Doro Fixture Site to be demolished, replaced with Apartments/Retail

[acme54321]

The project architect said he worked textures, colors and materials from the original Doro Fixture building into the designs.

LOL!!

[thelakelander]

So unfortunate, that this passes for a form of preservation and paying homage to history locally. Btw, I seriously doubt we even know what the original colors were.

[Captain Zissou]

"The REV grant would be an important piece of this, making it financially feasible," Marshall said.

The REV grant will need City Council approval.

Why would we let them demolish the building before the grant is approved?  This project lives and dies with this grant and they don't even know if it will be approved...  Is this an attempt to force the city's hand to approve the grant so that they aren't stuck with yet another blighted city block?

[Steve]

"The REV grant would be an important piece of this, making it financially feasible," Marshall said.

The REV grant will need City Council approval.

Why would we let them demolish the building before the grant is approved?  This project lives and dies with this grant and they don't even know if it will be approved...  Is this an attempt to force the city's hand to approve the grant so that they aren't stuck with yet another blighted city block?

Probably.

[heights unknown]

DDA should make it a rule and policy that is binding in some way, that anyone who seeks to buy property, and demolish already existing structures on said property, and are proposing to build or construct on that property, must build their proposed development, etc., within a certain amount of time, and somehow DDA should them to it legally. I too am tired of people buying up properties downtown, proposing to build, and then get money and other incentives from the city, and then back out. As a part of the approval process, DDA should somehow bind them to commit building or constructing what they propose or plan on those properties. (this is not my field so feel free to correct me if I am off).

[Snaketoz]

DDA should make it a rule and policy that is binding in some way, that anyone who seeks to buy property, and demolish already existing structures on said property, and are proposing to build or construct on that property, must build their proposed development, etc., within a certain amount of time, and somehow DDA should them to it legally. I too am tired of people buying up properties downtown, proposing to build, and then get money and other incentives from the city, and then back out. As a part of the approval process, DDA should somehow bind them to commit building or constructing what they propose or plan on those properties. (this is not my field so feel free to correct me if I am off).

That's reasonable.

[jaxlongtimer]

I find it interesting that if a building isn't deemed officially historic, it isn't protected.  Who determines that status and when is it invoked?  If the owner has to request it, that's the fox guarding the chicken coop.  If the City has to request it, is there an ongoing process to seek out such buildings and declare them historic?  How can the community participate by making such a request?

Seems very few buildings are protected in this City leading to endless demolitions of our past.  We have one-off historic buildings all over the City that are not necessarily in "historic districts" and thus not officially surveyed.  Why can't a building be deemed historic as a result of reviewing its status for a demolition permit thereby halting its demolition?  How do other cities like Savannah and Charleston handle such matters?

[MusicMan]

"Popoli said the state Historic Preservation Officer at the Florida Department of State determined the Doro Fixture building doesn't meet the criteria for Jacksonville's Downtown National Register District"

Wow. I'd like to see that report, 'cause from everything I've ever read here it absolutely qualifies. Are the standards that much different, or is this "Historic Preservation Officer" legit?  Maybe he's getting some kickback from the developer.

[Charles Hunter]

Is the Doro outside the Downtown National Register District?  It could be as simple as that.

[thelakelander]

It's more complicated than that. A historic district is a cluster or compact concentration of structures, sites, etc. It's a mile east of the Downtown National Register District. So it's not.  However, that doesn't mean much, in terms of if it is actually historically significant or not.

A few of the buildings are possibly eligible to meet local landmarking criteria, which has nothing to do with the national register. Unfortunately, we'll likely never know because it could be rubble before anyone is provided the time to research and present that information.

[bl8jaxnative]

Which building(s) at the Doro site are people claiming are historic?   There are several structures on that property.

[thelakelander]

I would say the two facing A. Philip Randolph Boulevard would most likely meeting the necessary landmarking criteria, if we actually attempted to look into their history. The two story building actually predates Doro and is one of the last two commercial structures still standing from when this corridor was the business district for the suburb of East Jacksonville.





