Petitioning Council to Save the Claude Nolan Building

[JaxUnicorn]

Not sure I can make a meeting during the day.  But I will be at City Council meeting tonight to speak on my support of this bill.  Hopw others will do the same.

[sheclown]

This afternoon's meeting:

Robert Prado, MCCD, Jason Teal, OGC, CM Lumb, CM Gaffney, Lisa Sheppard (not in photo), Joel McEachin

CM Boyer was also present.

[sheclown]

Prado's main point was that the MCCD has imposed rolling fines on the building since 2011(?).  They total something like 70K.  He also said there are no plans to demolish the building (more on that later).  The owners have little left on their 180 days to make repairs including replacing all windows.

Jason Teal spoke for preservation today (whether he intended to or not).  His point to Lumbs concerns that the city would pay more if it wanted the building under eminent domain (for some future development project) -- we could just foreclose on the rolling fines like Bostwick.   He stated that the building is in a bankruptcy situation.  He also talked about the environment issues but stated that there are options other than demolition to deal with any contaminates.

CM Lumb began the meeting stating that he voted against the landmark status while in LUZ, but due to public concern wanted more information.  He seemed willing to listen to the preservation side of the issues and had many questions for Joel.  When Jason pointed out that the modified front part of the building --which addresses the architectural significance -- wasn't even one of the criteria which was met, you could see a light going on (went on in my mind as well, more on that later).

CM Gaffney wants the neighborhood to be happy.  He loves the old houses.  He wants to help.

Lisa Sheppard spoke about the section 106 reviews that would need to be completed if the area was undergoing any sort of remediation whether or not it is landmarked. 

Joel pointed out that the criteria that was not met (the missing 2 elements) were the building's architectural significance and (I believe) a significant historical event occurred there?  Like Lincoln being born. 

Joel's reasoning behind not pursuing the architectural significance (which is why the remainder of the preservationists in the universe want to save the building) is that the other criteria is easily met and the architectural significance gets muddy with the art moderne reno. 

[sheclown]

And herein lies the problem.

I believe that when Joel focused on the famous-person-argument-for-preservation over the Klutho-building-significant- architecture-reason for preservation, that confused people.  Joel only needed to meet four of the seven criteria (initially, later it was changed to only two of the seven criteria because the owners were on board with the plan).  Claude Nolan was instrumental in bringing cars into Jacksonville.  Before the Claude Nolan building was constructed there were less than 150 cars in J'ville,.  And not only did he brings cars into town, store then in a uniquely urban vertical warehouse, he also brought car loans. 

But the report, while mentioning Klutho, didn't focus as much on it.  Therefore, the council assumed that it wasn't significant, architecturally because of the alterations to it. (Not so says Dr. Wood in his presentation to the group).  Seems to me that was a bit of twisting the report around.  Apparently, the person and the significant historical contribution is the lesser card.   But be that as it may.  It was all laid out this afternoon.

In actuality I believe the building meets most all seven standards for landmarking.  Famous person, famous architect, suitable for restoration.

In other words, it seems to me that Joel made two assumptions.  First that meeting four of the criteria would be sufficient without going into the modifications to the facade and secondly that the Klutho buildings speak for themselves.

[sheclown]

And finally, my favorite part of the meeting.

Prado was asked if there were any demolition plans for this building.  He said no.

Michelle Tappouni, when her turn to speak, said "I'd like to set the record straight."  And then she proceeded to do so.  She spoke about the bid forms (copy of which is posted somewhere on a Claude Nolan thread).  She spoke about the bids submitted -- $80k for dry demo and $300k for wet demo

And does anyone think a dry demo would be in order with the possible contaminates all around?  These are my thoughts as I'm hearing this.

She pointed out that it is all well and good to say there are no demo plans, but with a bid out and the formal process begun, it would not be too difficult to give the demo contractor the green light. 

It's not like it hasn't happened before.

