Architecture Firm KBJ Destroys Historic Church
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/kbj_demolition/after-demo/DSC01869.JPG)
Architecture Firm KBJ (Keeping Back Jacksonville) has successfully destroyed a historic building in the heart of Downtown Jacksonville in favor of a parking lot. Despite the Historic Commision determining the building was historic, the City Council decided it was not.KBJ was still required to get approval for the demolition. At this time it is unclear when or where they recieved approval to proceed with the demolition. Look at what KBJ has done...
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/470
I came a conclusion that the lost of this building wasn't that important; Trying to save this church would've been too expensive, and IMO it's not worth it. People only are in uproar just because they're gonna replace it with a parking lot. Jax lost buildings in the past with FAR more value; Lets please don't make this church to be the George Washington Hotel or something. People can try to villify KBJ all they want to, but IMO KBJ done what's good for the city vastly overshadows a run-down church being demolished. A know someone is gonna say "All KBJ done for Jax is make our skyline ugly" yada,yada,yada; My response to that is God forbid anyone building any structures in the sixties, seventies, or eighties. IMO it's not KBJ making Jax look ugly, if anything it's those damn new architect firms coming to town making all of those beach condos. Something tell me that I'm gonna be very unpopular around here for having an opinion; Oh well, whatever.
Why not demo the Laura Trio? The renovation cost is more than the cost to demo and build new?
Might as well demo the Ambassador Hotel too. You could probably get 100+ parking spaces out of that parcel.
Jacksonville has no soul.
There is nothing that we value, nothing that comes before a quick buck. My disappointment in this city grows by the day. Homes are being demolished by the dozens in Springfield. No one with any power cares.
KBJ does not even need the additional parking. They don't even utilize space in the existing lot that only needs some painted lines to add parking.
KBJ should be ashamed.
While I do think that the demolition of any building of Historic significance is reason for mourning, I still agree that this site could be put to much better use without the Church there and rejoice is in order. So, I agree with I-10east. But, I do also agree with MetroJax stand that KBJ has done a great disservice to the city of Jacksonville. I've lost immense amounts of respect over the last couple of months for the firm and it's managing partners. But to say that they have done nothing but "vilify" the Jacksonville skyline is a matter of taste. I-10east made a good point, why isn't anyone pointing fingers at the developers cramming our city full of massive residential developments and hideous condo structures like the Strand and Peninsula. These monstrosities add nothing to the architectural heritage of the city. Neither do they promote any modern flavor or taste. They are an eyesore and a detriment to the city in their complete blandness and total lack of originality and architectural vision. But, as I said, it's a matter of taste. Some people like Florida Red (pink) and stucco, I personally do not. But then again, I'm an architect and apparently don't know what the hell I'm talking about when it comes to architectural taste and aesthetic judgment. :-|
yeah, some architects there... brilliant people... are they at least salvaging anything, mouldings, doors, BRICKS???
I'm sure that KBJ builds with bricks right? or more likely they use T111 or the new strandboard and stucco.. yeah great minds think alike :-*
whatever...in the end it makes no difference, Jax will never be Savanah or Charleston heck for that matter not even St. Augustine.
Was this on the news? In the T-U? Nobody cares. I am sure if this was a new Chili's opening at the SJTC that somebody from First Coast News would have been there for the ribbon cutting.
maybe instead of a parking lot they could put a Chili's there. :P
This is not only about KBJ taking down a building that was deemed historically significant, as I have stated here before, we don't let our buildings stand long enough to be historic most of the time, and yes it is offensive that they are replacing the buidling with a surface parking lot, but the worst aspect of all is this has been going on in downtown Jacksonville for years.
FINALLY people are voicing their displeasure with ANY old structure going down.
In the late 60's early 70's our downtown looked complelely different. There were actually complete blocks with buidlings on them. The saddest thing of all, is very few of the buildings and city blocks that have been demolished since have been rebuilt. Was it urban renewal? If so where's the renewal?
If those structures were still here imagine what could have been done with them and how much more vital our downtown would be.
But no one really spoke out about the mass destruction. We just watched it slowly happen.
Many of those buildings were fairly young. 50, 60 70 years old. If buildings of those ages weren't worth saving there would be no Springfield, Riverside, Avondale and Ortega.
