Revised - the duplications have been removed.
1647 North Pearl Street
April 28, 2010 :HPC commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition after 3 months.
1925 North Liberty Street
April 28, 2010: HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition after 9 months.
342 West 10th Street
April 28, 2010: HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1721 North Ionia Street
June 25, 2010: HPC Commission approved emergency demolition
451 East 7th Street
April 5, 2010 HPC Commission approved emergency demolition
1334 North Liberty Street
2/24/2010 HPC Commission HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1323 North Ionia
2/24/2010 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
347 East 9th Street
10/23/09 HPC Commission approved emergency demolition
1643 North Pearl
8/26/09 Approved for demolition
115 East 3rd Street
6/24/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1626 Ionia Street
4/22/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4810960330_59feb2504e.jpg)
1948 Hubbard Street
4/22/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1344 North Ionia Street
4/22/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
455 East 7th Street
Emergency Demolition (no date)
1145 North Market Street
3/25/09
1647 North Pearl Street
April 28, 2010 :HPC commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition after 3 months.
1139 North Market
3/25/09
524 North Market Street
2/25/09
Are they trying to tear down all of Ionia Street?????
If you see any duplicates let me know.
we need these organized by streets, if anyone has some time...
I have more to pull off.
We also need to know which houses are lost and which are still standing.
What is the reason for all this demolition?
Is there a fear they'll be used for criminal activities? Gangs? Drugs?
Is there a fear homeless will take up residence, become injured, and then sue the city?
Having only moved to Jacksonville within the past year I really am quite amazed how they get the bulldozers out when there's little to nothing to replace it.
Revised
1430 North Liberty
2/25/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
417 Walnut Court
1/28/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
423 Walnut Court
1/28/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
2011 North Market Street
1/28/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1142 Hubbard
1/23/07 Emergency Demolition
1732 North Ionia
1/23/08 Emergency Demolition
1528 North Walnut
1/23/08 Emergency Demolition
1339 Silver Street
12/13/07 Emergency Demolition
2039 North Market Street
6/25/08 Emergency Demolition
815 East 3rd St.
6/27/08 Emergency Demolition
427 East 2nd Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
2118 North Pearl Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
1929 North Pearl Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
143 East 9th Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
335 East 3rd Street
4/26/95 COA for demolition
1744 North Liberty Street
2/23/94 COA for demolition
234-236 West 8th Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
341 East 7th Street
3/22/95 COA for demolition
128 East 4th Street
4/26/95 COA for demolition
1411-1413 North Ionia
3/1/95 COA for demolition
1438 North Silver
3/1/95 COA for demolition
1928 North Market Street
1/25/95 1430 North Liberty
2/25/09 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1952 North Hubbard
3/1/95
Revised
1915-1917 Hubbard
(no date) Emergency demolition
111 East 6th Street
12/10/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1309 North Market St
12/10/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1828 North Hubbard
11/19/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1824 North Hubbard
11/19/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
402-404 West 7th Street
7/23/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
232 West 8th Street
7/23/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
229 East 2nd Street
4/23/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition.
1635 North Pearl Street
2/27/08 Demolish [I'm not sure what this means]
27 West 7th Street
1/23/08 Demolish
1137 North Liberty Street
1/23/08 Demolish
316 West 12th Street
1/23/08 Demolish
Wow ....more surface parking for Springfield :(
1918 Hubbard Street
12/24/07 Demolish (house or just a structure?)
318 West 5th Street
10/24/07 Demolish
1447 North Ionia
9/26/07 Demolition of structure (house or other??)
1430 North Ionia
9/26/07 Demolition of structure (house or other??)
136 West 6th Street
9/26/07 Demolition of structure (house or other??)
1903 Liberty
5/23/07 FAST TRACK to demolish
1518 Ionia
4/25/07 Formal Track
1316 Ionia
11/15/06
1224-1226 Walnut
10/26/2005 Emergency Demolition
136 West 6th Street
10/27/04 Demolish
1551, 1553, 1555 Ionia
9/22/04 Permit pulled for demolition approved 8/04
1716 Walnut
9/22/04 Demolish
1605 Ionia
5/26/04 Demolish
1140 Ionia
11/19/03 Demolish
1117 Walnut
11/19/03 Demolish
355 West 7th
5/28/03 Demolish
1140 Ionia
5/28/03 Demolish
230 East 3rd
5/22/02 Emergency demo
211 East 3rd
5/22/02 Emergency demo
1924 North Main
3/27/02 Emergency demo
1325 Silver
2/27/02 Emergency demo
321 East 5th
10/22/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition in 3 months.
253 East 2nd Street
10/22/08 HPC Commission approved property to be placed on Formal Track for demolition in 6 months.
1402 Laura
12/19/07 Emergency demo
1210 Walnut
2/28/07 Demolish
320 East 4th Street
1/24/07 Demolish
209 East 4th
1/24/07 Demolish
321 West 10th Street
1/24/07 Demolish
1815 - 1817 Market
1/24/07 Demolish
1911 Hubbard
10/25/06 Demolish in 6 months
348 Carmen
10/25/06 Demolish
335 Carmen
10/25/06 Demolish
1114 Walnut
9/27/06 Emergency demo
1134 Hubbard
9/27/06 Demolish in 3 months
41 West 9th
8/23/06 Demolish
1338 Clark
4/26/06 Demolish
1435 Boulevard
3/22/06 Demolish
200 East 8th Street
3/22/06 Demolish
45 East 8th Street
3/22/06 Demolish
321 East 4th Street
3/22/06 Demolish
1554 Walnut
8/25/04 Demolish
1716 Walnut
8/25/06 Demolish in 6 months
355 East 5th Street
8/25/04 Demolish
349 East 5th Street
8/25/04 Demolish
138 W. 7th
2/24/04 Demolish
1615-1617 Perry
2/24/04 Demolish
1115 Liberty
2/24/04 Demolish
32 E. 2nd
(no date) Emergency demo permit date 10/9/03
426-428 E. 5th Street
Emergency demo permit date 7/2/03
1035 Liberty
5/28/03 Emergency Demo
1425 Silver
10/23/02 Demolish
1932 Hubbard Terrace
1/30/02 Emergency Demo
1142 Hubbard Street
1/23/02 Emergency Demo
2072 Walnut
1/15/02 Emergency Demo
1940 Pearl Place
"Signed Permit 6/11/01, No documentation from Property Safety Prior to Demolition"
101 East 9th Street
3/28/01 Demolish
1712 Perry
3/28/01 Demolish
1615 - 1617 Perry
3/28/01 Demolish
1532 Market Street
3/28/01 Demolish
416-418 W. 7th St
3/28/01 Demolish
136 W 6th St
3/28/01 Demolish
48-50 W 6th St
3/28/01 Demolish
49-51 E 5th
3/28/01 Demolish
27 E 5th Street
3/28/01 Demolish
520 E 4th St
3/28/01 Demolish
321 E 2nd
3/28/01 Demolish
1926 Hubbard
8/00 Emergency Demolition
32 W 3rd
7/26/00 Demolish
1940 Pearl Place
7/26/00 Demolish
1946 Hubbard
7/26/00 Demolish
301 E 3rd
7/26/00 Demolish
245 E 4th
5/24/00 Emergency demo
1706 Walnut
5/24/00 Demolish
245 E 5th Street
5/24/00 Demolish
229 W 4th
4/26/00 Demolish
316 W 12th St
3/22/00 Demolish
116 E 7th St
3/22/00 Emergency demo
409 E 3rd Street
3/22/00 Demolish
334 W 11th Street
10/23/02 Demolish
1334 Liberty
6/23/99 Demolish
135 E 9th Street
6/23/99 Demolish
1835 Liberty
3/24/99 Demolish
23 W 7th Street
3/24/99 Demolish
1919-1921 Hubbard
1/27/99 Demolish
1415-1417 Liberty
2/24/99 Demolish
132 E 6th St
1/27/99 Demolish
1348 Clark
1/27/99 Demolish
45 E 9th St
12/16/98 Demolish
1441 Hubbard
12/16/98 Demolish
That's it. Some may be duplicates, a few may be demolitions of outbuildings (although it stated that on these notes and I didn't include those in here). Still...