Makes landmarking the structure and allowing the owner to mothball it a wonderfully economical plan for the city.

[sheclown]

Jack Meeks talked about the economic advantage that the building would have if it were landmarked and that it would attract a good buyer. 

Wayne Wood had a wonderful presentation, photos of Kluthos now gone.  He called this building "world class" and spoke about it as a "free" Klutho.

It was a great meeting.  Lots of good info.  Smart people talking preservation.  Good stuff.

Tons of love to CM Lumb and Dr. Gaffney for doing this.

They heard the petition,  the emails and took a closer look.

[sheclown]

CM Lumb getting interviewed before the meeting.

[JaxUnicorn]

Tons of love to CM Lumb and Dr. Gaffney for doing this.

They heard the petition,  the emails and took a closer look.

I agree with showering appreciation to Lumb and Gaffney for taking a closer look.  My concern is that they are only 2 of 19 council members and I'm not sure the landmark status will pass.  If it does not, I would think the owner could appeal and based on the council's decision to landmark the Meyers' sisters' house on W 6th I would think he would win.

[Debbie Thompson]

You don't think they'll share what they learned today with other council members?

[thelakelander]

Thanks for keeping us in the loop, Sheclown!

[sheclown]

After almost a year's long journey, this will be voted on by full council tonight.

[JaxUnicorn]

IT PASSED TONIGHT 13-5!!

Major thanks to those councilmembers who voted FOR this landmark status.  You've not made a mistake.

[sheclown]

This was totally an intense meeting.

We were in double triple overtime. 

CM Lumb took charge of the defense of this.  He said he changed his mind due to listening to commissioners, staff and the community.  He gave arguments for the landmarking.  Gaffney spoke about the meeting as well, and said he had heard Springfield speaking.  Lori Boyer was a strong defender. 

Cresembini eloquently pointed out that everyone (except a few councilmen) were for this so why are we wasting our time?

Even Bishop who quite obviously has no appreciation for Art Morderne and used many opportunity to call it "ugly", said he changed his mind about landmarking it.

Warren Jones spoke for the designation citing the loss of historic fabric downtown.

Joost and Clark acting like middle-schoolers tossing spit-wads -- they blamed the ugliness downtown on the Historic Preservation Commission -- calling them inflexible and harsh.

Then riding in on a beautiful high horse, comes Denise Lee.  And she preached it good.  She told Clark and Joost that it is the policy of ignoring the urban core which is responsible for the blight downtown.  She was great. 

Redman was just....

The bottom line is that council was VERY receptive to the Springfield community tonight and this community owes them are great thank you.

I have asked you to email city council many times to complain about this or about that.

Tonight I'm asking you to email your appreciation.

Clay@coj.net, WBishop@coj.net, RClark@coj.net, Redman@coj.net, LBoyer@coj.net, MattS@coj.net , Gaffney@coj.net, EDLee@coj.net, WAJones@coj.net, : RBrown@coj.net, Holt@coj.net, doylec@coj.net, Gulliford@coj.net, JimLove@coj.net, KimDaniels@coj.net, : JRC@coj.net, Joost@coj.net, GAnderson@coj.net, RLumb@coj.net

[Kay]

Wonderful news.

[sheclown]

Barrier needed around polluted soil at Confederate Park, state tells Jacksonville
Cleanup would require demoliton next to landmark Main Street property

By Steve Patterson Sun, Aug 24, 2014 @ 9:21 pm | updated Mon, Aug 25, 2014 @ 11:54 am

The three buildings at 937 N. Main St. were declared landmarks by the city's Historic Preservation Commission, but one stands to be sacrificed in a contamination cleanup.

Cleaning up 19th-century pollution buried around Jacksonville's Confederate Park will require adding a protective underground wall and demolishing buildings constructed on long-forgotten contamination, state environmental officials have told the city.

