Are boarding houses really the problem?

[sheclown]

Yes, I remember those places.  There were several "water-only" crack houses around.  No electricity, only water.  I've cleaned up after a few myself.  The problem was, most evidently, with the crack and the cops, not to mention the building safety department.

You don't shut down all hotels because Phillip's Highway is teaming with prostitution and drug activity, or all convenience stores because some of them are selling crack under the counter.

The demonizing of boarding houses and consequent country-wide out-zoning of them, has probably done more to increase homelessness in this country than any other factor. 

Just my, unpopular, opinion.

[strider]

I think we managed to get to the end of the forties at my last post.  The truth is, Springfield, while it was losing some of it's luster by the fifties, was still a pretty exclusive community in some ways.  Did you know that into the late sixties, even young African American boys were not "allowed" to ride their bikes through Springfield on their way to the ball parks that they were "allowed" to play at?

People were still putting money into their houses in Springfield.  Remember hearing about the "chicken wire man"?  All that really "nice" stucco? It was, I believe, the fifties that the decline of most urban areas began.  Certainly by the mid sixties, what some call "white flight" was in progress.  The middle and upper middle classes that once liked the urban core were taking off for Arlington, the Southside and even just further up on Main.  As these people moved out, areas like Springfield became less and less desirable and so the values began dropping.  I believe that began and lead to the "era of the slumlord" so many of you wish to bring up. As the area's wealth went elsewhere, the urban core began to crumble.  The seventies saw many of the larger department stores and other businesses abandon the urban setting for the new malls and strip plazas of the era.  This depressed housing values and as Springfield became more affordable, the poor moved on in.  They had no choice really. 

Rooming houses became just an affordable place to crash.  The seventies and into the eighties saw the drug problem grow country wide. The local law enforcement, unable to stop the spread of drugs and prostitution often just "contained" it.  Many of us remember being told by the police that if we didn't like the crime, we shouldn't be here.  Springfield became one of those "containers".  All of this depressed values even more.  Do you know anyone who bought in Springfield in the Eighties and the problems they faced just purchasing a home here? No bank wanted to even consider loaning money on a house in Springfield. Few Realtors ventured here as well.

It should also be noted that in the eighties, SPAR and the city had a program to revitalize Springfield.  Experts from the Savannah revitalization came down and offered their advise on how to do it.  SPAR was told to be successful, the money being brought in had to be spread around to everyone.  The landlords as well as the single family home owner.  SPAR did not listen.  The program was offered for only the people they liked - the home owner.  So a home owner would get the funds to fix their house that had a rental on either side.  The landlords couldn't beg the funds to fix theirs so the revitalization was set up to fail.  Of course, the landlords got blamed for this program's failure as they were just being greedy and so refused to spend money on their houses. The truth often was that there was no money available and without the special help that was being offered to the home owner, it just wasn't practical either. 

By the late eighties, things had gotten so bad that even the rooming houses were closing.  Many of the "water only" houses were actually closed houses ... squatters could turn the water on themselves illegally so they had water and no electric. By the beginning of the nineties, crack had a good hold on many urban areas.  Even the good landlords were having trouble keeping up with the damage being done to their houses.  If the landlord was one that didn't care, and there were several, the houses really suffered.

Basically, it wasn't the rooming houses that brought Springfield down, they suffered as the community suffered and their decline became just one of the symptoms of the disease of urban blight that brought many once flourishing urban communities down.

[heights unknown]

No one wants those days back nvrenuf.

But people living in a boarding house does not have to equal ghetto.

You're right about that Stephendare.  You stated your Aunt Ruby owned two boarding houses on Duval in the 60's; well, my Mother, before she came and got me from my Grandmother, lived in a rooming house at 817 West Duval Street a half block from Davis.  Her room was neat, clean, well wall papered and very nice.  We had to share a bathroom back in the day but back then people were respectful of each other and bleached out the tub and cleaned the bathroom after each use.  I don't think there are too many rooming houses left in cities let alone Jacksonville these days.  I know rooming houses were still going on in Springfield when I left Jax in 1995.

Rooming houses, back in the day, were for people starting out families, single people, and people who could not afford houses, but they were kept very nice and in good shape back then.