Now to contrast: Demolitions & Demolition Requests for Riverside/Avondale during this same time period:
2902 Post St.
2/24/99 Demolish
742 Dellwood Avenue
9/27/00 Demolish
2148 Dellwood Avenue
Emergency Demo ( no date?)
2318 Oak St
12/13/01 Emergency Demo
2877 Forbes
1/23/2008 Emergency Demo
1002 Barrs St.
1/23/08 Emergency Demo
2318 Oak St
12/13/01 Emergency Demo
2674 Gilmore
10/4/09 Emergency Demo
That's it.
WOW. Are all of these locations THAT BAD?
WOW!!!!
Seriously, wow.
Many of these houses have been torn down. Many, however, are still holding on and are due for demolition. It is going to take a lot of research to figure out which ones on the list are still standing.
That is an awful lot of houses. Sheesh
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4142/4816393899_6f715bc8db.jpg)
Save Our Springfield
Cool sign. I hope it helps.. This seems a bit...no.. Im sorry ALOT ridiculous!
I'm taking off the count right now. I find contradicting information and then don't quite know what to make of it. I'll do some more checking and then post.
There seems to have been spurts of demos, then calm, then spurts again.
What is important is this: How many "green tagged" homes are out there? How many are currently on the "Formal Track". We can assume that any house which is condemned is in the system and it is just a matter of time, if the corrections are not quickly made, that it will come down.
It is time for a political solution to this problem. Policies must be changed.
It is also a time for an attitudinal change in the neighborhood. If we ask the city to take care of homes in disrepair in our neighborhood, they will. And it won't be pretty.
In two years time................total of 107! Glad to see that the SPAR Council is staying on top of things! I mean no one would want to accuse them of not preserving anything of historical significance! Gee whiz.....WTF!
Sheclown:
You have done a remarkable job at stating the facts about Historic Springfield structures and their demolition or impending demolition.
I would like to clarify an additional fact about the process of "demolition." The following will be validated with posting of HPC meeting minutes and code enforcement reports which will be posted in the next days.
When a case file is opened on a property that has to do with the health and safety of people living inside the structure, or people who could live in the structure, (basically everything but overgrown grass and an abandoned care on the property,) the owner of the property has 2 options with the one or more code violations: "Repair or Demolish." This is stated clearly on the report from Code Enforcement that is sent to the owner of the property.
In the last year, several properties have been brought to HPC meetings from code enforcement with a request to put on a "Formal Track for Demolition," however the "for demolition" is often kept silent. There are 2 kinds of tracks for demolition: Formal Track and Emergency Track. A property put on the formal track for demolition typically takes 6-9 months before the demolition process begins. This change in time (was 36 months, now is 6 months occurred in approximately 2007.) Any time something legal happens with a property, i.e. change of ownership, Code Enforcement begins the notification process again for the new owner and it's back on for another 6-9 months. Again, the new owner must "repair or demolish." Now, Code Enforcement will work with property owners who are in good faith working on their properties and need more time, that fact can not be ignored, which allows an owner to "repair" code violations in a fair and reasonable time.
Filing an e-care request currently does NOT help to preserve a property. HPC meeting minutes state (from Code Enforcement,) that there is not money to "board and secure." The Code Enforcement Officer documents (exterior only by the way as they are not allowed inside a property without the owner's permission which they typically can NOT get in touch with despite dozens of attempted contacts which they document,) via photos and written comments about the condition of the exterior of the property. One example for a justification of a "Formal Track" is because the accrued fines on the property exceed the value of the property. One property had $131,500 in fines. With this information in hand, Code Enforcement presents their written report to HPC and requests the "Formal Track for Demolition." Past practices typically meant HPC went out and surveyed the property, but sometime around 2007, things changed and only Code Enforcement viewed the property and typically only from the outside.
HPC is agreeing to the formal tracks requested by Code Enforcement and in many cases is supported and not disputed by folks attending the HPC meetings from Historic Springfield.
In the next days copies of meeting minutes that discuss specific addresses (of homes still standing,) and the request for "Formal Track of Demolition," will be posted. Also posted in the next days will be copies of a few code enforcement reports that state property violations and the means to fix meaning: "Repair or Demolish."
We can not change the past, we can complain and be shocked about things, but the reality is in the here and now. We must band together in the name of preservation and work towards a common goal together for Historic Springfield to preserve what is left of the properties, Code Enforcement needs to be left out of the equation. Remember: Repair or Demolish. Every home that is left standing and is in need of attention needs to be boarded and secured until a current owner or new owner can do the right thing. We need to take charge, initiative and command as concerned residents, business people and neighborhood advocates. It is truly up to US. As the economy continues to slowly turn around and we crawl out of the foreclosure and short sale homes these homes in need of attention will be sold and brought to their former glory.
Advocates, residents, concerned persons need to speak up by attending HPC meetings, writing emails about specific properties or preservation in general. In the next days as well it is apparent I should write specifics about how and who to do this for/to.
When we stay quiet, we lose the homes. When we make noise, ruffle feathers, and nose around, we make music in a heartfelt song titled preservation.
Quote from: CS Foltz on July 21, 2010, 10:14:54 PM
In two years time................total of 107! Glad to see that the SPAR Council is staying on top of things! I mean no one would want to accuse them of not preserving anything of historical significance! Gee whiz.....WTF!
my mistake and I apologize. The figures are not nearly as bad as I originally thought. I need to double/triple check and cross check by street addresses and I'll correct as I can.
That being said, it is still quite alarming.
Quote from: Timkin on July 21, 2010, 08:42:18 PM
Cool sign. I hope it helps.. This seems a bit...no.. Im sorry ALOT ridiculous!
I think you are just jealous you did not think of this on your own. ;-)
There are over 2 dozen hearts on stakes and fences that are gracing over 10 homes that need our help and support. The hearts "Save Our Springfield," are meant to draw attention to the homes in a positive way, that are on the formal track for demolition and in particular, these specific homes are looking at a bulldozer in the next week or two. Time is of the essence.
I'm pretty damn proud of those hearts. Someone/s care and is doing something proactive towards preservation. A whole new outlook that shows someone/s is not staying quiet or accepting that the house should come down. It is a positive piece to a much bigger response to demolition that continues to grow.
Springfield is a Nationally Recognized Historic Neighborhood and as with homeowners who are required to file COAs and follow rules for restoration/renovations, the city should be required to follow a set of rules not the same for a NON Historic Neighborhood. We are different. We should be treated different. Preservation in a Nationally Recognized Neighborhood should occur without hesitation. How many more do we lose before we lose our designation???????
As you should be proud. What I was saying was ridiculous, was that House is being demolished ..or it would appear. IF the City is footing the bill to demo them..seems boarding them up for now would be cheaper, since we are in pretty dire straits , economy-wise... In other words, buy some time for ones like this..
But then there will be postings indicating the opposite. they are empty and run down to demo them. Too well i know the drill.. I have been in a Preservation mission myself for several years.. so I get the battle :)
And your battle my friend is one I respect. Love the school. LOVE, LOVE, the school. We all need to get into positions of political power to make change!!!
iloveionia 4 mayor!
