1634 Ionia - owner requested demolition

[strider]

[/quote]

Demo should be the absolute last and EXTREME course for a house in a HISTORIC DISTRICT.  If you don't want restricts in a HISTORIC DISTRICT, don't move there.  Jax has made if far too easy for demos to occur.  This is wrong.  Since the back of the house was an early addition, it too should be restored, but I think if the front half was done, maybe a variance could be done for the back.  The house should be preserved, there are folks willing to do it.

Trying to do something differently is a bit like moving into a neighborhood with an HOA that demands approval for paint, flowers, and complains if your garage is open more than 15 minutes.  If you don't like the conditions, don't move there.  You certainly can't put in a shed or carport if you live in Queen's Harbor or Marsh Landing without jumping through hoops. 

Thank You.

[sheclown]

I think they are just trying to save another home from being lost.  The argument is that the only thing that truly needs to be demolished is the damaged back side addition.  The rest looks as if it could be restored by someone who is willing.  The property owner should have been aware that it would be difficult to tear down an historic home in a district like this.  If he truly bought it just to tear it down because of the back side that is dangerous in his mind then he could partner with someone and pay for the demolition of the addition while the partner restores the rest of it.  If it was that tremendous of an issue for him, why did he buy and build on the adjacent property?  If he got that one for $7,000 what are the adjacent ones worth?  Are they even occupied?  He's a developer, maybe he could buy all three and restore them simultaneously.  That would certainly freshen up that block a bit and add value to his current home around the corner.   

The other two houses are owned by folks that purchased the homes for back taxes.  1630 Ionia has no building value according to the city.  1638 Ionia has a building value of $1,083.  Obviously this is a forsaken area.

There's a couple nice homes on the block, a gigantic quad across the street that's being renovated, and a long vacant house next door being (slowly) renovated. Also, the owner is going before HPC next month to propose 2 additional new construction homes across the street.

"Things are a changing", as someone once said.

Some of those are on 7th and as far as has been said to date, no plans for infill in place of the Ionia street house. 

However, to correct the info provided by Naldoaveknight:  1630 has no value because it is not there.  It is the empty lot that resulted from the demolition of the house that actually caused the damage to 1634.  The house at 1630  - I wish we had good pictures - was truly badly burned and did need to come down.  The house to the south is 1626 and while the owners did the carriage house first, they are now working on the main house.  It will be a cool place when done. The house at 1638 was saved from the wrecking ball and is slowly being rehabbed.  The state of the houses on Ionia is also the result of the MCCD policies that contaminate and make rehabbing a house difficult.  And yet, they are indeed being done.  Just like the one at 1634 can and should be done. Oh, and the removal of the addition on 1634 at this point would be easier than the removal of the entire house.

here ya go...




1630 Ionia

[sheclown]

1626 Ionia

Our journey with this house:



http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,9227.0.html

[sheclown]

The demolition of 1630, November 2010.  PSOS was there.



http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=10048.0

[sheclown]

save.the.houses.

[JaxUnicorn]

I think they are just trying to save another home from being lost.  The argument is that the only thing that truly needs to be demolished is the damaged back side addition.  The rest looks as if it could be restored by someone who is willing.

You've hit the nail on the head here!! 

The property owner should have been aware that it would be difficult to tear down an historic home in a district like this.  If he truly bought it just to tear it down because of the back side that is dangerous in his mind then he could partner with someone and pay for the demolition of the addition while the partner restores the rest of it.  If it was that tremendous of an issue for him, why did he buy and build on the adjacent property?

Exactly CCMjax!

If he got that one for $7,000 what are the adjacent ones worth?  Are they even occupied?  He's a developer, maybe he could buy all three and restore them simultaneously.  That would certainly freshen up that block a bit and add value to his current home around the corner.

Again, YES!!   

[JaxUnicorn]

The other two houses are owned by folks that purchased the homes for back taxes.  1630 Ionia has no building value according to the city.  1638 Ionia has a building value of $1,083.  Obviously this is a forsaken area.

Strider addressed these houses in his comment.  I'd just like to state that this is NOT a "forsaken area".

The owner can't make changes to the house like you suggest.

Yes he can.  In fact, the Historic Planning department suggested removal of the addition, leaving the main structure intact.

Removing the back half of the house would entail months/years of approvals from neighborhood groups that are resistant to change and/or want their palms greased.

What experience do you have with working with the neighborhood groups and/or Historic Planning?   Preservation SOS as well as SPAR both spoke in favor of removing the addition.

He would have to spend the full $225,000.  To suggest otherwise is an assumption that can't be made at this point, especially with the neighborhood groups that hold sway in Springfield.

The owner of the property bought at the right price and is a developer.  The $225,000 estimate is way overstated and given the owner's developer status, he is in a prime position to restore this home way under the true restoration price (which is way less than $225k).

Pages 75 of the "Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Springfield Historic District" has ten conditions that must be met for a demolition.  All ten of those conditions have been met in the case of 1634 Ionia. 

http://www.coj.net/departments/planning-and-development/docs/historic/historic-preservation-guidelines-for-springfield.aspx

The 10 things you reference under the Demolition section of the Historic Preservation Guildelines for the Springfield Historic District are not "conditions to be met" to approve demolition.  They are things that must be considered. 

Demolition of significant buildings, outbuildings, and individual features conflicts with Standards 2 and 4.  Demolition alters the essential character and integrity of a building and the district in which it is located.  As part of the Jacksonville Historic Preservation Ordinance the following additional standards are prescribed when a property owners applies for a certificate of appropriateness for a demolition.