The block where KBJ sits has one, ONE buidling on it. A WHOLE CITY BLOCK and now another hole in that block is getting MORE surface parking. If KBJ had announed they were building a structure, other than a parking garage, I don't think the sentiment here would have been quite as angry.
As the city council allows destruction, can't they just look west to La Villa to see what a nightmare can look like.
All the big talk and big plans for La Villa have resulted in a downtown office park and not a very nice one at that. No matter what is developed there short of some decent residential, people will NOT walk the sidewalks. They will drive there go to a bank or doctor get in their car and leave.
Although some of the posters here think some of us are making a big deal about nothing, as the remaining guts of Jacksonvlle are ripped out leaving a perforated cityscape at least we tried to express our dissappointment. Maybe one day a large enough number will show their concern and it WILL make a difference.
'I still agree that this site could be put to much better use without the Church there and rejoice is in order."
Excuse me, another gaping hole in the urban fabric, a parking lot, is something to rejoice?
As for the Strand and the Peninsula, at least they are ELIMINATING a surface lot and bring density. The design of the Strand could have been better, but it's premature to pass judgement on a buildingthat isn't even close to finished (Peninsula).
As a whole KBJ work has run the gamut, much it of good or at least better than average. Jax's skylin eis way about average IMO, and they deserve credit for that. However, this action is simply inexcuseable and totally unjustified.
didn't kbj buy the building 26 years ago?
"IMO KBJ done what's good for the city vastly overshadows a run-down church being demolished"
was it "run-down" then. so if I want a piece of land, and I don't like what's on it, all i have to do is let it rot into the ground until people don't care if it's demolished?
This builiding held little appeal to me, but "architects" who are supposed to know something about land use, cityscapes and vibrancy, should be ASHAMED for planning a parking lot in the urban core.
Put a 4-5 story, residential building with commercial space (office or retail) on the ground floor -- but please let a REAL architecture firm design it!!!
If KBJ owned the building for 26 years as stated above, I am sure someone occupied it during that tenure. So where was the interest from the public to use the building? If sitting empty, must we wait for the roof to fall in, windows to be smashed out, before someone decides to use it, and by then the cost to re-use is astronomical compared to destroying it?
Buildings were not designed and constructed to sit empty. If you want to save a building, find someone to use it, otherwise go and hug a tree and save it.
While I am not a fan of purchasing a building, letting it sit there for 30 years then demolishing it, I think a huge point is being overshadowed here.... has everyone forgotten that this building was deemed historic by the Historic Commission... then overruled by the City Council..??.. Why is the Historic commission even in place if our leader are not going to listen to the group? Whether the site is better served with or without the church on it is a moot point IMO, if our governement isn't even going to listen to itself.
Just my thoughts.
I think the scariest issue is not that the city ignored the Historic Commission, but that they would allow the demolition for another surface parking lot.
Has anyone seen any plans for this parking lot?
I am sure they will plant some nice trees, but I think this is another indication that the City Council only cares about the suburbs.
For the years and years this has been allowed to go on, downtown looks more and more like a Southside office park...
I AM NOT AGAINST pocket parks, but it's odd where they are being built. The one on Main Street is crazy. IT WILL BE THE NEW OUTDOOR HOMELESS SHELTER.
Maybe city hall knew that the homeless would possible abandon Hemming Plaza if they gave them a new place to hang out.
As every hour, day, week, year pass Jacksonville becomes more and more desolate.
As in the next article, the city, state, federal government, and a local (developer?, absentee landlord), own a tremendous amount of downtown property and land.
They are having a negative impact on downtown.
I feel there is still hope but changes have to be made.
And because Jacksonville is a suburban minded city it's going be even more difficult.
Even one of our more urban thinking council persons made a comment a while back referring to the JEA site and how they didn't want buildings that would not be in scale with the surrounding neighborhoods. This is the kind of thinking that needs to change, especially since the JEA site is part of the Southside skyline.
Again as negative as this post sounds I really believe downtown will become a vibrant neighborhood, but it would help if the people with the power and the properties would wake up.
QuoteUse it or lose it
Written by cinch2win, Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 3:40:58 am EDT
If KBJ owned the building for 26 years as stated above, I am sure someone occupied it during that tenure. So where was the interest from the public to use the building? If sitting empty, must we wait for the roof to fall in, windows to be smashed out, before someone decides to use it, and by then the cost to re-use is astronomical compared to destroying it?
