Metro Jacksonville

Courthouse Design Approved

QuoteOne person who isn’t pleased with the way the Courthouse is designed is architect, City Council member and ex-officio DDRB member Bill Bishop. He attended the meeting even though, he said, “I realize I’m not a voting member.”

Bishop pointed out his comments were directed to the City, not the designers. He then said, “I believe we should go up, not out. This design uses too much land that could be sold to other developers.”

Bishop also said he thinks the end product will be “more of the same gray, fake classical stuff that’s already all over Downtown,” and added, “Considering the advances in Courthouse design I don’t think we have to settle for a cartoon version of classic design. This building would have been considered high-tech in 1935.”

Dave Schneider, the City’s project manager for the County Courthouse project, pointed out the appearance of the building as presented Thursday was approved in 2007 by the Courthouse Architectural Review Committee.

“I think when it’s a private sector project we shouldn’t have the authority to question the design but this is a public project,” said Bishop. “We’re building a monument that will be a prominent feature of Downtown for decades to come. I think we have an obligation to rise to a higher standard.”

After about an hour of discussion, the board voted to grant conceptual approval for the project.

A new bar at 119 E. Forsyth Street

QuoteAppollo Hospitality, LLC received a Waiver of Minimum Distance Requirements for a Liquor License Location at 119 E. Forsyth St. The as yet unnamed lounge is located across the street from the Florida Theatre

New Baptist Medical Office Building

QuoteConceptual approval was granted for a four-story, 80,000 square-foot office building that will house doctors offices and clinical facilities. Located on part of an existing parking lot between Prudential Drive and Palm Avenue, the development will also include a pedestrian skyway linking the building with Baptist Hospital.

full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=50893

Any renderings of the courthouse design?

Wow, the Baptist parking lot is finally being partially developed!!!  I wonder what the designs look like?!

I think its the same design as posted most recently.

The look of the courthouse hasn't changed.  I'll see if I can get a CD of the Baptist project and post here, next week.

For the Baptist building, at 20,000sf per floor that is not a substantial footprint (approx 175' x 120') but it will be nice to see something other than pavement on that huge lot.

Should I feel bad that I was only excited about the news of the bar?  ;D

Now for the $350M question  ::). When exactly will we see the courthouse break ground?  8)

December, I believe.

Build the D---! thing already.

I still think the courthouse design is stupid, but they are right about one thing: if the city ever does fill out around it, it will look pretty grand. Nice gathering place, for protests and what not... maybe some dictatorial speeches from the stairs... you know, the good old stuff!

Now if we can just get around the problem that filling out around such a building is extremely hard...

It will be a suburban eyesore and dead zone if they don't figure out how to include a courthouse square style plan for the wasted grounds immediately surrounding it.  For the life of me, I can't figure it out on why this important aspect continues to be ignored by our city.

At least the Councilman is voicing the ideas of many of us on this board... build up, not out!

This should have been completed long ago but it should continue to be delayed before building it as a campus.  The Federal courthouse gives us a great blueprint reduce the footprint.  It is like the city doesn't know about elevators and are afraid they will have to climb 12 flights of steps.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 11, 2008, 10:54:31 AM
It will be a suburban eyesore and dead zone if they don't figure out how to include a courthouse square style plan for the wasted grounds immediately surrounding it.  For the life of me, I can't figure it out on why this important aspect continues to be ignored by our city.

A suburban eyesore? A dead zone?!? :o ??? We all due respect, but doesn't that sound kind of ridiculous! I think that we just got to tell the city that the new courthouse needs a courthouse square style plan. The important aspects were ignored by the city because some of us might have not asked the city about what to do with the access land. I think the city knows what they're doing. No matter how they built that thing, it will not be an eyesore even if that courthouse design does look kind of suburban ::).

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink it.  With all due respect, it does not sound ridiculous and many have already told the city their concerns.  It's also silly to assume our leaders know what they are doing.  Our history has proven that this is a faulty assessment. 