Heights Unknown

[Ocklawaha]

Any of you blue blood patriots ever heard of the Peterson's Boarding House? Just another townhouse sandwiched in the middle of a great American City. Rooms, well some of them anyway, the size of two walk in closets. Slumlords! Misfits! Maybe even red eyed, pencil necked, Vietnam Vets! War trash!

I would agree, except this is where President Lincoln was carried to his death bed. The room and bed were so small that he didn't fit the bed and his feet hung over the end. The entire US Government filed through that place and it still stands today, across from Fords Theater. So are all rooming houses bad? Guess that depends on which end of the Dixiecup you drink from.

Me? Hell, I'm unreconstructed AND a Vietnam Vet, so I'll lay my roses on John Booths Grave, thank you very much!

If only those older rooming houses in Jacksonville could speak, then they too would "Belong to the ages..."

OCKLAWAHA

[nvrenuf]

You don't shut down all hotels because Phillip's Highway is teaming with prostitution and drug activity, or all convenience stores because some of them are selling crack under the counter.

True, but you probably also don't open 20 more pay-by-the-hour hotels on Phillips Hwy if you have any hope of revitalizing it. I don't recall anyone suggesting closing all boarding/rooming houses. Just asking that this 1 square mile area get a break. And I would think it was a shitty economy and overseas outsourcing that lead to more homelessness than any other factor. That's my obviously unpopular opinion.

The middle and upper middle classes that once liked the urban core were taking off for Arlington, the Southside and even just further up on Main.  As these people moved out, areas like Springfield became less and less desirable and so the values began dropping.  I believe that began and lead to the "era of the slumlord" so many of you wish to bring up. As the area's wealth went elsewhere, the urban core began to crumble.

Strider, I'm still trying to follow your line of thought on what destroyed Springfield because I really would like to know so it isn't repeated. If I'm reading these statements correctly, you are saying it was mid to upper classes leaving and the poor coming in that that led to its demise? Is that what you are saying? Poor people make an area crumble?? Following that logic it certainly wouldn't make sense to add even more low-income multi-unit buildings and thereby increasing the number of poor people in a compacted location which would then further add to the decline.

[strider]

I think everyone wants a simple reason for why things happen.  Like let's blame the homeless or boarding houses for the decline of Springfield.  The truth is seldom simple.  In just my few simple posts, we have touched on:

1) "white flight" - the middle class's flight to the suburbs.
2) The commercial enterprises leaving the urban core
3) Values dropping as the urban core became less desirable.
4) Law enforcement's tactic of "containment" rather than elimination of crime.
5) The lack of economic diversity - yes, sort of too many poor rather than the mix of economic groups that seems to be required to make a community successful.
6) The prejudice of local organizations as shown by unequal distribution of revitalization funds.
7) Wide spread issues with drugs and the resulting petty crimes.
8 ) lack of functional infra-structure. 
9) Lack of proper structural maintenance due to the low property values.

So, a quick list of 9 things that all contribute to the decline of a community.  Some would add to this list the rooming houses and such but they are actually covered by the above as they are a symptom not a cause.  Springfield is currently a primarily low income neighborhood.  It has a long way to go to be what many here hope it will be. It takes working together, not one faction against the other, to reverse the process.

[ChriswUfGator]

Springfield is currently a primarily low income neighborhood.  It has a long way to go to be what many here hope it will be.

Ohhhh...be careful there Strider! You're in dangerous waters.

I said that same exact thing on here before, and the thread blew up into 10 pages of bashing poor ole' Chris for being a 'slumlord' and an 'elitist' and 'part of the problem' and I can't remember what all else, but none of it was particularly complimentary.

Some people really take their Springfield seriously. Which is good for the neighborhood, no doubt. But I couldn't agree with you more that there's some ignoring of reality going on here. I think some folks have a hard time wrapping their head around the issues that are endemic, like the rampant poverty running through the area.

That type of thing is not solvable with paint and plaster, or by calling JSO and code enforcement. There's really not much that a small group of individuals (or even a large one) can do about it. I give them credit for trying their best, but I think they fall into the trap of blaming things that they just plain don't like, but which aren't really the problem.

