Metro Jacksonville

Inside the Park View Inn

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/park_view_inn/parkviewinn2dy.jpg)

Situated on the corner of Main and State Streets, the Park View Inn has become one of the most problematic pieces of property in the core of Jacksonville. In its current state, it is a blight that hinders progress in both Springfield and Downtown. Plagued by ground contamination from the former Coal Gasification plant previously on the site, all past redevelopment efforts have failed. Can this building ever be something to be proud of?  

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/344

A real shame that a building with such potential has gone to waste for so long.  This is just another example of a structure that could be easily turned into a highly desired residential establishment.  I hope they can get this turned around soon.  So much potential in the downtown area.

i pass this building every day.  how cool to be able to see the inside.  it reminds me of the building in "Candyman."  it really does seem like something that can be revitalized.  

I'd turn it into a clubhouse for Springfield and downtown. Have a fee and members. They could virtual golf, swim, have a gym, country club style all in a downtown setting.

Tear it down. The building has no charm, it has no historical signfigance. It is hideous. Tear it down. Lets get some density. We need something else there.

I'm turning this thing into the biggest hip hop dancehall you've ever seen!

It was a cheaply built motel to accommodate traffic on Main Street and into downtown and deserves to come down. But, look at the proximity to Confederate Park and Hogan's Creek. With the creek restored as the City is planning, what an opportunity to create access to the park and the creek as an enhanced urban natural area.

I beg to differ. The reason the park and the creek have oil contamination is because of that site. You simply cannot clean up the park and creak without cleaning up the source contamination.

I think they need to take the building down, do a full remediation, then get it back on the market for development. As it sits, nothing is moving forward, its creating  a barrier between Springfield and Downtown, and its a safety hazard. We already had a firefighters career ended because of that nasty old building... Time to s%$t or get off the pot, one way or the other.

definitely a diamond in the rough...well worth renovating for sure!

Bulldoze that POS!!!

As a former builder for 35 yrs.the best solution is to get rid of it, period. The cost of the renovation would be more than double the cost of a new structure. But I'm sure the Mayor would give the "in crowd" the money at our expense to do the project plus cost overruns.

However, the environmental concerns make it very expensive to demolish, since the soil would needs to be cleaned up.  However, if you don't crack the foundation, it can be renovated.  Surprisingly, the structure is not in bad shape (the roof is bad in places), so if you got someone creative to renovate it, it could be a gem.

2 words..... BULL DOZER!!! This place needs to be destroyed.....Did someone say movie theater downtown?? ;D

I'm with you on the Movie Theatre downtown, but not there - Ideally, a movie theatre would be somewhere near Bay St, so it can create a synergy between it and the venues that are already there.

In the past, we've done a bad job of locating nodes of activity far apart form each other, and it doesn't allow for good infill.

Quote from: Steve on January 30, 2008, 10:21:51 PM
I'm with you on the Movie Theatre downtown, but not there - Ideally, a movie theatre would be somewhere near Bay St, so it can create a synergy between it and the venues that are already there.

In the past, we've done a bad job of locating nodes of activity far apart form each other, and it doesn't allow for good infill.

Hmmm I think your right man. I didn't think of that. Bay Street would be a great location for a movie theater.

I don't know why this garbaggy (made up word) hotel is still around, and places like the Windsor and Washington Hotels are not. WHAT IS THE OPPOSITE OF FORWARD!!! >:(

With you on that - especially since some of the hotels that were demolished were done for surface parking lots.

Im with the Majority on this one.  If funding to save PS 4 couldnt be arranged, I cant fathom where ,how , or why anyone would spend one dollar on this dilapidated , HIDEOUS ( second only to the Haydon Burns Library) Building, that yes,,,with enough dumped into it , probably could be made into something nice.

Its curse is .... it is on , or very near the epicenter of a site of a former Coal Gassification plant. It is on contaminated soil that continues to contaminate the area around it, creeks etc.  To correct that, it MUST be razed in order to curtail the mess beneath it.  If it were not for that fact, significant alteration and renovation might be an option. I just dont see a way it is possible in this instance.  It is an old building but not that old.. When it was last "sort of " rennovated it was still uglier than a mud fence.

 Implosion   Bulldozer   Dumptruck.   in that order.

Boy did that building live a short life! Can't believe it was built in 1964.
The "Heart of Jax" hotel catered to the railroad people.
It was dated & a bit dismal when not even 20 years old.

I am curious how you obtained interior access?  The shots are during the day, so it must have been sanctioned.  Is it possible others could enter the building for the same purpose?

The owner let us in around the time he had announced plans to turn it into an affordable housing project, a few years ago.

By chance, do you have any idea if they'd be equally receptive these days?

How about in connection with the giant warehouse building behind it...

TWO MORE WORDS...

Trolley Museum

or

Transportation Museum

The place was trashed by railroad workers? God I can't imagine how that happened... Did they still allow us/them to hang the red lanterns outside the doors?  hee hee

Ocklawaha

That is a thought.   My ONLY concern about the building remaining there,BESIDES that it leads the downtown area in Blight, is the contamination underneath it continuing to seep into waterways.  IF theres a feasible way to rehab it, go to it , I say. but the thing occupies the whole city block.. appears to have a parking garage/facility inside it. Id rather see it get rehabbed than sit there and look more and more hideous every day.

We have so many buildings , some old and historic and some not so old and just abandoned and beat up , that we should try to rehab, vs demolishing every frikkin thing in sight and building new.    I havent changed my tune about the Park View.. Its still HIDEOUS ... however, im in favor of a rehab , vs it just sitting there in a funk.

It's coming down. http://www.fox30online.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=a6a32cd6-7752-45a4-90df-44c7b0c9fccf&rss=10 (http://www.fox30online.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=a6a32cd6-7752-45a4-90df-44c7b0c9fccf&rss=10)

So was Stephen Dare right about recent tests showing the ground underneath it not being contaminated?

So, they demolish it for what?  Is FCCJ interested in the site?

So the city is paying for the demolition? It can't be cheap.

Quote from: Jason on May 14, 2008, 11:36:32 AM
So, they demolish it for what?  Is FCCJ interested in the site?

Given the market, most likely a grass lot for the time being.

Wow.  What a wonderful city we live in when the answer to everything is to just demolish it.  I wonder if anyone did a cost analysis on this project.  I mean, how much would it cost to bring it up to code vs. tearing it down...including the costs of upkeep (not that the city does this) on an empty lot after demolition?  Wouldn't it just make more sense for the city to help out history, Springfield, the city of Jax and the property owner by throwing money into correcting the violations????  Wait, of course no one thought of that.  That would be a logical and rational solution to the problem and when's the last time you heard about COJ doing anything logical or rational.  Dumbasses.

Although the Park View is an eyesore, the area is not going to look any better without it. It's just a bad situation all around.

The contamination I have always been talking about is oil contamination and it is at the bedrock level and slowly migrating downhill (The creek, park and moving ever so slowly to the SE under the creek). This is documented with several environmental agencies and the city. Soil contamination may ALSO be an issue, but its not the issue that held up site development so far as I understood it.

This demolition will be good for Springfield as it tears down what is basically a big overgrown, dilapitated wall to our community. It will also be good for the creek/parks/St Johns, because the site can be properly remediated.

I agree, it would have been great if rather than sit on the property, it were developed starting soon after it was condemned in 1999, but the owner chose to let it sit and countless fires (and a couple of career ending injuries) later, it is nothing but an eye sore with no end in site.

If almost 10 years isnt enough to come up with a plan, I think the city is justified in tearing down this non-historic, non-contributing strucutre.