Take a look at the flops over the years (in no particular order).

- A "suburban" community college campus that completely ignores its surroundings (just like the new courthouse plan).  Instead of having a campus laid out in a manner that opens up to the streets, bringing vibrant walkable life in that area, its considered no man's land between Downtown and Springfield.

- Being unable to make a decision on the convention center location - Another committee and study that failed.  Not being able to suggest a permanent location for the center leaves the transportation center plans and a few extra blocks in LaVilla in Limbo.

- Super Bowl failure - Many cities use the momentum and excitement of hosting something like the super bowl as a way to push community legacy projects forward.  In Salt Lake City and Houston, they took advantage of hosting big events to implement starter light rail lines.  Today, their communities have benefitted with billions of dollars in Transit Oriented Development.  In Detroit, they put up a state-of-the-art public square in the heart of downtown.  Now, despite losing over 1 million residents in the last 50 years, that area is as vibrant as it gets.  Now take a look at us.  All we ended up with was a few lighted bridges and poorly paved roads.  We blew a chance to get the skyway to the Sports District or get the Landing renovated and better integrated with downtown.

I could go on, but if you don't get the point after these examples, then you're not going to get it.  It can be argued that our current courthouse and police building on Bay Street are both eyesores with suburban designs that fail to stimulate as much business and life around them as they could, if more thought was given to how they interact with their surroundings.  We all should want the best for our community.  Accepting poor design and not trying to figure out how to get the most out of our public investment should be unacceptable.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 13, 2008, 08:25:37 AM
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink it.  With all due respect, it does not sound ridiculous and many have already told the city their concerns.  It's also silly to assume our leaders know what they are doing.  Our history has proven that this is a faulty assessment. 

Take a look at the flops over the years (in no particular order).

- A "suburban" community college campus that completely ignores its surroundings (just like the new courthouse plan).  Instead of having a campus laid out in a manner that opens up to the streets, bringing vibrant walkable life in that area, its considered no man's land between Downtown and Springfield.

- Being unable to make a decision on the convention center location - Another committee and study that failed.  Not being able to suggest a permanent location for the center leaves the transportation center plans and a few extra blocks in LaVilla in Limbo.

- Super Bowl failure - Many cities use the momentum and excitement of hosting something like the super bowl as a way to push community legacy projects forward.  In Salt Lake City and Houston, they took advantage of hosting big events to implement starter light rail lines.  Today, their communities have benefitted with billions of dollars in Transit Oriented Development.  In Detroit, they put up a state-of-the-art public square in the heart of downtown.  Now, despite losing over 1 million residents in the last 50 years, that area is as vibrant as it gets.  Now take a look at us.  All we ended up with was a few lighted bridges and poorly paved roads.  We blew a chance to get the skyway to the Sports District or get the Landing renovated and better integrated with downtown.

I could go on, but if you don't get the point after these examples, then you're not going to get it.  It can be argued that our current courthouse and police building on Bay Street are both eyesores with suburban designs that fail to stimulate as much business and life around them as they could, if more thought was given to how they interact with their surroundings.  We all should want the best for our community.  Accepting poor design and not trying to figure out how to get the most out of our public investment should be unacceptable.

