Quote“SPAR SPEAK†the Weekly Update
We have heard the concerns about Large Tree Removal as part of the Ash Remediation. According to Jim Manning, ash was located in some parts of Klutho & Schell Parks. It is the intent of ash remediation not to remove large trees; however, an arborist determined there were some trees in these parks which are in decline and the owners of the parks (Jacksonville Housing Authority and City of Jacksonville) authorized their removal. Residents can refuse remediation to protect existing trees. The ash remediation funds are for 3" trees (for the expected replacement of trees in a residential area); however, due to the size and location of this tree removal, the city is looking into Tree Mitigation funds and possible Streets & Drainage to get large growth replacements.
from "SPAR SPEAK" email sent out today.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4796466627_cb96285393.jpg)
I saw a new green tag today.
WTF does tearing down 250 year old trees have to do with ash remediation exactly?
I'm not a scientist, but maybe someone can explain this one to me? Hopefully there's an explanation besides for COJ/JEA's typical crap where they just want them gone to cut the costs of having to trim them annually in order to keep the branches away from powerlines, so they just cook any convenient excuse they can think of to chop them down...
^It is easier to tear them down than to deal with remediating around them?
Just as it is much easier to tear down an old house than to deal with the time/money and effort in restoring an old one.
The photo of the house is one E. 6th Street/Hubbard. Today there are 2 trucks in front of it (one said A/C, which makes no sense,) but it appears as though they are starting the disconnect process. I couldn't stop and talk with them, but will head over as soon as I can and see what's up. In regards to houses, it is apparent that homes owned by banks haven't the first clue about what a historic district is and what the "rules" are. Going back to S.O.S. I think it would be beneficial to draft a letter to bank owned homes in eminent danger of decay and ultimate demolition and give them the 411.
The sewer lines were cut from this home today.
The bulldozers will be next and I expect it will be demo'ed first part of the week. From my licensed contractor eyes, this does not look to be a public safety concern.
I don't understand why it is being demolished.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4800664634_c2b7afbafd.jpg)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4800030223_2c59196cd6.jpg)
You can see the straight lines on the siding. No bulges or dips. No swayback.
East 5th Street
Unbelieveable . Nope. totally believable in Jacksonville. I would be the first to admit its not the prettiest house but it doesnt look like a canidate for a wrecking ball.
The porch needs to be opened up and then you would see some of the architectural detail.
Just one more glaring example of the City disconnect from an Historical point of view! They don't have any! The developers/Nifty Fifty decide to do something and poof..............its done! Not good for the long range point of view!
Revitalization & Restoration, are often by their nature, at odds.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4801974351_0e4bfd5642.jpg)
What is ugly about this house is the enclosed front porch. There is a house, in great shape for being 100 years old, behind that plywood.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4801974477_053f1128d8.jpg)
The inside looks fine. I've restored many in worse shape.
The Porch was probably enclosed WITHOUT obtaining a permit. ( This usually pisses off the City ) I am pretty sure I was in this house a few years ago and it is far from being structurally unsound. The home we sold in Ortega that was my Granparents house was buckling and sagging.. This one is nowhere close to as bad... and it should definitely NOT be demolished.. Although I will say if I were buying it, the first thing to go would be that Plywood-enclosed front porch... I do hope this one does not get razed....or the Garage beside it.. it would be a waste to tear this down.
The floor is even, the walls are in good shape. There was a drop ceiling which was pulled down, but the ceiling on the first floor is in adequate shape. The second floor ceiling has some issues with the plaster.
It flies against the face of the National Historic Designation to tear this down. If it can't be fixed up right now, then board it and keep it until it can be. That's what has been done in Springfield for decades before the neighborhood began to focus on "revitalization" instead of preservation. It will take political pressure to get back to where we once were.
Revitalization comes and goes. Preservation lasts.
You won't get a dispute here, Sheclown. This just unfortunately is not the mindset of the majority.
Quote from: Timkin on July 17, 2010, 06:47:09 PM
You won't get a dispute here, Sheclown. This just unfortunately is not the mindset of the majority.
Then...they need to go live in the suburbs :)
I have a better idea.. they need to live in another City or State. :)
The push for demolition is relatively new. Until around 2005, the city was content to board them and leave them be. I have personally restored many homes that were boarded up for a decade or more before they were resuscitated.
This all changed with the push for Icare complaints against neglected properties. While on the surface, it appears to be a good thing to push owners into restoring their properties, the unintended effect of this was to pile on files and pressure to the point where the homeowners abdicated total responsibility and lobbied the city to get it off their backs.
The neighborhood hoped this effort would increase the likelihood of homes coming on the market at reasonable prices and, I'm sure, this happened. However, if no buyer was to be found, then the owner is stuck with crazy fines and he lobbies the city to tear his house down.
This, coupled with the city's new policy of increasing the 'fast track to demolition' -- changing the required time for the house to be in the system from 36 months to 6 months, and then you have all of these houses getting destroyed.
And, here we are.
An attack against any house in this neighborhood, is an attack against the neighborhood.
Does anyone know how many houses have been torn down in Riverside in the last couple of years?
Quote from: sheclown on July 18, 2010, 09:48:51 AM
Does anyone know how many houses have been torn down in Riverside in the last couple of years?
To my knowledge, 0.
There was about to be 1, which was Bronson Lamb's bungalow, but RAP put the kybosh on that.