Good riddance.

Structurally, that thing is a solid as a rock.  It needs a new everything else, but if a hurricane hit this town, it would be one of the last spots fo fall down.  Unfortunately, its just not feasible to invest in a structure that size with the environmental questions surrounding the immediate area.  Your money would be better served on a site elsewhere.  In any event, it coming down does present a unique opportunity for a full block development from scratch on of the inner city's busiest intersections, especially if the city foots the bill for demolition and site clean up.

Memories, Memories, memories; stayed there quite a few times during my naval career in Jacksonville (which spanned over 20 years at certain times from 1974 to 1994), but I best know it as the heart of Jacksonville.  Remember seeing Larry Holmes the Boxer (when he was at his prime) there at the desk around 1991 (I wonder if he owned it; it was the Parkview Inn then).

It's a shame that the Owner just let it go and didn't invest some money into razing it, cleaning up the contamination, and then putting it up for sale (for commercial or residential); it probably would have sold much faster and for a lot of money had he did this; I guess that was too hard of a feat.

Now the City takes over, will clean it up, bill the Owner (who I bet doesn't have the money because why did he not take it upon himself to do this earlier?), and now the property will probably sit forever and ever amen.

Anyhoo, end of another era for another historic property/building in "Big Jax."

Heights Unknown

Yeah, the city should hold on to this crappy run-down building for the sake that it's a mid-rise. I guess people would be happy if I made an eight-story edifice outta cow dung; Yeah, that adds to the skyline. The Byrds made a song called "Turn, Turn, Turn" They said in that oldies classic "A time to build up, and a time to break down" and this is clearly a case to break down that old raggedy hotel. This does not have anything to do with razing buildings with potential for a parking lot. This building is long overdue to be torn down.   

^ Well then leave it up to a developer to tear down when the option to replace it comes along.  Razing the building now just continues the nasty cycle of demolition that has run rampant in our core for decades.  It has to stop somewere.

I say either reconstruct and convert what currently exists on these properties, or if you tear them down, ensure you have something to build and replace immediately.

Heights Unknown

Ok Jason, lets stop it with Annie Lytle. The ParkView is a non-contributing structure with an owner who doest seem to care about downtown or its continued redevelopment.

Best case scenario:  Someone comes in and either rehabs the old hotel into apartments or tears it down and builds new residential.  This aint happening though as we all know.

Next best scenario:  The City comes in and tears this colossal eyesore down.  If this is what is actually going to happen, I am happy.  Personally, I think a grass lot would be far preferable to that hulking bum magnet.

QuoteOk Jason, lets stop it with Annie Lytle. The ParkView is a non-contributing structure with an owner who doest seem to care about downtown or its continued redevelopment.

Is the Annie Lyttle contributing anything?  Are any of the delipidated, decaying structures around town contributing anything?  Just because the ParkView is a less appealing structure doesn't warrant its demolition.  We all saw the images of a proposed renovation and many have vouched for the structures apparently sound construction, so why not force the non-existant owner to give it up and then issue an RFP to see what may become of it?  Because there seems to be no problem with contamination, there should be no problem completing a renovation.  If nobody wants it then bring in the wrecking ball.  But don't tear it down before giving it a chance.

When/where has anyone, aside from the absentee owner and Stephen, said there wasn't contamination?

I have spoken to him several times, yet when I drive by I see over gown weeds, broken windows, and people sleeping. I call, and the bare minimum is done. For 9 years now, it has stayed dilapidated and un-addressed in anyway except replacing the plywood when the city deems it too thin.

As far as what I have and haven't done, Doug and I have met with DEP, DCHD, the ACoE, and the COJ in regards to this parcel. So my foot work, while perhaps shy of taking soil samples myself, has been pretty thorough, including looking at historical data. The facts are, it was a coal gasification plant, it was also later used for Auto upkeep and repair. It is proven to have petroleum contamination, and that contamination is now polluting the creek and the park, and slowly working its way down hill.

Regardless, at the end of it The Park View is an albatross, and it needs to be fixed now, or it needs to be gone now. As a Springfield resident, I am tired of waiting, and watching, and catching people breaking in, and seeing news reports about the latest fire or city "action" against it.

My firm worked with a developer who wanted to demolish the building and construct a 25 story tower with a Walgrees on the corner of Main & State, back in 2003/4.  Although its not a superfund site, contamination was certainly an issue at that time from the environmental reports they had done and the ultimate reason on why they passed.  Sanborn maps also indicate that the site was indeed a coal glassification plant at one time.  I'll see if I can dig up the old files on Monday for proof.  Stephen, in the meantime, see if you can dig up documents from the owner that indicate the site being free of contamination.

Lake, try to post the rendering of that building as well.  For those that may not have seen it, it is a totally AWESOME design.  I wish they would have put it somewhere in DT/S'field. 

I have posted the Sanbornes before, and I have seen the DEP reports that show the "blob" as they have mapped it from cores. There is also industrial (non-petroleum) contamination under the old Claude Noland Cadillac that Hionides owns. He has vowed to address the issues of the Claude Noland building when the Park View in is addressed. I believe his remediation of the site has already begun, but I will double check. He feels any effort to redo the building now would be virtually for not with the Park View as it sits. Time will hopefully tell as one of the obstacles is about to be addressed.

As far as who I challenge and how, you are so far out of left field and grinding your own personal axe that you cant see straight. I have developed a good relationship with Hionides company as well, yet I still make phone calls and try to encourage them to do things like put glass in buildings and take down chain link and keep lots clean. I would say the exact same is true for Van Horn. I have emailed him and called him several times about over grown lots, open buildings, and other issues. I may pull my punches in as much as I am not a total jerk, but I still try to get the issues addressed as much as any ordinary citizen can.

From what I see, Hionides and Van Horne have begun remediation (and in some cases finished) on sites they know to be polluted, yet Van Winkle has tried to twist the pollution issues as though it is the creek polluting his lot (which is up hill from the creek and park), yet the ONLY place in the area that has  a history of petroleum production is that lot.

All of that said, since you dont believe me, why not ask Doug Vanderlaan. He sat in all of those meetings with me. Also, any one in the Springfield Womans club should be able to answer the questions as well as their efforts in the park have time and again been thwarted because of this same issue. So please, feel free to completely disregard me. I am ok with that.

This is all moot as the contamination isn't even central to the issue, this is just another red herring in your tactics to win an argument. The issue here is that city thinks 9 years is enough time to have come up with a plan and to begin acting on it.

Furthermore, I would appreciate it if you would stop vilifying me and acting on your petty little grudge. It really doesn't matter what I think and quite frankly if I am wrong it should be easily verifiable, and there wouldn't be two sides. If the DEP gives it a clean bill of health, thats great. Bully for Mr Van Winkle and his over grown, nasty lump of a building. Maybe if he would mix in the occasional mow, clean the occasional litter, and maybe slap on a coat of paint, it could stand empty for another 10 years.

I don't think its a us vs. them issue with the Park View.  People are just frustrated with the condition of the structure and lack of progress.  From a development standpoint, there's nothing you, me or anyone else posting can do to keep big developers from doing their homework.  I can't speak for the others but I vividly remember environmental issues being one of the reasons that project did not move forward.

As far as giving an owner nine years to fix the place up or tear it down, I think that mentality has resulted in the destruction of our inner city.  Sometimes you can't put a time limit on revitalization.  For example, it took 11 years to find a new use for the old train station.  Cities like Detroit and St. Louis have recently had buildings that have been vacant for 40 years finally renovated.  What we should be doing is making sure these vacant buildings are properly sealed unto a new and better use can be found.

