Disappearing Brooklyn: The Riverside Atlantic Bank
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/4537133916_6BcfPs9-L.jpg)
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-nov-disappearing-brooklyn-the-riverside-atlantic-bank
I never would have guessed at the original appearance of that building. I suspect the interior was changed as much. It is also interesting to see the old vault still standing. Probably a bit more than the excavator can handle.
Get your pictures of Park Street while you still can...
I have a good collection from MJ articles over the past decade. Should make for an interesting Ghost of Park Street article at some point in the near future.
Is there a Ghost of Riverside from when the DOT leveled everything in its path in the effort to make it 6 lanes from downtown to Forest Street?
Yeah, the same area all the hypocrites who live at Unity Plaza, shop a the Fresh Market and dine at BurgerFi... They should know what was torn down for them and their new heralded space.
Quote from: mtraininjax on November 25, 2015, 09:48:26 AM
Is there a Ghost of Riverside from when the DOT leveled everything in its path in the effort to make it 6 lanes from downtown to Forest Street?
Yeah, the same area all the hypocrites who live at Unity Plaza, shop a the Fresh Market and dine at BurgerFi... They should know what was torn down for them and their new heralded space.
looking in the archive I found this, however the article appears to be gone?
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2006-sep-disappearing-brooklyn-saving-what
Here's the 2006 article. I have no idea of why it isn't showing up.
Quote(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/disappearing-brooklyn.jpg)
Brooklyn was platted in 1865 by Miles Price, a Confederate veteran, who named a couple of the streets after famous Southern generals "Stonewall" and "Jackson". By the time it was annexed into Jacksonville, it boasted over 1,000 residents. After decades of neglect, two mega infill projects were recently announced potentially giving the community a new identity, with 1,750 additional housing units. While this will be a boon for the community, Metro Jacksonville urges the Mayor and the JEDC to save and incorporate Brooklyn's few remaining historic structures into those plans, preserving a link to the community's past.
Brooklyn Photo Tour
Brooklyn housing
Years ago, Brooklyn was a vibrant inner city community with a diverse collection of housing. Although in very poor shape, this house on Spruce Streets still stands.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/spruce-street-house.jpg)
Elm Street Shotgun Houses
During Brooklyn's heyday, shotgun housing was the norm. Although over the years this form of housing in the neighborhood has died out, this row of homes on Elm Street still remains.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/Shotguns-elmstreet.jpg)
Magnolia Homes
Most of the homes, east of Park have already been demolished. However, this one block of Magnolia gives us a glimpse of what Brooklyn once looked like.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/MagnoliaHomes.jpg)
Brooklyn Mixed-Use Development sites
Brooklyn Park (Miles Development) and Hallmark Partners projects will inject new infill mixed-use development into Brooklyn. Once constructed, these projects will take up nearly ½ of the area today known as Brooklyn.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/development-site.jpg)
Skyway Maintenance Yard
As a part of the Miles and Hallmark infill development projects, JTA plans to construct an elevated skyway station at this site. Once complete, this will give Brooklyn residents the option of traveling to the North and Southbanks without the use of automobiles or buses.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/skyway.jpg)
Riverside Partners</strong
The 13 story Riverside Partners office building is the latest addition to Brooklyn. Directly next to it is Fire Station #5, which was constructed in 1910 and is the last remaining historic structure on this Riverside Avenue stretch. Unfortunately, the JEDC wants to demolish or remove the building. If the old fire station, which is still in good shape, isn't worth saving then what is?
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/RiversidePartners-Firestati.jpg)
Park Street Commercial corridor
Park Street is littered with a collection of older warehouses, many of which catered to the textile industry. As the neighborhood is revitalized into a vibrant community, hopefully city leaders will see the potential in saving a few of the older structures, such as this brick building, on the corner of Park and Jackson Streets.