Well .. asst to the Mayor maybe ;)
Quote from: iloveionia on July 21, 2010, 11:04:18 PM
Sheclown:
You have done a remarkable job at stating the facts about Historic Springfield structures and their demolition or impending demolition.
I would like to clarify an additional fact about the process of "demolition." The following will be validated with posting of HPC meeting minutes and code enforcement reports which will be posted in the next days.
When a case file is opened on a property that has to do with the health and safety of people living inside the structure, or people who could live in the structure, (basically everything but overgrown grass and an abandoned care on the property,) the owner of the property has 2 options with the one or more code violations: "Repair or Demolish." This is stated clearly on the report from Code Enforcement that is sent to the owner of the property.
In the last year, several properties have been brought to HPC meetings from code enforcement with a request to put on a "Formal Track for Demolition," however the "for demolition" is often kept silent. There are 2 kinds of tracks for demolition: Formal Track and Emergency Track. A property put on the formal track for demolition typically takes 6-9 months before the demolition process begins. This change in time (was 36 months, now is 6 months occurred in approximately 2007.) Any time something legal happens with a property, i.e. change of ownership, Code Enforcement begins the notification process again for the new owner and it's back on for another 6-9 months. Again, the new owner must "repair or demolish." Now, Code Enforcement will work with property owners who are in good faith working on their properties and need more time, that fact can not be ignored, which allows an owner to "repair" code violations in a fair and reasonable time.
Filing an e-care request currently does NOT help to preserve a property. HPC meeting minutes state (from Code Enforcement,) that there is not money to "board and secure." The Code Enforcement Officer documents (exterior only by the way as they are not allowed inside a property without the owner's permission which they typically can NOT get in touch with despite dozens of attempted contacts which they document,) via photos and written comments about the condition of the exterior of the property. One example for a justification of a "Formal Track" is because the accrued fines on the property exceed the value of the property. One property had $131,500 in fines. With this information in hand, Code Enforcement presents their written report to HPC and requests the "Formal Track for Demolition." Past practices typically meant HPC went out and surveyed the property, but sometime around 2007, things changed and only Code Enforcement viewed the property and typically only from the outside.
HPC is agreeing to the formal tracks requested by Code Enforcement and in many cases is supported and not disputed by folks attending the HPC meetings from Historic Springfield.
In the next days copies of meeting minutes that discuss specific addresses (of homes still standing,) and the request for "Formal Track of Demolition," will be posted. Also posted in the next days will be copies of a few code enforcement reports that state property violations and the means to fix meaning: "Repair or Demolish."
We can not change the past, we can complain and be shocked about things, but the reality is in the here and now. We must band together in the name of preservation and work towards a common goal together for Historic Springfield to preserve what is left of the properties, Code Enforcement needs to be left out of the equation. Remember: Repair or Demolish. Every home that is left standing and is in need of attention needs to be boarded and secured until a current owner or new owner can do the right thing. We need to take charge, initiative and command as concerned residents, business people and neighborhood advocates. It is truly up to US. As the economy continues to slowly turn around and we crawl out of the foreclosure and short sale homes these homes in need of attention will be sold and brought to their former glory.
Advocates, residents, concerned persons need to speak up by attending HPC meetings, writing emails about specific properties or preservation in general. In the next days as well it is apparent I should write specifics about how and who to do this for/to.
When we stay quiet, we lose the homes. When we make noise, ruffle feathers, and nose around, we make music in a heartfelt song titled preservation.
Ionia, you said it!! Thanks for the explanation.
An understanding of
FORMAL TRACK is essential!
The HPC doesn't rule to demolish homes, as such, they rule to place these houses on a "Formal Track." Perhaps if the word "demolition" were used instead of "formal track" fewer houses would be on the LIST.
Formal Track means that if the house isn't renovated by such and such a date (usually less than a year), it will come down. And if the owners don't have the resources to fix it up, or won't (for whatever reason -- the economy, the Ash issue, or just plain greed), it is gone.
The Formal Track began in 2007, and it is not a good thing.
Quote from: BigGuy219 on July 21, 2010, 05:49:35 PM
What is the reason for all this demolition?
Is there a fear they'll be used for criminal activities? Gangs? Drugs?
Is there a fear homeless will take up residence, become injured, and then sue the city?
Having only moved to Jacksonville within the past year I really am quite amazed how they get the bulldozers out when there's little to nothing to replace it.
Big Guy,
Nicole and I will be posting the Historic Planning Commission meeting minutes soon for some of these properties. You will see that quite often homes are demo'd because vagrants or criminal activity has occurred in or around the property.
More alarming, very few of these houses placed on the formal track have even had interior inspections-- by ANYONE, let alone a structural engineer. And when exterior inspections have been done, they were by code enforcement officers, not anyone specifically trained or educated in historic preservation
Just a quick bit of information:
The house at 27 - 29 West 7th Street that was taken in 2008 had property taxes current. That house’s tax value was set at $ 103,936.00. (three or four year old structural improvements, metal roof, sills, etc.) The taxes due were $1,714.47. Demolition cost the city the majority of the demolition lien, which is for $8,452.24. I think we can assume about $ 6,000.00 of that was actually spent and the balance were the admin add-ons. The lot is currently at a value of $ 17,860.00 and the taxes due are $ 309.07. That means code enforcement spent thousands of our tax dollars to reduce the tax base by about $ 85,000.00 and the taxes collected by $ 1,400.00.
It just seems to make better sense financially to spent those thousands to preserve and protect houses like this and therefore eventually get a much larger return on the investment rather that the loss code enforcement has earned all of us tax payers.
Why are there not more homes in Riverside/Avondale placed on "formal track?" Because they raise holy hell over there! We need to get loud and our representatives (political and neighborhood organizations) need to start standing up for the foundation of our district: our historic homes!
What is the sense of a designated historic district when the city is just going to come in and level buildings? Absolutely ridiculous.
I think waht the residents are doing over there is great. A little TLC to help the curb appeal of some of these properties will go a long way, but that is a lot of sweat for a property you do not even own. It seems a lot of these homes could be had for a song but the renovation of a historic home like these is a lot of blood, sweat, tears and $$$.
Strider your facts are basically correct but, as Paul Harvey liked to say "heres the rest of the story".
The house was first inspected on Nov 20 2003 and was found at that time to have serious structural defects INSIDE and out, constituting a fire and windstorm hazard and was unfit for human habitation.
The case proceeded through normal channels including sending the property owners numerous notices of the violations. When no response was heard it went to the Special Magistrate for at least 4 hearings. Only one hearing did the owners ever show. They were given opportunity after opportunity to correct the issues. During that time they sold the house to another person, so the entire process started all over again. Notices were sent to the new owners advising of the violations. More Special Magistrate hearings were held and again the owners failed to appear.
It was finally ordered demo'ed, after almost 5 years of the owners making no effort to bring the building up to code. Meanwhile its condition was getting worse and worse. At some point in time the city has to draw the line and say enough.
I have seen pictures of the interior and it was absolutely unlivable. Believe me, the city does not want to demo a house. They would much rather owners fix them up. That adds to the tax base as you pointed out and is a win/win for everyone. But there are some structures that eventually the city has to step in and be the bad guy.
I hope this clears up some of the discussion of this particular structure.
Stephen I guess we will agree to disagree on that and move on. :)
Quote from: jbroadglide on July 22, 2010, 11:37:24 AM
Stephen I guess we will agree to disagree on that and move on. :)
How are you going to "agree to disagree"?