Quote from: stephendare on May 17, 2008, 04:41:48 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2008, 04:14:07 PM
I don't think its a us vs. them issue with the Park View.  People are just frustrated with the condition of the structure and lack of progress.  From a development standpoint, there's nothing you, me or anyone else posting can do to keep big developers from doing their homework.  I can't speak for the others but I vividly remember environmental issues being one of the reasons that project did not move forward.

Exactly.  Although from what I remember, the homework so far has been to ask community members rather than testing.

Any developer that would take a common resident's word over actually doing their own due diligence is not a serious developer, imo.  Personally, I'd have issues pouring a ton of money in the site, regardless of where the most contamination is.  Seriously, take a look at it and its surroundings.

1. Sanborn Maps and old city directories indicate the site was home to a coal gasification plant.  That's not up for debate.  The record of this can be easily proven with a quick trip to the top of the public library.

2. The building directly to the south was originally a car dealership with an auto repair shop in the back, dating back to the 1920s.

3. The building directly to the east was a paint company (or something of the sort) at one time.

4. Hogans Creek - it has its own set of issues that extend far beyond the corner of Main & Orange.

All in all, these are serious red flags for anyone who's going to invest money in that area.  As an investor, I would care less of what the owner's opinion is of the site.  I would want to see the documents and at the very least hire my own environmental engineer to conduct a Phase I report, before dropping a dime into the site. 

To me, the issue is not whether the old hotel site is the source of contamination.  The owner's word is no more credible than anyone here without presenting documents backing up his claim.  Nevertheless,  everyone agrees that the ground under Orange Street has serious problems.  Therefore, there should be no argument back and forth about who's right, who's wrong and who should listen to who.  Everyone should have their heads huddled trying to find a way to clean up the entire area, because no one is going to seriously invest in any of those buildings until that's done. 

1884
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/70/173300150_4d5f071924.jpg)

1887
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/40/173300152_ed20f0c170.jpg)

1891
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/173300153_ac9af4bf5b.jpg)

1897
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/75/173300154_b1707e32a5.jpg)

1913
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/62/173300156_3861249099.jpg)

1929
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/58/173300157_5dcb045583.jpg)

Oh, Im sorry. I guess Im not allowed to post the Sanborn images that Lake was talking about.

My bad.

Oh, cool. that should be easy to find records of then.

There's no reason to jump on downtownparks for posting the sanborn maps.  That's not going to get us to the point where we can help find a solution.  I was going to go to the library tomorrow, print copies and post myself.  Anyway, they do illustrate why there should be concern for that general area.  On those alone, there's a gas plant and what appears to be two auto repair shops.  The information the sanborn maps show can be used to find out more about the Park View property and the surrounding properties.  Btw, ashalt-substance like plants aren't clean either.  The mention of this additional information should be a cause for more concern along Orange Street.  In any event, I'm combing the DEP's website right now for any reports they may have on Hogans Creek.

Quote from: stephendare on May 17, 2008, 10:55:05 PM
I would think so.

Of course, you could call Robert and ask him.  I bet he and David have them.

Better yet, I'll stop by the library tomorrow and check the city directories.  They'll reveal more than anyone living today will about what was on these properties at the time the directories were published.

According the 1913 map above, The Jacksonville Gas Company was the last name before it became auto oriented. It appears to have been Citizens Gas and Electric before that, and Jacksonville Gas Works before that.

QuoteHis posts are always a little defensive, and he seems to be taking the whole matter personally, which makes it hard to have any different point of view from him

It was a post with sanborn maps.  That's informational, not defensive.

QuoteBut for the sake of the neighborhood, I certainly hope that Robert is telling the truth since that will remove millions of dollars from the anticipated cost of cleaning the park and speed it right along.

It really doesn't matter since there's still contamination in the area.  The place (potentially all three blocks) needs to be cleaned and even if Robert's property isn't the source, it will still be negatively impacted by the pollution of the sites immediately adjacent to it.  No developer with any sense is going to pour personal money into anything near there until the issues underground in the general area are resolved.

QuoteIt would be odd if all the landowners are just simply liars.

I wouldn't call Robert a liar, but there's no real reason to take him at his word, if you (the developer) plan to invest in this property or one of the adjacent ones.  All competent developers perform Due Diligence on potential properties they plan to invest in.  Instead of taking owner's or nearby neighbors words, most pay to conduct their own environmental phase 1 reports to make sure the property they plan to purchase doesn't have significant environmental issues.

Quote from: stephendare on May 17, 2008, 11:15:33 PM
Often times Name and Use can be decieving.  For example, we are still identifying the property as a hotel, when in fact it hasnt been used as one in a decade.

The good thing is the city directories also state the use of the property at the time the specific directory was published.  We may refer to the Park View as a hotel, but it would be listed as "vacant" in the latest directories.

Quote from: stephendare on May 17, 2008, 11:17:00 PM
the defensiveness was in crying about not being 'allowed' to post the maps.  Whatever that is supposed to mean, its defensive and a little bizarre.

Cause and Effect.  Check post 64, which had nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,197.msg22461.html#msg22461

QuoteI think I remember that there were listings of vacant on the cross directories.  Although again, name and use can be decieving.  The space Im leasing right now is presently functioning mostly as 'storage' rather than 'theater'.  Its just an FYI in case the listings are ambiguous, something I have often found.

With Sanborn maps on different projects I've worked on, the combination of name, site plan and city directory normally fishes out the concern you bring up.  For example, a name can be decieving by its self, but new silos showing up on the sanborn, that corresponds with a complementing use in the city directory can be a good starting point to determine what a property was used for at a specific point in history.

QuoteIt put into perspective how long ago the time periods discussed actually are.  They span from 1884 to 1929.  A lot has happened since then.

Correct.  However, the topic of the discussion centered around the Park View.  The Sanborns fall in line by giving us all a chance to see what has sat on this specific property over the last 100 years, which is vital to the contamination discussion.  The following post came across as trying to devalue the facts posted on the post above.

QuoteBut really, what else to expect whenever anyone disagrees with DP.  I really should have known better than to inject an opposing opinion.

It wasn't so much about having another opinion.  What was posted was facts.  

In any event, we are beginning to go away from the goal of finding a solution.  Perhaps its time for us all to get back on track.

Not sure what year it stopped being used. It looks like in the 1913 map there is only storage, so its use as a gasificaiton plant may have ended a little before that.

Thats where city directory's would be handy.

Im not sure when it started as a plant. The Sanborns dont cover that area before 1884.

I do know that people were worried about it exploding during the great fire in 1901. It was written about in Acres of Ashes.

Also, you do realize nobody is blaming the owner for the contamination, right? He was just unfortunate enough to have bought a dirty parcel, just as have Hionides, Vanhorn, SRG, Meeks and just about any other investor. It happens.

My biggest issue with the owner is his lack of ability/willingness to keep his building clean and secure.

One other note. Back when I was really heavily researching this, I wondered if "the Jacksonville gas works" was ever a publicly owned utility. My thoughts on it were that if the city had been responsible for the contamination, then more than likly they would be responsible for the clean up, similar to how dry cleaner clean ups are funded.

However, I was told by Joel McEachen (who has extensive records on this) that the gas plant, in all of its various names were privately owned. I also wondered if the company who bought the Jax Gas Works was still around. Again, if they were, perhaps they could be made responsible for the clean up. However, that was also not the case. The company went out of business, and was not bought.

