Metro Jacksonville

Does anyone know the status of the old Park View Inn building by Confederate Park? I didn't find any articles on MJ when I did a search.

Here's an old image of the structure from streetview:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=32202&sll=30.323193,-81.630908&sspn=0.070236,0.153809&g=32202&ie=UTF8&ll=30.33363,-81.655101&spn=0.002195,0.004807&z=18&layer=c&cbll=30.333592,-81.655135&panoid=IPozfpIcgAGN1zO0sQVH9w&cbp=12,241.12485393437927,,0,-9.822086957051068

Now the balconies and windows are ripped out, looks like it's being gutted.

Here is an old thread about it with pics. Not sure whats going on now.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,197.0.html

I've posted several comments regarding the Parkview Inn over the last couple of months.  Never received a response.  They have been knocking down the walls slowly over the last several months.

There is no official, immediate demolition plan for the Park View. Officials claim that the visible destruction/demolition is being done by individuals seeking copper and aluminium for scrap.

Quote from: The Compound on December 10, 2008, 05:34:09 PM
Here is an old thread about it with pics. Not sure whats going on now.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,197.0.html

Thanks. I really did like that building in the sense it creates an urbanscape similar to some spots in Brooklyn, NY. I would always go that way on the way to pearl/tsi since it's been there. Imagined it would be residential units one day, but apparently the damage is too severe to the structure. Sad really, it would've made a great artist work/loft space.

I thought there was a candidate months back, who was going to renovate the property for workforce housing. Maybe that deal fell through.

Quote from: JaxByDefault on December 10, 2008, 07:23:57 PM
There is no official, immediate demolition plan for the Park View. Officials claim that the visible destruction/demolition is being done by individuals seeking copper and aluminium for scrap.

There is no way that the new demo is being done by copper thieves.. There are entire walls missing. Outside room walls. The porch rails are gone, what was left of the room doors and such. There is too much demo fro this not to be being done by someone official. I just wish someone would come out with it. Why is it such a secret?

I agree Sox, I have been by there multiple times in the middle of the day and there is more than one person working, cops drive by, eat right down the street. If it was thieves I think they would be arrested or at least stopped, the police have always been pretty good about that at the Park View...

If I had to guess, I'd bet preliminary demo is being done by the building owner to prove some movement on code compliance issues, hoping the City will not demo to the slab (which they legally have the right to do, as I type).

I'm glad almost-daily demo attention is deterring some squatters.

While many wish this building to go away, it would be much better to utilize it so I hope the city doesn't just knock it down.  I would think (I haven't seen older pics, so I don't know) that it originally looked better than the stucco of today?  In any case, the existing building could certainly look as good as 3rd and Main will. Stucco is stucco and you can do a lot with it to add details to make it look better. Overall, with the roof top pool and parking, it has huge potential.  Has SPAR Council talked to the owner and LISC about it for workforce and affordable housing?

Interesting tidbit.

QuoteOriginally named the Heart of Jacksonville, the hotel was once a favorite stopping point for Elvis Presley.

Said Gaudry, "Elvis used to stay here when he came to Jacksonville to do his concerts."

Built 32 years ago, the structure (covering a full city block) was constructed as a full service hotel with 236 rooms plus administrative space, 170 underground parking spaces, a second floor swimming pool with snack bar, a full service kitchen, bakery and meeting space. The meeting space includes four separate meeting rooms with a capacity of 500.

full article:

Downtown hotel tries to upgrade insides, image
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/1997/08/04/focus4.html?q=parkview%20hotel%20jacksonville

The hotel during better days.

(http://fpc.dos.state.fl.us/general/n032754.jpg)

When was this place actually shut down?

It was still in operation as low income housing in 1994-95.  It shut down shortly after that.  In terms of when it was a decent hotel, that would probably be the 1970s if I had to guess.

Location could/should still be the "Heart of Jacksonville." Building certainly is not (though it would make an excellent stop on the Blight Museum tour)...

Quote from: RiversideGator on December 11, 2008, 11:01:34 AM
It was still in operation as low income housing in 1994-95.  It shut down shortly after that.  In terms of when it was a decent hotel, that would probably be the 1970s if I had to guess.

Your time frame is a little off, because when I first got to town back in 1999/2000, that place was still open as a ghetto "pay by the week" type of motel, and all sorts of colorful characters were usually hanging out there. It also had this seedy lounge/package store type thing on the first floor with neon beer signs that would shine out of blacked-out tinted windows, and the bar had these huge wooden doors that were always propped open, and I remember thinking those doors didn't fit the style of the building (which was the least of that place's problems...LOL).

It didn't finally shut down until sometime around late 2001 or early 2002, when they had an electrical fire that ignited a bunch of stored mattresses, and the owners could not afford to fix the damage. I remember it made the news, because the city condemned it and started kicking out all the weirdos and prostitutes who had been renting rooms for $50/wk or whatever, and they gave them no notice and no place to go. I vividly remember the channel 4 reporter interviewing this toothless crackhead/hooker who was standing with her suitcase in front of the building. I remember thinking the city was being kind of heartless kicking people out on the street, but I think clara white or that place on North McDuff finally agreed to take most of them in.

There have been subsequent fires, but those were all after the original fire that shut it down.

Quote3 blazes damage downtown hotel after agency fails to heed warning

Sunday, June 17, 2001

By Steve Patterson and Paul Pinkham
Times-Union staff writers

Jacksonville's fire prevention agency didn't act on a state inspector's warning about fire hazards at a downtown hotel later damaged by three fires, records from a state hotel agency show.

The Park View Inn, a low-rent residential hotel at 901 N. Main St., was condemned in December because of fire damage and a slew of electrical and fire code hazards that made the building dangerous to live in.

But eight months earlier, an inspector from the state Division of Hotels and Restaurants tried to tell the Jacksonville Fire Prevention Division about some of the same dangers.

"He told me the place was a fire trap, and he felt like somebody was going to be burned up," said Charlie Conner, an acting fire prevention captain.

Full Article:
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061701/met_6457089.html

QuoteSaturday, October 10, 1998

Downtown hotel becomes Days Inn

By Catherine Crownover
Times-Union business writer

The new operator of the Park View Inn plans to transform the downtown property into a Days Inn.

San Francisco businessman Ashok Kumar, who took over the lease for the Main Street hotel in May, has reached an agreement to operate the 236-room property as a Days Inn franchise.

Full Article:
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/101098/bus_1c11Days.html

There is another thread with many great pictures.
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/344 (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/344)

Well, at least the property is being reused, and downtown will have more hotel rooms.

^Lunican's last article is over 10 years old.

Sorry, I was just establishing a timeline.

It's hard to believe the building has been empty for less than 10 years. The place looks like it was abandoned 30 years ago.

I realized that, after posting. Such a shame that a good piece of property has to go to shambles, and then some.

You are right.  I had forgotten about all that (luckily).  I was out of town for part of that time also.

Quote from: Lunican on December 11, 2008, 12:38:12 PM

Quote3 blazes damage downtown hotel after agency fails to heed warning

Sunday, June 17, 2001

By Steve Patterson and Paul Pinkham
Times-Union staff writers

Jacksonville's fire prevention agency didn't act on a state inspector's warning about fire hazards at a downtown hotel later damaged by three fires, records from a state hotel agency show.

The Park View Inn, a low-rent residential hotel at 901 N. Main St., was condemned in December because of fire damage and a slew of electrical and fire code hazards that made the building dangerous to live in.

But eight months earlier, an inspector from the state Division of Hotels and Restaurants tried to tell the Jacksonville Fire Prevention Division about some of the same dangers.

"He told me the place was a fire trap, and he felt like somebody was going to be burned up," said Charlie Conner, an acting fire prevention captain.

Full Article:
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061701/met_6457089.html

Yup, that's pretty much what I remembered.

Quote from: RiversideGator on December 11, 2008, 01:18:21 PM
You are right.  I had forgotten about all that (luckily).  I was out of town for part of that time also.

Ya, that was back when I had all my rental properties in Springfield, so I drove by it a lot. That's mainly why I remember.

