Blight committee ponders razing sound structures --

[sheclown]

Panel ponders demolition for boarded, but sturdy, Jacksonville buildings
Group mulls removal to stem blight

By Steve Patterson Fri, Apr 25, 2014 @ 3:47 pm | updated Fri, Apr 25, 2014 @ 9:45 pm

A Jacksonville panel on neighborhood blight began considering legislation Friday to authorize demolishing some boarded-up buildings whether they're structurally sound or not.

Buildings that have been vacant and boarded for at least two years, and aren't historic, could be labeled unsafe structures under a draft bill that city attorney Cherry Shaw circulated to the Stand Up For Neighborhoods Blight Committee.

The legislation has not been formally introduced yet, and Councilwoman Denise Lee said more discussion is needed before a bill is proposed to the council.

Unsafe buildings can be demolished by city order.

Local rules haven't allowed that when buildings are structurally sound, but advocates for new rules argue existing laws still allow buildings, and neighborhoods, to decay.

"We've got to create something new," Lee told the committee, an informal group she formed with Chief Administrative Officer Karen Bowling and Sheriff's Office administrators.

The idea was greeted hesitantly.

"If the house is not unsafe, we can still go in and demolish it?" Councilman Warren Jones asked after the bill was first outlined. "... I need to think about it."

Jones later suggested a provision to exempt a building from demolition if its owner has posted it for sale through multiple listing services, saying a property shouldn't be razed if there's an active effort underway to reuse it.

The city can order a vacant building boarded up if doors or windows are left open.

Jay Higbee, an executive at the Foland and Higbee property management company, told the committee he saw examples of vacant buildings downtown that seemed to argue both for and against demolition.

The landmark Seminole Club across the street from City Hall has been vacant for years but is in very good condition, he said. In contrast, he noted that the Bostwick building, an early-1900s building on East Bay Street, is historically important but decaying badly.

The demolition rules were being discussed in a panel Lee earlier formed to respond to "human blight," her term for the harmful effects of people hanging out on streets and porches, often dealing drugs.

Regulatory Compliance Director Kim Scott told panel members that vacant boarded buildings can become hubs for trouble and a drag on an area's quality of life.

"Imagine going home to a neighborhood where a vagrant frequently takes off the boards ... and is living in there," she said.

Steve Patterson: (904) 359-4263

http://members.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-04-25/story/panel-ponders-demolition-boarded-sturdy-jacksonville-buildings

[sheclown]

one word:  mothball

[sheclown]

goodbye downtown

[thelakelander]

WTF? Areas of town with a ton of vacant, overgrown lots (previous demolished building sites) look like a hot mess. Mothballing, picking up trash, maintaining yard growth and keeping the public ROW clean are more cost effective, visually enhancing and economically stimulating options for "blight" clearance.

We're not Detroit, Flint or Youngstown, we're a growing Sunbelt community. Why are we considering self destroying, shrinking rust belt city strategies? This hasn't worked anywhere else in cleaning or turning communities around. What makes anyone believe things will be different in Jax?

[sheclown]

This will hit the historic (but unprotected by historic designation) black neighborhoods really hard -- Durkeeville, East Side,


We claim to want sustainability? What is sustainable about tossing away perfectly good buildings?

[thelakelander]

Of course it will. A look at the East side of Detroit will show you the end result of such a strategy. Jax can do better.

[JaxUnicorn]

So the City spends money they don't have to tear down a structurally sound building just because it is vacant and boarded?  What's next?  Demolishing homes that are vacant and NOT boarded?  The City currently has lawsuites pending for Code Enforcement's demolition of houses - I'm thinking this will significantly increase those.  According to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary, one of the definitions of blight is "a deterioriated condition" while another is "something that frustrates plans or hopes."  Perhaps it is the latter that is driving this initiative?? 

• Will someone please tell me how demolishing a boarded structure alleviates blight?
• What benefit does it provide the community?
• Depending on the size of the structure, it could cost significantly more to re-build than to renovate (remember, these are structurally sound buildings).
• Where will the City of Jacksonville get the funds to demolish these houses?

