bostwick. Nevertheless, whatever the case, I'm happy with the Bostwick outcome so far.
The flower shop did not disappear without a peep. There will be consequences for using NSP funds to demolish it.
I didn't see this posted anywhere but it looks like the city foreclosed on it last month:
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla – The Bostwick Building will soon be up for sale after a judge ruled in favor of the city in a foreclosure lawsuit.
The owners of the building owe more than $70,000 in fines due to code violations, according to Chris Hand, chief of staff for Mayor Alvin Brown.
The minimum price at the still-to-be-scheduled sale would be the fines plus any attorneys' fees.
"It built up over a number of years, steps they hadn't taken to keep the building well-maintained and in good condition," Hand told Action News.
The owners had wanted to tear the building down, claiming it was beyond repair. But city officials oppose that plan.
"Because the market says otherwise," Hand said. "Prior to this court case, there was more than one private owner who wanted to come in and redevelop the Bostwick Building."
One of those developers told our news partners at the Jacksonville Business Journal he's still interested in putting an upscale restaurant and rooftop bar in the building.
The Bostwick family still owns the building until the outcome of that foreclosure sale. If no one bids on the building, the city will take over the title.
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/City-wins-foreclosure-lawsuit-over-Bostwick/zzpjl9dWLk2QcDtLc4TZ7A.cspx?rss=3568
It's not a topic here, but I commented on a post regarding that. I just don't recall the thread name. I am glad the building will potentially get a new owner let's see what happens to it. I tried contacting the Bostwick's for let's see about 2 months straight about 6 months ago to bring the building up to code, but they never contacted me back so I honestly am glad they lost it.