Lunican's first article was exactly what I had remembered, but then I was shocked to read his second article from 1998, talking about the new owners just bought it and were dumping $1,000,000+ into it. Good F*ing GOD, I can't even imagine what all must have taken place in and around that building for it to be in the horrendous condition I remember it being in 2001 or so. It staggers my mind that it could have become THAT trashed less than 3 years after a large renovation in 1998. 

:o  :o  :o :o  :o  :o

Apparently now it could become a parking garage

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

Which will never happen

I question the demand for 400 parking spaces in that location. JEA is kinda close, but they have there own parking.  How full is the library garage?

A parking garage (which is already there) and converting the street level structure to retail use sounds like a viable situation to me.  That block has a pretty high vehicular traffic count, which makes retail more viable at that location than DT spots like the Landing, Bay or Laura Street.  For example, I don't know the building's first floor layout or roof height, but if it contained meeting rooms, combining those spaces could be enough to attract something like a Walgreens or CVS to such a location.  Anyway, I don't know if this project will ever become reality, but it beats having another vacant lot, imo.

The link to the article and the comments posted there are spot on. That place is disgusting. If it were knocked down then maybe we could restore the cool Klutho right across the street, the old Claude Nolan Cadillac building. That one is worth saving, but no one will touch it with a ten foot pole as long as that disaster sits across the street. If the current owners can get private financing, fine. Spending city money on that site would be a COMPLETE and TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY AND AN INSULT TO THE RESIDENTS OF JACKSONVILLE!!!

Honestly I'm a little surprised FSCJ never looked into it as possible student housing. Since they're now a state college and offer 4-year degrees, why not have some dorms nearby?

That would be nice. I like the possibilities.

It's a sizable location and perfectly positioned to be integrated with the park. Really there are a lot of options, but in terms of knocking it down and starting from scratch I would prefer to see investors focus on Brooklyn first, it makes more sense to connect downtown with thriving Riverside than floundering Springfield. I think adapting and reusing the structure is the most financially viable option at this point.

I took the liberty of a self guided tour though Springfield yesterday, and I would not describe it as floundering.

I was surprised to see how many houses here looking quite good. The neighbors cast nary a discouraging eye my way. I was not pleased by the median through Main St, but perhaps residents feel differently.

I forsee good things for Springfield, and businesses will surely prosper, given time.

There is some blight there, to be sure. It is looking much better than in the past, and I would say the nice homes are equal to or even outnumber the delapidated ones.

BTW, Burrito Gallery has a fine product being served. Delicious.

I'm pretty sure all of us who live in Springfield would take offensive to that "floundering Springfield" bit.  How many new places have opened here recently compared to Riverside?

regarding the median:  it's a pain in the rear.
regarding springfield vs. riverside:  some people just won't take us seriously until we have a bark boutique and an assortment ov clothing stores that cash in on the ghost ov edginess past.  personally, i think we're better off without those people.

^Easy now, I don't think anyone is trying to put down springfield.  I think the poster was just trying to discuss the differences between the areas. In comparing the commercial corridors, there is a pretty big difference.

I don't mean that as a knock against Springfield.  My feeling is that the poster could have picked a better work than floundering, while the springfield folks should stop feeling like the fat girl at the prom, begging someone to know that they'ed be great at the afterparty if someone would just go home with them.

Quote from: Steve on May 04, 2010, 01:59:55 PM
^Easy now, I don't think anyone is trying to put down springfield.  I think the poster was just trying to discuss the differences between the areas. In comparing the commercial corridors, there is a pretty big difference.

I don't mean that as a knock against Springfield.  My feeling is that the poster could have picked a better work than floundering, while the springfield folks should stop feeling like the fat girl at the prom, begging someone to know that they'ed be great at the afterparty if someone would just go home with them.

And we move into more faux pas! lol! ;D

srsly, the only reason i never went home with the fat girl is 'cause i never went to the prom (and while that may be stretching the metaphor a bit, i daresay it still applies to springfield).

Quote from: geauxtigers31 on May 04, 2010, 11:36:20 AM
It's a sizable location and perfectly positioned to be integrated with the park. Really there are a lot of options, but in terms of knocking it down and starting from scratch I would prefer to see investors focus on Brooklyn first, it makes more sense to connect downtown with thriving Riverside than floundering Springfield. I think adapting and reusing the structure is the most financially viable option at this point.

Springfield is hardly floundering and is experiencing an influx of new residents, both owners and renters.  You'll soon be hearing some announcements about upcoming openings, some you may have heard about others you likely haven't.  

I've fielded so many requests for information on local realtors recently that I had to create a prominent page on mySpringfield.org for them.

If you haven't been to Springfield recently come by this Saturday for the 2010 Bike Tour.  It starts at Three Layers at 10am.  It's free and I'll buy you a beer afterward.

Back on topic...Reusing the existing structure for first floor commercial combined with parking would be a far better option than an empty lot for the next 10 years.  It would help connect Springfield with downtown and possibly allow greater utilization of the park.  Whether the plan is feasible and the owner will follow through is another question.

Buckethead, so glad you checked Springfield out.  And Steve, lots of folks from Riverside, Avondale, San Marco and even the beaches have recently chosen to make Springfield their home - and are enjoying the party.

Regarding the Park View: I agree that street level retail with a parking garage above might make sense, ESPECIALLY if combined with student housing for FSCJ at a nearby location.

Quote from: Miss Fixit on May 04, 2010, 02:20:49 PMAnd Steve, lots of folks from Riverside, Avondale, San Marco and even the beaches have recently chosen to make Springfield their home - and are enjoying the party.

Geez - didn't want to break out the defensive bandwagon.  It was a joke.  A good friend of mine just bough a house on Silver, and I have a bunch of other friends that have lived there for years on Market, Walnut, etc.

This is kind of my point though.  One guy says something slightly negative about the neighborhood, and people go ape.  Everyone breathe for a second.

Not, back to the topic at hand.  I'd love to know who's going to park at this proposed garage befor I give my green light.

Thats what I like about you stephen..................watching out for your fellow person!

Quote from: buckethead on May 04, 2010, 11:43:53 AM
...The neighbors cast nary a discouraging eye my way. I was not pleased by the median through Main St

Glad I am not the only one

My point was only that if someone is willing to spend the money on building something from the ground up then I think Brooklyn is the smarter choice. There is more daytime activity in the area with the Fidelity and Everbank complexes and it would connect with the night time activities of five points. While I know there are some good things happening in Springfield, as an objective observer with no real ties to either place, Riverside is in a much better position to really take off as a thriving urban neighborhood, like a Marigny in New Orleans, than Springfield.

To tie it to the actual thread, I think demolishing and building from scratch would be a poor investment choice given the other options available. Reuse is what needs to be explored.

I strongly question the building's integrity. I know from first hand experience that the roof is not saveable and am surprised that the elevator pull system(which was really cool btw) had not fell through yet.
Dunno how bad the fire damage is in it either. Lot of fugie as well, and black mold.

Although the reception area is awesome, so is the deck and pool area.

Some of the houses in Springfield were in far worse shape and they have been rehabbed.  The solid concrete skeleton of the building appears to be structurally sound. Other features like the roof and facade would have to be replaced.  However, doing so would be more of a benefit to the area than spending $1.5 million of taxpayer money to demolish it, leaving another abandoned lot on our downtown moonscape.

What would you make it into? The closest surrounding buildings all of which are vacant would not lend itself to another hotel I would not think. Maybe dorms but most who go to the FSCJ go there for certification class or work related.

I don't advocate demolition and I don't like abandoned blight.  However, how long will we have to wait to see renovation to Park View?  The owners need to stop flapping their jaws and put their money where their mouth is.  Get the project done. 

Park View in its day (I've only seen pictures,) appeared gorgeous.  I think a parking garage sucks, but if retail, and housing were added, better.  Connection to the college?  Even better.  Park View's location IMHO is prime.  A gateway to Springfield and to Downtown and adjacent to Hogan's Creek and the park.  It may not seem prime at this given moment, but I am a firm believer it will be as this area of Jax continues to improve, albeit slow improvement, improvement nonetheless.

