Jacksonville's Most Endangered Historic Buildings

Started by Metro Jacksonville, June 07, 2007, 12:00:00 AM

Timkin

#30

Regarding the Lola Culver and John Gorrie Jr High School Buildings...


I spoke with a person today from DCSB who oversees the realestate aspects of the School System.... regarding these two Schools, plus Lackawana.   Lackawana is decomissioned but is going to be used as a depository.. . The other two , Gorrie and Culver will be proposed to be reused as special schools ...on the order of what Lackawana was used for in its last years...  If they are not used as Schools any further , then they will eventually go to Auction.   I mentioned to the person at DCSB that Culver is listed as one of Jacksonville's most endangered buildings.  He indicated that he didnt understand why that would be , because as far as he knew , Culver is NOT slated to be demolished or removed in anyway...in fact quite the opposite. And that he knew of , Culver was in no way unsafe to occupy...simply an outdated structure that the board could not afford to continue dumping tons of money into...

So maybe it will be in the future , that these two nice structures could see a reuse as lofts or something.. Hopefully they will not fall into disrepair as PS # 4 has.  :(

ormolu611

I for one, am shocked that the city let the First Christian Church next to the architectural firm be demolished in exchange for yet another friggin surface parking lot. Sometimes I really lose faith in this place.

Jax2024

Does anyone know what the deal is with the CHart House on the Southbank?  Although funky, it is a tremendous example of period architecture and the exact type of architecture this city might be inclined to rip down and regret later?  Who owns the land underneath it?

redhead25

Okay, I am a little confused?  If we have buildings (especially city owned buildings) why are we not having non profits come in and provide services to the community?  I know my organization is looking for space and would love to continue the buildings historic past.

leahfu

While the jury is out on whether the Annie Lytle School is haunted or not, I can tell you that it is very nasty in the inside from homeless people living in there and doing their "business" in there.

JeffreyS

Quote from: redhead25 on August 06, 2008, 03:13:57 PM
Okay, I am a little confused?  If we have buildings (especially city owned buildings) why are we not having non profits come in and provide services to the community?  I know my organization is looking for space and would love to continue the buildings historic past.
I for one would like to move services out of downtown.  They are a homeless magnet. I do not wish to cut services we do not have enough but spread throughout the city disperse the homeless community.   The large number that can commune together creates a sense of normalcy not the temporary attitude I would like to see with someone who has had a run of bad luck.
Lenny Smash

apvbguy

Quote from: JeffreyS on August 31, 2008, 08:59:17 AM
Quote from: redhead25 on August 06, 2008, 03:13:57 PM
Okay, I am a little confused?  If we have buildings (especially city owned buildings) why are we not having non profits come in and provide services to the community?  I know my organization is looking for space and would love to continue the buildings historic past.
I for one would like to move services out of downtown.  They are a homeless magnet. I do not wish to cut services we do not have enough but spread throughout the city disperse the homeless community.   The large number that can commune together creates a sense of normalcy not the temporary attitude I would like to see with someone who has had a run of bad luck.


you are spot on! having JSO and the jail downtown is a boneheaded thing. The new court should be shelved and a site outside, but close to the core should be developed and a "justice" campus, JSO, the jail and the courts can all be located in a contiguous area and still easily accessible and this would free up valuable core properties for wiser uses, a side benefit would be to get rid of the bail bond shops, nothing says urban decay more than a plethora of bail bond and check cashing shops. The bus station should be moved to or closer to the Amtrak station.
The social service providers needs to be relocated away from the central core also, these places attract (please do not take this the wrong way) a crowd downtown that doesn't need to be there, why not have the social service providers relocate closer to areas where these services are needed?
Another thing that should be relocated is the education building on the south-bank, surely they don't need prime riverfront property, they too should find a home near but not in the core.
regarding the homeless, I am not up on what outreach there is for them, but maybe a carrot and stick approach is necessary, they need to be removed but they also need help, a shelter and drug treatment, medical and mental health services should be offered, and if the homeless refuse the "help" then they need to be relocated.
When you put clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out

never argue with an idiot, he'll drag you down to his level and clobber you with his experience

