Appeal of Avondale Bungalow Demolition Denial @ LUZ tonight

[grimss]

Those of you who've seen the stories in The Resident and RAP's Community Newsletter are familiar with this case.

The owner of a 1920 bungalow would like to demolish what is an intact, attractive and contributing structure in the Riverside Avondale Historic District. He has stated that he does not have an interest in renting or selling the property, but also does not want to continue spending money to maintain what is presently a vacant structure. He's been told the home needs a new roof, estimated to cost $6,000. As the quote to demolish the structure is only $5,000, this is his preferred option.  The property is presently valued at around $300K. 

The JHPC denied his request, stating the demolition request met none of the preservation ordinance's required criteria for demolishing a contributing structure. The owner is appealing that denial before the Land Use and Zoning Committee tonight at 5 pm. Paul Harden is his lawyer.

I invite any of you who support the preservation of Jacksonville's historic structures to join your neighbors at tonight's meeting, which will be held in the City Council chambers at City Hall.  The appeal is the first item on the agenda, so the ball should get rolling at 5 pm sharp.

The JHPC, in their ruling, said they could not allow a historic building to be demolished merely for convenience's sake. I personally feel that if the LUZ overturns the JHPC's ruling, it will set a terrible precedent for our historic districts as it dramatically lowers the bar for future demolition requests.

[Lucasjj]

Do you have an adress for the property?

[grimss]

1945 Greenwood Avenue

[Jason]

Doesn't RAP offer renovation and/or upgrade incentives?

[copperfiend]

Looked it on Google Maps. Not too shabby.

[CS Foltz]

Would anyone care to bet that Paul Hardin allready has a buyer lined up for the vacant property? This is about his speed.............hope he wears socks to the LUZ Meeting...........normally he does not! LUZ needs to stick to their guns regarding something that is in the historical district and overseen by them! Don't change the appeal!

[grimss]

I don't believe the owner has expressed any interest in incentives (not that RAP has the $ to offer them, but they'd try to connect him with available state and federal programs).  The owner has deep pockets, but doesn't want to spend any additional $ on the property.

[thirdeye]

As someone who has no love lost for RAP, I don't understand why Mr. Lamb is picking this fight. Choosing to demo a home because it is cheaper than replacing the roof is irresponsible. Seems like the money he is going to spend on Harden would negate any savings with the demolition.

He is also encouraging RAP's & JHPC's power trip by appealing the previous decisions against him.
When Mr. Lamb loses his appeal, which he should, RAP will declare victory and will say they are saving "the neighborhood".
Then they can go back to fighting well intentioned homeowners(not Mr.Lamb) that are just trying to improve their property and therefore the neighborhood.

I wish RAP and the JHPC could understand the concept of old vs historic. Just because a house, window, door or roof is "old" does not make it "historic".
Right now my my house is freezing because I have "old" windows that RAP views as "historical". Too bad RAP does not pay my electrical.

I've always wondered what type of person has the "nerve" to tell someone what they can and can't do with their home. I use to call them politicians and bureaucrats but in Riverside/Avondale you call them your neighbor.

[vicupstate]

^^
Thirdeye, in your objective opinion, were the new windows you planned on using, a reasonably close replica of the old ones?

BTW, but for RAP, Riverside and perhaps Avondale would not look much better than Brooklyn (what remains of it), does today.  A Freeway running through the middle of a neighborhood is often it's death knell.  Be thankful for RAP, otherwise, you probably wouldn't want to live there in the first place.

BTW, the city has at least as much control over virtually ANY property, as RAP or any private organization ever could.  But for that 'nerve', you could have a nuclear waste dump next door.  Be glad that someone else can't reduce YOUR property values at will.   

[grimss]

Well said, Vicupstate. Thank you for getting it.

As for the meeting, it was 1) long, 2) quite interesting, in that I don't think Harden was all that effective, and 3) somewhat predictable in that the majority punted till another day. Kudos for Councilman Corrigan for passionately defending the historic ordinance.  Jason Teal, representing the JHPC, was DEVASTATING in his refutation of Harden's argument about how the bungalow was a train-wreck.  Louise DeSpain also spoke up, saying that any of the three houses she's renovated would have had better reasons for getting demolished than this one.

Ultimately, it was determined (heavily advocated by Don Davis, who seemed clearly to be in Harden's pocket) that the city needed to send out an engineer and a public safety officer to determine if the structure represented a danger to the neighborhood. Given that one of the owner's own family members was living in it as recently as a year ago, that seems unlikely.

[grimss]

Forgot to mention that, as far as I can tell, Harden was wearing socks. Clearly, pulling out all the stops.

[thelakelander]

It sounds like the money is in the land.  Rip the house down and the piece of property is worth a lot more once the market comes back.

[thirdeye]

^^
Thirdeye, in your objective opinion, were the new windows you planned on using, a reasonably close replica of the old ones?

BTW, but for RAP, Riverside and perhaps Avondale would not look much better than Brooklyn (what remains of it), does today.  A Freeway running through the middle of a neighborhood is often it's death knell.  Be thankful for RAP, otherwise, you probably wouldn't want to live there in the first place.

BTW, the city has at least as much control over virtually ANY property, as RAP or any private organization ever could.  But for that 'nerve', you could have a nuclear waste dump next door.  Be glad that someone else can't reduce YOUR property values at will.   

Vicupstate,
Yes, our windows are no different visually than what they replaced.
RAP feels windows in certain houses should be repaired not replaced by a superior product that looks exactly the same.
Who needs modern, insulated dual pane windows these days anyway? Energy is only getting cheaper and our climates not changing.

I wish RAP was as powerful and effective as you say they are. Protecting our neighborhood from greedy developers and nuclear waste dumps.
But instead they go after homeowners that widen their driveways, replace patio tile and install fences to protect their children.

[grimss]

Well, an interesting part of this is that one of the 10 COJ criteria for demolition of a historically contributing structure is that you must provide plans that show what you want to put in its place. I suppose this is to avoid a situation where the applicant claims to have no intentions for the property, but then later decides that all along s(he) wanted to erect a non-compliant structure (HPC review of new construction in that situation being less restrictive).

Mr. Lamb has claimed from the beginning that he just wants to grass the property and hold it for his grandchildren.  Surprise surprise, though, today Harden was more than willing to agree to a requirement that they produce plans for a new historically compatible structure on the site within a specified period of time at the LUZ's discretion--he suggested two years.  Kind of makes you go hmmm.

[gatorback]

Having lived in one of the more charming homes in Avondale, I'd say....if you want to tear something down, go out to middleburg.  There's nothing but historic homes in Riverside/Avondale that we need to keep.