(http://"http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/Park-brickwarehouse.jpg)
ALSCO
This attractive brick warehouse/manufacturing facility is home to a textile company called ALSCO. As the neighborhood reinvents itself, city planners should do everything in their power to save unique structures like this because they provide a direct connection with the community's past.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/Alsco.jpg)
The Dance Warehouse
The Dance Warehouse is housed in a small, attractive brick commercial building that was originally constructed in 1927. The location and interesting brick detailing is ideal for potential retail or dining overlooking the planned Brooklyn Central Park. Unfortunately, the city plans to demolish the structure for green space.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/Dance-Warehouse.jpg)
Intersection of Jackson & Chelsea Streets
This old small store is located a block west of Park on Jackson Street.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/jackson-chelsea.jpg)
643 Edison
For those who don't see the value in saving the few older brick buildings this city has, 643 Edison is a good example of what these structures can resemble, once fully renovated.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/643-Edison.jpg)
Myrtle Avenue
This street connects Brooklyn with Durkeeville. This picture was taken just north of the McCoy's Creek bridge.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/mrytle-avenue.jpg)
Annie Lytle (Public School No. 4)
You can't mention Brooklyn and preservation without bringing up the endangered Annie Lytle school. Constructed in 1917, a developer and the JEDC are currently pushing for its demolition in order to construct a retirement home on the site. If anyone has any ideas towards saving it or believes in preserving it, let your opinions be made known to Councilmen Shad (AShad@coj.net, (904) 630-1382) and Corrigan (Corrigan@coj.net, (904) 630-1390).
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/AnnieLytle.jpg)
Riverside Avenue (Before & After)
Once a 5 lane road lined with commercial buildings, Riverside Avenue now boasts 6 lanes of traffic, bicycle paths, wide medians and wide sidewalks. While the improvements were needed, the planning did a disservice to the community by turning the road into a suburban highway, instead of an urban parkway.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/Riverside-Avenue.jpg)
Btw, this building has also been torn down recently.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brooklyn/jackson-chelsea.jpg)
Dating back to 1930, it was the last commercial storefront on the west side of Brooklyn that was not located on Park Street. It originally housed a neighborhood market owned by Syrian immigrants Assof and Mary Naaseef. Here's the site as of this past Saturday:
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Neighborhoods/Urban-Core-Demolitions/i-vBsBbRS/0/X2/DSCF7661-S.jpg)
I probably fall in the camp of happy with an extensive remake of Brooklyn (Park street in particular)with a few of the old buildings remodeled for contrast.
When the River City Renaissance initiative was in development under then Mayor Ed Austin, there was funding included for Brooklyn to be leveled just as there was for LaVilla. Eventually the Brooklyn funding got cut and only LaVilla got leveled. Now it is happening anyway.
LaVilla has been laid bare for decades now. While Riverside Ave. through Brooklyn has seen new construction, I have to wonder if the rest of Brooklyn will ever be filled in again.
^Apparently so, if private companies are buying up the land.
Is "Da Tunnel" still around?
It seems to me that people on this site want development, but they only want it their way. What was going on in Brooklyn before the latest devleopment? Not much. I agree it would be nice if some of the older buildings (such as the Fire Station) could be implemented in the rebranding and revitalization of the neighborhood, but from a development standpoint, when a building has ben left to rot for years, there's either the reality that nothing can be done to salvage or that it would be an absurd investment to do so based on the cost to refurbish building corpses.
LaVilla was leveled, and I think we can all agree that demolition without any outcome other than parking surfaces is just a damn shame. What's worse for Brooklyn (and Jacksonville in general): Empty storefronts and cheap land or new storefronts and high demand for dirt in the area?
I can understand the reservation felt towards rebuilding areas based on how mismanaged attempts in this city have been in the past. However, not all development is inherently bad.
I can't speak for anyone else, but my only issues with Brooklyn are (1) that the city isn't getting the developers to stick to urban design, a la the Brooklyn Station stripmall, and (2)that now that the already-razed land has been developed, development is now taking out perfectly usable buildings instead of moving over to the various other vacant spaces nearby.
Yes, Park Street is just a bunch of warehouses, but most of them are still in use, and the street could be turned into something really cool without much work. Demolishing them means taking a step back to take 2 steps forward, rather than, say, 2 steps forward in an already empty block. But yes, if they have to come down it's much better that a development replaces them than nothing. I just hope the city makes sure it's not another strip mall.
QuoteEmpty storefronts and cheap land or new storefronts and high demand for dirt in the area?
People too often associate 'empty' with unuseable or unsalvageable. Many vacant buildings simply need cosmetics and minor structural repairs. It is far easier to achieve organic growth with such structures than expecting new start ups to have the funds to build new from the ground up, which will never be inexpensive.
