(KBJ) Keeping Back Jacksonville: Before and After

[Steve]

Regardless of wether or not KBJ designed the building, the city, the owner, and the state of downtown at that time did not request that these buildings adress the street properly.  I'm not trying to let KBJ off of the hook but they are not solely to blame.  Luckily, for almost all of these structures it is relatively easy to enhance them to better address the street and improve their walkability and connection with the rest of their surroundings.

No, at the time there was no DRC (however, they've let some pretty crappy designs through).  As far as the owners of the buildings, they generally don't know what urban design is.

As far as retrofitting the structures...


Modis - Flip the retails bays to open out, instead of in.  That would greatly enhance the appearance/experience

Wachovia - Poor Site Plan; you would almost be better siuted building a separate building on Riverplace Blvd

BB&T - I'd have to see their loading dock up close on Bay to see what could be done

Prudential - First one has crappy site plan, and Garage didn't include retail, so it would be pretty expensive.

[jeh1980]

I know that this has nothing to do with the destruction of that old building...but KBJ as "Keeping Back Jacksonville?!" Not so! We all due respect, but if it weren't for KBJ, we wouldn't see some of those high-rises near the river (Modis Tower -Independent Square, Riverplace Tower - Wachovia, BB&T Building, Prudential Plaza 1 & 2, especially the soon to be the former Bellsouth Tower now renamed AT&T)

Let me ask you something - which would you rather have:

1. A City that Looks Great from I-95, or
2. A City that is vibrant at street level


I'd much rather the city vibrant at street level.  Most of KBJ's designs prohibit that.   Look at the base of the Prudential Building (the newer one).  Other than the entrance, the ground floor is maintenance equipment.  how is that visually appealing to walk next to?

The BB&T building is no better.  It looks good from Forsyth St (the main entrance, but it completely failed to take into account any other side of the building.  Bay St is a Massive Loading Dock (the BOA tower has less loading dock space at street level than BB&T.  Hogan St is a concrete wal.

The at&t building is okay, but again, it's designed with one entrance, and no external retail.

Tell me, what if they kept the building design the same from floors 2 or 3 to the top, and redid the street level?  It would be the same from I-95.  Now, take a look at the Bank of America Tower.  While not a perfect design, it's much better.  Three of the Four corners could be external retail spots simply by replacing one window and putting in a door (actually the one at the SW corner is already standalone).  How about the Everbank Building on Riverside.  It has all of the modern conveniences, with really good urban sesign at the street.

Not to mention, let's be honest.  KBJ didn't exactly inspire Independent Life, Prudential or Gulf Life to build a new building.  They had a need for Office Space, and KBJ was paid for a design (they didn't donate it).  Somehow, if KBJ didn't exist, I think those companies would have still built their buildings.

I think I can understand. We do need to have more external retail. We definately need to be vibrant...especially at night at every street level. But to review those choices...

Would you rather have...
1. a city that looks great from I-95 or
2. a city that is vibrant at street level

My answer....Why not have BOTH!
Why don't we all do something to make it happened.

[thelakelander]

It's a shame to lose it, but I know why they did it, so I'm not as sorry to see it go.  There are plans for something much more productive for that site.  How long it will take to realize those plans is anyone's guess.  But, if it turns into a surface parking lot, I say we burn them at the stake.

Pulled this thread up to help answer a development question. I assume the property owner at the time (they don't exist anymore now), did not follow through with their plans. 13 years later, we still have a vacant lot. Just something to think about with the recent and current demolition proposals in DT.

[marcuscnelson]

Does that mean we have permission to burn them at the stake?