That will apparently mean tearing down a small building off Main Street downtown without damaging two others, one just feet away, that the city declared landmarks this year.

And it could call for digging up parts of the park on Springfield's southern edge and scooping sediment out of a pond there and along Hogans Creek, where chemicals from coal tar used at a plant that manufactured natural gas have seeped into ground water for generations.

Direction the city received this month from Florida's Department of Environmental Protection pushes the start of a long-discussed park cleanup closer to reality, something that people involved with the surrounding area have heard about for years.

"I think it's awesome that the cleanup is beginning. The health of the community is very important," said Gloria DeVall, a historic preservation advocate who had asked the city to declare three buildings that back up to the creek as landmarks because the structures were used by Claude Nolan Cadillac, the city's first car dealership and the oldest Cadillac dealer in the South.

The cleanup would demolish one of the three buildings at 937 N. Main St., a red brick structure designed by locally famed architect Henry Klutho. But DeVall, who championed the designation to the city's Historic Preservation Commission and to the City Council, said that loss was unavoidable.

"It was the only way to get the other two buildings landmarked," she said. "It would not have gone through. We had to sacrifice it."

After reviewing three cleanup options the city offered in January, the state approved two of them and told the city to have a final cleanup plan ready by November.

Hitting that deadline will be a problem, said Aleizha Batson, a city spokeswoman.

"We are working to pull all aspects of the plan together, however we will be asking for an extension," Batson said. The city doesn't have anyone under contract who can prepare a cleanup plan right away, she said, and it will be September before the city's procurement process gets started.

The choices the state approved for the cleanup both involved creating a buried wall about 2,100 feet long that would block groundwater moving through a zone of contaminated soil. The wall would reach 40 feet below ground level and soil inside would either be excavated and carted away to a landfill or mixed with a cement-like material that would solidify in place keeping contaminants where they are.

The 51,000 cubic yards of stabilizing material by itself is expected to cost almost $3.2 million, and the full cost for a cleanup is expected to top $17 million.

How that's going to be paid for isn't settled yet.

The city sued neighboring property owners — Jacksonville Hospitality Holdings L.P. and Shoppes of Lakeside Inc. — in federal court in 2012, saying they hadn't done anything to solve a problem that was partly theirs. But the city was also partly liable, too, because the park had some coal tar from the old gas plant.

Since the plant had been built in the late 19th century, closed and been forgotten, whole generations of construction had happened around the creek. The buildings that had housed Claude Nolan's dealership became the now-abandoned E.H. Thompson buildings, and the Park View Inn at Main and State streets — where the gas plant stood in the 1880s — had flourished, faded and been torn down with the exception of a parking garage. That garage would be demolished as part of the cleanup.

But attorneys for the businesses the city sued have been pushing back.

The state's approach to the cleanup "virtually guarantees" that efforts to decide who's liable "will be unnecessarily frustrated, unsynchronized, inequitable and ultimately not in the interests of any of the stakeholders," a lawyer representing owners of the Park View site, James C. Rinaman III, said by email.

Shoppes of Lakeside attorney Mary Sorrell wrote to the state in June that cleanup work suggested near Hogans Creek "is not supported by the data." While there is pollution in the ground, she added, "it has been present ... for over 115 years and has barely migrated." Sorrell did not return a phone message left late last week.

The city is "in legal discussion with all property owners and hopes for a positive outcome," Batson said. The city would like to get agreement on who picks up the bill before the work is done, but "if it is prolonged, we will consider all options," Batson said by email.

Though the site is old, there's not limitless time to settle the dispute.

The state had recommended asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to take over the cleanup as a federal Superfund project — where the cleanup bill is passed on to the responsible parties after the fact — during former Mayor John Peyton's term in office. The state backed off that plan when the city took steps to get some solutions.



Steve Patterson: (904) 359-4263

http://members.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-08-24/story/barrier-needed-around-polluted-soil-confederate-park-state-tells[/quote]