Unfortunately, if a neglectful landlord (KBJ) refuses to lease out their property or maintain it and the city refuses to make sure the building is being properly maintained, there's not much an outsider can do.
QuoteBuildings were not designed and constructed to sit empty. If you want to save a building, find someone to use it, otherwise go and hug a tree and save it.
If KBJ would have seriously considered selling it, then I'm pretty sure it would be already renovated and standing today. Since KBJ never had any plans of getting rid of that piece of property, everything else mentioned is hot air.
Lake - If the property has sat there owned by the same tenant for 26 years, surely someone could have done more with it than what the outcome provided? Surely!
If someone had offered more for the land, something more could have been done, but with so many open lots, why spend the money to rehab it or build on it? Its economics 101. No one stepped forward to use the property for more than a parking lot.
QuoteWritten by cinch2win, Friday, June 15, 2007 at 12:48:26 am EDT
Lake - If the property has sat there owned by the same tenant for 26 years, surely someone could have done more with it than what the outcome provided? Surely!
The easiest comparison would be to look at many of the properties the city owns in the core. There's been several cases of the private sector wanting to lease or purchase underutilized city owned property, only to be turned away.
KBJ used the building for storage for a number of those years. There's never been (at least in recent years) a "for sale" sign placed on that building and KBJ never gave any intentions of wanting to sell the premier corner of a full city block in their ownership. Unfortunately, they never bothered to properly maintain it either and the city has done a poor job of code enforcement. Nevertheless, we wouldn't be having this debate today if the council had not over ruled the educated opinion of the historic commission. Which brings up another question....
Why have one if you're not going to listen to them anyway? Seems like a waste of public funds.
QuoteIf someone had offered more for the land, something more could have been done, but with so many open lots, why spend the money to rehab it or build on it? Its economics 101. No one stepped forward to use the property for more than a parking lot.
That's like saying if Len Bias hadn't overdosed, he'd be a hall of famer by now. If the owner has no intentions of selling a small piece of a large city block they own, then the game is over, as far as making offers. Unless, you're suggesting over paying (Hionides-style) a slumlord for his land.
Its not about stepping forward. This thing is about, demolition by neglect, the council overriding the historic commission to allow demolition and the potential approval of parking, which violates the downtown master plan. This has public ineptitude written all over it. :'(
Len Bias was a tragic story, I guess that is your point, but really, the 14 people who were displaced by a fire on the westside is a more tragic story, but since neither relate to this downtown matter, let's refocus.
The master plan and overlay are words and graphics on paper. Its the people who enforce them that should be held accountable either way. So throw out those who fail to follow the documents, or wait and run for office and make a difference. If Code Enforcement was told to back off of the building, then Derek Igou should be called to the mat. That is a difficult department and you are always going to tick someone off.
I thought that the Jax Historical Department in the city had Joel and 2 other planners, maybe with a secretary, are there more than that? That does not seem like a huge burden to the 1 billion dollar budget, but maybe we could limit Joel's pay raise next year. I think for the number of people, they do an outstanding job. This was a small issue, and perhaps there are more coming that deserve more attention. I can't speak for Joel.
We can agree to disagree, I know that if a building sits empty, it breeds bad things, decay, prostitution, drugs, so either use it or lose it. Had the old library been at this same site and the church at 122 Ocean, would it have made a difference? I doubt it, the library would have been torn down and someone would have seen the value of property at 122 Ocean, and thus saved it.
People do not build buildings to be monuments, they are built to be used and because they are used, people revere them as monuments.
QuoteLen Bias was a tragic story, I guess that is your point, but really, the 14 people who were displaced by a fire on the westside is a more tragic story, but since neither relate to this downtown matter, let's refocus.
They all relate in that they are tragic stories.
QuoteThe master plan and overlay are words and graphics on paper. Its the people who enforce them that should be held accountable either way.
Agreed. If we really want to see downtown develop successfully, the master plan needs to become more than words and graphics on paper. It needs to become an official part of zoning. If not, the city needs to stop wasting it's time and money putting together such things.
QuoteSo throw out those who fail to follow the documents, or wait and run for office and make a difference.
..or continue to expose the problems to gather more support for change, in the meantime.
QuoteIf Code Enforcement was told to back off of the building, then Derek Igou should be called to the mat. That is a difficult department and you are always going to tick someone off.