Quote from: Sportmotor on May 04, 2010, 06:31:28 PM
What would you make it into? The closest surrounding buildings all of which are vacant would not lend itself to another hotel I would not think. Maybe dorms but most who go to the FSCJ go there for certification class or work related.

I think the owner's idea may be more feasible than all past proposals for the property.  

from article

QuoteBut 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.

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

I believe this is a viable use for the building for the following reasons:

1. This corner has one of the highest vehicular traffic counts in DT, which is a major plus for retail.

2. The deck and structure are already in place and reuse will be a ton cheaper than new construction.

3. The parking deck will serve the retail on this block and potentially the Klutho building across the street at Main & Orange.

4. A nice renovation project at this corner will do more for the area than a vacant lot with only the concrete slab remaining.

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/assets/thumbs/image.344.feature.jpg)

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/park_view_inn/DSC_0008.jpg)
This front along Ocean could feature street level retail.  That large space on the corner (the old lobby and meeting area) may be large enough for something like a CVS or Walgreens to anchor the retail portion.

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/park_view_inn/DSC_0020.jpg)

The parking deck is already there and accessible from the rear, via Orange Street.  This would be used as the parking requirements for the retail spaces going into the complex.

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/park_view_inn/DSC_0029.jpg)

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/park_view_inn/DSC_0004.jpg)

The driveway/old lobby entrance at Main & State would be a nice spot for a courtyard/open plaza with outdoor seating.  Retail opening this space would be idea for a restaurant or something that can take advantage of the high traffic exposure on the corner.  An outdoor plaza would also be a great entry feature for Springfield. Along with the gas station & restaurant planned across the street, these two projects would combine to play a huge role in enhancing the pedestrian connection between DT & Springfield.  These projects could also lead to additional development at the corner or FSCJ opening up their campus across the street.

Will all these things happen?  At this point, I can't say.  However, taking down the old tower and restoring the base of the structure at least makes this a possibility.  Tearing it and waiting for new construction to get financed on that block in the middle of an economic recession does not.

Quote from: iloveionia on May 04, 2010, 07:52:27 PM
I don't advocate demolition and I don't like abandoned blight.  However, how long will we have to wait to see renovation to Park View?  The owners need to stop flapping their jaws and put their money where their mouth is.  Get the project done.

This is easier said when an individual is not putting up the money to fund such a renovation or tear down.  I don't know the owner's financial status but I do have direct experience with the site's problems.  When I moved to Jax, this was the site of one of my first architectural projects in town.  At the time, the client had an option to purchase the property with plans to demolish the hotel and construct a +20 story condo tower with street level retail and a Walgreens in its place.  That project, like many after it, died due to environmental issues surrounding the site and the nearby creek.

My guess is this has had a direct impact on nothing happening with the property over the last decade.  From what I've been hearing over the last few years, it seems like this latest plan is quite doable.  Anyway, I guess only time will tell.  However, as a taxpayer, I'd rather see this guy get tax breaks to get this off the ground than using $1.5 million to tear down private property.  Imo, $1.5 million in public money would be better used in many other ways.

This is a Rite Aid integrated into a building on the campus of the University of Charleston.  This EXACT floorplan can be accomodated into the footprint of the Park View Inn under the proposed modifications being presented by the present owners.  Obviously, the facade of this particular picture would need to be adapted to be more visible... however, the traffic count on this corner would rival the top 35% of existing traffic counts from drug stores(CVS, Walgreens, etc) currently in the city(certainly not the top 10, but a VERY reasonable amount).  Additionally, the working and living population is WELL within this type of store's requirement.  Furthermore this would serve a very big need for both DT and Springfield.

The comment about the COPS show is very true.  Its time for that to change!

(http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/6138/picturebc.jpg) (http://img718.imageshack.us/i/picturebc.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Quote from: thelakelander on May 04, 2010, 09:43:21 PM
However, as a taxpayer, I'd rather see this guy get tax breaks to get this off the ground than using $1.5 million to tear down private property.  Imo, $1.5 million in public money would be better used in many other ways.

While I agree wholeheartedly, the current situation with 11E/The Carling tempers my enthusiasm a bit.  Tax breaks aren't guaranteed stimulus, however if someone has plans ready to go and some financing lined up, tax breaks can certainly provide the extra push necessary. 

That said, what are the odds that, a few years down the line, they'll need more breaks from the taxpayer to keep the building afloat.  Obviously, 11E/The Carling got loans from the City so it's not an apples to apples comparison, but both situations have government intervention in the market.

Plus, I can't imagine that project coming in under budget, especially if it went out to bid in the current, cutthroat environment.  I'm no rehab expert, but parts of the building just look awful.  Finding something unexpected during construction seems inevitable. 

Either way, it is a great location and would be a great to see part of downtown go from such a negative to a positive.  Are there any plans for the building across Orange St from the Park View (E.T. Thompson Bldg I believe)?

^11E/Carling received loans worth more than the cost to renovate the entire Park View, making them hard to compare.  The only thing that looks bad on this building is the cosmetic stuff that will have to be taken down and replaced.  As long as the actual structural integrity of the building is intact, its not going to fall down. 

There were plans to convert the E.T. Thompson Bldg into lofts and retail a few years back.  I believe those plans are on ice, due to the same environmental issues that have plagued the Park View.

Smaller building but interesting results.  Under most circumstances, this would have been torn down in Jacksonville.

(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a259/Bexi23/fire.jpg)

(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a259/Bexi23/fire2.jpg)

(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a259/Bexi23/fire4.jpg)

(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a259/Bexi23/fire5.jpg)

more images and text: http://www.gossiprocks.com/forum/home-garden/85365-modernist-loft-rises-scorched-industrial-complex.html

those examples are nice, but they aren't located along a 4 lane highway.  state and main make this area so unwalkable.  i don't see how anything could be located there as long as state and union are arranged as they are.  were i mayor, my first action to save downtown/springfield would be to make both of those roads two way, encourage enforcing the speed limit strictly, and unsync the stoplights so that people can't blaze though main, ocean, state and union.

The parkview inn doesn't have the best view of the park, needs to be a couple more stories, but I suppose there will be no residential components of the renovation.

Quote from: konstantconsumer on May 05, 2010, 12:28:53 AM
those examples are nice, but they aren't located along a 4 lane highway.

state and main make this area so unwalkable.  i don't see how anything could be located there as long as state and union are arranged as they are.  were i mayor, my first action to save downtown/springfield would be to make both of those roads two way, encourage enforcing the speed limit strictly, and unsync the stoplights so that people can't blaze though main, ocean, state and union.

Go to any city of significant size and you'll find a couple of streets like State & Main running through the urban core.  The major thing that makes them unwalkable is the fact there is nothing pedestrian oriented lining them.  Having them lined with development that encourages walkability can have a significant impact on the perceived environment.

DC
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/459272143_X4fJX-M.jpg)

Louisville
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/719189371_niU5X-M.jpg)

Baltimore
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/592129648_av4oT-M.jpg)

Nashville
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/562687642_tiiMn-M.jpg)

White Plains, NY
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-7893-p1120147.JPG)

Atlanta
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/599830565_HXgvQ-M.jpg)

Chicago
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/476441964_jFBEs-M.jpg)

Indianapolis
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/570694740_Zr6DU-M.jpg)

Columbus
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-1894-p1010166.JPG)

Also, I think the strongest case for improving walkability is the north/south connection between Springfield and Downtown.  Having development on these corners that embrace and encourage foot traffic will go a long way into improving current conditions in those areas.

Quote from: TheProfessor on May 05, 2010, 01:29:33 AM
The parkview inn doesn't have the best view of the park, needs to be a couple more stories, but I suppose there will be no residential components of the renovation.

Correct, there are no residential components.  While one can assume that the streetscape on that entire block would be improved as a part of any redevelopment plan, it would be nice if FSCJ could be convinced to improve their frontage on the stretch of Main, between State and Hogans Creek.