Here's a general description of the creek from the US Army Corps website:

QuoteHogan’s Creek origin is in the Springfield community. Wayne W. Wood in his 1989 Jacksonville’s Architectural Heritage: Landmarks for the Future (Jacksonville, FL) described that in about 1870, Springfield had been named because of a spring of good water located in a field near Broad and West Fourth Streets. This spring would have been near the headwaters of Hogan’s Creek.

Richard A. Martin, in his 1972 book The City Makers (Convention Press, Inc., Jacksonville, FL), described changes made along the creek. To control mosquitoes and associated diseases, efforts were made in the late 1800s to drain marshy areas along the creek. To help with flood protection, the creek was dredged at about the same time.

Sewage problems adversely affecting the creek have also been noted over the years. The creek has also served as a firebreak. Very little of the Great Fire that destroyed the City of Jacksonville in 1901 passed beyond the creek.

Industrial land use activities have occurred near the mouth of the creek. A shipyard used to exist at the mouth of the creek. Coffee has been ground near the mouth of Hogan’s Creek since about 1906. In this early time period, coffee beans were brought in directly by ship to docks at the mouth of the creek and unloaded. The coffee beans would be ground and placed into jars. The jars of coffee would then be placed on railroad cars for distribution to points north.

The creek is shown on Corps of Engineer drawings dating back to 1926. Wood reported that in 1929 Jacksonville architect Henry John Klutho designed the balustrades and bridges along the creek in the Springfield area. The current study would review water quality problems associated with Hogan’s creek and develop recommendations, including for the creation of a greenway and littoral areas alongside the creek. Flooding problems would also be reviewed. The creek physically runs for about a mile and a half ending at the St. Johns River, an American Heritage River. The Hogan’s Creek basin incorporates approximately 2000 acres.

http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/pd/pdpf_studies/Hogans_Creek/hogan_creek.htm

One more bit of info, unrelated to the PVI, We did was we asked JU to do some testing on the creek. I presented these finding to the DEP as well as Congresswoman Brown when Doug, myself and a couple of others were asking her to push harder for funding on the ACoE project.

Here are the results

Quote
Results

   Water samples were analyzed for the following metals: copper, chromium, cadmium, manganese, lead, nickel, and zinc.  Cadmium was the only metal that was found in the water and was very low in concentration (about 0.02 ppm).

  Copper, zinc, and especially lead, are found to be exceptionally concentrated in the sediments.  Included are the results for a sediment sample taken from the banks of the St. Johns River near the boat dock at Jacksonville University.

Both cadmium and nickel in the environment are dangerous but manganese is not very harmful.  The lead levels are very high and would be harmful to bottom feeding organisms.

(http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/668/samplesfb3.jpg)

I asked my DEP contact about the results, and he said

QuoteWith Lead, our most conservative number for probably effect and threshold effect are 130 mg/kg (ppm) and 36 mg/kg (ppm) respectively

and

when I asked about the Confederate Park remediation, and followed up on the other industrial contaminants found in the study I was told (Info dated from 06/2006)

Quotehe City's consultant started drilling an additional set of assessment wells this week, you should be seeing a large drilling rig onsite for the next couple of weeks.

Need to see the results of the sampling and discuss internally for ideas, no initial thoughts on Nickel and Cadmium, but will try to think of possible sources..  Anything in the historical studies for Springfield that would suggest possible industries with these constituents.  The tanning industries did use these as part of some types of processes.

Also of note, This was from August of 2006

QuoteWe are continuing the investigation of the contamination resulting from the past operations of the coal gasification plant formerly located adjacent to Confederate Park.  Additional borings were performed at the request of FDEP within the last 2 months and our consultant is currently evaluating the newly collected data and will be submitting their findings.  To fully assess the site, private commercial properties in the surrounding area may need to be assessed and it is my understanding that the State is currently pushing the owners to perform the necessary work.    Once the investigation has been completed we will be better able to determine what the options are for addressing the contamination and estimate a schedule for the cleanup of the Park.   The other end of the creek, in the vicinity of 6th Street and Boulevard, is part of the Jacksonville Ash Sites and under the jurisdiction of USEPA.  We are currently waiting on their issuance of the record of decision so we can move forward with remediation of the affected parcels.

QuoteThank you for your email concerning Hogan Creek and Confederate Park.  Here is the status of various projects affecting this area.



Flood Reduction:  A project to reduce flooding along Hogan Creek has been underway for several years.  The initial study identified contamination issues in the creek that would have made channel dredging too costly for the flood reduction benefit gained.  However, flood reduction was gained by constructing stormwater treatment ponds upstream within the watershed.  Flood reduction will also be gained with the replacement of the Bay Street Bridge and channel widening at the mouth of the creek and the river.  This project is scheduled to commence construction in January 2007.



Eco-Restoration:  The USACOE project will be a good first at restoring Hogan Creek.  The city as a funding partner has committed to pay all costs associated with required contamination remediation/removal in the project footprint.  We look forward to this project being reactivated by the corps in the future.



Hogan Creek Greenway:  Walking Path along the creek including greening landscapeâ€"Design is underway with estimated bid letting in May 2007.



St. Johns River and Tributary TMDL Cleanup:  The city is obligated to reduce pollutants entering the main stem of the St. Johns River and several tributaries, including Hogan Creek.  Development of a Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) is underway now.  Funding for this project is forecast in the proposed 2006-2011 Capital Improvement Plan.  We are currently grading proposals form consultants to provide professional service associated with this work including, updating the master stormwater management plan, updating the flood insurance rate maps, and performing water quality modeling to identify cost effective solutions to meet our TMDL (pollutant reduction) allocation for urban stormwater runoff entering the St. Johns River.



River Accord:  Recently, the mayor, together with partners who will invest in the future health of the river, announced the formation of the River Accord, a 10-year, $700 million program to begin restoring the health of the Lower St. Johns River Basin.  Details can be found at:  http://www.coj.net/Mayor/River+Accord/default.htm



A project to address the specific cleanup issues throughout the reaches of Hogan Creek, or any other similarly contaminated creek, is not underway.  However, through our current NPDES permit activities, we are aggressively identifying and causing removal of point sources of pollution entering our drainage system and ultimately the St. Johns River and its tributaries.  The City committed over $75 million of BJP funding for phasing out failed septic tanks throughout the city.  JEA is also executing an aggressive program to rehabilitate aging sewer lines.

I stopped in the library this afternoon to check the old city directories.

Citizen's Gas Light Company was established in 1874.  S.B. Hubbard was the president and the head office was located on Pine Street (now Main) on the present day site of the Bostwick Building.  The gas works plant was located where the Park View now sits.  However, the gas works plant does not show up in the city directories after 1896, so it must have ceased operation around that time.  I don't know when the plant was demolished, but I would not be suprised if it was a casualty of the Great Fire of 1901.

I also checked what was located on the site during the early 1920s.  By this time, this area had become automobile central.  The Park View site was the home of Atlantic Tire, Super Service Garage, Robertson-Mckee Motor Co., Indiana Truck Corp., Lovejoy Sales Co. and National Plating Workshop.  Claude Nolan Cadillac was located on the block immediately to the south and the block immediately to the east.  The old red brick warehouses on Orange were used for automobile repair, service, paint and body shops.  Also in 1921, the block just to the west was occupied by Marmon Motor Cars.

Quote from: stephendare on May 18, 2008, 06:21:51 PM
So it would be safe to assume that the maximum time that the gas works was open was from 1874 to 1896.  22 years.  And the plant ceased operation 112 years ago. 

If Van Winkels position is correct and 20 years of the plants operation was not gassification, then the amount of time that the 'blob' might have accumulated from 'gassification' would be even briefer.

