Inside the Park View Inn

[downtownparks]

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

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

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

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

Good riddance.

[thelakelander]

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

[heights unknown]

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

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

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

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

Heights Unknown

[I-10east]

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

[Jason]

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

[heights unknown]

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

Heights Unknown

[downtownparks]

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

[RiversideGator]

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

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

[Jason]

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

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

[downtownparks]

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

[downtownparks]

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

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

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

[thelakelander]

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

[vicupstate]

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

[downtownparks]

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

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

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

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

[downtownparks]

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

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