Property Safety's scam of mailing the Notice of Violation and/or Notice of Hearing before the Special Master to the wrong address is something both Stephen and myself personally experienced. There is no arguing it, it happens more often than not.
By the time the owner realizes in reality that the property has been cited or called for hearing, the hearing has usually already passed and the fines are already running. Frankly, I think that's the intended strategy. Unfortunately for them, this does not constitute valid service or notice.
Then when you call the GC's office to discuss the situation, they turn it into a game of "Let's make a Deal" on how much you'll pay to settle. LMAO, I'll pay $0 thank you very much, we'll just get a declaratory judgment invalidating the fines. And when that happens, you are wasting the city attorneys' $80k/yr time, which I consider to be a nice little bonus considering COJ were the ones trying to pull a fast one in the first place. Of course, this contributes to the system's fiscal inefficiency, but what's the property owner supposed to do?
Ask anybody who's owned property in Springfield, this scam with notices is well-known. And you can't say COJ doesn't "know" what your address is, considering that under our consolidated government they're also the same party who records the deed for your house and issues your drivers' license. Trust me, they know where you live.
Property Safety gets its owners name and ADDRESS from the Property Appraiser and the Tax Collecters official records.. If you have a beef take it up with them. If you aren't living at that location any longer than you need to notify PAO and TC and inform them of your new mailing address so they will update their records and then Property Safety can update theirs.
This is something MJ should do a photo tour of. It's one thing to see a list of random addresses but it could really hit home with more people if they could see the structures in their current state. It would be also interesting to see how this policy compares with those in Savannah, Charleston and St. Augustine.
Okay Stephen, I'm not going to argue the point any longer. You are referring to whats happened in the past. All I can tell you is the facts as they are now. PSD database is tied into PAO database. Whatever the Property Appraiser has as the official mailing address for the property owner, thats where the notices are sent.
Moving on...........
Quote from: jbroadglide on July 22, 2010, 11:49:40 AM
Property Safety gets its owners name and ADDRESS from the Property Appraiser and the Tax Collecters official records.. If you have a beef take it up with them. If you aren't living at that location any longer than you need to notify PAO and TC and inform them of your new mailing address so they will update their records and then Property Safety can update theirs.
That's total bullcrap.
I sued COJ over this exact issue very recently. The property records and my DL both clearly indicated my current address, and despite that, COJ did all of the following;
1: Cited me for violations at a property I had already sold before the property was inspected or cited.
2: Mailed the Notice of Violation to the property address, which was never my residence, when the property records and my DL are both updated and showed my actual residential address.
3: Convened a Special Master's Hearing to assess a $350/day fine against me personally, despite having no personal service of process which would be required to support a personal judgment.
4: They mailed the Notice of Hearing to a property I sold way back in 2004, again despite my information always being up to date in the records, and despite the deed selling the property they actually sent the Notice to having been recorded 5 years ago. Needless to say, I never received notice of the violation, never received notice of the hearing, and by the time I had found out about it the fines totalled $140k.
5: When notified of the problem, the GC's office tried to argue the same bullcrap as you are now. In return I faxed copies of all the aforementioned documents, together with my Drivers' License and current address records. They had no explanation, but still refused to drop the fine.
So I sued.
Don't try and tell me this B.S. doesn't happen. It does. You're welcome to come see all the documentation.
Quote from: jbroadglide on July 22, 2010, 11:59:07 AM
Okay Stephen, I'm not going to argue the point any longer. You are referring to whats happened in the past. All I can tell you is the facts as they are now. PSD database is tied into PAO database. Whatever the Property Appraiser has as the official mailing address for the property owner, thats where the notices are sent.
Moving on...........
More bullcrap.
Quote from: jbroadglide on July 22, 2010, 11:18:51 AM
Strider your facts are basically correct but, as Paul Harvey liked to say "heres the rest of the story".
The house was first inspected on Nov 20 2003 and was found at that time to have serious structural defects INSIDE and out, constituting a fire and windstorm hazard and was unfit for human habitation.
The case proceeded through normal channels including sending the property owners numerous notices of the violations. When no response was heard it went to the Special Magistrate for at least 4 hearings. Only one hearing did the owners ever show. They were given opportunity after opportunity to correct the issues. During that time they sold the house to another person, so the entire process started all over again. Notices were sent to the new owners advising of the violations. More Special Magistrate hearings were held and again the owners failed to appear.
It was finally ordered demo'ed, after almost 5 years of the owners making no effort to bring the building up to code. Meanwhile its condition was getting worse and worse. At some point in time the city has to draw the line and say enough.
I have seen pictures of the interior and it was absolutely unlivable. Believe me, the city does not want to demo a house. They would much rather owners fix them up. That adds to the tax base as you pointed out and is a win/win for everyone. But there are some structures that eventually the city has to step in and be the bad guy.
I hope this clears up some of the discussion of this particular structure.
You are correct. I've read numerous transcripts, spoken to several Code Compliance Officers and folks in the office. They are following a code set on the books, plain and simple. The past, however, brought a different result. Something went remiss around 2007, frustration maybe, and bam, bam, bam houses went on formal tracks for demolition and it continues like a landslide. I believe Code Enforcement too wants the houses restored/renovated. But they are tired of waiting. It was stated the process moved from 36 months to 6 months right around that time.
But I will not accept this for a Nationally Recognized Historic District.
Board it and secure it rather than spending all the money to take photos, write reports, and do nothing proactive to protect a structure. A different approach. Patience is needed.
The city's 6 month policy for their historic districts needs to be changed/amended whatever. The way the policy is written is not congruent with preservation of their Historic Districts. I understand this policy for outside of the districts, but the districts need to be excepted.
In most cities historic districts are great economic centers and the cities make exceptions to preserve and enhance these neighborhoods.
Springfield can not become an amenity for the city if the city allows its policies to undercut it.
The following is an example of a property on the eminent danger list.
1925 Liberty Street
I post this for 2 reasons:
1. The letter to the Special Master to "abate violations by demolition"
2. The validation that an owner has 2 options: "repair or demolish" according to the city.
I am not a structural engineer. I am not an architect. I have not been inside this property. I do not know it's real condition other than looking at it from the outside.
It very well could be beyond repair due to severe deterioration. It very well could be boarded and secured to prevent further damage. I don't know.
Because Springfield is a Nationally Recognized Historic Neighborhood, properties do deserve more than the current 6 months. Previously it used to be 36 months. We need to go back to that and in the meantime board, secure, and watch over the property.
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs034.ash2/35056_1443059688483_1592832305_1069809_5631064_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs054.snc4/35056_1443059768485_1592832305_1069810_2933686_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs034.ash2/35056_1443059808486_1592832305_1069811_2009414_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs034.ash2/35056_1443059848487_1592832305_1069812_1000726_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs054.snc4/35056_1443059888488_1592832305_1069813_1400964_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs054.snc4/35056_1443059928489_1592832305_1069814_2322012_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs074.snc4/35056_1443059968490_1592832305_1069815_6288736_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs074.snc4/35056_1443060008491_1592832305_1069816_6538860_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs054.snc4/35056_1443060048492_1592832305_1069817_4209690_n.jpg)
Here is a chart that includes a photo of the property:
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs043.snc4/34535_1443089969240_1592832305_1069837_1775116_n.jpg)
That house is by my house. It's fine. It's been boarded up for years, which is fine by me! I would much rather have a boarded up house next to me for years and years that I know will one day be renovated than a blighted vacant lot and a less dense neighborhood. That house should not be demo-ed!