According to City of Jacksonville code, a building must meet at least two of the following criteria to be landmarked, and must meet four to guarantee landmarking designation if the current property owner objects. The criteria are:

1. It has value as a significant reminder of the cultural, historical, architectural, or archaeological heritage of the city, state or nation; - The site meets this. It's the only intact remaining pre-urban renewal block surviving in the former community of East Jacksonville.

2. Its location is the site of a significant local, state or national event; - Would need some research. Maybe, maybe not.

3. It is identified with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state or nation; - It would be interesting to dig into the history of George Doro himself. After a century in business, the millwork the company produced is very likely a piece of historic sites all across the country. Locally, for decades during downtown's heyday, he had a popular sandwich named after him. He's a possible prominent figure in comparison to the precedence that has been set from the landmarking of other local sites in the past.

4. It is identified as the work of a master builder, designer, or architect whose individual work has influenced the development of the city, state or nation; - Would need research. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't.

5. Its value as a building is recognized for the quality of architecture, and it retains sufficient elements showing its architectural significance; - Arguments can be made for both. For example, how many buildings around there still include cast iron storefronts like the two story one? The one story building has an art deco flair. Art Deco is something certainly not in large supply in DT Jax.

6. It has distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style valuable for the study of a period, method of construction, or use of indigenous materials; - Both certainly feature distinguishing architectural styles and characteristics from their period of construction.

7. Its suitability for preservation or restoration. - Neither is in danger of structurally falling down, so they meet #7.


In my professional opinion, 1, 5, 6 and 7 would be easy to prove. Some extra amount of research would be needed to see if the buildings meet 2, 3 and 4.

[bl8jaxnative]

Thank you

[thelakelander]

Sounds like the side of the main public library 2.0....

Mapping Jax, a local historic preservation and Downtown revitalization group, brought 11 members to the March DDRB meeting to oppose the demolition.

They asked developers to merge the oldest Doro Fixture building into the proposed new construction instead of demolishing it.

The DIA staff report states that design elements of the existing building are proposed in Rise Properties plans as "a nod" to the Doro fixtures structure, including green window frames and painted white brick patterns in the sites proposed as urban open space.

The report says a proposed "feature wall" that will screen the parking garage incorporates materials and architectural features from the existing building.

Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/renderings-show-developer-not-changing-plans-to-incorporate-doro-elements

[bl8jaxnative]

I would say the two facing A. Philip Randolph Boulevard would most likely meeting the necessary landmarking criteria, if we actually attempted to look into their history. The two story building actually predates Doro and is one of the last two commercial structures still standing from when this corridor was the business district for the suburb of East Jacksonville.





According to City of Jacksonville code, a building must meet at least two of the following criteria to be landmarked, and must meet four to guarantee landmarking designation if the current property owner objects. The criteria are:

1. It has value as a significant reminder of the cultural, historical, architectural, or archaeological heritage of the city, state or nation; - The site meets this. It's the only intact remaining pre-urban renewal block surviving in the former community of East Jacksonville.

2. Its location is the site of a significant local, state or national event; - Would need some research. Maybe, maybe not.

3. It is identified with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state or nation; - It would be interesting to dig into the history of George Doro himself. After a century in business, the millwork the company produced is very likely a piece of historic sites all across the country. Locally, for decades during downtown's heyday, he had a popular sandwich named after him. He's a possible prominent figure in comparison to the precedence that has been set from the landmarking of other local sites in the past.

4. It is identified as the work of a master builder, designer, or architect whose individual work has influenced the development of the city, state or nation; - Would need research. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't.

5. Its value as a building is recognized for the quality of architecture, and it retains sufficient elements showing its architectural significance; - Arguments can be made for both. For example, how many buildings around there still include cast iron storefronts like the two story one? The one story building has an art deco flair. Art Deco is something certainly not in large supply in DT Jax.

6. It has distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style valuable for the study of a period, method of construction, or use of indigenous materials; - Both certainly feature distinguishing architectural styles and characteristics from their period of construction.

7. Its suitability for preservation or restoration. - Neither is in danger of structurally falling down, so they meet #7.


In my professional opinion, 1, 5, 6 and 7 would be easy to prove. Some extra amount of research would be needed to see if the buildings meet 2, 3 and 4.

Thank you.

I'm curious.  If it's the oldest storefront on the east side it's surely one of if not the oldest in the city outside of downtown, no?