More parking headed to the Northbank...
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/210456_standard.jpeg)
This building next door will be renovated into office space for the Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/styles/sliders_and_planned_story_image_870x580/public/210452_standard.jpeg?itok=02xck72q)
This building next door will be demolished to serve as a surface parking lot for the office project.
Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/former-gulf-life-insurance-building-recommended-for-demolition
QuoteThe commission determined the building did not meet the extent of the required criteria needed to recommend preservation and to seek landmark status with the city.
"The building is a classic example of Art Moderne and is one of the best examples in the Downtown National Register Historic District. The nomination for the historic district lists 10 Art Deco style buildings Downtown and this structure is one of the best examples of the style," said the memo.
So it is one of the best examples of an entire architectural style, but is does not meet the criteria for preservation? Did George Washington have to sleep there, for it to meet the criteria?
This building is not a showplace, but at the same time another surface parking lot is the last thing DT needs. With all the parking garages First Baptist has, they can't work out a deal to lease a few spaces on the days the church doesn't use them?
Just when I thought Jax couldn't suck anymore than it does.
It is pretty crazy how we're still finding ways to become less dense in the 21st century. To be honest, I don't have high hopes for downtown becoming a vibrant pedestrian friendly place any time soon. While in Houston this past Saturday, it hit me like a ton of bricks in that if this city did everything right for the next 30 years (from preservation and trails to infill development and mass transit), at best it would be a significantly smaller poor man's version of 2018 Houston. The major areas where we can carve out a special niche for ourselves revolve around preservation/adaptive reuse, history, culture and eliminating things that restrict the natural market place from organically growing on its own. For the most part, these are the things we struggle with or ignore the most. Regarding this specific project, I wonder if there was any discussion of leaving the Art Moderne facade up? Even that would be better than the typical surface lot, knee wall and black aluminum fencing that's likely to come in it's place.
WTF? It would be one thing if it was Eddie Farah, Sleiman, Warren Buffet, or Khan.... but our own fire department!?!? the COJ is one of the worst enemies of downtown revitalization
Quote from: vicupstate on November 20, 2018, 09:49:24 AM
QuoteThe commission determined the building did not meet the extent of the required criteria needed to recommend preservation and to seek landmark status with the city.
"The building is a classic example of Art Moderne and is one of the best examples in the Downtown National Register Historic District. The nomination for the historic district lists 10 Art Deco style buildings Downtown and this structure is one of the best examples of the style," said the memo.
So it is one of the best examples of an entire architectural style, but is does not meet the criteria for preservation? Did George Washington have to sleep there, for it to meet the criteria?
This building is not a showplace, but at the same time another surface parking lot is the last thing DT needs. With all the parking garages First Baptist has, they can't work out a deal to lease a few spaces on the days the church doesn't use them?
Amen....this one is idiotic. I realize that the local historic designation is what stops demolition and that Downtown isn't a historic district and by letter of the law they can do this. With that said, unreal that the picture shows the FBC garage a block away! I'm sure during the workday FBC has plenty of garage space for what will be a couple dozen spaces in this lot tops.
Email sent to CM Gaffney, CM Boyer (Who is my CM) and the At Large CMs. I'd urge everyone to do the same on this one.
One thing that stands about Hogan and Laura Streets is that they've both been largely preserved from having significant sized parking lots break up their historic/pedestrian scale building fabric between Bay and Union streets. That's very impressive given our godzilla like appreciation for razing buildings. However, because they're the only two main streets left with this type of context, should there be a discussion about maintaining that walkable atmosphere?
In terms of site design, wouldn't this project have to go before the DDRB? If so, how can demolition be approved before that process? Obviously, demolition radically changes the site. If the facade is one of the best examples of Art Deco within the downtown historic district, should there not be a discussion about the feasibility of at least incorporating it into the plan? This design option isn't available if the building is gone before the parking lot proposal comes up for review.
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
Am I the only one who sees the silver lining that they're going to renovate the adjacent building and use it as office spaces? Anything seems better then the state of the buildings as they currently stand, dilapidated and vacant...
QuoteAnything seems better then the state of the buildings as they currently stand, dilapidated and vacant...
If your goal is pedestrian scale vibrancy, a surface parking lot is worse than vacant buildings. So a single saved building surrounded by a sea of surface parking in the heart of downtown would be a long term negative.....if your goal is vibrancy in terms of walkability. If it's not, then it doesn't matter. However, I see this specific issue as an opportunity. I don't think it has to be an either or situation.
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:07:45 PM
Am I the only one who sees the silver lining that they're going to renovate the adjacent building and use it as office spaces? Anything seems better then the state of the buildings as they currently stand, dilapidated and vacant...
I disagree. I'd rather they not do this at all.
If they make it a parking lot, getting it back as a private development is impossible. Just park a block away.
Kerry is actually somewhat correct that Fire Departments are sometimes at odds with unique or innovative site design due to their need for wide turn radiuses and drive aisles for fire trucks. I've had to make recent modifications on projects ranging from a hospital to a mixed use village due to Fire Departments. Both made the sites less pedestrian friendly, and neither was functionally necessary for fire access. It is pretty common in the site planning world for Fire to be at odds with urbanism and innovative designs.