Quote from: thelakelander on July 22, 2010, 11:54:48 AM
This is something MJ should do a photo tour of. It's one thing to see a list of random addresses but it could really hit home with more people if they could see the structures in their current state. It would be also interesting to see how this policy compares with those in Savannah, Charleston and St. Augustine.
Great ideas. iloveionia enlisted someone to photograph several of the properties currently in danger. Do we have a comprehensive list yet sorted by street and block? If not, I need the raw data and will work on that. Sheclown?
I'm working in the near future with Stephen on a "photo tour."
nvrenuf, I emailed you data from HPC. It's what you need.
SPAR is a waste of oxygen! Local residents will have to band together and form a counter organization inorder to slow down wanton waste of historical structures! If the continueance of empty lots continues......Springfield will have to change its name to something like..........Empty Lot USA! The City probably won't do much to help, they can not afford it.........but maybe they can be shamed into doing something! After all, if John Boy can pay Alan, who is not working for the City any longer, they should be able to, at the very least, work with residents who give a darn about their neighborhood! What about it Johnny..........here is your chance to leave a legacy that means something!
In all fairness, Brenda at SPAR has been work these last months as executive director against demolitions. I have meeting minutes from HPC to post that will validate this.
as much as i dislike and distrust SPAR, i second iloveionia on that--there are people in the organisation who genuinely want to save these houses. many were expecting SPAR to be something different than it is, and then thought it'd be easiër to redirect the current organisation than to start a new one.
Again, being a "foreigner" here this still leaves me a bit dumbfounded. I took a drive through Springfield last night and this morning, having not spent any time there, despite living downtown, and while some of the properties did seem in disrepair, overall it had a rather charming feel.
There has to be some financial reason for wanting these homes destroyed so quickly. Money ties to the demolition crews? Eminate domain use of the vacant land? Do property values go up when a house in disrepair is suddenly vaporized?
Being a born and bred New Yorker I'm understandably crooked, and whenever I see something like this, I'm seeing money changing hands. Did anyone see that episode of The Sopranos where Tony got the HUD money to buy damaged homes, then demolished them, sold off the scrap material, and then sold the land to a building contractor? Is there a grid map of all this demolition? And has anyone with a hooked nose and a Cadillac been sighted driving up and down the blocks?
Quote from: iloveionia on July 22, 2010, 05:09:32 PM
In all fairness, Brenda at SPAR has been work these last months as executive director against demolitions. I have meeting minutes from HPC to post that will validate this.
The problem is that SPAR is claiming it's trying to fight demolitions that SPAR actually caused in the first place.
I think it's very hard to trust SPAR or take them seriously, especially given the recent hoopla over the carwash being painted a color they didn't like. If they've changed then great, but from this end it sure seems like more of the same misbehaved people doing the same asinine crap. I hope they turn around.
Again, I said "Brenda from SPAR" I did not simply say SPAR. I am confident Brenda will develop a sensible pattern of going against demolition and working for positive change. I am doing my best with others to support by solidifying a plan of action in preserving historic homes.
Quote from: nvrenuf on July 22, 2010, 03:02:48 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 22, 2010, 11:54:48 AM
This is something MJ should do a photo tour of. It's one thing to see a list of random addresses but it could really hit home with more people if they could see the structures in their current state. It would be also interesting to see how this policy compares with those in Savannah, Charleston and St. Augustine.
Great ideas. iloveionia enlisted someone to photograph several of the properties currently in danger. Do we have a comprehensive list yet sorted by street and block? If not, I need the raw data and will work on that. Sheclown?
Great! I drove up and down Ionia today and made a little graph. I have pictures of all of the houses and a notation of their relative condition. I would like to compare this with the number of actual lots from the property appraisers data base and see how many historic homes are actually left standing.
Never, you could do the same with your street. It was hit pretty darn hard. Addresses of the houses that remain. Notations whether they are condemned, restored, livable, non-conforming or new construction and a picture of each. I'm going to make a data base that several of us (you included if you wish) can post to. I think if we just tackle this block by block we can make it work.
My list is no where near comprehensive. I still have to check on demo COA's which I can do, but many many empty lots are no where to be found on the info I currently have. There are also condemned properties that are not on HPC's list.
Oddly enough, as I was driving around checking on the status of the homes on my list, I noticed that my list is barely the tip of the iceberg. It was then, that I knew we needed to take another survey.
I have a list of homes, street by street, which are on the formal track and still standing. I'll post this and we need to get some hearts on these homes to let everyone know their days are numbered!
Quote from: jbroadglide on July 22, 2010, 11:18:51 AM
Strider your facts are basically correct but, as Paul Harvey liked to say "heres the rest of the story".
The house was first inspected on Nov 20 2003 and was found at that time to have serious structural defects INSIDE and out, constituting a fire and windstorm hazard and was unfit for human habitation.
The case proceeded through normal channels including sending the property owners numerous notices of the violations. When no response was heard it went to the Special Magistrate for at least 4 hearings. Only one hearing did the owners ever show. They were given opportunity after opportunity to correct the issues. During that time they sold the house to another person, so the entire process started all over again. Notices were sent to the new owners advising of the violations. More Special Magistrate hearings were held and again the owners failed to appear.
It was finally ordered demo'ed, after almost 5 years of the owners making no effort to bring the building up to code. Meanwhile its condition was getting worse and worse. At some point in time the city has to draw the line and say enough.
I have seen pictures of the interior and it was absolutely unlivable. Believe me, the city does not want to demo a house. They would much rather owners fix them up. That adds to the tax base as you pointed out and is a win/win for everyone. But there are some structures that eventually the city has to step in and be the bad guy.
I hope this clears up some of the discussion of this particular structure.
To begin with, jbroadglide, I am going to call some BS on you. You are quoting from records alright, but only those that support you take on things and not what the reality of the situation was. Even your years are not really correct. I picked this house as an example for a reason. I know this house. Much better than code enforcement ever did.
I used to own this house at 27 - 29 West 7th street. A permit was pulled in 2003 and we replaced the sill, jacked up the center of the houses , replaced 1/3 of the framing of the house and ½ of the roof framing and put a new standing seam clip loc metal roof on it (rood permit 8/2003). The work was put on hold for a time due to personal reasons. The supposed November 2003 inspection that found all those structural issues is pure and unadulterated bull shit. SPAR Council, Code Enforcement, SRG and JSO all had tried to get this house and the one next to it demo’d prior to us pulling the permit.
SPAR Council (per code enforcement) turned it AGAIN to code enforcement and code enforcement decided after they break into it (their words, not mine) that it needed additional boarding and so I find out about this when they are doing it. Because the notices went to the wrong address. The right address was on the PRC, but somehow they used the old address. The result of the appeal was “Ohpps, pay anywayâ€. The city got their “blood money†of $2500.00 for about 500.00 worth of work that was not really needed when I sold the house a few months later.
The women who bought the house paid good money for it. They were going to be my realtors but bought it instead. I got what seemed like very good money, but somehow in the end, there was a capital loss. Just works that way sometimes. The sisters did not get to do much as the market began falling.
I can not state about any meetings, but I know they spent a decent amount of money for a couple of years trying to keep ahead of code enforcement. I know this because I know them and the guy who did the work. The inside of the house was of course not livable, anyone with an ounce of sense knew that and knew why. it was a construction site and a house being brought back from that fairly massive fire. However, as stated above, the STRUCTURE of the house was new and so it was not falling down as the minutes of some meetings seem to indicate. I know this to be true without a doubt. Pictures can be taken in such a way to make it look worse than it really is, but this house was structurally sound and should not have been taken.