Well at least we have a bit more in the 'factual' arena to work with now.

Thanks Lake for taking the time.   That took only one day?

It only took about 45 minutes of serious looking.  The rest of my time was spent looking at old downtown master plans, city photo albums and Klutho books. 

There were not many environmental regulations during that time.  A few years of gassification could be more than enough to pollute a site with no environmental regulations in place.  However, I would be just as concerned about contamination as a result of auto repair and painting shops in the general area that date back from the 1920s.  I'm going to have to do a little more study on National Plating.  At this point, I have no idea on what they were doing in that building, which was located on the corner of Main & Orange.

Interesting read.  By the way, although the gas works appeared to have closed around 1896, the 1907 directory has the company listed as the Citizens Gas Company (lights were dropped), specializing in gas stoves.  Their office at this time, was located at 18 E Forysth Street.  Sanborn maps also show a much larger gas plant near Beaver & Church in operation at this time.

QuoteA few interesting points in this article.  First note that the Seattle Gassification Plant (which is truly massive btw) operated from 1906 to 1956 or 50 years.   By contrast, we have established a maximum operation time for our much smaller plant to have been 22 years.

Second, the Seattle Gassification Plant only closed in 1956, and yet according to the article by 1985 most of the property had already cycled out the pollutants. This is a period of 30 years.   As an additional contrast, we have alread established a time period of 113 years since the Jacksonville Gassification Plant was operational, possibly longer.

Third, the apparent pollutant one worries about with the gassification process is the release of benzenes as a related process from decompozing pollutants.

I havent seen any discussion of these benzenes in our environmental reports.

I'd be just as concerned about the other uses that took place on that site before the hotel was build there and the sites surrounding the hotel.  The gas works was one of many "dirty" industries during a time when the environment was not a real concern.  If something (gas, paint, car oil, human waste, whatever) has contaminated the ground in the general area, there's a good chance that contamination is not confined to one particular block.

QuoteThanks Lake, I really think this 'problem' has a lot simpler solutions than declaring war on all the landowners, and then waiting on the 'guv'ment' to cough 10 million dollars to dig everything up, taking up another 15 years of foot dragging and bullshittery.

I don't think we'll get any where blaming downtown advocates that want to see the park and creek restored.  Without them and their passion, the park system would still be as poorly maintained as it was five years ago.  The difference in what it looks like today and what it was in 2003 is night and day.  Also, as I understand it, a good portion of money set aside to restore the creek, ended up being shifted to Iraq.

As for the Park View, if the site has a clean bill of health, then there's little anyone can do to hold up or deny redevelopment if a developer is serious about investing in it.  Quite frankly, there's no reason for someone not to be in favor of improving the site.

Quote from: stephendare on May 18, 2008, 07:53:15 PM

QuoteI'd be just as concerned about the other uses that took place on that site before the hotel was build there and the sites surrounding the hotel.  The gas works was one of many "dirty" industries during a time when the environment was not a real concern.  If something (gas, paint, car oil, human waste, whatever) has contaminated the ground in the general area, there's a good chance that contamination is not confined to one particular block.

true but given the history, it is at this point the least likely to be the most significantly contributing property.

Actually considering that remediation has already taken place, this property has the potential of being the least contaminated of all of them.

FYI, because of the poisonous nature of the gassification plants, it was the first industry to have national environmental regulations created for it.  They date back to the 1880s.

When did remediation take place on the Park View site and the blocks surrounding it?  Is there anything on record that we can upload for all to see?

Luckily no one is standing pat.  Since I moved to town and purchased property in Springfield, progress has been made.  These would include the Hogans Creek Greenway (hasn't started, but the money has been set aside by the State), the dog park, the rose arbor, better city maintainance, the improved baseball ground, restored gazebo and Dillion fountain at Klutho Park.  Plus its not a homeless campground anymore.  In the meantime we all just have to keep plugging along and taking advantage of these many options when they present themselves.

Cool. Handle up.

Quote from: Steve on January 30, 2008, 10:21:51 PM
I'm with you on the Movie Theatre downtown, but not there - Ideally, a movie theatre would be somewhere near Bay St, so it can create a synergy between it and the venues that are already there.

In the past, we've done a bad job of locating nodes of activity far apart form each other, and it doesn't allow for good infill.

How about two movie theaters, a large one (12 to 24 screens) on Bay Street, and a smaller one on the Park View location (6 to 12 screens for Springfield, Eastside Residents); then you'd have enough theaters for downtown for the present.

Heights Unknown

Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2008, 08:31:26 AM
My firm worked with a developer who wanted to demolish the building and construct a 25 story tower with a Walgrees on the corner of Main & State, back in 2003/4.  Although its not a superfund site, contamination was certainly an issue at that time from the environmental reports they had done and the ultimate reason on why they passed.  Sanborn maps also indicate that the site was indeed a coal glassification plant at one time.  I'll see if I can dig up the old files on Monday for proof.  Stephen, in the meantime, see if you can dig up documents from the owner that indicate the site being free of contamination.

Lakelander.......peacemaker and mediator!

Heights Unknown

Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2008, 04:14:07 PM
I don't think its a us vs. them issue with the Park View.  People are just frustrated with the condition of the structure and lack of progress.  From a development standpoint, there's nothing you, me or anyone else posting can do to keep big developers from doing their homework.  I can't speak for the others but I vividly remember environmental issues being one of the reasons that project did not move forward.

And.......in the meantime the old, dilapidated, broken down structure is just sitting on top of contaminated property rotting and doing nothing but providing an ugly picture for that end of downtown and Springfield; so, in my opinion, the smart thing for the Owner to do (maybe someone should tell him this cause maybe he's too old to understand), is to tear it down, clean-up the contamination if there is in fact contamination, and put it on the market for the City or a private developer to buy; otherwise, the City will do the tearing down, contamination cleaning, and bill the Owner...and who knows how much the tab will be...probably more than if the Owner did it himself.

Heights Unknown

Quote from: stephendare on May 18, 2008, 06:21:51 PM
So it would be safe to assume that the maximum time that the gas works was open was from 1874 to 1896.  22 years.  And the plant ceased operation 112 years ago. 

If Van Winkels position is correct and 20 years of the plants operation was not gassification, then the amount of time that the 'blob' might have accumulated from 'gassification' would be even briefer.

Well at least we have a bit more in the 'factual' arena to work with now.

Thanks Lake for taking the time.   That took only one day?

It's amazing what a little "teamwork" and "mutual cooperation" can do.

Heights Unknown

Aside from some posters personal indignation on behalf of the fair and decent downtown landowner, none of the questions have been answered.

Any update on gaining access to the latest round of testing?  It would greatly benefit the land owner to display proof that site contamination isn't a significant issue with his property.

So how do we get a copy?  Since you personally know the owner and have a good relationship with him, can you talk to him about it?  Or do we have to go through the state?

Here's an image of the project my firm worked on for the Park View site around early 2004.  This project died, partially because of site contamination clean-up costs, which made building a tower at that location unfeasible.

(http://www.powers-design.com/dynimages/projects/sample57.jpg)

Hey Lake.

Did you ever get a chance to look over the test results?

Has anyone notice the activity that has been going on here in the last week?  The south facing rooms have had their walls torn down.  The east facing garage entrance has been open several times.  There is new plywood sealing the entrance.  Does anyone know what is going on.  Renovation or demolition?

Quote from: alta on October 02, 2008, 12:38:34 AM
Has anyone notice the activity that has been going on here in the last week?  The south facing rooms have had their walls torn down.  The east facing garage entrance has been open several times.  There is new plywood sealing the entrance.  Does anyone know what is going on.  Renovation or demolition?

