QuoteBetter Jacksonville Plan Project Manager Dave Schneider appeared before the Downtown Development Review Board of the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission Thursday to update members on an aspect of the Duval County Unified Courthouse project.
The board granted conceptual approval Jan. 28, 2010, for the design of a pedestrian bridge connecting the former federal courthouse and post office and the County Courthouse under construction Downtown.
The locally approved design complemented the look of the two buildings in terms of color and facade.
However, the design was rejected by the State Historical Preservation Office.
“They said the bridge should look like neither building,†said Schneider. He explained the state was concerned that people not familiar with the project might conclude that the bridge had always been part of the federal building, which could lead to confusion.
“Let’s just not build it,†said board member Andy Sikes.
“That would be a tough sell,†said Schneider.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/downtowntoday.php?dt_date=2011-01-28
Renderings of the rejected design(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/774978826_pynuE-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/774978833_2Ucbz-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/774978921_TMwXk-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/774978916_fQYNp-M.jpg)
they dont need that thing. From the looks of the renderings it appears Pearl St will be opened to traffic.
I agree, use the money for the front lawn and courtyard instead.
Is this the same bridge that Angela Corey said was vital to protect our prosecutors from attacks?
Quote from: Jumpinjack on January 28, 2011, 11:26:15 AM
Is this the same bridge that Angela Corey said was vital to protect our prosecutors from attacks?
YEP
Quote from: Jumpinjack on January 28, 2011, 11:26:15 AM
Is this the same bridge that Angela Corey said was vital to protect our prosecutors from attacks?
Angela Corey "says" a lot of things...
The current courhouse has had no special bridge to nowhere for the past 60 years and I don't see anybody getting shot. Give me a freakin' break. A ridiculous waste of money.
Well whether or not the bridge was a good idea, the argument to block it is absurd. Do they really think that people will "presume" that a very very neo-classic skybridge was always part of the 1932 federal building? The colors won't even match because the federal building is old stone and the new construction is pearl white. Whatever...I wish they would just be honest and say they thought the idea of a pedestrian bridge was stupid, then I might agree (I kinda' liked the look, though).
the fat asses that work in the court house need to get outside more and enjoy some fresh air anyways.
With things this far along, the fact that not insignificant issues like Monroe Street and the Bridge are still on the table just further demonstrates the degree of poor planning and design that went into this building. As I have said before, it will be a 50+ year monument to the folly of picking this design over a vertical high rise like the Fed's built for a fraction of the price.
You have to be pretty bad for the Federal government to be more efficient on a project than you are - but here we are! 8)
Quote from: stjr on January 28, 2011, 05:35:22 PM
With things this far along, the fact that not insignificant issues like Monroe Street and the Bridge are still on the table just further demonstrates the degree of poor planning and design that went into this building. As I have said before, it will be a 50+ year monument to the folly of picking this design over a vertical high rise like the Fed's built for a fraction of the price.
You have to be pretty bad for the Federal government to be more efficient on a project than you are - but here we are! 8)
agreed. typical build/design project. Without being privy to the design issues on the inside, I wonder what hoops they've had to jump through to get interiors finished. If they can't plan a street, can they select a paint color?
Quote“They said the bridge should look like neither building,†said Schneider. He explained the state was concerned that people not familiar with the project might conclude that the bridge had always been part of the federal building, which could lead to confusion.
And if people are confused???
SHould have built a tunnel.
Look at the bright side on this, I've long said that the reason any convention center here will fail miserably is that Jacksonville will never (at least in the short/medium term) be able to keep up with the other convention cities because there is nothing to do here. The real convention cities, like Vegas and Orlando, have this thing called "attractions" and "stuff to do." Well I've just thought of the solution. We DO have an attraction, I just didn't realize it until now. Ready? Our new tourism campaign;
"Come to Jacksonville and see THE WORLD's MOST EXPENSIVE COURTHOUSE!!!"
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on January 28, 2011, 05:56:28 PM
Ready? Our new tourism campaign;
"Come to Jacksonville and see THE WORLD's MOST EXPENSIVE COURTHOUSE!!!"
or....
Come to Jacksonville and mow down our State's Attorneys - it's a live game of frogger with you at the helm
Really, if she was that worried for their safety, she would have had a tunnel, not some open air target range.