At some time, the house got foreclosed on by the hard money lender. Code enforcement of course kept up their fun little dance with this house and the lender realized they only way to get any peace was to have it or let it get torn down. I do certainly believe that the hard money lender did not show up to any meetings. Your statements, jbroadglide, about the owner not showing up at meetings is mostly just misleading. It implies a person when by then it was most likely a “bankâ€. Unless of course, they were while I owned the house and never got notices for, like the one about boarding. Very possible with code enforcement at the time as they and SPAR council and SRG all wanted this house gone.
So, by “embroidering†the truth, the lender, the code enforcement department and who knows who else got one of the few historic homes zoned CCG-S ½ block off of main torn down. Do any of you know how few historic homes are left and zoned right to become cool little commercial establishments? Very, very few are left, thank you code enforcement policies.
So, Jbroadglide, whoever you really are, when you try to set that record straight next time, make sure you have all the real facts and not just what you wish to be true. So much for you and Paul Harvey.
This guy and his post is exactly why we are where we are today. And why we need new blood like Iluvionia and others here to save the houses that are left. Now, back to the important issues at hand.
DANGER LIST: Named Streets
These houses are all on the formal track and are still standing (as of this afternoon). They will be demolished if not repaired in the very near future. This list was built using Historic Planning Department information and is based on the ruling by the HPC.
Ionia: 1140, 1323, 1551-1555, 1626,
Walnut: 1528
Walnut Court: 423 (already has a green tag -- door is open-- needs boarding)
Liberty: 1334, 1415, 1417, 1430, 1925
Market: 1145, 2011
Pearl: 1643, 1647
Numbered Streets:
East Second: 32,229,253
West Third: 32(?)
East Third: 115
East 5th: 321, 349
West 6th: 48-50
West 10th: 342
This is by no means a full list. There are many condemned houses that are not on the HPC list. We will find those condemned houses when we do our survey. However, this list gives us a beginning point. All SPRs should watch out for these and if you see the sewer lines being cut, notify us. It means demolition is only a short time away.
QuoteSec. 307.106 (t) In any case where the Chief of Building Inspection or the Chief of Property Safety determines that there are emergency conditions dangerous to life, health or property affecting a landmark, a landmark site, or a property in an historic district, either Chief may order the remedying of these conditions in accordance with other applicable laws or regulations without the approval of the Commission or issuance of a required certificate of appropriateness. This Section specifically includes those structures that have been defined to be unsafe pursuant to Section 548.102(a), (3), (12) or (13), Ordinance Code. The Chief of Building Inspection or Chief of Property Safety shall promptly notify the Chairman of the Commission of the action being taken.
Sec. 307.113. Construction with other laws and severability.
(a) Whenever a provision of this Chapter conflicts with a provision of the Ordinance Code, the provision that is more conducive to protection of public safety, health and welfare shall prevail. Provided, however, in the event a structure that has been designated as a landmark or contributing to an historic district under the provisions of this Chapter is declared to be an unsafe structure or condemned pursuant to Chapter 518, Ordinance Code, except emergency action as provided in Section 307.106(t), Property Safety shall notify the Commission at the same time the owner or other responsible party is notified and no demolition of the structure shall commence until the Commission has responded to the division. Such response shall be made within 60 days of such notification by Property Safety. If the Commission requests that the structure not be demolished, then the Commission shall advise Property Safety as to what actions will be taken to correct the unsafe conditions and when such actions will be taken in order to avoid the necessity of the City proceeding with abatement action. Notwithstanding, if the indicated actions are not taken within the time indicated in the Commission's response, and in the opinion of the Chief of Property Safety no such action will be taken within a reasonable time, no further notice shall be required to the Commission prior to Property Safety proceeding with abatement action. However, such abatement action shall include demolition of the structure only when the Commission, at the request of the Chief of Property Safety, determines that demolition is appropriate action and that other abatement action is not economically feasible or practical. The Commission shall give a recommendation within 30 days of being requested by the Chief of Property Safety. If the Commission fails to give a recommendation within 30 days, the Chief of Property Safety shall be allowed to take whatever action he deems appropriate.
Quote from: sheclown on July 22, 2010, 07:25:32 PM
Great! I drove up and down Ionia today and made a little graph. I have pictures of all of the houses and a notation of their relative condition. I would like to compare this with the number of actual lots from the property appraisers data base and see how many historic homes are actually left standing.
Never, you could do the same with your street. It was hit pretty darn hard. Addresses of the houses that remain. Notations whether they are condemned, restored, livable, non-conforming or new construction and a picture of each. I'm going to make a data base that several of us (you included if you wish) can post to. I think if we just tackle this block by block we can make it work.
Time flies, apparently in 12/2007 AlexS and MovedSouth were working on a similar database collecting photos of homes on the unsafe structure list. They were saving them using the RE# so that they could be tied to the Property Appraiser database. I'll start on Boulevard and Perry today.
Excellent. I did walnut today but got the photo and the numbers mixed up. hahha. That is not fun!!! Probably need to do it again.
Had a chance to talk to people (naturally curious as I am snapping photos of their houses) and everyone I've talked to is eager to see this done and wants to be informed of the outcome. Great way to meet people.
245 w third street also looks like it is doomed with the orange tag. This is such a great house, and could be restored. There are several great houses that have been, and look great. This one is so unique. built in 1909, and almost 5000 sq ft. what a loss.
This is INSANE
HOLY CRAP!
That is one of the most awesome houses in the city!
*Praying*
"Please Lord, Send some cash my way... I want to remake this house into the jewel the original builders constructed".
I will lie in front of the bulldozers and wrecking crews like a fruitcake tree-hugger... clinging, unbathed to sequoia.
*Researching ownership*
Yeah, it would be a travesty if they demolished this house (looks more like a castle). Its awesome. Not to mention it's the first home a lot of people see when they drive into the neighborhood.
http://apps.coj.net/pao_propertySearch/Basic/Detail.aspx?RE=0708420000
(http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b175/Lunican/dsc01223.jpg)
Google Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=245+w+third+street+jacksonville+fl&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=245+W+3rd+St,+Jacksonville,+Florida+32206&gl=us&t=h&layer=c&cbll=30.339553,-81.659272&panoid=nm7d85gUAga8LgXURNKQmg&cbp=12,74.49,,0,-3.99&ll=30.339553,-81.659272&spn=0.001081,0.002236&z=20)
Google Images (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=245+w+third+street+jacksonville+fl&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=245+W+3rd+St,+Jacksonville,+Florida+32206&gl=us&t=h&layer=c&cbll=30.339441,-81.658822&panoid=mD4_SCro_IvFbRBfQQuV-Q&cbp=12,321.62974159999993,,0,-8.0510082&ll=30.339441,-81.658822&spn=0.001081,0.002236&z=20&photoid=fr-4221126570)
Quote from: mbwright on April 10, 2011, 10:11:42 PM
245 w third street also looks like it is doomed with the orange tag. This is such a great house, and could be restored. There are several great houses that have been, and look great. This one is so unique. built in 1909, and almost 5000 sq ft. what a loss.
Why on earth is that house on the track for being torn down?????
Quote from: buckethead on April 10, 2011, 10:29:38 PM
HOLY CRAP!
That is one of the most awesome houses in the city!
*Praying*
"Please Lord, Send some cash my way... I want to remake this house into the jewel the original builders constructed".
I will lie in front of the bulldozers and wrecking crews like a fruitcake tree-hugger... clinging, unbathed to sequoia.
*Researching ownership*
Let me know...I will become a fruitcake tree-hugger with you in front of the bulldozers!!!!
It is the green tag which warns of pending demolition.
The orange tag, while not a good sign, means a violation of some sort.
It does point to a deterioration and a heading down a sad path, that's for sure.