Rooming houses are easy to vilify, and the same thing with the "beer and cigs" corner stores that they all hate. There was an 8 page thread on here awhile ago, where people were trashing the BP station for selling rolling papers, malt liquor, those "rose" things, etc., etc. I pointed out then, that businesses only adapt to their market, not vice-versa.

The real threat to Springfield isn't any of the stuff people worry about, the biggest problem is actually COJ itself. It's getting to the point where every other lot is going to be vacant and growing weeds. They have demolished hundreds of historic structures that should have been saved, and those aren't coming back. Ever.

Say what you will about rooming houses, but the truth is those are probably still standing because they found a profitable use in an area where that's tough to do. Otherwise, many would've been demolished along with the 1/3rd or more of the neighborhood that's already been bulldozed. I do think Springfield will eventually turn around, but that's just a matter of time. How much time, nobody knows.

People should devote their efforts to ensuring that there will be anything left by the time that happens, rather than targeting landlords and business owners who have had no choice but to adapt to their market environment. When that market segment moves on, so will they. In the meantime, much of what is historic in this historic district has been lost. Enough fiddling while Rome burns. I heard there's another demo scheduled for next week.

[nvrenuf]

Stephen, did your family members tell you why they moved? If it was for racist reasons don't be embarrased to say so. I have racists in my family too, I just choose not to agree with them.

Chris, to be honest this is one of the most flattering posts I've ever seen you make about Springfield. I would suspect you are so quickly attacked because you tend more toward the 'its a slum and always will be' comments. And we just vehemently disagree with you. This time you said you see hope, with time. We have hope too and it is extremely frustrating when others say there is none.

Yes, we would prefer to keep values high for the exact reasons Strider is explaining above. For me, not so much to keep money in my pocket, but to keep my neighborhood from a backward slide. And yes I personally do hope all the things that keep values down or cause them to go in that direction eventually leave. I don't care if the hookers were here before me, I will continue to make it as difficult as possible for them to continue doing business near my home.

Strider, which revitalization funds are you referring to in #6?

[strider]

Nvrenuf - I also referred to it in my post (#22) earlier -  the eighties when the experts from Savannah said the funds must go to everyone, not just who you like. In other words, the landlords needed the help as well as the single family home owners.  If you exclude a group, then you are depending on the market values to rise enough that the rentals get sold and then fixed up.  That didn't happen in the eighties so when the homeowner fixed their house up and the landlords didn't because they didn't have the money, the program failed as the values never got high enough.

If we look at what has happened since, the "special uses" were still excluded but as the properties values got high enough, the houses either got sold and then fixed or the landlords fixed them themselves to be sold or as investments. Remember that in 2000 there were about 40ish "special uses, today 11.  The issues we now face is one of falling values and the lack of investor capital.  IE, money for fixing these houses is hard to come by.  It doesn't bode well.

Many think that the rooming houses are a gold mine.  Not true.  It took a lot of money to just pay expenses.  Those of you who "do the math" forget about things like vacancy rates, getting stiffed and the very high expense costs.  Then add maintenance, higher taxes, and lately, all those pesky fees. If the rooming house business had actually been all that great, none of us would have found those old empty ones.  At some point, the costs got higher than it was worth and the house closed down.  Squatters often moved in showing that there was a housing need but the business of renting rooms couldn't often survive. Of course, some landlords were truly slumlords and took advantage of their renters.  To listen to some on this forum, it was every single landlord that ever had a house in the urban core.  Common sense tells those of us who can think for themselves that it was a very few.  Most simply did what they could.

Today, we still have acceptable rooming houses of sorts.  They are called bed and breakfasts.  Part of the difference is private baths rather than shared.  That is a change dictated by current societies dislike of sharing the bath rather than simple economics. While some have criticized what a rooming house charges, no one says anything about what a bed and breakfast or even a extended stay hotel charges.  I happen to know that in Springfield it can be a decent clean room and shared bath for 60.00 a week.  Much less than what a B&B is per day.  Even one of the halfway houses can be had for 133.00 per week.  3 meals included.  When you try to do the math, remember that it is x number of guys showering, washing cloths, cooking (or cooking for x number of guys) and everyone of them has a microwave, a TV, DVD player, ETC.  Expenses are high....JEA loves them!