Quote from: sheclown on July 18, 2010, 09:15:54 AM
An attack against any house in this neighborhood, is an attack against the neighborhood.
Worst thing is that the complaints came from within the neighborhood. (SPAR)
Key word: Preservation
It should be the forefront of this neighborhood. It was at one time, it is necessary again.
I too hear the same about Riverside. That's because preservation is the only answer in their historic neighborhood.
Quote from: sheclown on July 16, 2010, 08:31:57 PM
The sewer lines were cut from this home today.
The bulldozers will be next and I expect it will be demo'ed first part of the week. From my licensed contractor eyes, this does not look to be a public safety concern.
I don't understand why it is being demolished.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4800664634_c2b7afbafd.jpg)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4800030223_2c59196cd6.jpg)
You can see the straight lines on the siding. No bulges or dips. No swayback.
East 5th Street
I actually talked to the guy that owns this house about a year ago. i was buying some drywall from him and he told me why. i think i actually posted something about it as well. Anyways he told me that he was trying to demolish it because he says that the house was in bad shape. he said there was nothing historic left in the house and he thought that the land was more profitable than to renovate the house. i didn't go inside, so i can't confirm if it is true or not, but it did sound like he just wanted to tear it down so that he could sell the land
And in an historic district, he doesn't have that right. The house not only belongs to the owner, but it also belongs to the neighborhood.
BTW, the house is very sound.
My house belongs to me. Unless you all want to help out with the mortgage. Call me if you're interested.
oh..yeah? Try putting in any kind of windows you choose! Or changing the roofing material! You'll soon see how much you "own" your home.
You can drive a mile down the road and put a butt-ugly addition on to your cottage, or put adobe style roofing materials over your asphalt shingles and no one says "boo" to the style component of your decision (certainly building department will make sure that it is done safely to code). As a homeowner in Springfield, you don't get that kind of authority over your dwelling. It is one of the "costs" of buying in a Nationally Recognized Historic District.
Quote from: stephendare on July 18, 2010, 01:13:22 PM
Quote from: FinnegansWake on July 18, 2010, 01:03:12 PM
My house belongs to me. Unless you all want to help out with the mortgage. Call me if you're interested.
true. You should try adding a 150 ft radio tower and a small convenience store in front of it, finnegan.
ROFLMAO @ Stephen. that was funny man
Quote from: sheclown on July 18, 2010, 01:13:56 PM
oh..yeah? Try putting in any kind of windows you choose! Or changing the roofing material! You'll soon see how much you "own" your home.
You can drive a mile down the road and put a butt-ugly addition on to your cottage, or put adobe style roofing materials over your asphalt shingles and no one says "boo" to the style component of your decision (certainly building department will make sure that it is done safely to code). As a homeowner in Springfield, you don't get that kind of authority over your dwelling. It is one of the "costs" of buying in a Nationally Recognized Historic District.
Code enforcement is stepping up in some areas.. And as I stated in a previous post, I ll bet the bank in the case of this house that is condemned, that lovely "Jax Bargain Plywood and Winders" enclosure done on the front of the house was N O T done with a permit. I could be wrong (have been many times before) but do not think I am in this instance.
I see both sides. If you make the mortgage payments , and pay taxes , etc, you "should" be able (within reason) do as you wish to your home. NOT SO ! In fact , IMO one never outright "owns" a home. go delinquent on your property taxes , which you will always pay, even if there is no mortgage. Even more is Historically-protected or Deed-Restricted communities. that patio addition would go over like a lead balloon and code enforcement would have a ticket-writing party. :)
Too bad for this house... it definitely needs work..but it should not be torn down.
If you bought in this neighborhood, you bought knowing there are rules. Nationally Recognized Historic Neighborhood. You know, so we don't look like the suburbs or something else God awful ugly.
You can buy a house in a planned development community and still have rules.
Shit, there are rules everywhere. Is anything really ours?
Something I have allways wondered about is how "Code Enforcement" goes about their business? A phone call to them, I would think, would initiate something but don't they take it upon themselves to possibly do the job they are paid to do? Does it take a phone call or do they have some kind of idea of how to go about doing their job? Phone calls from the "SPAR Council" , from a select few who have the number on their speed dial, should only be one slice of the job pie........so does anyone know just how they go about doing Code Enforcement? By the way, there are "Covenents" that all residents have to abid by when buying a home in Linkside!
Code enforcement investigation is complaint-driven. I suppose it has to be due to limited resources.
I was guessing it was sheclown, but did not know for sure!
Code enforcement is indeed, complaint driven via the phone calls and ecare tickets...plus they have their inspectors driving throughout the area looking for violations. I see the one for Springfield quite often as they're riding around, posting violations, taking pictures...
amazing....my neighbor gets away with having a construction trailer in his backyard (the most horrible looking thing) and adds additions onto his house (himself, no permits, i am sure of) and somehow code enforcement misses it. I on the other hand wanted to have a small 10x10 shed built and you would have thought i was building a freaking house! some follow the rules, some don't or should I say some are just allowed to get away with things.
well another interesting scenario,, Back around 1995, Myself and some friends repaired a garage behind my Grandparents home in Ortega. We got the proper permit and was instructed to place it in plain view so that the inspector could check the building when we were finished..We did exactly as asked. To my knowledge , no building inspector EVER came to see the garage, because it was never signed off on , and we sold the property after my grandmother passed on, with the permit still hanging in place, unsigned. The Garage was Stuccoed to match the house ,by the next owner.