This house seems to have been foreclosed on, or it is still pending. From what google tells, A widow owns the house. The husband apparently died after it's purchase. The most recent document I found stated the principle balance was in the $140's.
It seems I have seen activity at this house, though not recently. Some degradation (porches) is visible externally, but the structure looks sound. No signs that this property is on the market.
Someone lived in the house until about a year ago I think. At least power was connected as recently as a few months back. As sheclown pointed out, the orange "Condemned" sign does not always lead to demolition, but it is the first step.
"Condemned" more or less means that the house is unsafe to live in. Not having power connected could be one reason, structural issues another. The house has obvious problems with sagging, missing roof tiles and general deterioration. Until recently, the lawn and such was well maintained but I think it is slipping too.
I see this house as a "must safe". It is right at the entrance of Springfield, and very unique and impressive in its appearance. However, saving it will need substantial effort due to the size of the house and the structural problems it likely has. So start filling out those lottery tickets!
Yes......that one is really nice.. No way should it be torn down.
I sincerely hope with a new administration will also come new rules, and a new staff at code enforcement.. There is no way in hell this house needs to be torn down.
Only in Jacksonville Florida :(
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/245-W-3rd-St-Jacksonville-FL-32206/44476426_zpid/
Here is the info according to zillow. It doesn't appear to be on the market. Being in the const mortgage industry, when it is listed, they need to take their losses and ask for much lower, especially considering the condition it is in.
This is such a beautiful home! I wish I had the $ to take on such a wonderful building!
I have been working on trying to reach a "decider" on that house for some time. It IS an icon of Springfield and it's important that we save it.
After some research I discovered that the current owner, Mrs. Massey, has a mortgage that is in default and a bunch of city fines. I've tried to reach out to her and sent her registered letters offering to help but to no avail.
I did reach the attorney who worked with her on the foreclosure and it appears that she successfully fought the lender to a standstill. The bank began foreclosure procedings back in 2006 and about a year ago the bank ended up in stalemate with her because they have lost a document she was supposed to have signed and without it they can't foreclose. Registered letters to them and the attorneys they hired have also gone unanswered.
A buyer who contacted SPAR is interested in restoring the home and living in it. He is a contractor and so is his son so they know the challenges they will face in this home. We just have to find someone who has clear title who will move the process forward. If Mrs. Massey would agree to let us negotiate a short sale (because she owes more than the home is worth) I believe we could get the bank to agree, especially since we have a buyer. But without her consent we can't do anything.
If anyone knows Mrs. Massey personally and can reach her and persuade her to move on this I have faith we can work out a short sale. We do this all the time.
I'm open to any ideas and will be happy to help any way I can. We're not looking for a commission on this sale - I just want to save this iconic home.
+1
In order to save Springfield, one house at a time... one giant leap of faith.
GOD SAVE THE SPRINGFIELD (like homage to Queen of England thingy, just bare with me ;))
-Josh
God... also please spare School 4 for me too ... pleeeeeeeeease!!! :)
Quote from: Springfield Chicken on April 11, 2011, 11:09:50 AM
I have been working on trying to reach a "decider" on that house for some time. It IS an icon of Springfield and it's important that we save it.
If anyone knows Mrs. Massey personally and can reach her and persuade her to move on this I have faith we can work out a short sale. We do this all the time.
I'm open to any ideas and will be happy to help any way I can. We're not looking for a commission on this sale - I just want to save this iconic home.
Thank you for your work in trying to save this home.
Thanks Chicken. We love you.
Also, Code Enforcement has taken the steps to properly board and secure the home to keep vagrants and looters out. +1 MCCD
Also, MCCD did not come upon this home by themselves. A care request for "deterioration" and "trash debris" was placed on at least 2 recent occasions (April 6th) hence MCCD checking out the property.
3 years ago also, a care request was also called in on the home while the owner lived there.
The CARE system does not protect our homes. It is one of the primary reason SOS was created; to help folks.
This thread will go down in history as SPAR's legacy.
Those douches were behind most of the complaints filed on these properties, and many others. Usually bogus.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on April 11, 2011, 05:50:31 PM
This thread will go down in history as SPAR's legacy.
Those douches were behind most of the complaints filed on these properties, and many others. Usually bogus.
The difference between RAP and SPAR is night and day!!
To an outsider it almost seems like SPAR wants to be complete oposite of RAP!!!
RAP might be a pain in the ass a lot of the time...but I am glad to have them after hearing stories of SPAR!!!
Through Urban Core CPAC, received a list of "Formal Track" homes -- CM Lumb had requested this info from Code.
QuoteMCCD cases of the unsafe structures with commission approval for demolition.
2009-48418 1925 N. Liberty S
1998-479 253 E. 2nd St.
2002-4475 1112 Ionia St.
2004-5530 2011 N. Market
2003-12601 1430 N. Liberty
2003-243 1145 N. Market
2009-106647 115 E. 3rd St.
2008-185935 321 E. 5th St.
2008-109635 1334 N. Liberty St.
2010-17878 1323 Ionia St.
1998-5557 1524 N. Market St.
1998-4990 1647 N. Pearl St.
1998-4546 423 Walnut Ct.
2005-409 342 W 10th St.
Unless we can figure out a way to stop the destruction of Formal Track homes, these are lost.
342 W. 10th is already down. 423 Walnut Court is mothballed.
Code Enforcement, in particular Kimberly Scott, Chief of MCCD, has willfully and intentionally violated the Sunshine Laws. In the last 2+ years, even prior to PSOS I have asked over and over again for a list of homes that were in eminent danger of demolition, my terminology changed later when PSOS was formed and the practice of the "formal track" which of course according to MCCD doesn't exist, yet I can read about it over and over in HPC meeting minutes, and a list of homes approved for the formal track would be requested, and nothing. "We don't maintain a list, we don't have one." MCCD and Kim Scott and General Counsel can sugar coat it anyway the want, the community was lied to. Because alas, all of a sudden there is a list? Are your fricken' kidding me?
This is absurd. Absoutely absurd.
This crooked department needs to be leveled.
Quote from: iloveionia on March 06, 2012, 08:29:56 PM
Code Enforcement, in particular Kimberly Scott, Chief of MCCD, has willfully and intentionally violated the Sunshine Laws. In the last 2+ years, even prior to PSOS I have asked over and over again for a list of homes that were in eminent danger of demolition, my terminology changed later when PSOS was formed and the practice of the "formal track" which of course according to MCCD doesn't exist, yet I can read about it over and over in HPC meeting minutes, and a list of homes approved for the formal track would be requested, and nothing. "We don't maintain a list, we don't have one." MCCD and Kim Scott and General Counsel can sugar coat it anyway the want, the community was lied to. Because alas, all of a sudden there is a list? Are your fricken' kidding me?
This is absurd. Absoutely absurd.
This crooked department needs to be leveled.
+1 The sooner the better, too .
QuoteThis is absurd. Absoutely absurd.
+++++++1!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: iloveionia on March 06, 2012, 08:29:56 PM
Code Enforcement, in particular Kimberly Scott, Chief of MCCD, has willfully and intentionally violated the Sunshine Laws. In the last 2+ years, even prior to PSOS I have asked over and over again for a list of homes that were in eminent danger of demolition, my terminology changed later when PSOS was formed and the practice of the "formal track" which of course according to MCCD doesn't exist, yet I can read about it over and over in HPC meeting minutes, and a list of homes approved for the formal track would be requested, and nothing. "We don't maintain a list, we don't have one." MCCD and Kim Scott and General Counsel can sugar coat it anyway the want, the community was lied to. Because alas, all of a sudden there is a list? Are your fricken' kidding me?