I thought that the Jax Historical Department in the city had Joel and 2 other planners, maybe with a secretary, are there more than that? That does not seem like a huge burden to the 1 billion dollar budget, but maybe we could limit Joel's pay raise next year. I think for the number of people, they do an outstanding job.
If we fail to listen to them, the work they do is useless, regardless of how good they are. Btw, I believe this city needs them, but their work needs to be respected and right now its not.
QuoteThis was a small issue, and perhaps there are more coming that deserve more attention. I can't speak for Joel.
Unfortunately, most buildings destroyed in downtown were small issues. In the suburbs that may not matter, but in an urban environment, continuous building fabric is a major element of urban pedestrian friendly vibrancy, while parking lots are the anti-christ. At this point, you might as well take out the Porter house too or plop it off of JTB. Its significance has declined over the decades, considering the block of urban fabric around it has been reduced to asphalt.
QuoteWe can agree to disagree, I know that if a building sits empty, it breeds bad things, decay, prostitution, drugs, so either use it or lose it.
No doubt, but you're overlooking the fact that the owner/city both let it decay by neglect for two decades. If we had a true understanding of what revitalizing a downtown core really means, it would have never gotten that far. Until we grasp the importance of having building fabric (instead of parking lots), our downtown revitalization efforts will never achieve what we want and spend money visiting other cities to see.
QuoteHad the old library been at this same site and the church at 122 Ocean, would it have made a difference? I doubt it, the library would have been torn down and someone would have seen the value of property at 122 Ocean, and thus saved it.
This is not so much about historic preservation or the building's importance as it is introducing blight into an urban area. Yes, vacant buildings are a better use in the downtown core than surface parking lots. At least they contribute to the architectural diversity and scenery of the core. They also are easier for mom & pops to set up shop than building from scratch.
25 Urban Districts: What Do They Have In Common?: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/358/83/
QuotePeople do not build buildings to be monuments, they are built to be used and because they are used, people revere them as monuments.
Nobody ever claimed the building was a monument. The problem is, how we got to this point and the negative impact that what's replacing it on the core.
Update:
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/kbj_demolition/DSC_0011.JPG)
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/kbj_demolition/DSC_0012.JPG)
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/kbj_demolition/DSC_0014.JPG)
It will be interesting to see what becomes of this land.
As a former KBJ employee, now living and working in New Orleans, I would like to say that it is a shame that the building was demoilished. However, they have owned the building for as long as they have owned the main house. It was used as storage, a model making shop, and for a little while, the main floor was used as a basketball court. There was talk while I was there of potentially renovating it and leasing it, but the costs to do so was unbelievable. When the buildings were bought, the neighborhood was terrible. Female workers had to be escored to their cars if they worked until dark. Several employees were mugged. So the fact that an old, established firm of that nature moved into a neighborhood like that, seems to me they did a fair amount to make the area appealing for people to come in there to work, etc.
As for them making Jacksonville ugly...give me a break. Do you know how many people outside of Jacksonville think that the city has a beautiful skyline. Yes, some of the buildings are old and outdated, but they were built in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. If you are saying old and ugly buildings should be torn down, then you are contradicting yourself. When the buildings were designed and built, they were cutting edge. Get over it. Several of those buildings have won awards from the AIA (American Insitute of Architects), so someone must think they aren't so bad.
As for historical buildings, Jacksonville does need to work on that. However, there is a point that is overboard, like New Orleans. Everyone here thinks buildings should look like they were built in the 1800's. People forget that when these buildings were built, they were cutting edge. There is a fine line between living in the past (like New Orleans) and trying to become a cutting edge city and respect it's past (like Jacksonville).
These are my humble opinions. Thanks.
QuoteAs for them making Jacksonville ugly...give me a break. Do you know how many people outside of Jacksonville think that the city has a beautiful skyline. Yes, some of the buildings are old and outdated, but they were built in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. If you are saying old and ugly buildings should be torn down, then you are contradicting yourself. When the buildings were designed and built, they were cutting edge. Get over it. Several of those buildings have won awards from the AIA (American Insitute of Architects), so someone must think they aren't so bad.
Regarding architectural styles and AIA awards, designs come a dime a dozen and you'll always have people who view them differently. However, what's twenty times more important to the success of the urban core is how these structures meet the street and integrate with and improve their surroundings. From an urban planning standpoint, many of those structures, such as MODIS, leave a lot to be desired. Anyway, that's a completely different subject that can feed it's own large thread.