Coolyfett

Quote from: apvbguy on August 31, 2008, 10:21:51 AM
Quote from: JeffreyS on August 31, 2008, 08:59:17 AM
Quote from: redhead25 on August 06, 2008, 03:13:57 PM
Okay, I am a little confused?  If we have buildings (especially city owned buildings) why are we not having non profits come in and provide services to the community?  I know my organization is looking for space and would love to continue the buildings historic past.
I for one would like to move services out of downtown.  They are a homeless magnet. I do not wish to cut services we do not have enough but spread throughout the city disperse the homeless community.   The large number that can commune together creates a sense of normalcy not the temporary attitude I would like to see with someone who has had a run of bad luck.


you are spot on! having JSO and the jail downtown is a boneheaded thing. The new court should be shelved and a site outside, but close to the core should be developed and a "justice" campus, JSO, the jail and the courts can all be located in a contiguous area and still easily accessible and this would free up valuable core properties for wiser uses, a side benefit would be to get rid of the bail bond shops, nothing says urban decay more than a plethora of bail bond and check cashing shops. The bus station should be moved to or closer to the Amtrak station.
The social service providers needs to be relocated away from the central core also, these places attract (please do not take this the wrong way) a crowd downtown that doesn't need to be there, why not have the social service providers relocate closer to areas where these services are needed?
Another thing that should be relocated is the education building on the south-bank, surely they don't need prime riverfront property, they too should find a home near but not in the core.
regarding the homeless, I am not up on what outreach there is for them, but maybe a carrot and stick approach is necessary, they need to be removed but they also need help, a shelter and drug treatment, medical and mental health services should be offered, and if the homeless refuse the "help" then they need to be relocated.

Taking the bums away from downtown?? Then who would I run off the chess tables?? I need a bum to play chess MAN!! If you get rid of all the BUMS then when I go downtown Ill feel like Im in the Twilight Zone!! Look Downtowns are full of nooks and crannies, where are the bums gonna sleep dude? In a suburban sidewalk? I think not. THEY DON"T NEED HELP!! THEY NEED CHANGE!!! Anything between 5 & 98 cents. Stop picking at the bums man!!!




Where the hell is StephanDare when we need him???!!!!! Argh!!!
Mike Hogan Destruction Eruption!

jacksonvilleconfidential

Sarcastic and Mean Spirited

RiversideGator

The T-U is reporting today that the Weavers bought it, subject to School Board approval, and may use it for affordable housing for teachers and nurses.  I think y'all got scooped.   ;)

The Compound

Quote from: RiversideGator on January 06, 2009, 03:18:30 PM
The T-U is reporting today that the Weavers bought it, subject to School Board approval, and may use it for affordable housing for teachers and nurses.  I think y'all got scooped.   ;)

"affordable" meaning HUD housing, it better not.

downtownparks

If its targeting nurses and teachers, its great news.

RiversideGator

I think they mean "market rate" housing and definitely not HUD.  This is property affordable to those working as teachers, nurses, policemen, etc. and is designed to make spaces for those people in otherwise expensive neighborhoods (although I think the need for this in Riverside is highly debatable).  I own property in the area and will closely monitor the situation but I am almost positive it would not be HUD.

Personally, I would MUCH prefer an upscale apartment complex there.  It has so much potential IMO.  I am a little afraid that Mrs. Weaver (who is apparently the more liberal of the two) will use this to attempt to be a do gooder at the expense of the area.  The only saving grace may be that the Weavers do actually live at the end of Stockton Street so they have a vested interest in making the neighborhood better.  Note that I have no evidence that they intend any harm but it is a vague fear I have.  Overall, the Weavers have been great for the City and are great citizens.

tufsu1

the new term for it is "workforce housing"....that way it doesn't have the stigma that affordable housing does

The Compound

Quote from: RiversideGator on January 06, 2009, 07:36:59 PM
I think they mean "market rate" housing and definitely not HUD.  This is property affordable to those working as teachers, nurses, policemen, etc. and is designed to make spaces for those people in otherwise expensive neighborhoods (although I think the need for this in Riverside is highly debatable).  I own property in the area and will closely monitor the situation but I am almost positive it would not be HUD.

Personally, I would MUCH prefer an upscale apartment complex there.  It has so much potential IMO.  I am a little afraid that Mrs. Weaver (who is apparently the more liberal of the two) will use this to attempt to be a do gooder at the expense of the area.  The only saving grace may be that the Weavers do actually live at the end of Stockton Street so they have a vested interest in making the neighborhood better.  Note that I have no evidence that they intend any harm but it is a vague fear I have.  Overall, the Weavers have been great for the City and are great citizens.

Yes, I own 2 properties less than 3 blocks from it, and lease a commercial space across the street, so it very much concerns me as well.