Jacksonville Architecture BOTTOM 10

[buckethead]

If those here who are the most passionate about downtown Jacksonville think so little of her, how much worse does the rest of the world see her.

I'd like to see some positivity.

Downtown Portland Maine is stunning. Head to the waterfront and she becomes less so. It is more industrial/fishing/boating with dining mixed in.

All cities need their functionality. We would do better extolling the beauties of our city rather than giving her the Ike Turner treatment.

[mtraininjax]

Savannah and Charleston live off of great and/or historic architecture.

We are not these cities, not because we don't have the attributes, but because our leaders have chosen to focus on other ways to promote Jacksonville. When you are part of the First Coast, you wonder how our tourism is less important than that of those cities. Regardless this is a building thread, so back to the buildings.

Had the old City Hall, old Post Office, many of the old hotels remained downtown, we would have the historic gawkers downtown as well, be thankful for what we do have, but in the end, its not the historic attributes of the building that draw employers, its the same economics of rent, people, and demand to customers. I don't care if there is a building downtown that was built after the fire, lined with gold, if the rent is cheaper somewhere else, and people, customers, are all the same no matter where they are located, economics will win and they will move to where it is cheaper.

Don't think for a moment that companies "need" a historic building to promote their company. Most don't care, they just want to have enough money at the end of the month to be able to re-invest in the business.

[civil42806]

Savannah and Charleston live off of great and/or historic architecture.

We are not these cities, not because we don't have the attributes, but because our leaders have chosen to focus on other ways to promote Jacksonville. When you are part of the First Coast, you wonder how our tourism is less important than that of those cities. Regardless this is a building thread, so back to the buildings.

Had the old City Hall, old Post Office, many of the old hotels remained downtown, we would have the historic gawkers downtown as well, be thankful for what we do have, but in the end, its not the historic attributes of the building that draw employers, its the same economics of rent, people, and demand to customers. I don't care if there is a building downtown that was built after the fire, lined with gold, if the rent is cheaper somewhere else, and people, customers, are all the same no matter where they are located, economics will win and they will move to where it is cheaper.

Don't think for a moment that companies "need" a historic building to promote their company. Most don't care, they just want to have enough money at the end of the month to be able to re-invest in the business.

ummmmm actually we don't "not because we don't have the attributes"  have those attributes at all.  At least not in the density that both Savannah and Charleston does.  But your right trying to develop jax in the modes of Savannah and Charleston is a fools errand.  Lord knows there used to be post after post a few years ago trying to compare us to them, its not possible, maybe 30 or 40 years ago it may have been, but that ship has sailed.

[stjr]

Savannah and Charleston live off of great and/or historic architecture.

We are not these cities, not because we don't have the attributes, but because our leaders have chosen to focus on other ways to promote Jacksonville.

I only mentioned those cities to demonstrate to you that architecture can contribute to an economy and create jobs, an idea you dismissed.  I never said Jax was in their league (although, as mentioned, a more visionary group of past leaders could have put us there).

Don't think for a moment that companies "need" a historic building to promote their company. Most don't care, they just want to have enough money at the end of the month to be able to re-invest in the business.

That's often the conclusion of an often poorly run company out to make a quick buck and move on.  Truly re-investing in their business, as you call for, includes investing in their buildings and the image and values they convey.

Plenty of businesses do restore and occupy buildings to use as part of their image management and to show the community they respect and appreciate it through the preservation of its history.  Many historic and other  buildings are icons and provide instant recognition and acceptance, not to mention conveying corporate culture and values. Visionary companies that plan to lead their communities and convey permanence will pay a premium to make a statement with their buildings.

NBC promotes its HQ's in Rockefeller Center. Banks and government agencies build marbled columned temples to themselves.  Skyscrapers are built to top all others. Transamerica makes its "pyramid" part of its image.   Almost every Fortune 500 company works hard to have a distinctive HQ's.  Professional firms and architects treasure distinctive buildings.  And, don't forget restaurants and entertainment venues looking for memorable locations.  Even Wal-mart, with its legendary stripped down HQ building is using it as a statement about its culture.  The fact is, architecture can "speak" to customers, community, and employees.  Like expensive, slickly produced advertising, there are companies willing to pay extra for "slick buildings" to promote special messages.

[mtraininjax]

Truly re-investing in their business, as you call for, includes investing in their buildings and the image and values they convey.