FSCJ at Main & Orange Streets.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-8056-p1170434.JPG)

Imagine if the wall blocking Orange Street were removed and their central pedestrian corridor were extended one block to Main.  DVI and the JEDC should really look into a plan that improves street level connectivity with the uses already in place.  DT may have more foot traffic than all of us believe right now.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/463586735_VuxQd-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/463586171_nAkdP-M.jpg)

What is the status of the soil contamination issue between Park View, and the Park?

If the current owner of the Park View has a "vision", then all the best to them, AS LONG AS IT IS PRIVATE FINANCING. When the current owner can convince a bank or other lender to give them the $$$$$$ to make it beautiful, I wish them the best. Can we please stop talking about what the city can do and focus on what the current owner has actually done. NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It is a disgusting unsafe rat nursery, and it should be condemned. Give the current owner a time frame to fix it or knock it down. A clear vacant lot will more likely attract a responsible owner (and open the space to unlimited development) than the dump that is sitting there now. 

Are MusicMan and CS Foltz the same person?

Quote from: MusicMan on May 05, 2010, 09:03:34 AM
If the current owner of the Park View has a "vision", then all the best to them, AS LONG AS IT IS PRIVATE FINANCING. When the current owner can convince a bank or other lender to give them the $$$$$$ to make it beautiful, I wish them the best. Can we please stop talking about what the city can do and focus on what the current owner has actually done. NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It is a disgusting unsafe rat nursery, and it should be condemned. Give the current owner a time frame to fix it or knock it down. A clear vacant lot will more likely attract a responsible owner (and open the space to unlimited development) than the dump that is sitting there now.  

Do you feel its right to spend $1.5 million of taxpayer money to tear it down?  If so, isn't this view hypocritical? As a taxpayer, it could sit there for eternity in abandonment before I'd advocate spending that much public money to tear a private structure down.  If we have that type of money to throw around, it would be better used a number of public realm oriented projects.

Quote from: billy on May 05, 2010, 08:37:48 AM
What is the status of the soil contamination issue between Park View, and the Park?

There have been several heated threads on this forum and others about this.  Basically, there is contamination.  There have been studies done that prove this and also provide for what remediation must be done to utilize the existing building.  It does not involve anything with Hogans Creek's issues. That does not mean they are not related, but simply that the existing building can be made safe to use without doing anything to Hogan's Creek.

Once the building is torn down I believe the remediation required to build new on the site would become much more extensive than is required to utilize the existing building.  I also suspect that if the city demos this building, that remediation would eventually end up being paid for by our tax dollars.

Utilizing the existing building in some way seems to be the more practical thing to do.  If it takes tax payer money now to use this building rather than tear it down for 1.5 mil we will never get back and then who knows how much more later on to get someone to build on that lot or use it as park land, then I am all for it. At least the public will get some value now for our investment.

QuoteOnce the building is torn down I believe the remediation required to build new on the site would become much more extensive than is required to utilize the existing building.  I also suspect that if the city demos this building, that remediation would eventually end up being paid for by our tax dollars.

From my understanding, the foundation of the building is essentially a cap for the crap that may be underneath.  Remove that and unearth whatever is under there and we'll have to pay for that cleanup.  If demolished, my guess is the city would probably leave the foundation in place to not deal with the unknown and you would have another block like this:

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-3455-p1070613.JPG)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/520611056_ZizaQ-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/520607018_E7HyE-M.jpg)

That's really such a shame, because there's no better place for the college to work in some sort of housing concept. And if they partnered with JTA a bit, it could really take off as a greater educational institution.

It shouldn't be an absolute NO - considering the school is one of the few growing, positive businesses we have, it should really be encouraged by all parties to reopen and test the grounds once and for all.

You know they could turn Park View Inn into a heck of a club

QuoteDo you feel its right to spend $1.5 million of taxpayer money to tear it down?  If so, isn't this view hypocritical? As a taxpayer, it could sit there for eternity in abandonment before I'd advocate spending that much public money to tear a private structure down.

Oh my gosh, next thing I know, the people will be coming out of the woodwork to claim this is a Historical and contributing structure. Hogwash, its a decrepid old aging structure that is a blight on the community. It probably costs $100,000 to tear down, but $1.4 million to remove all the nastiness inside.

Who in their sound or right mind would actually park there? I think the owners are infected by what is in the ground.

Actually, if you refer to the article on MetroJacksonville about this site, it is sort of historical.  It was, after all, one of THE places to stay in Jacksonville at one time.

Many people have advocated tearing this place down.  Perhaps if all that effort on behalf of certain orgs and people had gone to advocating actually doing something worthwhile with the existing building instead of saying all the time it had to go, we would not be having this conversation and the building would be a useful and important part of downtown by now.

Doing something with the existing building is a plus, tearing it down at tax payer expense to the tune of 1.5 mil is obscene and does nothing what so ever for downtown except create another abandoned and unlikely to be built upon ugly lot.

^Just in case Mtrain missed the actual proposed use in the article:

QuoteBut 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.

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

Maybe its just me, but it would seem the parking garage (which happens to be already in place) would serve the street level retail on the block.

QuoteOh my gosh, next thing I know, the people will be coming out of the woodwork to claim this is a Historical and contributing structure. Hogwash, its a decrepid old aging structure that is a blight on the community.

Quote

Wouldn't renovation (assuming the owner is serious of course) solve the blight issue and also save taxpayers money?

QuoteMaybe its just me, but it would seem the parking garage (which happens to be already in place) would serve the street level retail on the block.

Lake, in order for retail to work, there needs to be other retail, and GASP, people near the retail. This location has neither.

There are different types of retail (imagine that). While the GAP or Macy's won't be coming in, that's a great location for something like a pharmacy or quick serve restaurant. Also, there is a Burger King, Winn Dixie and other businesses already along that stretch.  Both are examples of forms of retail, btw.

QuoteAlso, there is a Burger King, Winn Dixie and other businesses already along that stretch.

Stretch is a good word. I can think you are stretching the truth when you say, "already along that stretch", but who in their right mind would park at the Inn to go to Burger King or Winn Dixie, or for that matter shop at the Inn? If there was retail next to or across the street, it makes more sense, but what is next to the Inn? Across the busy street is the Shell station, already thriving with various night and day residents, probably the same who live at the Inn now. What else is around the Inn? A manufacturing business next to it on Ocean, a distributor on Orange, JEA across Main and a vacant lot across the street.

What other retail is up and down State and Union to tie this in? If the owners want to throw their money at it, fine by me. Seems like more of a waste to clean it up, and try and run retail from it. The City will not be kind with them in permitting, and you will have to bring the building up to new codes. This will not be a cheap renovation.

Seriously, did you read the article? This is the proposal.

A. Take down the hotel tower on the north side of the property.

B. Keep the existing parking garage, which is located on the site's NE corner.

C. Convert the hotel's existing first floor space along Ocean and Main (SE corner) into retail.

Thus, people who park in the property's garage will most likely be working, shopping or eating at the retail spaces attached to it within the same structure.  Sort of like the parking lot in front of the Riverside Publix.  Most visiting that lot either shop, work, eat or visit the retail spaces adjacent to it.

Just to clear up any confusion, the proposal is to convert a portion of the structure into retail use.  To serve the retail spaces, the structure's existing parking garage will remain intact.  Although this Jax Beach project is a much smaller scale, it serves as an example of what the owner believes may be feasible for the Park View Inn (minus the hotel tower, which would still be demolished).

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/628154444_DM6Vx-M.jpg)
This retail center in Jax Beach is now complete.  Parking for the stores is located on the center's roof.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/567382385_o2KLz-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/567382372_hieoi-M.jpg)

^This is basically the owner's new proposal for the portion of the old hotel that isn't demolished.  Given the high traffic count at that intersection and the lack of retail in the area, he may have a very feasible project on his hands.  Let's hope they can finally pull something off.

^ Thanks for clarifying Lake.  Do you know about what the proposed square footage of Park View would be?

I think I'm getting the retail and residential markets downtown confused.  Judging by 11E and the Carling, the residential market downtown doesn't look great.  What's the retail market like?  Looking at situations like the Landing; does the demand exist and it's just a matter of getting the details in order (ie, meeting parking requirements) to attract retailers?

Could they accommodate a drive-thru on the concrete foundation of the part that will be demoed?  You know, for a pharmacy or coffee shop?