I agree that the skyline is very attractive, yet it's also quite decieving once you get down there at street level and discover a different picture. Nevertheless, the real negative here is the elimination of urban building fabric for a dirt lot in the heart of what is supposed to be pedestrian district.
Dispite the Porter House being on that block, it's a visual blight on the downtown core, due to the nasty conditions of the KBJ owned parking lot, to the west and now a dirt lot, to the south. The north is not much to cry about either, but at least Ashley Towers keeps their surface lot decently landscaped. I may be asking too much, but is it wrong to expect an architectural firm to at least properly maintain the grounds of it's home office?
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/kbj_demolition/DSC_0014.JPG)
That building in the background is what needs to be leveled. It's hideous. At least the church had some architectural interest.
Four thousand and twenty to go.....keep up the good work boys!
Another ingenious move of our city... and regarding the comment of the Ambassador... I would not be surprised if it sees the wrecking ball. I am beginning to feel the same way about Annie Lytle.. A Buyer buys them (Annie and this Church) Boards them up (or not) they sit for decades , and Historic Status or not , they come down ..
IMO Buildings ARE monuments. they are the end product of their Architecture and Designer.. It is obvious that everything has a beginning and an end.. But what are we going to end up with in Jacksonville? Glass and Concrete Towers , a few older homes , and the rest vacant land?? This is beyond absurd, beyond ridiculous. We tear this Church down, yet the HIDEOUS PIECE OF CRAP Parkview Hotel is still standing , in spite of the fact that its gutted, it has evidence of an extensive fire , there are far more dangers lurking in that piece of junk than there ever was in this Church.
Guess he who has the gold makes the rules. What the rest of us think really never mattered. Nice going , KBJ . douchebags!
I was driving by the KBJ abomination that is our new courthouse on the way to Dos Gatos with my architect friend this evening and we discussed this very subject. What the eff?
What I have never found out is just how we are paying for our "New Courthouse"? John Boy did not hesitate to crank up for it, but nothing has been said about how we are to pay for it? Maybe johnny is going to charge a Fee for cases tried there which would be about right for hiz honor! I did not ask for it and with the budget stretched beyond imagination neither he nor the Council are doing their jobs! Having City Departments tabbed with oversight on Historical structures does no good if that department is not listened too! Just one more example of the waste that takes place throughout!
Quote from: JerryH on July 10, 2007, 10:33:39 AM
As a former KBJ employee, now living and working in New Orleans, I would like to say that it is a shame that the building was demoilished. However, they have owned the building for as long as they have owned the main house. It was used as storage, a model making shop, and for a little while, the main floor was used as a basketball court. There was talk while I was there of potentially renovating it and leasing it, but the costs to do so was unbelievable. When the buildings were bought, the neighborhood was terrible. Female workers had to be escored to their cars if they worked until dark. Several employees were mugged. So the fact that an old, established firm of that nature moved into a neighborhood like that, seems to me they did a fair amount to make the area appealing for people to come in there to work, etc.
As for them making Jacksonville ugly...give me a break. Do you know how many people outside of Jacksonville think that the city has a beautiful skyline. Yes, some of the buildings are old and outdated, but they were built in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. If you are saying old and ugly buildings should be torn down, then you are contradicting yourself. When the buildings were designed and built, they were cutting edge. Get over it. Several of those buildings have won awards from the AIA (American Insitute of Architects), so someone must think they aren't so bad.
As for historical buildings, Jacksonville does need to work on that. However, there is a point that is overboard, like New Orleans. Everyone here thinks buildings should look like they were built in the 1800's. People forget that when these buildings were built, they were cutting edge. There is a fine line between living in the past (like New Orleans) and trying to become a cutting edge city and respect it's past (like Jacksonville).
These are my humble opinions. Thanks.
I am going to begin my reply with a quote from "Clueless." A '90s film classic...
Tai: Do you think she's pretty?
Cher: No, she's a full-on Monet.
Tai: What's a monet?
Cher: It's like a painting, see? From far away, it's OK, but up close, it's a big old mess.
Yes, from the highway, downtown Jacksonville has a pretty skyline. All of the nice, modern glass buildings sparkle in the sun like a glittery vampire. But, upon closer inspection, downtown doesn't look so great. Dilapadated buildings and abandoned lots dominate the landscape.