Let's keep to Jacksonville for our discussions. No need to go to NYC and Rockefeller Center, which is more of a mall complex than 1 single building. Most companies in Jacksonville do not own their building, they lease the space, why? Because owning a building and maintaining it are more expensive than the lease of it. Also, and I am not an accountant, some people feel it is more financially responsible to lease than to rent. I am a proponet of owning, because it is an asset you can do more with assets in the US, and if you lease, you well, have no asset.

Eola Capital manages the Modis Building, I doubt Modis owns it, so the owners manage to sell the rights to the name of the building, and maintain it for the tenants. I'll study this further, but I do not believe there are many "companies" that own their own buildings. If they do, they own them in a seperate company to hide the debt of the company, a smart accounting move.

How many companies downtown own their own building? I know Boyd Jenerette owns their own building, as do a number of law firms, or they did, but it will be interesting to see if the commercial crisis hurts ownership of these buildings, and subsequent maintenance.

[Captain Zissou]

I know a few companies that own their own buildings DT. Not to keep bringing up Rockefeller center, but it is a notable example of a sale lease-back.  Companies who own their buildings often sell them to free up capital and lease them back from the purchaser.  Many companies choose not to buy their buildings in the first place, so most buildings are owned by third party companies.

[mtraininjax]

There are a few, probably more than a few downtown. The discussion was though, if you own a historic building or any building, do you do more to keep it up, because it is historic, and provide more worth for people to admire, especially downtown. Or do you lease the space and let the landlord manage the space and the appearance?

The CSX building, while not an architectural gem, did receive new windows, I think in time for the Super Bowl. Energy efficiency, the whole 9 yards. A building built in the early 50s, completed, I believe in 1960, it would appear they own it and maintain it, and from all appearances, it has held up well with their own maintenance and improvements.

[reednavy]

The CSX Building is quite nice now, and have grown to like it.

Plus, it block 550 Water St being seen from the river, which is just an ugly structure. That said though, at least their plaza has been redone.

[KenFSU]

This is my choice for Jacksonville's worst architecture.

It actually won't be too bad once the rocket ship is repaired enough to fly home.

[mtraininjax]

Reed - Your right, 550 is just a box with windows. But at least they have windows compared to the ATT Data Center with its concrete and monolithic views, reminds me of the old structures on the Martin Landau TV program, Space:1999.

[jeh1980]

I saw that there was a MJ "Jacksonville Architecture Top 10" (see http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,2105.0.html ).

Well, I couldn't resist thinking that we, unfortunately, may have many more candidates surviving today for a "Bottom 10" than a "Top 10".  So, to get things started, I offer the following suggestions, likely to offend almost everyone  .  Feel free to add comments or your nominees.

Hyatt/Adams Mark Hotel (the wall by the river?)
$ky-high-way Tracks and Supports
JSO HQ's (or is that a fort?)
Bennett Federal Office Building (another fort, just taller?)
Wachovia Northbank Bldg. (the flat mirror with a bump on its head next to the Omni)
The Fuller Warren (I-95) Bridge (or, is that an oversized overpass?)
All parking garages
All the "new" office buildings in La Villa
All the strip malls, shopping centers, and malls in Jax
All the fake stucco box tract homes

*Awaiting completion to qualify: New Duval County Courthouse, master street killer.

I hate to have to extremely disagree with that list. I never complain with the design with all of these. Although a few buildings could use some more life:

All parking garages i.e.

As for the new courthouse, I don't think it looks that bad.

[Dog Walker]

One of the worst has to be the Federal Reserve Building that blocks the view of the Prime Osborne from downtown.  That thing looks like a concrete block laid on it's side and is soon going to be vacant since the Jax Federal Reserve office is closing.  Even our jail has better design!

[Keith-N-Jax]

School Board building on the south bank should be on this list.

[reednavy]

I don't understand why the Wachovia Northbank is on the list. I find it very nice and if the sun angle in the sky is right, and your position is as well, you can get this large glare from it's roof even on the Buckman.

[stjr]

I don't understand why the Wachovia Northbank is on the list. I find it very nice and if the sun angle in the sky is right, and your position is as well, you can get this large glare from it's roof even on the Buckman.

Reed, I am supposing this is your sarcasm about one of Jax's largest "solar panels".  A box entirely skinned in simple reflective glass and nothing more isn't very inspiring accept maybe to sun worshipers.