Quote from: mtraininjax on May 05, 2010, 08:01:30 PM
Lake, in order for retail to work, there needs to be other retail, and GASP, people near the retail. This location has neither.

mtrain...one of the main questions many retailers have is "what is the adjacent traffic volume"...believe me, this site can work just fine for uses like drug stores, banks, fast food, etc.  

Quote from: urbanlibertarian on May 05, 2010, 10:13:14 PM
Could they accommodate a drive-thru on the concrete foundation of the part that will be demoed?  You know, for a pharmacy or coffee shop?

There's already a drive thru where the old lobby used to be.  So if that were a desire of a perspective tenant, I assume that could be preserved in some fashion.

Quote from: 9a is my backyard on May 05, 2010, 09:53:07 PM
^ Thanks for clarifying Lake.  Do you know about what the proposed square footage of Park View would be?

Its hard to tell without knowing the exact details or proposed second floor parking configuration (this is where the pool and interior courtyard are currently located).  However, using Google Earth for measuring, it could be anywhere from 15,000 to 30,000sf of retail space.  That old lobby/conference room area looks to be close to having a 10,000sf footprint.  That box may be a perfect fit for the type of space typical pharmacies tend to look for.

QuoteI think I'm getting the retail and residential markets downtown confused.  Judging by 11E and the Carling, the residential market downtown doesn't look great.  What's the retail market like?  Looking at situations like the Landing; does the demand exist and it's just a matter of getting the details in order (ie, meeting parking requirements) to attract retailers?

The actual market is much larger than downtown and what DVI claims it to be.  DT is really just a central neighborhood in a larger urban core area that includes adjacent neighborhoods like Springfield, Eastside, Durkeeville and Brooklyn.  Within a five mile radius of the area, you probably have 150-200k residents.  So the real market is closer to that then the 2k residents typically mentioned as living in the Northbank. State & Union are centralized enough and easily accessible to pull traffic from each specific district, as well as people on their way over the Matthews Bridge or to I-95.  

So, demand is there.  However, you still have to make sure your project has the necessary essentials (ex. parking, visibility, feasible leasing rates, etc.) to attract and keep tenants.

So,,,,If I am understanding this correctly...the 4 story stripped out portion of the structure,  plus the lovely green and trash-filled swimming pool will go byebye?  and renovation of the remainer of the structure?.

If it sees renovation , fine.  I hope retail will work there...  it is in such a Sketchy area of town, Im not sure about the level of success it will see. But if they actually renovate and tear down the 4 story portion of it,  I guess I can live with it.

Most new Walgreens stores being built today are around 14k sq ft and most of the new CVS stores being built today are around 13k sq ft.  Typically they require parking for b/w 50-70 cars and drive thru access.

This corner(remember this is an intersection located on two main thoroughfares) hits pretty much every traffic characteristic needed for these model stores.

That being said, a 9k square foot floor plan would fit JUST fine in this space.  I posted a pic of a Rite Aid 9k sq ft parcel that would work just fine.

Dunkin Donuts would also be a prime candidate based on traffic count numbers(or as a part of the new BP station).

Lake is absolutely right, you can't just look at the residential population... in addition to the 2k or so residents downtown(and whatever the resident count is in the Springfield Historic District), theres another under 50k or so working population downtown... and plenty of traffic during peak hours from residents going to and from work feeding to/from the Matthews Bridge.

The potential for a very contributory business is 100% there, now its a case of getting the dollars to make sense.

The Urbana development Lake posted in Jax Beach is very nice.  This was a corner that sat derilic for many years and is now a tremendously attractive multi-use space that encourages pedestrian activity and does not clog up parking in an area where parking is limited.  On a side note, anyone ever notice that even with space restrictions that any of the beaches do not have parking meters in their 'core'?  Imagine that  ;)

Anyway,
Imagine the Park View space looking something like a multi-use structure anchored by a pharmacy(something that is needed downtown IMO) like this...

(http://www.readthehook.com/images/issues/2006/0549/onarch-pharmacy.jpg)



Do you see how attractive that corner could be?  The traffic count, need, and population is there... now its a matter of economics.

^Great points. 

Agreed^ Jax Beach has come a long way.

A clean user friendly transit option should also connect the (theoretical) new convention center dirctly to downtown Jax Bch. Obviously not monorail. I'd feel more comfortable letting our resident experts decide the appropriate mode, but I'm certain an easy trip to the beach could woo businesses who are attending conventions. This is but a possible side effect of providing a connector from DT to the Beaches. Beachers could also enjoy the ammenities and employment opportunities of downtown more easily.

I'm at the beaches, so I may be biased.

I am coming around to understanding your viewpoints.  Again Im asking... Is the Hotel itself being demolished and just the parking garage and lobby spared?? I guess i am confused as to exactly the plan there. 

Fieldafm... I love that rendering... something like that , or some similar construction would be AMAZING to replace the eyesore we presently endure every day.    What is sad is that the Origonal Heart of Jax picture I saw of the Hotel was SO COOL looking !  its such a shame that this "renovation" to the current design took place... Even trying to imagine it in "good" shape , It simply is NOT attractive in its current design.

From my understanding of the proposal, the base of the hotel will stay.  This part contains the garage, lobby and meeting rooms.  The hotel tower portion would be demolished.  The base would then be renovated and converted into retail space and the garage would serve those retail uses.

Ok.. got it now.   Wish I could be the one to bring the Hotel down ;)  I really hope this plan comes to life.  You guys have vision I only wish I had by comparison.  But I guess my heart throb,,,and this is no secret , is School #4.   IF I live to see this baby have new life breathed into it, I would die a happy man :)

- All for adaptive reuse.  I liked the work-force condo idea that floated a couple of years back.
- Not too happy knowing the City Council is going to figure out where else to spend the demo money BEFORE we know if the reuse plan will work.  What if this falls through again, like all the other plans, only now the money that was going to demo this eyesore has been diverted elsewhere and we are stuck with it again.
- The current plans I saw for Hogan's Creek is that this corner will be a traffic circle/gateway to Springfield/tie in Confederate Park, so I don't think the long term plan was to have another vacant lot.  That said, I'd be more interested in adaptive reuse.
- Miss Fixit, I attended functions in this hotel during my high school days (sometime in the Cro Magnon era :-) and it was beatiful at one time.  

Quote from: Debbie Thompson on May 07, 2010, 02:09:05 PM
- The current plans I saw for Hogan's Creek is that this corner will be a traffic circle/gateway to Springfield/tie in Confederate Park, so I don't think the long term plan was to have another vacant lot.  That said, I'd be more interested in adaptive reuse.

The Hogans Creek concepts have not been adopted by the city and no funding has been geared for such a project.  There's also an issue of this being private property.  Futhermore, both of the streets involved in the roundabout concept are FDOT (another issue).  All in all, the idea (a bad one from a utilization standpoint) of a roundabout where the Park View currently stands is just that, an idea and dream at best.

QuoteDear Dr. Gaffney:

   On behalf of the SPAR Council Board, I urge you to oppose the reallocation of the funds set aside to demolish the Park View Inn.

   It almost goes without saying that the decades-long existence of this derelict building continues to be a terrible blight on the gateway to both Springfield and Downtown.  Just when the end apparently was finally in sight and demolition was imminent, we learned that the owner has come up a "plan" to turn it into a parking garage and that the City, with no input from the neighborhood, has decided to pull the $1.5 million set aside for demolition.  We are opposed for the following reasons:

   1.  This decaying, crime-ridden building is an eyesore that should have been demolished years ago.  How wonderful it would be if people entering Springfield and Downtown could actually view the park!

   2.  The site is so polluted that it highly unlikely it could ever be occupied without massive remediation.

   3.  Where is the demand for a parking garage on to outskirts of downtown.  This is a subterfuge.

   4.  Who would ever finance construction on a contaminated site with no apparent value?  It is reported that the owner expects "free" City money.  A pipe dream.  Why would the City ever want to throw scarce money down that pit?