• The historic or architectural significance of the building or structure.
• The importance of the building or structure to the ambience of the historic district.
• The difficulty or the impossibility of reproducing such a building or structure because of its design, texture, material, architectural detail or unique location.
• Whether the building or structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the neighborhood, the county, or the region.
• Whether there are definite plans for reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect of those plans on the character of the surrounding area would be.
• The difficulty or impossibility of saving the building or structure from collapse.
• Whether the building or structure is capable of earning a reasonable economic return on its value.
• Whether there are other feasible alternatives to demolition.
• Whether the property no longer contributes to an historic district or no longer has significance as a historic, architectural or archaeological landmark.
• Whether it would constitute undue economic hardship to deny the property owner the right to demolish the building or structure.

I've quoted a few other important statements in the aforementioned document:

Demolition invariably exerts a negative impact on a historic district.

Furthermore, eliminating a building from a streetscape is like pulling teeth. Either a conspicuous, void is created, or the replacement, even if well designed, is usually less well designed and constructed than the original.

Standard 2 states the following:  "The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided."

To deny the demolition while offering to take title of the house at the same meeting is corruption.

If you are accusing Preservation SOS of being corrupt, you are WAY off base!  How DARE you!!!

[Debbie Thompson]

Naldo, you are way off base.  Preservation SOS' sole intent is to save the house and get it into the hands of someone who will rehab it. We contacted the former owner more than once without response.  At the exact same HPC meeting, a contractor spoke to HPC about the fact that house could be rehabbed.  During a break, with my encouragement (because I thought the owner just wanted a rehabbed house nearby to his, and not a neglected one) that contractor went over and offered to buy the house.  The man is a general contractor and had the means to rehab the house.  The owner said no.  The owner presented a letter with his demo application that clearly stated he bought the house to demolish it. 

Springfield unfortunately has plenty of vacant lots, due to policies of the past.  We don't need people making more of them.  Infill on existing vacant lots is fine. We need that.  Creating vacant lots by demolishing still-sound historic houses isn't. 

[iloveionia]

I happen to love Ionia.
It's a bit more humble then the rest of Spfld.
PSOS fostered 14 homes into the hands of owners who are all restoring.
These owners as a condition of accepting the house from us paid all back taxes directly to Duval County. $50k worth.
Corruption?
All my houses and lots, coincidently are predominately on Ionia, I purchased. The old fashioned way.
He knew what he was buying. Simple.
He bought to demo.
Well. Not without a fight.

I do agree to some level that PSOS would benefit the neighborhood even better if we could purchase forgotten homes and rehab them.
The city could help us on this.
We are working southern slow to see how to garner that support.

In the meantime,
Save the houses.

[CCMjax]

I think it is pretty clear that the owner wants to demolish and build a new house on the site despite that fact that he stated he had no plans for it.  He built a new home around the corner, that may be his formula.  He should help restore it or pass it on to someone else.  Sounds like there are plenty of people willing to do it.  But where were they before he bought it?

[iloveionia]

Trying to contact the owner without success.
COJ has the same struggle.

[sheclown]

Let's talk about property rights for a sec.

Buy a lot on the Westside and neglect to cut the grass.  Call it a meadow.  See what code enforcement does to you.

Decide to build on the Westside lot.  Need permission from zoning, from building inspection department.

Successfully built that house?  You can't move in until you have received that "certificate of occupancy".

Want to rent it?  The feds tell you who you must rent to.

Want to evict your tenants?  You have to go to court to do it.

Decide you have had enough with the government and stop paying your property taxes?  See what happens to that piece of land.

Historic districts put additional restrictions on what one can do with a piece of property, they do NOT take away property "rights."  Those were gone a long time ago. 

[sheclown]

This is how PSOS has been looking at houses and making assessments for the last 5 years.  I think it is helpful for this conversation.

FOUR AREAS

Roof: Is the roof intact or are there pieces of missing roofing material? Is the roof structure visible? Is the roof structure damaged? Does the main line of the roof dip or is it straight? Are there areas where the roof sags inward (called "hog bellies by roofers).

Walls: Is the siding intact? Does the siding run level and plumb? Are the door and window openings (relatively) square? Is there visible damage to wall structure? Does the wall bow out?

Floor: Is there visible damage to the floor sills (those giant beams that run the perimeter)? Are the floor joists intact? What is the percentage of damage to floor joists?

Foundation: Are all piers still standing? Are the piers showing obvious damage ie. crumbling mortar and falling bricks? What percentage of piers are still standing?

These are the four important parts of the structure of a house. Looking at a house, walking around it, what do you see?


http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,11063.0.html

[sheclown]

from 2011:  Demolitions in Springfield, the facts:

Joel McEachin put the number out today at 533.  That is the current number of demolitions in the neighborhood since the neighborhood was declared a Nationally Recognized Historic District.  That is also almost 30% of the historic fabric of this neighborhood.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,13154.0.html

this is why we fight for houses

[NaldoAveKnight]

from 2011:  Demolitions in Springfield, the facts:

Joel McEachin put the number out today at 533.  That is the current number of demolitions in the neighborhood since the neighborhood was declared a Nationally Recognized Historic District.  That is also almost 30% of the historic fabric of this neighborhood.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,13154.0.html

this is why we fight for houses

Saving the house isn't the issue.  Forcing someone to spend a lot of money or donate it to a 'non-profit' is the issue. 

How many folks on this board that are fighting to keep this house from demolition live on Ionia street?