If I remember, it would be demo.

That is what I read a while back.  They are tearing down the walls slowly if that is the case.  Why not a recking ball or dynamite?

Asbestos is likely, and other toxins that have developed over years of decay and such.

I have this postcard, not sure of the date since it was never sent... it used to be called the "Heart of Jacksonville" hotel, or so it says.
Have a lookhttp:
(http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs094.snc1/4686_1081332429653_1116582054_30199524_7995436_n.jpg)

Neat, huh?
I got a good little collection of things around town. Hoping to really expand my albums.

Looks like Parkview's days are numbered.  A demolition company was there yesterday and JSO was patrolling the north entrance apparently to keep the homeless from wondering in. 

What's going on, if anything, with the old Cadillac dealer/ restaurant supply building
(Klutho) between there and Hogan's Creek?

^^parking garage???

Quote from: Steve on April 03, 2007, 05:07:05 PM
However, the environmental concerns make it very expensive to demolish, since the soil would needs to be cleaned up.  However, if you don't crack the foundation, it can be renovated.  Surprisingly, the structure is not in bad shape (the roof is bad in places), so if you got someone creative to renovate it, it could be a gem.

I agree here. The larger problem is the criminal element that makes that location undesirable. This will continue to haunt Downtown, springfield and riverside. As people age, and become more affluent, they often migrate to more suburban areas, returning to the city to shop and play. Our city is virtually devoid of shop and play, but an unwelcoming feeling of dread and danger persist.

Sadly, this will change when the good ole boy network decides the time is right to invest in downtown. They will force out more than the criminal element....
^{oops, my cynicism is showing.}

I know Daniel Herbin took the photos a long time ago but is there a way to contact him and ask if he still has all of the full size photos? The ones he took on this date http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2007-feb-inside-the-park-view-inn

Try this: http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Urban-Issues/Inside-the-Park-View-Inn/7080953_FiPCN

Quote from: Lunican on September 21, 2009, 08:29:04 AM
Try this: http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Urban-Issues/Inside-the-Park-View-Inn/7080953_FiPCN

Sweet thanks! It looks so much different after just 2 years.

Just found this...

QuoteHogan’s Creek project could be ‘Hold on Creek’
   

by Mike Sharkey
Staff Writer

In a 2002 Army Corps of Engineers report on the status of Hogan’s Creek and the plan to restore the waterway that bisects Downtown, project manager Steven Robinson concluded the then-$4.9 million was absolutely necessary.

“Without the project, Hogan’s Creek would continue to degrade in environmental quality and contribute to pollution and sediment loadings of the St. Johns River,” he wrote.

Robinson is no longer in the Corps’ Jacksonville District office, but Hogan’s Creek is still polluted and there are still plans to improve the waterway from both an aesthetic and environmental perspective. When those plans go into motion isn’t clear, either.

According to John Pappas, deputy director of Public Works, the State Department of Transportation has set aside $1 million to build a 12-foot wide concrete pathway along a portion of east and north sides of the creek. However, since the 2002 study, new environmental concerns have cropped up, namely an ash remediation effort that hasn’t started and doesn’t have a price tag.

“We are waiting before we can move forward,” said Pappas. “We are waiting to hear from the ash remediation group.”

Dubbed the “Hogan’s Creek Greenway Project,” the $1 million plan involves a walkway, concrete edging and monument of some kind, said Pappas.

According to Tom Heal, an engineer with Public Works, part of the clean up will involve the removal of trash that’s in the creek and on the creek banks. Because the creek flows from Springfield southeast to the St. Johns River, much of that trash gets caught in a net in the water just before the mouth of the creek. The banks of the creek in that area are littered with fast food cups, beer cans, a bicycle rim, police tape and other garbage â€" all evidence of homeless people sleeping under and near the various bridges that cross the creek.

While the creek’s water may appear filthy, Ebenezer Gujjarlapudi, director of the City’s Environmental Compliance Department, said until the water and the sediment are tested, there’s no way to determine exactly what contaminates are in the water and to what levels. He said the Corps and the State Department of Environmental Protection will deal with the creek itself while the City will concentrate on the Greenway project and the area outside of the water’s edge.

“The State has determined that over 85 percent of the contamination is from fecal matter from pets, geese and other animals,” he said. “Most of the contamination is around Confederate Park. We are looking at what’s in the ground.”

What’s near Confederate Park is the Park View Inn, a long vacant hotel at the corner of State Street and Newnan Street. Gujjarlapudi said the Park View is condemned and slated for demolition within the next couple of months. After that, he said, the State DEP will work with the property owner to begin remediation. At that time, he added, the City will be able to better gauge the environmental issues at Confederate Park.

“Once they clear that up, we will put our plan together to clean up our property,” said Gujjarlapudi.

Heal said the project could go to bid, but since only about one-half to two-thirds of it could be placed on a request for proposal due to the ash issues, the project is “in the middle of nowhere” and it wouldn’t make sense to put out an RFP.

Jim Manning, an engineer in the Environmental Compliance Department, said some of the contamination is from an early 1900s gas manufacturing plant that sat where the Park View Inn is today.

“It’s like tar and it’s deep underground,” he said. “It’s not in the creek, but it’s deep underground and it’s sinking.”

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=52772

Anything new happening with it?

Hopefully the building will get demolished soon. If nothing else , turn it into surface parking. would be a huge improvement to what we have to look at presently. it looks worse than ever at this point.

I understand that this building has asbestos and other issues, but it shouldn't take this long.

A large warehouse severly damaged by the Murfreesboro EF4 tornado is almost gone, and it had asbestos and structural issues. Tornado was April 10th, almost 6 months later, it is a broken slab as it is nearly done being dismantled.

Oh good God already!

A freckin arsonist would do the job quicker.

...............If it were made of wood.

QuoteWhile the Creeks water may appear filthy, Ebenezer Gujjarlapudi, director of the City’s Environmental Compliance Department, said until the water and the sediment are tested, there’s no way to determine exactly what contaminates are in the water and to what levels. He said the Corps and the State Department of Environmental Protection will deal with the creek itself while the City will concentrate on the Greenway project and the area outside of the water’s edge.

What a crock of crap, I could go down there any day with a dip net and bring this guy all the sludge muffins he wants... With or without the toilet paper!

Maybe upstream toward 8th we should build a Giant Monument to the toilet bowl as a great achievement, and rename the whole thing CRAPER CREEK!

OCKLAWAHA

Quote from: stephendare on September 27, 2009, 11:17:35 PM
The building, which is owned by Robert Van Winkel, is being demolished down to a two level parking garage.

They are working out the schematics now.

That sucks.

What is the feasibility, possibility, cost...etc of building a garage capable of supporting future garage floors or a mixed use/office building on top?  I would have no complaint (well...fewer) with everything DT becoming a parking garage if they were built capable of supporting future development.  Kind of a giant Lego set waiting for real development to come along.

Quote from: stephendare on September 27, 2009, 11:17:35 PM
The building, which is owned by Robert Van Winkel, is being demolished down to a two level parking garage.

They are working out the schematics now.

Parking for what exactly?

Quote from: jason_contentdg on September 30, 2009, 03:39:34 PM
Parking for what exactly?

You know, for all the people visiting, shopping and eating downtown.

i don't think the plans are set in stone....

Any ideas put forth so far.

