Tearing Down Worman's Deli - via Jax Daily Record

Started by aubureck, July 24, 2012, 12:09:24 PM

aubureck

Quoteby Karen Brune Mathis, Managing Editor

Worman’s Bakery and Deli is coming down.
The business at 204 Broad St. closed almost three years ago, in August 2009, after more than 85 years in business. Owners closed the deli and bakery, which served generations of customers Downtown since at least 1923.

The City issued a permit Monday to demolish the building, described at 5,066 square feet. The demolition cost is $8,000.

Property records show the structure was built in 1909. The records show a 2011 taxable value of $432,190, including a land value of almost $286,000.

It is owned by the Pearl Leibowitz Life Estate.

According to a Florida Times-Union report, founders Sam and Rosa Worman opened the New York Star Bakery in Jacksonville in 1923, moved to Daytona Beach in 1935 and returned to Jacksonville to open Worman’s on Broad Street in 1939.

It was then run by their son, Morris Worman, and his sister, Pearl Worman Leibowitz-Sederbaum, and son Scott Worman.

The bakery is on the edge of the new Duval County Courthouse campus. Owners had said they hoped to keep the business open until courthouse construction was completed, but contract and construction issues delayed the opening until this year.

kmathis@baileypub.com

@MathisKb

356-2466

http://jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=537059#
The Urban Planner

thelakelander

Could have saw that one coming a mile a way.  Especially, after that car ran into it a while ago.  Look on the bright side.  That lot will now match and rest of the moonscape surrounding the courthouse and downtown's newest food truck location will have clear visibility to the front door of the building.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali

Debbie Thompson

Another historic building gone, another vacant lot for downtown.  Wonderful, just wonderful.  And what are the plans for the site, or are we just knocking another buildng down with no known use for the location?

JaxJerry

other than the fact that it was old, exactly what was "historic' about the Worman's building?

duvaldude08

And they are going to do what with the land? I hope something is planned for it besides a parking lot.. Which is what they are probably going to do. More parking for the courthouse  ::)
Jaguars 2.0

Timkin

Quote from: Debbie Thompson on July 24, 2012, 12:45:52 PM
Another historic building gone, another vacant lot for downtown.  Wonderful, just wonderful.  And what are the plans for the site, or are we just knocking another buildng down with no known use for the location?

I think we know the answer to this Debbie. It is what happens 99% of the time that a building is taken down and replaced with a vacant lot.

Next will be Genovar's Hall , and the 3 shot gun houses .

aclchampion

Just FYI, the city is not demolishing the structure, the owners are. They could not afford the repairs to bring it up to code.

simms3

Better to have an ugly old building than no building at all.  The city hasn't nor will it learn.  Parking lots are a very lucrative place holder for local real estate investors waiting to sell to big guys entering the market (and are even ok to sit on the books of developers waiting to develop a site), but this is not Austin or Midtown Atlanta.  There really isn't even demand for surface parking...damn shame.

City should look the other way on code or take over buildings itself.  Perhaps give tax relief to those who can't afford the necessary fixes until fixes can be afforded.  There are ways, you know...
Bothering locals and trolling boards since 2005

Adam W

I think we sometimes fetishize (if that's even a word) buildings because they're old. That old Fire Station comes to mind.

I'm not trying to be controversial here. I just think that well-built (architecturally interesting) and useful buildings are what we need, whether they are old or new or whatever. Today's new building is tomorrow's old building. The buildings we regard so highly today were once new buildings.

So I don't necessarily think we should just preserve old buildings because they're old.

Okay, that said.... Jacksonville really, really needs to stop tearing down buildings. I'd rather have old, unremarkable buildings than empty parking lots. This has to stop. I just don't understand the point. I don't see what the end game is here. What are we trying to accomplish?

fieldafm

#9
QuoteSo I don't necessarily think we should just preserve old buildings because they're old.

That was really the last remaining building stock near the courhouse that a small business could have moved into if the owener would have agreed to a build to suit arrangement.  That's what the big deal is.  The last frontier of infill is now the Fosythe garage or the City owned Courthouse parking garage.  Generally speaking, a small business owner can't afford to open a restaurant, tailor, flourist, whatever if they have to purchase the land, build new construction and then purchase equipment/inventory.

Historic building stock, no matter the architectural merits of the building, is crucial to small business growth downtown.

I've been touring some properties downtown recently and it's really unbelievable how difficult(read: expensive) it would be to move in considering the bare bone(and often cases neglected) conditions most of these ground level spaces are in nowadays.   

QuoteThat lot will now match and rest of the moonscape surrounding the courthouse and downtown's newest food truck location will have clear visibility to the front door of the building.

Amazing really, when you look at that new spot and appreciate for a moment how creative small business owners will get just to fight for their own existence.  Downtown needs more pioneers like Andrew Ferenc.

duvaldude08

Quote from: aclchampion on July 24, 2012, 03:09:38 PM
Just FYI, the city is not demolishing the structure, the owners are. They could not afford the repairs to bring it up to code.

Okay
Jaguars 2.0

Adam W

Quote

That was really the last remaining building stock near the courhouse that a small business could have moved into if the owener would have agreed to a build to suit arrangement.  That's what the big deal is.  The last frontier of infill is now the Fosythe garage or the City owned Courthouse parking garage.  Generally speaking, a small business owner can't afford to open a restaurant, tailor, flourist, whatever if they have to purchase the land, build new construction and then purchase equipment/inventory.


Yeah, I totally understand. I don't think we should be tearing down buildings. It seems that it should be the last option, but it too often seems like the first one considered. But that is an assumption I am making.

fieldafm

QuoteThe last frontier of infill is now the Fosythe garage or the City owned Courthouse parking garage.

Even more ironic is that since 7-11 has moved into the Forsyth garage, asking rents have magically gone up on the unimproved parcels in the rest of the garage.  Which is ashame b/c the Adams Street corner property is a pretty decent location. 

The City garage isn't horrible if you only need a business to serve ONLY Courthouse patrons (b/c otherwise you are isolated on nights and weekends), but you still have to pay for the buildout as the remaining spaces are just setbacks in the garage space. 
Two tenants are moving in, but one is a lawyer's office and the other a breakfast/lunch spot for Courthouse patrons.

RexMontana

I know for a fact from a very unreliable source that the reason behind all the buildings being torn down is that the Jacksonville Histerical Society is working on a secret project to recreate what Jacksonville looked like after the Great Fire. Alert the media! You heard it here first!

Timkin

Quote from: aclchampion on July 24, 2012, 03:09:38 PM
Just FYI, the city is not demolishing the structure, the owners are. They could not afford the repairs to bring it up to code.

Oh well that makes it a whole different story then. Let me guess. Code enforcement has pressured them to make repairs on the building that they could not afford to do. So now , instead of boarding it up in a mothball status (I'll wager a great deal cheaper than an 8k demolition where it is wiped out forever), they then pressured them for demolition ..BECAUSE THATS WHAT CODE ENFORCEMENT DOES!!!!!!!!!!  Case in point... HUNDREDS of homes in Springfield they have badgered owners over and then had demolished.

This is CRAP.  and typical CITY doings! .