Well, I could understand, I guess. I guess that the city could have done better. The way I see it, some of their ideas are sometimes not very good. Then there were some that ideas that can have great success in the long run. I mean, what do we expect from the new courthouse design in the first place? A Taj Mahal meets times square? After all, the courthouse parking garage still has all the vacant spots that are still waiting on retail shops and other businesses to show up. About the idea that we "blew are chance" at capitalizing on the success we have after the Super Bowl, despite the fact its a hard pill to swallow just by accepting that, it's understandable. The city leaders could've had better ideas. We all don't know any better. Perhaps that many of out city leaders may not come from big cities like Seattle or Houston or Los Angeles or Miami where the people have many great ideas on how to improve their urban surroundings. Maybe we could've use them to help us improve on our's. Maybe our leaders don't know how to figure out what to do about curtain urban issues like the homeless. And in some cases, that might be true. But I still believe they can do better than what they are doing. I think that they were more focused on getting safer streets in downtown first, then they can bring in more stuff. More entertainment, more of other things we see in places like Atlanta or Chicago or in other cities that may have a small 100,000 to 200,000 population. It may seem as though I'm defending the city leaders and their ideas. Well,...the truth of the matter is that I still believe in the city leaders and I do show humility toward our Mayor. It's just that they need to do a better job about our urban surroundings, let alone our entire city. Give them time. And other thing, I personally don't believe that the Police Memorial Building on Bay Street is an eyesore. But we do need to do something with the other places that need urban improvement for businesses to grow and flourish.

By the way, Lakelander. Have you ever thought of considering running for Mayor in the 2011 Mayor's election? :) Your thoughts and views on our downtown are all over the place on this site. Maybe you can help the city get to where it should be(just a suggestion, of course :D ;)).

Quote from: jeh1980 on October 14, 2008, 02:57:49 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 13, 2008, 08:25:37 AM
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink it.  With all due respect, it does not sound ridiculous and many have already told the city their concerns.  It's also silly to assume our leaders know what they are doing.  Our history has proven that this is a faulty assessment. 

Take a look at the flops over the years (in no particular order).

- A "suburban" community college campus that completely ignores its surroundings (just like the new courthouse plan).  Instead of having a campus laid out in a manner that opens up to the streets, bringing vibrant walkable life in that area, its considered no man's land between Downtown and Springfield.

- Being unable to make a decision on the convention center location - Another committee and study that failed.  Not being able to suggest a permanent location for the center leaves the transportation center plans and a few extra blocks in LaVilla in Limbo.

- Super Bowl failure - Many cities use the momentum and excitement of hosting something like the super bowl as a way to push community legacy projects forward.  In Salt Lake City and Houston, they took advantage of hosting big events to implement starter light rail lines.  Today, their communities have benefitted with billions of dollars in Transit Oriented Development.  In Detroit, they put up a state-of-the-art public square in the heart of downtown.  Now, despite losing over 1 million residents in the last 50 years, that area is as vibrant as it gets.  Now take a look at us.  All we ended up with was a few lighted bridges and poorly paved roads.  We blew a chance to get the skyway to the Sports District or get the Landing renovated and better integrated with downtown.

I could go on, but if you don't get the point after these examples, then you're not going to get it.  It can be argued that our current courthouse and police building on Bay Street are both eyesores with suburban designs that fail to stimulate as much business and life around them as they could, if more thought was given to how they interact with their surroundings.  We all should want the best for our community.  Accepting poor design and not trying to figure out how to get the most out of our public investment should be unacceptable.

Well, I could understand, I guess. I guess that the city could have done better. The way I see it, some of their ideas are sometimes not very good. Then there were some that ideas that can have great success in the long run. I mean, what do we expect from the new courthouse design in the first place? A Taj Mahal meets times square? After all, the courthouse parking garage still has all the vacant spots that are still waiting on retail shops and other businesses to show up.

With the courthouse, given the investment, I would expect a complex that is fully integrated with its surroundings and something that is an extremely strong anchor for additional downtown development.  Going vertical and clearing up a few blocks for complementing development is one way to do this.  Setting the courthouse up where the main entrance forces people to walk the new garage's (horribly designed-but that's another story) retail spaces would be another.  Even with the horizontal option we still have the possibility of embracing a courthouse square style public space that could attract people in its own right.

QuoteAbout the idea that we "blew are chance" at capitalizing on the success we have after the Super Bowl, despite the fact its a hard pill to swallow just by accepting that, it's understandable. The city leaders could've had better ideas. We all don't know any better. Perhaps that many of out city leaders may not come from big cities like Seattle or Houston or Los Angeles or Miami where the people have many great ideas on how to improve their urban surroundings. Maybe we could've use them to help us improve on our's. Maybe our leaders don't know how to figure out what to do about curtain urban issues like the homeless. And in some cases, that might be true. But I still believe they can do better than what they are doing.