To all those who for years have asked for this structure to be torn down, this is a definite "watch what you wish for, it may come true."....   All the pushing for something to be done, all the calls made to attempt getting your wishes and this is what you ...and we ... get.. Another parking lot...but not,  as this one will still have an ugly two story, half done looking parking garage on it.  I would rather have that half burnt empty building that may some day have been a nice place again than a half aXX parking garage that will be there for ever!

I don't want another parking lot. What can be done with it? Anyone know? In it current state of decay it seems hopeless for the structure.

Here is a shot provided by a really good photographer who has posted many shots (mostly surfing but some more diverse) on surf-station dot com MB St Auggie (http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac58/guamysurfer/_MAD0086copy.jpg)

More great shots (http://surf-station.com/community/showthread.php?t=29564)

There are some really great shots of the Park View Inn as well as a closed steel manufacturing plant (as he described it) somhere west of town. Maybe someone could identify it too?

Kid has an eye, and is shooting renegade style. No permission.

The steel plant is the old National Wire Southeast (?) mill on West Church Street.  It's directly north of JTA's property and a part of the plant has been built over the old S-Line ROW.

Good call, Lake. I remember delivering mail there when i first started at the Post Office. I believe it's been vacant about 8 years or so.

Quote from: stephendare on September 09, 2009, 04:20:58 PM
no significant contamination found at the spot.  This was an untrue campaign actually.

The EHThompson building is owned by Petra and they are doing their best to fill it.

Yup. None at all.

Quote from: stephendare on February 22, 2010, 11:21:11 PM

Quote from: downtownparks on February 13, 2007, 11:48:32 PM
I beg to differ. The reason the park and the creek have oil contamination is because of that site. You simply cannot clean up the park and creak without cleaning up the source contamination.

I think they need to take the building down, do a full remediation, then get it back on the market for development. As it sits, nothing is moving forward, its creating  a barrier between Springfield and Downtown, and its a safety hazard. We already had a firefighters career ended because of that nasty old building... Time to s%$t or get off the pot, one way or the other.

I agree!

I found this Bill that is in commitee I guess. If the Bill goes through, I guessing I'll be looking at the shell of a building for few more years or are they going to rehab it now. Anybody got an answer or did I miss the memo  :)



Bill Type and Number: Ordinance 2010-184

Sponsor: Council President at the request of the Mayor

Date of Introduction: March 9, 2010

Committee(s) of Reference: F, RCD

Date of Analysis: March 11, 2010

Type of Action: Appropriation

Bill Summary: The bill re-appropriates $2,213,722 within the Department of Housing and Neighborhoods’ “Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP)” funds to reallocate the funding to different programs under the NSP umbrella.  The bill reallocates $1.5 million previously appropriated to the demolition of the former Park View Inn hotel on State Street (Ordinance 2009-450-E) to the NSP Homebuyer Assistance program; reallocates $400,000 from the NSP Multi-Family Rehab and Resale program to the NSP Homebuyer Assistance program; and reallocates $313,722 from the Multi-Family Rehab and Resale program to the Land Banking activity for financing to acquire properties for future affordable housing development.  All funds are authorized for carryover from FY10 to FY11.

Background Information:  The funding previously allocated for demolition of the Park View Inn is being reallocated to another use since the owner of the hotel has reappeared and sought City funding assistance for restoration and reuse of the building.  Since the building is no longer considered abandoned, it does not qualify under the NSP funding guidelines for demolition.   The Housing and Neighborhoods Department has determined that the remaining $713,722 in the Multi-Family Rehab and Resale account is insufficient to fund a multi-family rehab of any real size, so the department recommends shifting $400,000 from that fund and the $1.5 million from the Park View Inn demolition project to the very popular Homebuyer Assistance Program.  The remaining $313,722 is proposed for transfer to the Land Banking activity (which already has an $800,000 balance) for use by a developer who has proposed purchasing a portfolio of scattered site, small multi-family units (duplexes, triplexes) for affordable housing purposes.

Policy Impact Area: Affordable housing

Fiscal Impact: The bill reallocates $2,213,722 within the Neighborhood Stabilization Program funding to other uses.

Analyst: Clements

And the "owner of the hotel" would be Robert Van Winkle?

Before someone gets seriously injured or killed in this dilapidated POS ,  it needs to come down. It has no hope whatsoever of having a new day of use.  It is so far down the chain of reusable buildings , it is not even funny.  Its gotta go.

hey it has a great use still Timkin!

for crack heads, homeless, prostitution, meth heads, potential murder site, death trap, eye sore, fugus growing area...



really tho I agree after going to ever single corner of it, the garage seems to be the only spot saveable, if it wasnt so far from anything I say the site itself could be used as parking garage tho if someone wanted to run transportation to and from the area.

not that we really need another parking garage..but tear the building down and use the lot for FREE parking..thatd be a nice switch downtown :)

Park View Inn property avoids wrecking ball

QuoteJacksonville’s plans to demolish the old Park View Inn in downtown have been thwarted by the property owners’ latest plans to renovate.
The city had planned to use $1.5 million in federal dollars to demolish the boarded-up, graffiti-covered building and clear the corner on State and Main streets that has attracted vagrants and vandals for the past few years. That money was approved by the City Council in June.
But by August, owners Robert Van Winkel and David Muyres  had approached the city with a plan to keep much of the existing structure intact to re-purpose the building as mainly a parking garage.
Their proposal is to keep the existing underground parking spaces and turn the second floor into another parking deck. The first-floor space would be converted into storefronts for retail use.
“We want to make use of the viable parts of the building instead of just destroying the whole structure,” Van Winkel said Monday.
The council, at its meeting next Tuesday,  is scheduled to approve new uses for the $1.5 million it would have spent to demolish Park View Inn.
The property owners have now requested $1.3 million from another pot of federal dollars to help finance the project, including $350,000 to pay for partial demolition and asbestos abatement in the old hotel.
Van Winkel said the total project cost is about $2.5 million to $3 million and could provide 400 parking spaces. He said the new facility can provide downtown businesses with low-cost alternatives for employee parking.
Van Winkel said he and Muyres are confident that they can get financing to cover the project costs because the parking garage plan has a much lower cost than other proposals for the property, which included one to convert the hotel into condominiums.
Plans to fix up the blighted property, built in 1966, were slowed down initially because of environmental issues because the hotel and surrounding properties were built on contaminated soil. Then, the recession further hindered owners’ efforts to sell the property and other owners eventually gave up their stake.
Over the years, the hotel amassed more than $100,000 in code-enforcement fines. When the owners didn’t fix the issues, the city decided to demolish the property.
The city is reviewing Van Winkel and Muyres’ application for Community Development Block Grant dollars. However, the city only has about $5 million to distribute among 64 applicants, and it is unlikely the owners will get the entire $1.3 million.
Councilman Johnny Gaffney said he was briefed on the owners’ plan for the site and feels it is “doable, but I’m not enthusiastic.”
“I haven’t met the owners,” he said, “so it’s still a lot of promises.”
Gaffney, who represents the Springfield area, said he is not sure a parking structure is needed and wondered if there are better uses for the property. But he wants something to replace the boarded-up windows and graffiti-covered walls.
“I would rather something be there,” he said, “than just have a condemned building.”

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-05-03/story/park-view-inn-property-avoids-wrecking-ball

It will take more then 1.5million to fix that place up.

An empty lot would be better than the eyesore that is there now.  Maybe another Springfield garden?

haha  :D

We'll get right on it Charles!

As long as the structure is structurally sound, I'll take the garage and street level retail over an empty lot anyday.  Strip it down to its structural bones and throw a new facade on it and it can look completely different.  All it needs is an Architect who knows what they are doing.  Maybe the city should take that $1.5 million it was going to use to demolish it and instead invest it on helping to restore the property?