   5.  How much more time is the owner going to given to fix up the property after he has neglected it for decades?

   6.  If the owner's "plans" fail, where will the demolition money come from after it has been spent for other purposes?

   7.  Who will enforce the law?  This property was supposed to be demolished years ago and fines are accumulating.  The owner is under a demolition order.  My understanding is that the General Counsel's Office was supposed to be acquiring the property by foreclosure so that NSP funds could be used for demolition.  I can find no evidence that the City is foreclosing on it.  In case I missed it, why isn't the City pursuing it or who stopped it?

   Unless the property is demolished promptly, as it should have been years ago, we can foresee no outcome other than continuing decay, continuing  blight and continuing crime blocking the improvement of Springfield and Downtown.

   Thank you for your consideration of our position.

Sincerely,

Claude R. Moulton

Quote from: Debbie Thompson on May 07, 2010, 02:09:05 PM
- All for adaptive reuse.  I liked the work-force condo idea that floated a couple of years back.
- Not too happy knowing the City Council is going to figure out where else to spend the demo money BEFORE we know if the reuse plan will work.  What if this falls through again, like all the other plans, only now the money that was going to demo this eyesore has been diverted elsewhere and we are stuck with it again.
- The current plans I saw for Hogan's Creek is that this corner will be a traffic circle/gateway to Springfield/tie in Confederate Park, so I don't think the long term plan was to have another vacant lot.  That said, I'd be more interested in adaptive reuse.
- Miss Fixit, I attended functions in this hotel during my high school days (sometime in the Cro Magnon era :-) and it was beatiful at one time.  

I like the idea of adaptive reuse, as well.  Never went into the Park View, but remember the older men in my office heading to the Park View for Happy Hour in the afternoons when I was first worked in downtown Jacksonville.

When did it cease operations?  I think I remember it open as well.

Quote
1.  This decaying, crime-ridden building is an eyesore that should have been demolished years ago.  How wonderful it would be if people entering Springfield and Downtown could actually view the park!

In its current condition, it is an eyesore and we all have our opinions and a right to express them, but if the same sentiment had been taken of Springfield for the last five decades, there would be no historic district. 

Quote2.  The site is so polluted that it highly unlikely it could ever be occupied without massive remediation.

If what is under the building's garage and foundation is really a concern, it makes more sense to keep that portion of the structure in place to serve as a permanent cap.  The city foreclosing on the property and spending $1.5 million to rip it down may leave the city liable to clean up whatever may be under it.  That's a huge risk to put on the backs of the Jacksonville taxpayer.

Quote3.  Where is the demand for a parking garage on to outskirts of downtown.  This is a subterfuge.

Sounds like some confusion may still be going on.  The garage is already in place and the parking will be needed to serve the retail uses that has been proposed for the space.  At least this is what it says in the linked article:

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.

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

Quote4.  Who would ever finance construction on a contaminated site with no apparent value?  It is reported that the owner expects "free" City money.  A pipe dream.  Why would the City ever want to throw scarce money down that pit?

Spending $1.5 million of taxpayer money to tear down a privately owned property is throwing scarce public money down the pit.  If we're really concerned about protecting the taxpayer, renovating a portion of the structure and providing development grants, incentives or tax breaks to do so make much better sense.

Quote5.  How much more time is the owner going to given to fix up the property after he has neglected it for decades?

According to the TU's archives, the hotel closed back in December 2000 (9 1/2 years ago, not decades).  

source: http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061701/met_6457089.html

I used to feel this way about private development, but after working for development clients and doing some things on my own, I've come to the understanding that its much easier to sprout things off when you're not personally putting up the hundreds of thousands or millions to get up a regular project.  These things take time.  Throw in environmental issues, the project's size and trying to get past a fight with an adjacent neighborhood and things get delayed even more.  

Quote6.  If the owner's "plans" fail, where will the demolition money come from after it has been spent for other purposes?

Instead of wondering about a worse case scenario, lets work together to try and get something to finally succeed.  You know the line, "united we stand, divided we fall."  There's a ton of passion in our community and if everyone could work together for a change, turn around will rapidly come to fruition.  As for the demolition money, hopefully that public funds will be spent on things that actually benefit the taxpayer.  

Quote7.  Who will enforce the law?  This property was supposed to be demolished years ago and fines are accumulating.  The owner is under a demolition order.  My understanding is that the General Counsel's Office was supposed to be acquiring the property by foreclosure so that NSP funds could be used for demolition.  I can find no evidence that the City is foreclosing on it.  In case I missed it, why isn't the City pursuing it or who stopped it?

Other than code enforcement, I can't answer the foreclosure questions.  However, perhaps its not in the financial interest of the city to acquire and demolish private property in the midst of an economic recession.

QuoteUnless the property is demolished promptly, as it should have been years ago, we can foresee no outcome other than continuing decay, continuing  blight and continuing crime blocking the improvement of Springfield and Downtown.

The demolition money has been reallocated so there's no reason continuing to cry over spilled milk.  Let's all work together to ensure that a feasible redevelopment plan becomes reality this time around.  

Quote from: sheclown on May 08, 2010, 08:20:28 AM
When did it cease operations?  I think I remember it open as well.

December 2000.  Although the thing looks like it has been vacant for decades, its really been vacant for a little less than ten.  When abandoned buildings aren't properly sealed, they fall apart pretty quickly.

Well the surrounding buildings are in no better shape. The one overlooking the park looks just as bad, they all need to be addressed and then it might spur some heavyer intrest I would think.

I wouldnt build a nice new anything with the area looking like the way it does.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 08, 2010, 08:56:06 AM
December 2000.  

No way! I would have guessed it had been abandoned since the early 90's, if not before.

Everything in the building currently points toward it looking like it has been far far far far far farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr longer then just 2000. Its rough on the inside of it.

While there has been a lot of finger pointing at the owner of this building, as a past owner of a condemned house, it isn't easy keeping up with the maintenance issues.  From what I have seen with this site, the owner has done about as well as anyone else has with their vacant commercial properties in Springfield.

The condition is as bad as it is I believe due to the fires set within the building. Had it not been for the fires, it would not have had the partial demolition to the rooms, which I am sure was done at least partially due to pressure from code enforcement.

Mr. Moulton's letter certainly indicates that the community organization has been campaigning for demolition rather than ever embracing any of the possible uses that were presented through the years.  This tracks with what we know about this organizations track record with demolition of structure.

Lake says it best, we need to get behind the latest proposals and get it done for the betterment of all.

Stephen, that conceptual master plan was and is just that, a conceptual master plan.  Master plans take years (sometimes decades) to come online and rarely turn out as conceptually conceived, especially when assuming potential uses for privately owned property.  They are just visions of how an area should be developed.  In reality, the market will drive the private sector development and uses.  However, as long as the park and creek are revitalized, every existing structure in the area could remain and the long term goal would still be achieved.

Quote from: Sportmotor on May 08, 2010, 09:26:25 AM
Everything in the building currently points toward it looking like it has been far far far far far farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr longer then just 2000. Its rough on the inside of it.

Because it was not properly sealed up, vagrants were living in it for a while.

"Instead of wondering about a worse case scenario, lets work together to try and get something to finally succeed.  You know the line, "united we stand, divided we fall."  There's a ton of passion in our community and if everyone could work together for a change, turn around will rapidly come to fruition..."


Your lips to God's ears, Lake.  

The new RRP rule just out last month, will make any work at the site a nightmare for contractors and owners.

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm

Fines, per incident of over 30,000 each. Anyone want to be first in Jax? Disturb more than 6 square feet worth of work, and you have to be certified and use the correct equipment with the work. Lead consumption is often overlooked, but it is deadly and living in many buildings, including this one.

The park view Inn has to be lead abated and did so even prior to this latest (2008 - now being enforced) EPA policy.  This new ruling seems to be effecting residential more than anything.  It applies to homeowners working on their own homes as well.

Strider, that's not what it looked like to me...unless you mean people who hire contractors to work on their homes.

Information for Homeowners Working at Home
If you are a homeowner performing renovation, repair, or painting work in your own home, EPA's RRP rule does not cover your project. However, you have the ultimate responsibility for the safety of your family or children in your care. If you are living in a pre-1978 home and planning to do painting or repairs, please read a copy of EPA's Renovate Right: Important Lead Hazard Information for Families, Child Care Providers, and Schools.  You may also want to call the National Lead Information Center at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323) and ask for more information on how to work safely in a home with lead-based paint.

