Inside the Park View Inn

[thelakelander]

I don't think its a us vs. them issue with the Park View.  People are just frustrated with the condition of the structure and lack of progress.  From a development standpoint, there's nothing you, me or anyone else posting can do to keep big developers from doing their homework.  I can't speak for the others but I vividly remember environmental issues being one of the reasons that project did not move forward.

[thelakelander]

As far as giving an owner nine years to fix the place up or tear it down, I think that mentality has resulted in the destruction of our inner city.  Sometimes you can't put a time limit on revitalization.  For example, it took 11 years to find a new use for the old train station.  Cities like Detroit and St. Louis have recently had buildings that have been vacant for 40 years finally renovated.  What we should be doing is making sure these vacant buildings are properly sealed unto a new and better use can be found.

[thelakelander]

I don't think its a us vs. them issue with the Park View.  People are just frustrated with the condition of the structure and lack of progress.  From a development standpoint, there's nothing you, me or anyone else posting can do to keep big developers from doing their homework.  I can't speak for the others but I vividly remember environmental issues being one of the reasons that project did not move forward.

Exactly.  Although from what I remember, the homework so far has been to ask community members rather than testing.

Any developer that would take a common resident's word over actually doing their own due diligence is not a serious developer, imo.  Personally, I'd have issues pouring a ton of money in the site, regardless of where the most contamination is.  Seriously, take a look at it and its surroundings.

1. Sanborn Maps and old city directories indicate the site was home to a coal gasification plant.  That's not up for debate.  The record of this can be easily proven with a quick trip to the top of the public library.

2. The building directly to the south was originally a car dealership with an auto repair shop in the back, dating back to the 1920s.

3. The building directly to the east was a paint company (or something of the sort) at one time.

4. Hogans Creek - it has its own set of issues that extend far beyond the corner of Main & Orange.

All in all, these are serious red flags for anyone who's going to invest money in that area.  As an investor, I would care less of what the owner's opinion is of the site.  I would want to see the documents and at the very least hire my own environmental engineer to conduct a Phase I report, before dropping a dime into the site. 

To me, the issue is not whether the old hotel site is the source of contamination.  The owner's word is no more credible than anyone here without presenting documents backing up his claim.  Nevertheless,  everyone agrees that the ground under Orange Street has serious problems.  Therefore, there should be no argument back and forth about who's right, who's wrong and who should listen to who.  Everyone should have their heads huddled trying to find a way to clean up the entire area, because no one is going to seriously invest in any of those buildings until that's done. 

[downtownparks]

1884


1887


1891


1897


1913


1929

[downtownparks]

Oh, Im sorry. I guess Im not allowed to post the Sanborn images that Lake was talking about.

My bad.

[downtownparks]

Oh, cool. that should be easy to find records of then.

[thelakelander]

There's no reason to jump on downtownparks for posting the sanborn maps.  That's not going to get us to the point where we can help find a solution.  I was going to go to the library tomorrow, print copies and post myself.  Anyway, they do illustrate why there should be concern for that general area.  On those alone, there's a gas plant and what appears to be two auto repair shops.  The information the sanborn maps show can be used to find out more about the Park View property and the surrounding properties.  Btw, ashalt-substance like plants aren't clean either.  The mention of this additional information should be a cause for more concern along Orange Street.  In any event, I'm combing the DEP's website right now for any reports they may have on Hogans Creek.

[thelakelander]

I would think so.

Of course, you could call Robert and ask him.  I bet he and David have them.

Better yet, I'll stop by the library tomorrow and check the city directories.  They'll reveal more than anyone living today will about what was on these properties at the time the directories were published.

[downtownparks]

According the 1913 map above, The Jacksonville Gas Company was the last name before it became auto oriented. It appears to have been Citizens Gas and Electric before that, and Jacksonville Gas Works before that.

[thelakelander]

His posts are always a little defensive, and he seems to be taking the whole matter personally, which makes it hard to have any different point of view from him

It was a post with sanborn maps.  That's informational, not defensive.