Oh I know, there is no commonsense in any of this. A glass fish barrell for "security" and a 6-lane expressway that runs exactly 1 block. This woukd really be hilarious if it didn't cost us $400mm...
Assessed court costs are going to go through the roof.
Judge: Your fine for spitting on the sidewalk is $15.
Court costs are $1,050.79.
Lawyer: Your Honor, that's way out of line.
Judge: You're in contempt of court. Your fine is $500 and a night in the pokey.
Court costs are $2,500. Don't say another word or your fine will equal the court cost.
Yep. I'd look up at the bridge for the prosecution and say, "I'm confused, not because the bridge doesn't seem to match either building or that I can really tell it's a new structure but because I thought there was a budget crunch and all the money was used up on the special woodwork, high ceilings and fancy lavatories".
I'm not crazy about the wall in the rendering. Is this courthouse going to have all the barriers around it like around the federal courthouse in Miami?
Probably like the White House. All that lawn enclosed by a fence. You can look but not touch. Look up on the parapets for the guys with the sniper rifles protecting Angela's people as they cross the street.
Quote from: simms3 on January 28, 2011, 03:13:34 PM
Well whether or not the bridge was a good idea, the argument to block it is absurd. Do they really think that people will "presume" that a very very neo-classic skybridge was always part of the 1932 federal building? The colors won't even match because the federal building is old stone and the new construction is pearl white. Whatever...I wish they would just be honest and say they thought the idea of a pedestrian bridge was stupid, then I might agree (I kinda' liked the look, though).
actually, this is quite common for the SHPO....and I'd be willing to bet the decision ws made purely on the design of the bridge
Well it's nice SOMEONE managed to save us some money on this dumbass courthouse, even if apparently completely by accident.
Quote from: tufsu1 on January 28, 2011, 08:52:52 PM
actually, this is quite common for the SHPO....and I'd be willing to bet the decision ws made purely on the design of the bridge
actually it sounds like a quote from the National Parks Service in their preservation rants:
Them: We need to replace 3000lf of running trim, but it can only be sourced from >80yro harvested stock.
Us: I can't find any source for that kind of material.
Them: We have to have it to maintaini historical accuracy
Us: The species & profile will be an exact match.
Them: Today's wood doesn't have the same amount of growth rings
Us: ??>??>?? WTF are you talking about - you're going to paint it without duplicating the lead content in the paint.
Nutshell - preservationists have their hearts in the right place, it's just ashame that they seem to be sitting on their brain most of the time.
When you're attaching or adding on to a historic building, you're not supposed to mimic it. You should be able to tell the difference between the old and new.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-3335-p1060777.JPG)
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-3358-p1060849.JPG)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/459271771_MkuPz-L.jpg)
They should be fine by just changing the exterior to something that complements (ex. in terms of scale of openings, floor height, etc.) instead of copying hook, line and sinker with cheaper materials.
Quote from: danno on January 28, 2011, 05:50:19 PM
Quote“They said the bridge should look like neither building,†said Schneider. He explained the state was concerned that people not familiar with the project might conclude that the bridge had always been part of the federal building, which could lead to confusion.
And if people are confused???
SHould have built a tunnel.
Can't do that danno, they'd bust into the old tunnels underneath the streets and the media would discover the bootlegging and piracy that earned the well placed families their "old" money around here.
Same reason why the tunnels are just now coming to light (channel 4 is working on a news piece) since MJ broke into one a couple of years ago and plastered the photos all over the web. OH THE HUMANITY!OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: stjr on January 28, 2011, 05:35:22 PM
With things this far along, the fact that not insignificant issues like Monroe Street and the Bridge are still on the table just further demonstrates the degree of poor planning and design that went into this building. As I have said before, it will be a 50+ year monument to the folly of picking this design over a vertical high rise like the Fed's built for a fraction of the price.
You have to be pretty bad for the Federal government to be more efficient on a project than you are - but here we are! 8)
WE AGREE! I would love to see the people responsible for this mess sit before a public forum and try to explain themselves. Other than the judges who will sit inside it, is there ANYONE out there who likes this thing? How did we end up with it? Serious question - not rhetorical. Does anyone have a brief synopsis of how we got to this point and the names of the key players?
^^^Do the judges even like the design? Was it Judge Moran's concept? I know he in particular seemed to be the person everyone wanted approval from regarding the project.
I think they killed because it had the word "pedestrian" in the name of the project.