New Residents/Preservation Group to Replace SPAR?

fsu813 · April 20, 2009, 12:10:04 PM

eh, no thanks.

Sigma · April 20, 2009, 12:14:44 PM

Springfielder · April 20, 2009, 04:18:29 PM

I thought we were discussing the goals/concerns that may differ between this new group and spar....seems we've drifted off that path. If that discussion is over with, then it would seem that one more thread is lost

Sigma · April 20, 2009, 04:55:12 PM

A new preservation group to replace SPAR has been discussed for years. It seems to circle around every now and then. The last time I heard of a group working to form more of an HOA, but nothing ever came of it.

It appears that SRG owns SPAR now - for example, SPAR not long ago would block covert attempts to destroy historic homes. Now, it appears that they do little to stand in the way. Am I wrong?

On the flip side, I think SRG has accomplished what few others would have attempted and the neighborhood is years ahead of where it could be.

How about throwing a Springfield Tea Party to voice your grievances with SPAR?

strider · April 20, 2009, 05:23:39 PM

Just to remind some of what SPAR Council has been and has become.

Beginning at the very first SPAR Council board meeting after the merger of SPAR and HSCC, Louise DeSpain began allowing SRG and itâ€™s employees or, at least, employees of companies it does business with, to have great influence over the decisions that SPAR Council made on behalf of the community. This still continues to some extent today. A good move on SRGâ€™s part, but not necessarily good for the long term health of the community.

SRG has successfully gotten various partners, employees or people who work closely with them on various city and local boards and committees. These committees and boards, like the Planning Commission, often help set policy on what is allowed and what is not. Or what is enforced and what is not. The latest addition to this group is a member on the Historic Commission. At one time, this same person was on a board that helped decide whether home owners were fined or not for issues with condemned houses in Springfield. It does seem like this is about the same time as the trend of demo rather than save began. Again, not saying SRG did anything wrong, but one should and can question whether what is good for SRG is always good for this community.

Currently, it appears that SRG has lost or at least is losing some of itâ€™s influence over SPAR Council. This has allowed what may be a shift in control of SPAR Council to someone else. This control is not going back to the community, but some other person of influence. I say this because we now have a community/ membership based organization being run by an executive committee that has shown that it canâ€™t even follow the by-laws they themselves wrote and approved. This is very indicative of an organization or at least a group within the organization having â€œsold outâ€ to some outside influence. SRG has never been fond of saving the rest of the houses and there is no guarantee the next â€œperson of influenceâ€ will either.

The most important asset this community has is itâ€™s houses. Losing any of them is a crime. An organization that effectively has allowed it to happen should be ashamed of themselves. The houses themselves are why the vast majority of the people are here. Not a new 2006 house, not the empty lots, not the forgotten new foundations, but the old houses. Without the old houses, the new houses would have never been built here, without the grand 100 year old staircase, the people would not be here and without the people, SPAR Council would not be here. The current Executive Committee has forgotten that.

A new organization is perhaps what is needed.

Sigma · April 20, 2009, 10:17:58 PM

Thanks Strider,

I think that sums up what most people need to know before moving forward anyway. And a good point - new leadership does not guarantee any changes.

fsu813 · April 22, 2009, 03:54:59 PM

i don't think there is any realistic worry that SRG will knock down or influnce others to approve the knockdown of most of the unrenovated houses left. There are plenty and i'm guessing only the very bad ones will be knocked down.

just my opinion

Sigma · April 22, 2009, 04:18:12 PM

Quote from: fsu813 on April 22, 2009, 03:54:59 PM
i don't think there is any realistic worry that SRG will knock down or influnce others to approve the knockdown of most of the unrenovated houses left. There are plenty and i'm guessing only the very bad ones will be knocked down.

just my opinion

Oh, I don't think you want to go there! How long have you been in Springfield?

77danj7 · April 22, 2009, 04:33:45 PM

btw...I think Deuce is a great neighbor

strider · April 22, 2009, 06:26:07 PM

All one has to do is review several of the other threads on the subject of saving or losing the various historic homes in Springfield and one can see that there are basically two current schools of thought. One is that all of the old homes deserve to be saved no matter what and the other, the one that has been winning lately, is that an empty lot is much better. SRG seems to prescribe to the latter. One of the most recent appointments to the Historic Commission has publicly stated in the past that most of the remaining houses do not have enough historic fabric left to justify saving them. While many will criticize me for what I am saying, the current SPAR Council has helped eliminate more houses than it has helped saved in the past 5 to 8 years. Perhaps they have spoken out for saving the houses, but too many good, solid houses are gone for anyone not to suspect that any attempts at saving those houses was nothing but a smoke screen and that SPAR Council prescribes to the idea that that new empty lot looks better than that old empty house. I have said time and time again that what SRG has done, is doing, is not wrong for them, but this community should be considering if the long term goals of SRG or any developer, and now, SPAR Council, is what is best for Springfield long term.

fsu813 · April 22, 2009, 07:47:48 PM

strider,

in your opinion.....what are the long-term goals of SRG and what is long-term affect on the area if they reach their goal?

smallwood · April 23, 2009, 07:57:47 AM

Good Mourning Jacksonville,
Shall we stay on subject, Please ,all organizations change over time. Any and all organizations, groups or individuals are welcome. The net result is a strong community with people that care. Communities die one house and one block at a time and they come back one house and one block at a time. Remember the most important thing is that the individual home owners are the Heart Of Springfield.

AlexS · April 23, 2009, 09:18:34 AM

Quote from: stephendare on April 20, 2009, 04:25:41 PM
Im supposed to be getting a mission statement and an email address to post for interested parties sometime later on today. Ill post it when I get it.

It's been a few days now. Is this still forthcoming ?

Deuce · April 23, 2009, 09:48:06 AM

Well said smallwood. Thanks for the props Dan! I think you're a great neighbor too.

Even if SRG is guilty of having torn down some savable homes, on the whole what they have done is enormous. In areas that they have clustered their homes, other folks have rehabbed the nearby properties that might have eventually been torn down. One could argue that more properties have been saved as a result of their efforts. At this point in their development, they aren't tearing down houses. They have plenty of empty lots to build on for the next 5 years or more.

Back to the thread at hand: My gf and I are skeptical about another committee in the neighborhood. How many do we need?

fsu813 · April 23, 2009, 12:31:52 PM

how about a Springfield Florida State Seminoles club? that sounds good to me . . . .