That said, not sure it's really relevant to the discussion at hand.
Yes, in this case it's an office building, not a fire station.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2018, 06:05:52 PM
Yes, in this case it's an office building, not a fire station.
Correct - I'd object less if this was a discussion about needing to rapidly get on the fire truck or get in the Ambulance. these are office workers; more than capable of walking a block or two to their car.
FBC has a garage the sits empty for most of the week directly across the street. In fact, they have a couple of them, along with declining membership. They're also adjacent to the Skyway's Rosa Parks Station. Those garages are positioned to serve as a bundled parking solution for that entire section of downtown.
Their garages that are on either side of Julia Street, are relatively vacant during the week. Their garages on Laura are the ones used the most during the week.
Not sure how many space they have in those garages, but leasing a few hundred spaces would be beneficial to both parties.
Another Jacksonville step down. But is this a surprise? We are a suburban city. I'm sad.
Very disappointed in the church and the Fire department for doing this. Clearly neither entity is thinking about being a good part of the community as far as this endeavor is concerned.
I think they both mean well. From a high level, a long vacant building and block is being put back to use and both are playing a role in making that happen. Unfortunately, urban planning, historic preservation and walkability just aren't their areas of expertise or focus. Also unfortunately, they aren't for many of our local design and engineering firms as well. So the church is selling property/buildings it doesn't need anymore and the fire department is restoring an office building. The key here is to make this happen without turning an urban street corner into a gated parking lot.
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
It has been well documented by the good people at Strong Towns and CNU.
Quote from: avonjax on November 21, 2018, 10:06:27 AM
Another Jacksonville step down. But is this a surprise? We are a suburban city. I'm sad.
This is what I struggle with here. How do we change the mind-set of the average Jaxson? I found the New Urbanism movement in 2007 when I realized the tax rate we will have to pay eventually to cover the cost of sprawl. As a right-wing tea party conservative the New Urbanism movement really spoke to me because it makes so much sense economically and socially.
I know it can be done because places like OKC, Tulsa, Omaha, Des Moines, Memphis, Nashville, Wichita, and on and on and on have all managed to do it.
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
It has been well documented by the good people at Strong Towns and CNU.
Notice the "/s" at the end, denoting my incredible over-the-top sarcasm. I obviously don't want the town to burn down, nor do I think fire trucks in an urban environment are conducive to a walkable urban environment, but they're an absolutely necessary part of modern society, especially in an urban environment. I brought sarcasm in to add some whimsy to a sub-conversation that began about firetrucks, but I wonder why it was even brought up in the first place. Sure, the trucks are bad for walkable urbanism, as is surely documented, but having the town burn down is certainly worse than a lack of walkability (which only gets disrupted when a firetruck needs to leave the station). You can't get rid of firetrucks because they're bad for walkability, so why even mention it?
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 21, 2018, 12:35:06 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
It has been well documented by the good people at Strong Towns and CNU.
Notice the "/s" at the end, denoting my incredible over-the-top sarcasm. I obviously don't want the town to burn down, nor do I think fire trucks in an urban environment are conducive to a walkable urban environment, but they're an absolutely necessary part of modern society, especially in an urban environment. I brought sarcasm in to add some whimsy to a sub-conversation that began about firetrucks, but I wonder why it was even brought up in the first place. Sure, the trucks are bad for walkable urbanism, as is surely documented, but having the town burn down is certainly worse than a lack of walkability (which only gets disrupted when a firetruck needs to leave the station). You can't get rid of firetrucks because they're bad for walkability, so why even mention it?
Guys, we're missing the point. If this was an actual fire station where first responders would be dispatched from it would be a completely different discussion. This is an office building. No More. If this was an office building for a bank, would the opinion be any different?
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 21, 2018, 12:35:06 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
It has been well documented by the good people at Strong Towns and CNU.
Notice the "/s" at the end, denoting my incredible over-the-top sarcasm. I obviously don't want the town to burn down, nor do I think fire trucks in an urban environment are conducive to a walkable urban environment, but they're an absolutely necessary part of modern society, especially in an urban environment. I brought sarcasm in to add some whimsy to a sub-conversation that began about firetrucks, but I wonder why it was even brought up in the first place. Sure, the trucks are bad for walkable urbanism, as is surely documented, but having the town burn down is certainly worse than a lack of walkability (which only gets disrupted when a firetruck needs to leave the station). You can't get rid of firetrucks because they're bad for walkability, so why even mention it?
He just wants something to complain about by bringing up a straw man's argument- fire trucks are an entirely different issue than tearing down a building for an office used by the fire department. Championing places like Tulsa, Memphis and Wichita as models for zoning reform (all Sunbelt sprawlers that have WAY worse urban environments than Jax), is just icing on the cake.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 21, 2018, 11:40:29 AM
I think they both mean well. From a high level, a long vacant building and block is being put back to use and both are playing a role in making that happen. Unfortunately, urban planning, historic preservation and walkability just aren't their areas of expertise or focus. Also unfortunately, they aren't for many of our local design and engineering firms as well. So the church is selling property/buildings it doesn't need anymore and the fire department is restoring an office building. The key here is to make this happen without turning an urban street corner into a gated parking lot.
