by Glenn Tschimpke
Staff Writer
City Hall is considering another incentive to entice developers into restoring older buildings downtown versus breaking ground on new structures.
A subcommittee of the Task Force for Historic Downtown Preservation is developing a matrix that would provide an alternative to the rigid fire code that is required for new buildings and older structures undergoing renovation.
“It makes it economically feasible for developers to come into these old buildings and rehab them because they can’t come in and do new construction on them,” said City Council vice president Suzanne Jenkins and subcommittee chair. “[With the current system,] it doesn’t work. By the time you try to make that work, you’ve spent millions of dollars and you probably still aren’t going to get there.”
Often, developers play a trade-off game of either taking the expensive route of preserving the historic aspects of a building at great cost to bring it within current fire codes or ignoring historic nuances by replacing them with cheaper, modern construction methods that fall easily within fire codes.
With the proposed matrix, older buildings are graded on a series of positive and negative points. For example, a developer wants to preserve an architecturally and historically significant exit hallway. The current fire code may require it to be fire resistant for 30 minutes, but the nature of the original construction cannot survive that long. If the developer chooses to keep the hallway in its original configuration, negative points would be assessed because of its poor fire rating. Adding a built-in sprinkler system to the hallway would increase its fire rating and add positive points. Applying flame-resistant paint would add positive points as well. The end objective is to come out with positive points.
“If you come out on the plus side of points with the tradeoffs you’ve made that preserve the historical character of the inside of a building, then you get to do or not do those things that need to be done,” said Jenkins.
The City will look for outside help on the matrix and will meet with representatives from Tampa and Wichita, Kan. next week, who have developed their own matrices, to glean information.
“We want to ask them, ‘How did you get there and now that you’re there, what would you do differently? Does it need to be tweaked so that we can end up with the best thing here?’” said Jenkins.
The matrix would extend beyond buildings with an official historic designation and reach other older buildings.
“We’re trying to recognize that not every building downtown would qualify as a historic building, but you still want to redevelop those buildings because it’s going to bring people downtown and encourage the redevelopment of other buildings that may qualify as historic buildings,” said Jason Teal, an attorney with the City and member of the subcommittee.
Not all owners of older buildings necessarily want to seek historic designation — either the designation would restrict their plans for renovation or they fear their building would not qualify anyway. Exposing non-historic buildings to the matrix could encourage property owners of older structures to renovate but not spend an exorbitant amount of money to comply with modern fire codes.
“We’re trying to come up with an alternate definition of not necessarily a historic building, but a qualifying older building so they can still take advantage of the tradeoff of the matrix system,” said Teal. “You don’t have to have technical compliance with every aspect of the building code but yet you’re still making sure you’re providing for the public’s health, safety and welfare.”
The subcommittee is still working on the specific language of what constitutes an older building. For local historic designation, a building must be at least 50 years old. There are newer buildings in Jacksonville that have cultural or architectural significance that Teal would like to include in the language of the matrix requirements.
“You kind of want to err on the side of saving the buildings,” he said.
The biggest hurdle in terms of making the matrix work is to assess the layers of building and fire codes on the county, state and federal levels and be able to blend them together.
“As we’ve discovered, the fire code can be inconsistent with the building code, which could be inconsistent with the Park Service’s requirements [cognizant authority of federal landmarks],” said Teal. “It’s somehow figuring out how all of those codes can fit together in coming up with a plan to make sure we’re legal under all three of them It’s possible to do in Florida. They’ve done it in Tampa and they’ve done it in Kissimmee.”
The subcommittee hopes to have drafts ready in March with a final report available in April.
“We want to create something so that developers in this city, and even from out of town, can come in, buy a building, rehab it and it be safe and structurally sound,” said Jenkins. “We want to revitalize this city and get the density we need downtown.”