I am not advocating a return of all the rooming houses.  But perhaps something in between is OK and can serve both the needs of the renters and the community.

[sheclown]

Stephen, I have read about the axe handle riots, are these the riots that you are referring to?

[heights unknown]

Being a black man, I am embarrassed by the actions of some of my relatives during the morning shift before my watch.  I was taught to stay away from white people and that they hated me, which in general was true during those times, but was not altogether true for "all" white people. No there was and is nothing I can do to change people's behaviors, emotions, and attitudes during those days, but I will never, ever condone my relatives' behavior towards whites and am apologetic to any White Americans they may have disrespected.

When I went to my first integrated school in Sarasota, FL, I found out that not all people (White Americans) felt that way about blacks, that is, racist.  And it rings true through to the present.

As for boarding houses in Springfield, of which there were many when I lived in Jax, boarding houses are not the reason for increases in crime, deterioration of the neighborhood, etc.  There are true, hard down hard working Americans who lived and still live in boarding houses.  The wrong choices of the people in those neighborhoods, including Springfield, is the reason why those neighborhoods decline, deteriorate, etc.  I've seen low middle class to poor neighborhoods in Jax and other cities where the yards are kept up, there is very little crime, and people watch out for each other. 

People's wrong choices, on a wide swath scale, will help to decline that area or neighborhood contributing to the crime, poverty, drugs, and other problems that will decimate it.

Heights Unknown

[Springfielder]

Boarding houses, per say may not be the root of what brings a neighborhood down, but it usually doesn't help. There's a difference between renters and boarding houses, which generally means shorter term stays, and generally aren't all that interested in maintaining a nicely cut lawn, picking up trash, etc. These folks, for the most part are transients with no long term goal or investment in the neighborhood. Yes, there's exceptions to each rule, but boarding houses are for the most part, temporary housing for someone.

[sheclown]

IF a bed and breakfast opens in Springfield, will you complain about it?  Yet, it is basically the same thing...transient housing.

Often, temporary housing is needed for workers in a good economy, sometimes just to have a roof over one's head in bad times.  Either way, just about every transient person is a potential permanent resident. And they spend at least some of their hard earned money right here locally.  As times and the economy changes, the roll of rooming houses and boarding houses has and will continue to change.  How they are managed is the difference, like just about any business, between a good one and a bad one. You want a nice, economical place for people to live as apposed to a flop house.  Communication is key then as just saying all of them are bad and must go fuels the problem and leads the community down the wrong path.

[Joe]

Responding to the original post - yes, I think boarding houses are a problem. I do support a free marketplace, so I support the boarding house's right to exist. It does serve a clear function within the market. However, that doesn't mean that I refuse to acknowledge the inherent problems associated with them.

Even a poorly maintained house or apartment building can destroy neighboring property values. Something as simple as a slovenly neighbor makes a big difference.

Now, think about the function of a boarding house. Their (legitimate) purpose is to provide housing for people who (for whatever good or bad reason) aren't competent enough to rent a normal apartment on a normal lease. Especially once you factor in roommates, it is NOT hard for a person to rent a regular room somewhere - at similar cost to the boarding house anyway. Boarding houses are for people who (again for whatever reason) are so transient/unreliable/whatever that a lease simply isn't an option.

Consequently, the types of people who rent at a boarding house are tremendously more likely to be a problem neighbor. End of story. There's really no way around that.

[strider]

Now, think about the function of a boarding house. Their (legitimate) purpose is to provide housing for people who (for whatever good or bad reason) aren't competent enough to rent a normal apartment on a normal lease.

So, someone who worked their entire life in a lower paying service industry job that somehow made your life better, even if it was just a clean motel room, and finds themselves older and sick and on disability that doesn't allow for a normal rental is just incompetent?  Yes, many are in the position they are in through a mistake they made and never recovered from.  I guess you never made a mistake? Hopefully you never make one so bad as it destroys your life as you now know it.

Consequently, the types of people who rent at a boarding house are tremendously more likely to be a problem neighbor. End of story. There's really no way around that.

No, it isn't the end of the story, it is the beginning.  It illustrates the some of the prejudices we are faced with today. And ones we must get past if any community like Springfield is to become truly successful.