According to Kim Scott:

Regulatory Compliance Director Kim Scott told panel members that vacant boarded buildings can become hubs for trouble and a drag on an area's quality of life.

So you tear the building down?  The HOUSE is not the cause of the trouble....How about addressing the PEOPLE who cause the trouble??  If they are vagrants/homeless, lets figure out how to fix that problem (I have no idea how to do that btw).

"Imagine going home to a neighborhood where a vagrant frequently takes off the boards ... and is living in there," she said.

If someone does get in, it's probably not a vagrant but a crook/criminal with proper tools.  In my opinion, this is a JSO issue.  If a structure is properly boarded, it is very difficult for a 'vagrant' to get inside, as they normally do not have the tools necessary to break in.

Let's say there are two houses side-by-side; one is occupied and one is vacant/boarded.  All other things about the properties are equal (structures are sound, yards are maintained, roofs are in tact, etc.)   Each has a current tax assessment of $150,000.

The City tears down the one that is vacant/boarded. 

• Taxpayers foot this bill.
• Property owners will likely no longer maintain the property.
• This causes real blight - yards that are overgrown.
• The City spends taxpayer dollars to abate the blight the City created by demolishing the structure.
• The City will continue to spend more taxpayer dollars to continue to abate because grass doesn't stop growing because the structure is gone .
• The City spent taxpayer dollars that effectively reduced it's income.
  
  
  
  • The improved property (with a structure) generated approximately $2,800 in annual property taxes.
  • Property taxes on a vacant lot are significantly lower than those on an improved lot.

[sheclown]

Let's say it is in your personal best interest to promote demolitions....

But if Lori Boyer trusts Kim Scott enough to sing her praises at the Rules Committee meeting, who are we to question that? 

And ditto for the rest of the subcommittee...

[avs]

And just who is going to keep these vacant lots clean that the city is going to create??  The city already doesn't take care of half the property it owns!!  This is a WASTE of our tax money and will hit the poorest of neighborhoods, primarily the African American community.

Then there is the question: What about property rights?!  If a structure is not unsafe then the city can't just tear down someone's property because they don't like it's appearance!

There are SO many things wrong with this, on so many levels...

[ChriswUfGator]

Line up the 1983 claims...

[ChriswUfGator]

So I guess my question, legally, is how the city expects to a) demolish structurally sound private property b) without purchasing it from the private owner, and not be sued? This defies logic, and the law. The only way to do this lawfully is through eminent domain, and they'd still have to pay for it.

[sheclown]

COJ, if you want to reduce blight, clean up your own side of the street --

... literally,

mow the crow.

[sheclown]

The demolition rules were being discussed in a panel Lee earlier formed to respond to "human blight," her term for the harmful effects of people hanging out on streets and porches, often dealing drugs.


http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-03-27/story/alarmed-about-drug-deals-jacksonville-councilwoman-targets-human-blight

By Steve Patterson   

The head of a Jacksonville City Council committee to combat blight is turning her focus to "human blight," a term she calls the damage caused by people hanging around street corners, often dealing drugs.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-03-27/story/alarmed-about-drug-deals-jacksonville-councilwoman-targets-human-blight#ixzz3019WrvkA

Seems to me a dangerous leap in the fight on blight.

[Cheshire Cat]

This just drove my blood pressure to an all time high.  What a bunch of dingbats we have making decisions with regard to what should be demolished in our city.  It's frankly not only shortsighted it is ignorant and likely part of a bigger agenda on the part of some in our city.  Good money to be made in demolitions followed by bargain basement prices on land.  Damn....
This is sounding more and more like the rhetoric and planning that destroyed the fabric of LaVilla. 

[Debbie Thompson]

Uh oh. So I guess I'm not allowed to hang out on my own front porch any more, lest I be cited as human blight? How ridiculously stupid can this City get?