I remember during that time, we kept saying you have to open the door when opportunity knocks.  This sentiment was really strong with the Landing negotiations and Kuhn projects early on.  Unfortunately, we sealed the door shut, moved a couch behind it and hid in the back closet until the knocking stopped.  However, our leaders don't have to be like Oglethorpe or Pierre Charles L'Enfant.  Imo, the key is to have people around you with vision, knowledge and the discipline to stick with a long term master plan or goal.

QuoteI think that they were more focused on getting safer streets in downtown first, then they can bring in more stuff. More entertainment, more of other things we see in places like Atlanta or Chicago or in other cities that may have a small 100,000 to 200,000 population. It may seem as though I'm defending the city leaders and their ideas. Well,...the truth of the matter is that I still believe in the city leaders and I do show humility toward our Mayor. It's just that they need to do a better job about our urban surroundings, let alone our entire city. Give them time.

I don't expect anyone to be a miracle worker.  My suggestion is the same as it was when we first contacted Suzanne Jenkins and the Mayor's Office a few years ago.  That suggestion is to get out of the way and let the free market take control.  This doesn't take much time, its just a embracing a different strategy that lets the private sector assume a larger role.

QuoteAnd other thing, I personally don't believe that the Police Memorial Building on Bay Street is an eyesore. But we do need to do something with the other places that need urban improvement for businesses to grow and flourish.

Eyesore is defined as: Something, such as a distressed building, that is unpleasant or offensive to view.

Speaking from an urban planner's point of view, buildings that create hundreds of feet of dead wall space (because of design) in walkable areas are unpleasant or offensive to view. 

QuoteBy the way, Lakelander. Have you ever thought of considering running for Mayor in the 2011 Mayor's election? :) Your thoughts and views on our downtown are all over the place on this site. Maybe you can help the city get to where it should be(just a suggestion, of course :D ;)).

No, but I have seriously tossed around the idea of helping in other ways.

Well, the Police Memorial Building was built in 1977 (I think). I seen the building lots of time in my life and it doesn't seem to offend me. But have it your way.
I'm not criticizing on the design of the courthouse garage, though. The architects could've design it a different way. However, that's what they came up with. Damage was done. We can't turn back now (unless you want to add another courthouse garage with a completely different design with urban connectivity in mind). Now let's have the city something with it to improve the urban landscape while there is still an opportunity to do so. 8)

The courthouse garage's retail spaces are too narrow in depth.  As a rule of thumb, with the specialty retail projects I worked on in the past, there was a goal for each bay to not get smaller than 20' wide x 70' deep.  The garage retail bays along Adams appear to not even be 35ft in depth.  Retail bay designing also depends on the type of retailer you plan to attract.  For example, something like a CVS or Walgreens will need at least 10,000 square feet of space.  The smallest Publix is about 28,000 square feet.  A restaurant needs ample space for hoods and grease traps.  These are important factors that sometime get overlooked when properly designing spec retail.

QuoteHowever, that's what they came up with. Damage was done. We can't turn back now (unless you want to add another courthouse garage with a completely different design with urban connectivity in mind). Now let's have the city something with it to improve the urban landscape while there is still an opportunity to do so.

Now we're starting to get on the same page.  The garage and the retail spaces are there, so lets make sure the new courthouse plans are well integrated with this structure.  Let's make sure the design is something that has thousands of people walking past those retail spaces and down the surrounding streets on a daily basis.  Lets make sure the rest of the courthouse property includes uses and features that bring people into the general area at night.  When you begin to think about solutions for the points I just mentioned, this is when ideas like courthouse squares and going vertical come into play.  When you don't consider these elements you end up not getting as much as you could have out of your initial investment.