But for the sake of the neighborhood, I certainly hope that Robert is telling the truth since that will remove millions of dollars from the anticipated cost of cleaning the park and speed it right along.

It really doesn't matter since there's still contamination in the area.  The place (potentially all three blocks) needs to be cleaned and even if Robert's property isn't the source, it will still be negatively impacted by the pollution of the sites immediately adjacent to it.  No developer with any sense is going to pour personal money into anything near there until the issues underground in the general area are resolved.

It would be odd if all the landowners are just simply liars.

I wouldn't call Robert a liar, but there's no real reason to take him at his word, if you (the developer) plan to invest in this property or one of the adjacent ones.  All competent developers perform Due Diligence on potential properties they plan to invest in.  Instead of taking owner's or nearby neighbors words, most pay to conduct their own environmental phase 1 reports to make sure the property they plan to purchase doesn't have significant environmental issues.

[thelakelander]

Often times Name and Use can be decieving.  For example, we are still identifying the property as a hotel, when in fact it hasnt been used as one in a decade.

The good thing is the city directories also state the use of the property at the time the specific directory was published.  We may refer to the Park View as a hotel, but it would be listed as "vacant" in the latest directories.

[thelakelander]

the defensiveness was in crying about not being 'allowed' to post the maps.  Whatever that is supposed to mean, its defensive and a little bizarre.

Cause and Effect.  Check post 64, which had nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,197.msg22461.html#msg22461

[thelakelander]

I think I remember that there were listings of vacant on the cross directories.  Although again, name and use can be decieving.  The space Im leasing right now is presently functioning mostly as 'storage' rather than 'theater'.  Its just an FYI in case the listings are ambiguous, something I have often found.

With Sanborn maps on different projects I've worked on, the combination of name, site plan and city directory normally fishes out the concern you bring up.  For example, a name can be decieving by its self, but new silos showing up on the sanborn, that corresponds with a complementing use in the city directory can be a good starting point to determine what a property was used for at a specific point in history.

It put into perspective how long ago the time periods discussed actually are.  They span from 1884 to 1929.  A lot has happened since then.

Correct.  However, the topic of the discussion centered around the Park View.  The Sanborns fall in line by giving us all a chance to see what has sat on this specific property over the last 100 years, which is vital to the contamination discussion.  The following post came across as trying to devalue the facts posted on the post above.

But really, what else to expect whenever anyone disagrees with DP.  I really should have known better than to inject an opposing opinion.

It wasn't so much about having another opinion.  What was posted was facts.  

In any event, we are beginning to go away from the goal of finding a solution.  Perhaps its time for us all to get back on track.

[downtownparks]

Not sure what year it stopped being used. It looks like in the 1913 map there is only storage, so its use as a gasificaiton plant may have ended a little before that.

Thats where city directory's would be handy.

Im not sure when it started as a plant. The Sanborns dont cover that area before 1884.

I do know that people were worried about it exploding during the great fire in 1901. It was written about in Acres of Ashes.

Also, you do realize nobody is blaming the owner for the contamination, right? He was just unfortunate enough to have bought a dirty parcel, just as have Hionides, Vanhorn, SRG, Meeks and just about any other investor. It happens.

My biggest issue with the owner is his lack of ability/willingness to keep his building clean and secure.

[downtownparks]

One other note. Back when I was really heavily researching this, I wondered if "the Jacksonville gas works" was ever a publicly owned utility. My thoughts on it were that if the city had been responsible for the contamination, then more than likly they would be responsible for the clean up, similar to how dry cleaner clean ups are funded.

However, I was told by Joel McEachen (who has extensive records on this) that the gas plant, in all of its various names were privately owned. I also wondered if the company who bought the Jax Gas Works was still around. Again, if they were, perhaps they could be made responsible for the clean up. However, that was also not the case. The company went out of business, and was not bought.