However, it looks like if you rent any property, you have to provide your tenant with a lead booklet prior to painting, document compliance you have done so, and use lead-certified painting contractors...or become lead certified yourself before you can paint, it appears.  Yikes!  If you have any rental property, better learn the material.

QuoteThe park view Inn has to be lead abated and did so even prior to this latest (2008 - now being enforced) EPA policy.  This new ruling seems to be effecting residential more than anything.  It applies to homeowners working on their own homes as well.

Strider, I guess there are no windows to be removed in the Park View Inn, cause the law states that even companies that remove windows have to be certified, and be able to clean up the mess that removal creates. I doubt that in any abatement, all the windows and mess were cleaned up. This is a serious law with big teeth.

The windows in the Hotel itself are gone...have been close to a year ,,,along with the doors, walls and railings... It  is almost as if it were being prepared for demolition.

I hope this plan does come to fruction.  It seems unanimous that the hotel needs to go.  I hope if nothing else is done , that at least what remains there gets a coat of paint and cleanup.  the entire block is such an eyesore.

^^Where are they now?

Anything new with this plan?  Any progress securing the funding?

When I was in the Navy, I would go into town and stay there on the weekends (when I was living on base in the barracks); this was in the mid and late 70's.  It was in super shape back then.  We would all frequent the strip clubs and disco's downtown back then and of course there was no bus service after 11 o'clock to midnight, so we would stay at "The Heart" as we called it the entire weekend.

It was still a decent hotel through to the late 80's because I can remember staying there in the late 80's and the boxer Larry Holmes, who was on top of the world then, was standing at the reservations desk and I spoke to him.  If I remember correctly the 90's is when it began to deteriorate (as did other spots and locations downtown and in the surrounding urban core).

I wonder if the city will tear it down so we can quit wasting time on it. Sorry, but so many better causes to champion and protect in this city. Let it go and be done with it-restore Hogans Creek and lets paddle boat/kayak are cares away!

It seems that the city tears all of the good buildings down, while buildings such as this are allowed to stand. I truly wish I could understand this line of thinking .

Anyone know the current status of the Park View Inn project? 

So... does anybody know what's going on there presently?

They have a few construction personnel on site working in the garage area on the Ocean Street side.

I was wondering the same thing. I was doing my downtown stroll on my lunch break and notice workers there as I passed by. I should have stopped and asked.

The Park View Inn is destined to outlive us all...

ZOMBIES!

Dog Walker......wrong........they were moving too fast to be zombies! Where is Code Enforcement when you need them? They must be more concerned about historical homes!

Quote from: CS Foltz on September 14, 2010, 05:34:12 PM
Dog Walker......wrong........they were moving too fast to be zombies! Where is Code Enforcement when you need them? They must be more concerned about historical homes!

Well, perhaps their logic is that historic homes are mostly wood and therefore can demolish themselves with a few matches and propellant.
Whereas the Park View is a big concrete monstrosity in need of a good week-long traffic detour and some explosives.

The building is a zombie.  Thing just won't die and seems to eat brains.

hmmm might be a great place for a halloween scare zone, like halloween horror nights

For those of you who may have missed this prior post, I offer it again!

Quote from: Ethylene on September 07, 2010, 11:53:10 AM

Quote from: CS Foltz on September 05, 2010, 02:43:49 PM
Makes me wonder why that Hotel downtown, which appears to me to be a hazard, is still standing? Evidently there appears to be two sets of rules........single homes go in the blink of an eye, but a multi-room ex-hotel dwelling can hang around forever! WTF?

Ok, here goes, my 100th post! I guess you're speaking of the Park View Inn above. It not only appears to be a hazard, it most definitely is! Sometime ago, more than a year, I was taking my usual route on foot past this hideous complex and I suddenly heard metal sliding. I stopped in my tracks to figure out what was happening and sure enough a portion of the roof came sliding in my direction. I quickly determined I was far enough away on the sidewalk to avoid being t-boned but it was not out of the realm of possibility that anyone venturing any closer for any reason might have been clobbered!

Imagine being homeless, down on your luck, sleeping off the Colt 45 or what have you, only to be rousted still pickled and now also skewered!

Hours later on my return trek, that long metal section had been carted off, otherwise I would have called it in! In hindsight, I wish I had raised cain about this long neglected hazard! How long before parts begin sliding off Berkman II?

TAKE IT DOWN!!! TAKE IT ALL DOWN!!!!

It looks like most of the rooms were exposed by removing the outer walls.You can see Graffiti in the rooms from the front,and large sheets of metal mesh screening are visible and ready for installation on the second floor in the back.

If I happened to be walking by and something fell off that building and on me..............I would be sueing the owners and the COJ for allowing it to stay as is! But thats just me...........IMHO!

Our city leaders obviously don't care if the Park View building remained an eyesore for the next 1,000 years...  TEAR IT OWN ALREADY!

I still stick to my Idea of blowing up the building for an Action Movie....
That way we can buy the DVD and enjoy seeing this eyesore Blow up again and again.  ;D

Quote from: Ernest Street on September 15, 2010, 07:58:57 PM
I still stick to my Idea of blowing up the building for an Action Movie....
That way we can buy the DVD and enjoy seeing this eyesore Blow up again and again.  ;D

Awesome idea!

Quote from: Ernest Street on September 15, 2010, 07:58:57 PM
I still stick to my Idea of blowing up the building for an Action Movie....
That way we can buy the DVD and enjoy seeing this eyesore Blow up again and again.  ;D

+1

Quote from: Dog Walker on September 15, 2010, 10:42:48 AM
The building is a zombie.  Thing just won't die and seems to eat brains.

We obviously need to crack it's head open & feast on the goo inside. Immortality here I come!

Artist housing!? yeah maybe.
Corporate center/satellite offices/professional center? dental center!? lol mini mall atmospere? grand piano shaped pool! ahhhhsum!
community recreation space!
tennis/squash/racquet ball courts!
parking!? some.
street level retail. probably not.

i must be just about the only person around here who likes the building.

at the very least, i hope it stays up until after i've had a chance to break in and poke around--i've seen photos ov the inside, and there's some awesome decay in there.

There's really nothing to see inside, it's been emptied and vandalized, not to mentioned burned. It's an eyesore, at best. I have seen some sort of work going on the past week or so, (some company, never did quite catch the name, but it has something to do with water) workers and trucks have been there on the Ocean street side, and some kind of pump on the street that faces the park

Any takers on whether or not........those sewer lines have been cut? Of course not! Where oh where is Code Enforcement when they are really needed? Oh wait.............COJ has two sets of rules .....one for the taxpayers and another for their GOB network members! Makes me wonder just who they are paying off?

Gee whiz boys and girls, and here I though that place was destroyed in a freak boating accident.

OCKLAWAHA

I stopped and asked they were contractors  doing enviromental testing.

What is so annoying is how the George Washington, Seminole, Mayflower and other downtown hotels were demolished in the blink of an eye, but this monstrosity of a structure lingers on for yet another day.  Shame!

Agreed.  Even in the 1970's the downtown hotels had elevators with brass folding cage door, operated by hand, and elevator operators. They were truly elegant, and should have been saved.

But, then, I'm preaching to the choir, aren't I? 

It doesn't bother me too much.  Go to major cities and you'll see much larger structures with worse conditions.  Anyway, I don't think the city paid for the demolition of those grand structures.  Their owners did for either surface parking revenue, elimination of taxes/cost associated with vacant structures or to make room for new development.  In the Park View Inn's case, the owner doesn't want to pay for demolition because he believes the structure is still salvageable.  So if it were to come down, those cost would be on the back of the taxpayer.  I know its a gateway to Springfield and downtown but there are better ways to spend +$1.5 million on improving the urban core.  If we can free up that type of cash, I'd rather see it dumped into upgrading the park system along Hogans Creek.