I acknowledge that KBJ did the socially responsible thing by having a downtown presence. They however, hurt downtown by adding yet another building to the long list of buildings that have been razed. And, for what, surface parking? I am not sure if demolishing the old church was the only solution to the parkng problem.
As for New Orleans, history is an integral part of its culture and its appeal. Are they stubborn? Yes, and they should be. Unlike us, they know that you can't build an 18th or 19th century building from scratch once it has been torn down. Cities like New Orleans, Savannah and Charleston know what side their bread is buttered on and they fight important fights to prevent their cultural fabric from being irreversably compromised.
I do not think that the bulk of the criticism is aimed at the 'award-winning' buildings that occupy downtown. I think that most of the metrojacksonville folks are more upset with historic buildings that are demolished for either parking lots or that are demolished with no concrete plans for something to replace them. Ooooh, another 'award-winning' vacant lot.
I do not that that any of us are against progress. We only object to what passes for 'progress' in Jacksonville.
^^ I couldn't agree more.
History simply isn't important to either the powerbrokers or the citizenry in Jacksonville. Until and unless that changes, the demolitions will continue.
I don't think you should be knocking down any architecture of the urban fabric unless you plan to put something great there great in its place. Now we just have an empty lot and a missing tooth!
Exactly... Its starting to look like BUBBA
...and smell like BUBBA, too! I like going downtown for various events (like ArtWalk), but I really dislike the smell of urine on various sidewalks around the area. I notice this if I have to park around Julia Street or other areas beyond the beaten path for visitors.
Quote from: TheProfessor on July 17, 2010, 01:01:32 PM
I don't think you should be knocking down any architecture of the urban fabric unless you plan to put something great there great in its place. Now we just have an empty lot and a missing tooth!
I don't think we should be knocking anything else that is older down, personally.. The Ambassador is a Prime Example... the member who had "inside" information stated (with no real good reasons for stating it) that the building is coming down. Knowing the mentality of this city, that post was probably on the mark, but should it? I saw nothing about the structure that made me think it to be a lost cause.
I personally am glad the St. James Building was spared but am I wrong? was it not in horrible condition when they started? I do not get our "City Building Inspectors" and their conclusion along with City Council that if its historic, or even old it just must go.. In no other major City have I seen this.. EVEN DETROIT'S Downtown probably has more refurbished historic buildings than ours.
Someone must have had a nightmare about KBJ last night or something. How "historic" was that church anyway? Oh, no one cares, I understand, say it's historic to make KBJ truly look like the "bad guys". I understand.
Would it really matter to you I-10 if it was 50 , 100 + ?
He who has the gold makes the rules. It was KBJ's Church ...their option to take it down, and there will probably be many to follow. Rejoice! I guess those in favor of demolishing everything old far far outweigh those who do not.
Guarantee you though, If First Baptist Church owned it, it would be a cold day in hell it came down.
I take issue less with the historical aspect of the church than I take issue with the repeated demolition of downtown buildings to the point where there is little left standing. As I said in a previous posting, the decision to tear down a building cannot be reversed. We should be taking these choices more seriously. Downtown already is a wasteland and it's getting worse with every new demolition...
Quote from: Timkin on July 17, 2010, 09:31:50 PM
Guarantee you though, If First Baptist Church owned it, it would be a cold day in hell it came down.
How true!!!
Wasn't the church about to fall in on itself? I'm all for a dense DT, but I don't see any benefit of saving a building with no historic value that's about to fall in on itself. I agree with Timkin on the church would still be here if FBC owned it; I cannot see people of the cloth tearing down a church, although they would've had to spend lots of $ to fix it.
Was the church about to fall down? It's too late to know for sure now...
No it was not falling in on itself or even close. KBJ latched on to it with the intent of demolishing it.. the same as has been going on for close to the last decade with School 4 except School 4 is in a hell of alot worse shape.. If it were not for public outcry , it probably would be gone already. Id bet anything KBJ bought this fully intending to demo it and would have sooner, had there not been intervention. If they owned it for the last 25 years and wanted it to sit empty and rot down (winning demolition by neglect, much as Annie Lytle has) they can, as the owner, do so. To me the ONLY thing that has saved the School is that it was officially named a historic landmark and if myself and so many others had not raised so much hell about the demolition, my bet is , City Council probably would have pushed it through. More of the same CRAP that has gone on for at least 4 decades in Jax...whether its stable or not , if its old , it MUST GO. FEW exceptions!