If they can turn the old Book Cadillac Hotel building from this:

(http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070313/070313_Book-Cadillac_hmed_11a.h2.jpg)

to this:
(http://www.candgnews.com/Homepage-Articles/2008/9-3-08/images/XL-Book_PS6.jpg)

Then we should be able to make something decent out of the Park View Inn.

QuoteDETROIT â€" Prepare to be wowed.

The 84-year-old Westin Book Cadillac Detroit Hotel will open its doors without fanfare on Oct. 1. Once the jewel of the city’s retail shopping district, developers hope the 33-story hotel will return some iconic charm to long-neglected Washington Boulevard. 

The hotel has been shuttered since the mid-1980s and several attempts were made since that time to raise the nearly $200 million it has cost developers to complete the project. The Cleveland-based Ferchill Group launched the latest attempt at salvaging the building in 2006.

The developer has teamed up with Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, parent company of Westin, to operate nearly 500 hotel rooms and a ring of grand ballrooms, restaurants, bars and storefronts that encircle the ground level of the building.

Full article: http://www.candgnews.com/Homepage-Articles/2008/9-3-08/XF-BOOK.asp

^ Fabulous results but a $200 million price tag.  Still a good example - thanks for posting.

^Don't get sticker shock.  That was a 33 story building that has more square footage than just about every highrise in Jacksonville.  My reason for showing this as an example was the state of the structure's condition before renovation.  Many people called for its demolition during the decades it was vacant as well.  Nevertheless, finally a plan came together to bring the thing back to life and DT Detroit is a better place today because of it.  Relating that to the Park View, I'm just making the case that the structure is salvageable and could be an asset to the community if the right plan comes together.

If they make the Parkview inn into ANYTHING that even remotely resembles a renovation such as the Cadillac building you display , I will gladly stand corrected... The Parkview had an extensive fire, did it not??  would an extensive hot fire like that weaken that structure, especially for reuse as a parking garage?   OR is the Hotel portion being torn down and the remainder being renovated? 

The new proposal calls for only the taller hotel portion to be demolished.  If the building's structural system is unsound, then the proposed plan would not make sense.  Parking garages are expensive to build so the since one is already there, so there should be a huge financial incentive to keep it as a part of a retail plan. 

The extensive fire in that hotel has me questioning its structural integrity.  although I am obviously not a building inspector, THAT is my chief concern about the 4 story hotel. So that it is coming down , to me seems sensible.  I am certain , however that no one would knowingly drop mega-money into that project, to save the Hotel if the structure itself were compromised too badly by fire.

Quote from: Timkin on May 06, 2010, 11:40:32 PM
The extensive fire in that hotel has me questioning its structural integrity.  although I am obviously not a building inspector, THAT is my chief concern about the 4 story hotel. So that it is coming down , to me seems sensible.  I am certain , however that no one would knowingly drop mega-money into that project, to save the Hotel if the structure itself were compromised too badly by fire.

It only got like 1/4 of the side of the building it looks like. I didnt like going near that area tbh, felt like bad mojo.

Bad indeed.. but something fresh and new in its place will help to turn the area around.

I wonder what is going to become of the old Funeral home...another historic building ...across the street in the next block southwest of the Hotel.. Is it finally coming down?

The funeral home on Union Street?   I'm not aware of any plans to demolish that structure.  However, there are plans for a gas station/restaurant to go in on the vacant property next to it.

hmm.....what to do with a historic funeral home ????? :)

if it is haunted, turn it into something related  ;D

couldn't tell you . I was never in it. but it seems abandoned..  The Kyle Funeral Home is the one I am speaking of.. think its 3 or 4 story Brick.  kind of a nice looking Facade ... probably will follow suit of all the vacated buildings....Vandalism , etc .

I was wondering, does anyone have pictures of the Park View Inn when it first opened? I have searched the internet for old pics of it and can't find any. It would be really interesting to see this building in its hay day!

This is all I have - not a picture per se, but an actual postcard from it when it was still called the Heart of Jacksonville. Nice when it was brand new.

(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs094.snc1/4686_1081332429653_1116582054_30199524_7995436_n.jpg)

Wow.....what a mess it is now.  I have no idea why they changed it to look like it currently does. It was actually attractive in the rendering .

My wife, who was my girlfriend at the time and I stayed at the Heart of Jacksonville Hotel back in 1977. We stayed on the floor that the pool was on. I remember walking down the hallway then through a breezeway and out to the pool area. We were only 18 and 16 at the time. Its a shame that is has fallen into such disrepair. So sad as it was so nice back then.

Since I made this post nearly 8 years ago, I do know that the gas plant survived the Great Fire of 1901. There's a picture floating around on this site somewhere, showing everything (except it) being in ruins during the fire's aftermath.

so reading through the entire thread, at some point in the last 6 years they tore down everything but the parking structure and then...stopped? Last time I drove through there a couple months ago, it looked like it was abandoned...again.

More housing, incoming:

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2018/01/11/downtown-eyesore-may-soon-be-developed-but.html

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/park-view-inn-garage-site-downtown-sells-for-dollar2-5-million

So now that this eyesore has been sold, any speculations about the new owners or future plans for the property?

Was this project considered to be one of the developments proposed or in review in the recent State of Downtown report?

I do not trust any business entity called Prestige Worldwide to have any success developing this property.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 12, 2022, 03:00:55 PM
Was this project considered to be one of the developments proposed or in review in the recent State of Downtown report?

It doesn't look like it. No mention in the report (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VHY7HXdgyXzWmTE4qDqO6AcVQhvGe_c1/view) or on the development map (https://investdtjax.com/tools-resources/development-map/).

Quote from: JaxJersey-licious on October 12, 2022, 01:25:01 PM
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/park-view-inn-garage-site-downtown-sells-for-dollar2-5-million

So now that this eyesore has been sold, any speculations about the new owners or future plans for the property?

Based on the Ford plant decision, maybe an oil refinery as long as it offers at least one more new job to the City :).  Anything to "support" downtown.

Not sure if I missed something, but did Gateway Jax buy this property?

I know they picked up the buildings across main, but I noticed this had their fencing up around it.  It would be amazing if that area got redeveloped with the old Claude Nolan building restored.

Yes, Gateway Jax purchased this block as well.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/jan/09/planning-commission-endorses-plans-for-redevelopment-of-bombed-out-parking-garage-and-surrounding-properties/

I have never figured out the value of the Planning Commission other than rubber stamping most projects as a cover for the City Council's ultimate willingness to usually do the same.  What power, if any, does the Planning Commission have to alter or stop a project in its tracks?

It isn't surprising to me that the PC might be nearly toothless since it appears to be a "volunteer" led commission, such volunteers usually making a living off of development, directly or indirectly, or just people looking for something to boost their resume or give them a little excitement in their lives.

If I am being unfair, someone please point out the errors of my ways.

The Planning Commission, similar to CPAC's & Overlay Boards, only offer recommendations. Technically, all three have zero "real" power when it comes to LUZ legislation.

The purpose of all of these boards, is to lighten the work load and/or accountability (depending on how you view it) to the LUZ Committee - which does the same for City Council. The opinions of these boards are easily overturned by the LUZ Committee. They are the first 'real' government body that looks at things. If LUZ doesn't approve, there is a likely chance City Council won't approve it either. Obviously exceptions apply for several reasons.

The other boards are intended to make the decision to support a bill easier or harder... depending on those "several" reasons. The Planning Department's report almost always holds more weight than the boards - unless all these boards are unanimous in their decision & have their council-member's support.