This is absurd. Absoutely absurd.
This crooked department needs to be leveled.
As to keep things in context.
Actually this list is a little light. If you compare it to the one I got from MCCD, there are several additional properties slated for demolition which aren't on this list they disclosed to councilman Lumb.
So we are then back to "too bad, so sad, we honestly don't know how many to tell you?" Until, of course, they want to pull one out of a hat somewhere and issue a demo COA without notice. THEN, like magic, they can manage to find that address!!
And there lies a point of contention. Kim Scott was ticked with folio weekly gave kudos for "stopping 139 demolitions" the number of homes in the urban core (32206) on the unsafe structures list, at that time. Tisk, tisk she said, the information was incorrect and she was fuming. FUMING!!! I spoke to her on the phone as she refuses to email near most all of the time.
She and her staff have been exposed. And this fight will be unforgiving and relentless. She despises anyone messing with the unsafe structures list and trying to (as she calls it) save the house in the 13th hour. Tell ya what. I don't care if it's the millionth hour in her book. Everything absolutely possible will be done to prevent further demolitions in our neighborhood.
The neighborhood has been wronged on so many levels from so many different facets. Back off. Yup, that's right, back off.
It's never too late to preserve something. 13th hour? Tough! No way to go back after it's gone. Too late for regrets then.
iloveionia, this won't stop until you get rid of her. take her out with the Sunshine Law. You've got a ton of proof. Take her out.
Quote from: avs on March 07, 2012, 12:40:39 PM
iloveionia, this won't stop until you get rid of her. take her out with the Sunshine Law. You've got a ton of proof. Take her out.
What proof is that?
Emails. Written proof with top of the food chain denial.
Quote from: iloveionia on March 07, 2012, 01:17:17 PM
Emails. Written proof with top of the food chain denial.
Ha! Good luck with that.
To be honest, under Mayor Peyton, the sunshine laws were taken very seriously. We never had any trouble getting the information we were entitled to. Except from Ms Scott. Who likes to show up to meetings and do her best to intimidate without being even slightly prepared. At least that has been my personal experience meeting with her and Dr. Gaffney. I do have to say that she was smart enough to sort of comply, but never really comply with our information requests. Still, once certain information comes out, and certain legal actions are taken, she will mostly likely find herself in hot water.
Since Mayor Brown, we have had several sunshine information requests involving things like demolitions and the recent attempt at getting mothballing sunsetted pretty much totally ignored. The city is most definitely not taking these requests seriously and are blatantly in violation of the laws. I think they are just hoping that no one will have the balls to take this to the state ethics people. (Their wrong.) I guess Ms Scott might just fit right in with the new administration.
Below is an e-mail from Robert Prado to Joel McEachin providing Joel with the list that PSOS had asked for many times and Kimberly Scott refused to provide. Not only that, but it also states that MCCD had asked and the OGC had agreed that the new rules did not apply to them and that they were demanding that Joel state in writing that he would issue those administratively approved COA's for the demolition of the listed houses. Is there any doubt that the goal of MCCD is to tear down historic houses regardless of their real condition or the wishes of anyone else? Let alone the real needs of the city and the community for which the department supposedly works for.
QuoteFrom: Prado, Robert
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 2:34 PM
To: McEachin, Joel
Cc: Scott, Kimberly; Teal, Jason; Beard, Nelson
Subject: Condemned Structures with HPC approval
Joel the following list are the addresses and MCCD cases of the unsafe structures with commission approval for demolition. Review the list and send me a memo for the files that states an Administrative COA will be issued for the issuance of demolition permits. As per Jason Teal's advisory email.
Thanks
2009-48418 1925 N. Liberty St.
1998-479 253 E. 2nd St.
2002-4475 1112 Ionia St.
2004-5530 2011 N. Market St.
2003-12601 1430 N. Liberty St.
2003-243 1145 N. Market St.
2009-106647 115 E. 3rd St.
2008-185935 321 E. 5th St.
2008-109635 1334 N. Liberty St.
2010-17878 1323 Ionia St.
1998-5557 1524 N. Market St.
1998-4990 1647 N. Pearl St.
1998-4546 423 Walnut Ct.
2005-409 342 W 10th St.
Robert Prado
A.M.I.O.
Code Enforcement Administrator
Municipal Code Compliance Division
407 North Laura Street Suite 200
Jacksonville, Florida 32202
904-255-7002
rprado@coj.net
How do we stop this ?
I have no idea how or if Joel responded at the time this e-mail was received. I do know, however, that the COA for the demolition of 1647 Pearl Street has been sitting on his desk unsigned for about a week or so. Kudos to Joel for this. He bought us time and now we have Councilman Lumb doing his thing and we have a stay of execution for 1647 Pearl. A great first step that may not have been possible if Joel had just picked up that pen like Jason Teal of the Office of the General Council apparently told him to in some advisory e-mail.
Quote from: strider on March 07, 2012, 06:39:30 PM
To be honest, under Mayor Peyton, the sunshine laws were taken very seriously. We never had any trouble getting the information we were entitled to. Except from Ms Scott. Who likes to show up to meetings and do her best to intimidate without being even slightly prepared. At least that has been my personal experience meeting with her and Dr. Gaffney. I do have to say that she was smart enough to sort of comply, but never really comply with our information requests. Still, once certain information comes out, and certain legal actions are taken, she will mostly likely find herself in hot water.
Since Mayor Brown, we have had several sunshine information requests involving things like demolitions and the recent attempt at getting mothballing sunsetted pretty much totally ignored. The city is most definitely not taking these requests seriously and are blatantly in violation of the laws. I think they are just hoping that no one will have the balls to take this to the state ethics people. (Their wrong.) I guess Ms Scott might just fit right in with the new administration.
So much for Brown's "core initiative" then. With stuff like this & the moratorium on the mobility fee, it seems like business as usual for Jax.
I looked at all of the listed properties on Google Maps. And while I never support tearing down any historic structures (unless they're an absolute lost cause), almost all of them looked really really bad. Far worse than most of the ones that have recently been demoed. I wonder if many of them could even be saved??
Quote from: strider on March 08, 2012, 06:35:05 PM
Kudos to Joel for this.
yup.
To my knowledge, he never released the COA.
@pee...
of course, most of them do look bad.
That's what neglect looks like.
But, looks are deceiving. That is one of the benefits of mothballing, you make the outside look better while protecting the structure.
Lessons learned from this loss:
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab165/sheclown/PattersonApt.jpg)
To be honest, I never drive by the place where the Patterson Apartments used to be. I take other paths and it is quite easy for me to ignore that now vacant lot.
Pearl Street would have been another matter. I could not have avoided looking at the empty space that used to have this house sitting on it.
My heart, like so many hearts, is so grateful tonight. To Joel for laying down in front of a COA. For armies of emails, phone calls, conversations. For CPAC and most definitely for Councilman Lumb, a true and proven friend to Springfield.
But I am also grateful to that little square apartment building, on the formal track, that we lost and that taught us the cost of failure.
Quote from: sheclown on March 08, 2012, 07:34:29 PM
My heart, like so many hearts, is so grateful tonight. To Joel for laying down in front of a COA. For armies of emails, phone calls, conversations. For CPAC and most definitely for Councilman Lumb, a true and proven friend to Springfield.
But I am also grateful to that little square apartment building, on the formal track, that we lost and that taught us the cost of failure.
I absolutely concur.
While we enjoy a stay of execution, there is more work ahead.
We can do this.
We got mothballing.
We can put our lost and forgotten homes in the hands of individuals and/or groups who will love them. All of them.