Building a new multi-block area from the ground up in an urban area is not typical of most cities. Incremental revitalization of mostly existing structures, such that occurred in Five Points/Riverside, is pretty common. Maybe Brooklyn will fit the mold of the latter and not the former, but I am skeptical.
E_Dubya, adding a Walmart, a TA Travel Center or a paper mill with lots of parking are all forms of development. Judging from the public interest in the Shipyards, it seems like most do want a certain type of development as opposed to any type of development. If that were not the case, that site would be a property tax generating warehouse complex right now.
I think most people want development that leads to a vibrant pedestrian friendly environment in and around downtown. Not development for the sake of development or demolition (without quality replacement) that leads to what much of the Northbank resembles today.
I can understand those frustrations, and I know there is a major distate for surface parking lots in most capacities in urban areas. However, until our public transit improves (and extends to areas of demand such as Riverside, Brooklyn, San Marco, etc.) the demand for such parking surfaces will continue to exist. So, in order for developers to get the bang for their buck, it's a necessary evil. I'm hopeful that as Brooklyn continues to develop, with the likes of Unity Plaza and what seems to be more residental development in the future, the "strip mall" appearance of Brooklyn won't be the feature that stands out.
As to the second issue you mentioned, putting on the shoes of a developer, I would prefer to purchase and raze land that is closer to other development, rather than leave spaces and hope that someone else comes along and works the facade of older buildings into what is coming. From a dollar standpoint, having new development next to older/dilapidated structures next to new developments devalues property as well as kills the aesthetic draw for incoming business.
Had Brooklyn been managed better for the decades leading up to where we are now, I think the restoration of more structures in that neighborhood would have been much more plausible. I would have much prefered Brooklyn's callsic structures have been salvaged/preserved much like older buildings in 5 points and on King Street have been. However, I have to return to the point that development of Brooklyn into a commercial and residential hub with light manufacturing and other warehouses (it gives a working city vibe in the end) is better than just a string of warehouses between Riverside and Downtown.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 25, 2015, 02:17:21 PM
E_Dubya, adding a Walmart, a TA Travel Center or a paper mill with lots of parking are all forms of development. Judging from the public interest in the Shipyards, it seems like most do want a certain type of development as opposed to any type of development. If that were not the case, that site would be a property tax generating warehouse complex right now.
I think most people want development that leads to a vibrant pedestrian friendly environment in and around downtown. Not development for the sake of development or demolition (without quality replacement) that leads to what much of the Northbank resembles today.
I would hardly compare the Brooklyn development to a Walmart or TA Travel Center. And I hope it does not come across as though I'm advocating development for the sake of development. Obviously, developing land should aid in and at times focus on enriching the area to its full potential to further the city- especially when said development is taking place so close to a downtown that desperately needs draw.
Furthermore, I'm hopeful that Brooklyn (not just the frontage on Riverside Ave) can be made pedestrian friendly. I think much of that comes down to what is done on Park St. and West. You have two lanes with loads of usable store front that lends itself to a walking district, much like 5 points. The placement of Brooklyn Station lends itself to the realization of that type of revitalization in the neighborhood as a whole.
Quote from: E_Dubya on November 25, 2015, 02:20:05 PM
I can understand those frustrations, and I know there is a major distate for surface parking lots in most capacities in urban areas. However, until our public transit improves (and extends to areas of demand such as Riverside, Brooklyn, San Marco, etc.) the demand for such parking surfaces will continue to exist. So, in order for developers to get the bang for their buck, it's a necessary evil. I'm hopeful that as Brooklyn continues to develop, with the likes of Unity Plaza and what seems to be more residental development in the future, the "strip mall" appearance of Brooklyn won't be the feature that stands out.
To me, this is a cop out because enough information is out there to know that we can do better. Even without any public transit
(downtown does have ample bus service and the skyway....a lot more than many MSAs Jax's size) there are ways to deal with parking. Downtown's conditions today aren't a result of parking demand.
QuoteAs to the second issue you mentioned, putting on the shoes of a developer, I would prefer to purchase and raze land that is closer to other development, rather than leave spaces and hope that someone else comes along and works the facade of older buildings into what is coming. From a dollar standpoint, having new development next to older/dilapidated structures next to new developments devalues property as well as kills the aesthetic draw for incoming business.