Quote from: Debbie Thompson on September 18, 2010, 06:13:23 PM
Agreed.  Even in the 1970's the downtown hotels had elevators with brass folding cage door, operated by hand, and elevator operators. They were truly elegant, and should have been saved.

But, then, I'm preaching to the choir, aren't I? 

Debbie I think I love you! Those were awesome days in Jacksonville, the elevators themselves actually a vertical trolley car with almost identical controls. Do you or anyone else know if ANY, anywhere downtown were saved or are still intact or operation?

OCKLAWAHA

Is the Park View site an eyesore?  Absolutely!

But, I tend to look at this in the context of a much larger problem... and one that has a very viable solution.

One of the major problems here is that Springfield and Downtown are cutoff from each other.  The Main Street commercial corridor is virtually non-existant and suffers b/c it is cut off by a no-man's land that seperate these two core communities.

Specifically the problem is, how do you connect this:


(http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/3097/picture030ow.jpg)


with this:


(http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/1082/picture036nm.jpg)


???


I fervently believe a big part of the solution lies with the Park View site.
Keep in mind, it will take somewhere over $1million to demolish/level this building.  In a recession where the city's budget is experiencing severe downward pressure from decreased tax revenues, there quite simply isn't money available for this option.  Many of you posting in this thread that are in favor of the demolition of this structure also have identified the city's budget as a major concern.  Some of you are even against the proposed tax increase(something with which I share the same concern ).

Furthermore, spending that kind of money to create yet another empty lot in a downtown landscape defined by unfulfilled space simply exhasberates the problem. 

The current owners of the property are asking the city to allocate federal money available under HUD's Community Development Block Grant program.  What is this?

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/ (http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/)

QuoteThe Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is a flexible program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community development needs. Beginning in 1974, the CDBG program is one of the longest continuously run programs at HUD. The CDBG program provides annual grants on a formula basis to 1209 general units of local government and States.

About the Program
The CDBG program works to ensure decent affordable housing, to provide services to the most vulnerable in our communities, and to create jobs through the expansion and retention of businesses. CDBG is an important tool for helping local governments tackle serious challenges facing their communities. The CDBG program has made a difference in the lives of millions of people and their communities across the Nation.

The annual CDBG appropriation is allocated between States and local jurisdictions called "non-entitlement" and "entitlement" communities respectively. Entitlement communities are comprised of central cities of Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs); metropolitan cities with populations of at least 50,000; and qualified urban counties with a population of 200,000 or more (excluding the populations of entitlement cities). States distribute CDBG funds to non-entitlement localities not qualified as entitlement communities.

HUD determines the amount of each grant by using a formula comprised of several measures of community need, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing, and population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas.

Citizen Participation
A grantee must develop and follow a detailed plan that provides for and encourages citizen participation. This integral process emphasizes participation by persons of low or moderate income, particularly residents of predominantly low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, slum or blighted areas, and areas in which the grantee proposes to use CDBG funds. The plan must provide citizens with the following: reasonable and timely access to local meetings; an opportunity to review proposed activities and program performance; provide for timely written answers to written complaints and grievances; and identify how the needs of non-English speaking residents will be met in the case of public hearings where a significant number of non-English speaking residents can be reasonably expected to participate.

Eligible Activities
Over a 1, 2, or 3-year period, as selected by the grantee, not less than 70 percent of CDBG funds must be used for activities that benefit low- and moderate-income persons. In addition, each activity must meet one of the following national objectives for the program: benefit low- and moderate-income persons, prevention or elimination of slums or blight, or address community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community for which other funding is not available.

Sounds pretty appropriate doesn't it?

The problem as I see it with the Park View's ownership group is that they are asking for money from this program in order to level everything but the parking garage.  Again, additional parking and/or parking garages are not needed in and of itself and does nothing to 'address community development needs'.

However consider this, what if the Park View site became a viable commercial building, designed to be pedestrian friendly, that served an economic need to both communities, and that included the existing parking garage?

A retail drug store would be a perfect fit for this location.  The traffic count required for such a development is met at this location.  The combination of residential and employment population required for such a development is met at this location.  And the economic need exists for both of these neighborhoods.


This:


(http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/9646/picture029w.jpg)


could become this:


(http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/67/picture0311.jpg)


The existing parking garage would be kept for the drugstore and other potential commercial tennants.  This would reduce the amount of surface parking and encourage a pedestrian friendly design.

There is an example locally of this type of building design.
The Urbana in Jacksonville Beach serves as a smart inspiration for such a design on the Park View site.


(http://www.theurbana.com/images/BannerFinal2.jpg)


(http://www.theurbana.com/images/SitePlan1.jpg)


You could probably fit about a 9k square foot drugstore footprint into the Park View site.  This is smaller than the typical big box drug store coner lot formats, but not unusual in dense urban settings.
Additionally, in regards to the space concerns... if a drug store can be fit on this intersection's corner lot, then a smaller footprint format would certainly be viable at the Park View site.


(http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/9140/pictureja.jpg)
San Juan and Roosevelt Blvd/US-17


The ownership group would be assisted by fedral dollars and for an additional personal capital outlay, they would be rewarded with a commercial tenant that typically signs long term lease agreements.


This type of development, coupled with the new pedestrian friendly urban gas station/cafe diagonally across the street would serve as the start of a connection b/w these two traditionally economic-dependent communities.  The Rosa Parks connection station and FSCJ would facilitate pedestrian traffic to this gateway as well.


(http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/8696/picture032gz.jpg)


(http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9522/uniongasstation.png)

There has been a long history of the supposed community leaders speaking for nothing but the demolition of this building.  When the owners tried to get it sold and developed, we all heard it needed to be torn down.  When the plans to make it a condo development was announced, we heard how badly contaminated the site was and that the building needs torn down. Even today, we are hearing the building needs torn down.  Very few have ever given it a chance.  And that is a shame. Of course, as it turns out, some of the supposed leaders of the community have been saying to tear everything down, so it is of no big surprise.

Field, what you say makes perfect sense.  It should be used and not torn down.  It could have been and with a bit of support, it can still be utilized. But instead of support, we get letters saying that it blocks the view of the park so it must go.

We all hope common sense will win in the end, but this is Jacksonville and this is a council district that needs real leadership and has none. Some of us are trying to change things, but it will be a slow process.

Field, the Park View's owner wants to do what you described. He wants to keep the garage and convert the ground level space into retail. I don't know where the notion that they want a garage with no retail came from.

Quote from: thelakelander on September 19, 2010, 07:10:17 PM
Field, the Park View's owner wants to do what you described. He wants to keep the garage and convert the ground level space into retail. I don't know where the notion that they want a garage with no retail came from.

Does the current owner have plans and financing lined up for this project?

From my understanding, the current owner is working with the city to land some sort of federal grant to help with the financials.

QuoteField, the Park View's owner wants to do what you described. He wants to keep the garage and convert the ground level space into retail. I don't know where the notion that they want a garage with no retail came from.

My apologies.  I was informed that the proposal included just the parking garage and a concrete surface lot facing the park.  Third hand info so I realize that could have been skewed somewhat.

I thought I read an article in Monday's Times Union that this eyesore is finally coming down?

It's being renovated as discussed on this forum over the last couple of months.  Plans call for the hotel tower to be demolished, the hotel's garage to remain and existing street level spaces to be renovated into retail.  The hotel's owners also plan to renovate the old Claude Nolan Cadillac building across street at Orange and Main.

Are you saying that there's renovations going on now? I've not seen anything or any signs of work being done

I went by this afternoon, and there was some equipment at the corner of Main and Union next to the lobby.

Quote from: Springfielder on September 28, 2010, 07:40:22 PM
Are you saying that there's renovations going on now? I've not seen anything or any signs of work being done

No.  I was just answering Timkin's question about the building being demolished.  Its being partially demolished with the rest of the existing structure being renovated into a new use.

oh okay, thanks

Can Metro Jacksonville cover the Demolition in a spectacular (As usual) photographic thread?  (Hint...Hint)

Of course we can!

This has been a long-awaited demo.  If they can save some portion of the building and make something nice of it, great and wonderful.  But it is long past time for the Upper levels of this place to go. Its a death trap