Think Lakelander hits the nail squarely on the head. Both the Fire Dept and FBC have decent enough intentions. Ultimately, this is a challenge that has a solution that can work for everyone- keeping the built environment intact, while also contributing to the sorely-needed rehabilitation of a downtown building.
I deal with complex shared parking agreements pretty frequently, and churches and offices are a perfect pairing demand wise.
Generally, office only has a 10% parking utilization from 6pm-midnight on weekdays and on weekends. So if an office has peak parking demand of 150 spaces (9am-4PM weekdays), it would only need 15 spaces on weeknights and weekends. I don't have a utilization table for churches, but would guess that it is no more than 20% during 9am-4pm, but probably closer to 10%. Long story short, there should be sufficient excess spaces at FBC's parking garages for a shared parking agreement since their periods of peak demand are opposite each other.
I'm happy to help anyone that wants to try and work out a shared parking arrangement between the two parties...
Quote from: Steve on November 21, 2018, 12:41:22 PM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 21, 2018, 12:35:06 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on November 20, 2018, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 20, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 20, 2018, 03:24:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 20, 2018, 01:15:49 PM
Fire departments are one of the biggest deterent to walkable urbanism, so this is just par for the course.
What?
The trucks disrupt the peace.
Yeah, wish they'd just shutup and let the town burn to the ground. Nothing spurs new urbanism like another Great Fire! 1901 move over, Great Fire of 2018 is gonna be wicked!
/s
It has been well documented by the good people at Strong Towns and CNU.
Notice the "/s" at the end, denoting my incredible over-the-top sarcasm. I obviously don't want the town to burn down, nor do I think fire trucks in an urban environment are conducive to a walkable urban environment, but they're an absolutely necessary part of modern society, especially in an urban environment. I brought sarcasm in to add some whimsy to a sub-conversation that began about firetrucks, but I wonder why it was even brought up in the first place. Sure, the trucks are bad for walkable urbanism, as is surely documented, but having the town burn down is certainly worse than a lack of walkability (which only gets disrupted when a firetruck needs to leave the station). You can't get rid of firetrucks because they're bad for walkability, so why even mention it?
Guys, we're missing the point. If this was an actual fire station where first responders would be dispatched from it would be a completely different discussion. This is an office building. No More. If this was an office building for a bank, would the opinion be any different?
That's my point, I just went the long way about saying it (and failed to make the point that this is just an office building)
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: avonjax on November 21, 2018, 10:06:27 AM
Another Jacksonville step down. But is this a surprise? We are a suburban city. I'm sad.
This is what I struggle with here. How do we change the mind-set of the average Jaxson? I found the New Urbanism movement in 2007 when I realized the tax rate we will have to pay eventually to cover the cost of sprawl. As a right-wing tea party conservative the New Urbanism movement really spoke to me because it makes so much sense economically and socially.
I know it can be done because places like OKC, Tulsa, Omaha, Des Moines, Memphis, Nashville, Wichita, and on and on and on have all managed to do it.
The leadership of the city has to 'get it' and they have to have the courage to implement it. It matters little if Joe Six Pack or Jack White Collar Worker 'get it' or support it. It really doesn't.
If the standards that are necessary are adopted and adhered to, then the built environment will reflect that over time.
Once the walk ability and vibrancy is established, Joe and Jack will show up to the bars and restaurants and help create more vibrancy. They don't have to understand how it got that way, they will support it if it supplies what they want.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 21, 2018, 03:03:34 PM
Quote from: Kerry on November 21, 2018, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: avonjax on November 21, 2018, 10:06:27 AM
Another Jacksonville step down. But is this a surprise? We are a suburban city. I'm sad.
This is what I struggle with here. How do we change the mind-set of the average Jaxson? I found the New Urbanism movement in 2007 when I realized the tax rate we will have to pay eventually to cover the cost of sprawl. As a right-wing tea party conservative the New Urbanism movement really spoke to me because it makes so much sense economically and socially.
I know it can be done because places like OKC, Tulsa, Omaha, Des Moines, Memphis, Nashville, Wichita, and on and on and on have all managed to do it.
The leadership of the city has to 'get it' and they have to have the courage to implement it. It matters little if Joe Six Pack or Jack White Collar Worker 'get it' or support it. It really doesn't.
If the standards that are necessary are adopted and adhered to, then the built environment will reflect that over time.
Once the walk ability and vibrancy is established, Joe and Jack will show up to the bars and restaurants and help create more vibrancy. They don't have to understand how it got that way, they will support it if it supplies what they want.
Maybe this question is unanswerable, but how is it the Jax leadership seems to be the only elected officials in the whole country that DON'T get it already? Is it possible that the people don't get it so they keep electing people that don't get it either?
I don't think we're the only ones who's elected officials don't get it. But, I do think other cities do a better job listening to their experts they have on staff.