The image below is the reality of purchasing and razing land, only to never follow through with planned intentions...
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/520609538_krygK-L.jpg)
This is the unsuccessful model that has been implemented in downtown Jacksonville for decades. It doesn't work......if the end goal is pedestrian scale vibrancy.
Quote from: E_Dubya on November 25, 2015, 02:25:38 PM
I would hardly compare the Brooklyn development to a Walmart or TA Travel Center. And I hope it does not come across as though I'm advocating development for the sake of development. Obviously, developing land should aid in and at times focus on enriching the area to its full potential to further the city- especially when said development is taking place so close to a downtown that desperately needs draw.
Furthermore, I'm hopeful that Brooklyn (not just the frontage on Riverside Ave) can be made pedestrian friendly. I think much of that comes down to what is done on Park St. and West. You have two lanes with loads of usable store front that lends itself to a walking district, much like 5 points. The placement of Brooklyn Station lends itself to the realization of that type of revitalization in the neighborhood as a whole.
I wasn't commenting on any particular development in Brooklyn with my earlier comments. Just hoping we avoid the path that got us to where we're at today.
Man, looking at the before and after photos, they sure did "Floridafy" Riverside Ave. They actually managed to make it look like a suburban thoroughfare. I didn't realize it actually looked like an urban street just 10 years ago.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 25, 2015, 02:37:10 PM
Quote from: E_Dubya on November 25, 2015, 02:20:05 PM
I can understand those frustrations, and I know there is a major distate for surface parking lots in most capacities in urban areas. However, until our public transit improves (and extends to areas of demand such as Riverside, Brooklyn, San Marco, etc.) the demand for such parking surfaces will continue to exist. So, in order for developers to get the bang for their buck, it's a necessary evil. I'm hopeful that as Brooklyn continues to develop, with the likes of Unity Plaza and what seems to be more residental development in the future, the "strip mall" appearance of Brooklyn won't be the feature that stands out.
To me, this is a cop out because enough information is out there to know that we can do better. Even without any public transit (downtown does have ample bus service and the skyway....a lot more than many MSAs Jax's size) there are ways to deal with parking. Downtown's conditions today aren't a result of parking demand.
QuoteAs to the second issue you mentioned, putting on the shoes of a developer, I would prefer to purchase and raze land that is closer to other development, rather than leave spaces and hope that someone else comes along and works the facade of older buildings into what is coming. From a dollar standpoint, having new development next to older/dilapidated structures next to new developments devalues property as well as kills the aesthetic draw for incoming business.
The image below is the reality of purchasing and razing land, only to never follow through with planned intentions...
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/520609538_krygK-L.jpg)
This is the unsuccessful model that has been implemented in downtown Jacksonville for decades. It doesn't work......if the end goal is pedestrian scale vibrancy.
So when past developers haven't followed through on planned intentions, development that involves any kind of structural remova in generall is destined to fail? I think that is a potential outcome of development when the developer fails. I feel like there may be a misunderstanding between us, though. I'm not advocating for the demolition of structures and leaving broken concrete in the wake of a bunch of out of town developers. I also don't think that failed development in the past should make us shy of any development whatsoever. For example, I think the potential development of East San Marco at the corner of Hendricks and Atlantic would do wonders. It would do much better than how the land is being used now (sitting vacant, weed ridden, and fenced in).
As to your other response, I agree to a certain extent. Trust me, I ride the skyway often. I work downtown, and anytime I go to the south bank to grab a bite for lunch, I take it across the river. I'm not sure I follow you with the rest of this point though. Are you wrapping Brooklyn into part of DT?
Quote from: thelakelander on November 25, 2015, 02:39:49 PM
Quote from: E_Dubya on November 25, 2015, 02:25:38 PM
I would hardly compare the Brooklyn development to a Walmart or TA Travel Center. And I hope it does not come across as though I'm advocating development for the sake of development. Obviously, developing land should aid in and at times focus on enriching the area to its full potential to further the city- especially when said development is taking place so close to a downtown that desperately needs draw.
Furthermore, I'm hopeful that Brooklyn (not just the frontage on Riverside Ave) can be made pedestrian friendly. I think much of that comes down to what is done on Park St. and West. You have two lanes with loads of usable store front that lends itself to a walking district, much like 5 points. The placement of Brooklyn Station lends itself to the realization of that type of revitalization in the neighborhood as a whole.
I wasn't commenting on any particular development in Brooklyn with my earlier comments. Just hoping we avoid the path that got us to where we're at today.
My mistake. I was reading further into your comments than you intended. I think, at the end of the day, we're on the same page with how we
want devleopment in the area to turn out. I may just be a bit more liberal in my acceptance- could be due to my youth and the fact that the major development gaffes in our history occurred when I was quite a bit younger.
Quote from: E_Dubya on November 25, 2015, 02:47:41 PM
So when past developers haven't followed through on planned intentions, development that involves any kind of structural remova in generall is destined to fail? I think that is a potential outcome of development when the developer fails.
In general, the most successful urban revitalization pattern in this country is in the form of small scale reuse of existing building fabric, leading to a market where large scale private development becomes feasible. Relying on major projects where complete tear down and rebuild is necessary is the most risky. Things happen, economies change, financing doesn't always come through. You also lose your unique historical heritage and identity this way. Also, have our demolitions in the core don't happen for redevelopment purposes. So I don't relate demolitions with development.
QuoteFor example, I think the potential development of East San Marco at the corner of Hendricks and Atlantic would do wonders. It would do much better than how the land is being used now (sitting vacant, weed ridden, and fenced in).
This particular block looks the way it does because existing occupied retail stores and a bank building were cleared for East San Marco almost 8 years ago. The economy changed and the project fell a part. Hopefully, they'll get something together soon.
QuoteAs to your other response, I agree to a certain extent. Trust me, I ride the skyway often. I work downtown, and anytime I go to the south bank to grab a bite for lunch, I take it across the river. I'm not sure I follow you with the rest of this point though. Are you wrapping Brooklyn into part of DT?
Yes, I wrap Brooklyn into it too. Jacksonville once was a 30 square mile walkable city, in the same fashion that many older Midwestern and Northern cities are today. We've destroyed most of the original city over the last 60 years in the name of "redevelopment", thinking old, dense and vacant wasn't cool. I believe our urban core can be vibrant again. However, to meet the potential we'll need to change our past tendencies.
I always thought that Brooklyn was developed. It had homes, churches, businesses. You're right, it was dense and old and not cool.
A lot of businesses are still there and doing well but it sounds as if they are going to be redeveloped too.
Anyway, thanks for the article, and thanks also to the Jacksonville Historical Society for their efforts.
Brooklyn in Jax, has been a commercial area. Not really residential, sure there are some shacks and some houses located North of Park Street, along Myrtle, but the area around Forest and I95 and areas around those are Ash sites, places you don't want to disturb the land, lots of nasty things in the soil. Its been a blue collar area of town, and not much wealth. You can use your imagination and take the homes you see there now, and place them in LaVilla and get an idea of what that neighborhood used to look like, before Mayor Austin took a flamethrowner to the neighborhood.
As far as most of the warehouses in use along Park Street, I know of Alsco and Britton's as the two most active. Both on the north side of Park. The warehouses and old DCF building on the south side of the street, more or less could come down, sure would be nice to incorportate a cool design with them, but these are not storefronts like you see in 5-points. In fact, Sherwin Williams has been trying to sell their Park Street store for a while now, used mostly by commercial vendors.
It will be interesting to see when the drug-rehab clinic of River Region is moved out of the area and where. Its neat to see drug addicts in the area, rubbing elbows with the swanky crowds of Unity Plaza, but as "progress" moves to RR, you wonder how long they last on that corner. Maybe downtown may be getting a new client?
I really hope they revised the plans for the new hotel and we aren't clearing acres of buildings for a gigantic parking lot as shown in the renderings. The Brooklyn developments so far have been kind of a hybrid of suburban/urban style development. A giant street facing surface lot with hotel would be planting the suburban model into what should be a more urban neighborhood. I too thought the art deco style of some of the warehouses was kind of cool, but if they are replacing with denser development I will not shed too many tears, though still sad. If they are replacing with parking lots and a single hotel it will be raining tears of frustration.