Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/photos/i-xNqCSfz/0/L/i-xNqCSfz-L.jpg)
New plans for the adaptive reuse of the Jones Brothers Furniture building have been released. Seeking Downtown Development Review Board (DDRB) Conceptual Approval, the latest plans involve the addition of an 8-story structure in the heart of the Downtown Northbank.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/new-plans-emerge-for-jones-brothers-furniture-building/
I find it interesting that none of the perspective views include the Skyway.
I like that the parking garage doesn't look like a parking garage from the outside.
I think that was just to show what the building would look like.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on April 15, 2022, 10:17:15 AM
I find it interesting that none of the perspective views include the Skyway.
I like that the parking garage doesn't look like a parking garage from the outside.
I was thinking the same, I think the skyway is coming down :-\
Quote from: JaGoaT on April 15, 2022, 01:16:52 PM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on April 15, 2022, 10:17:15 AM
I find it interesting that none of the perspective views include the Skyway.
I like that the parking garage doesn't look like a parking garage from the outside.
I was thinking the same, I think the skyway is coming down :-\
This is such a wild leap to make based on a drawing. In order to better showcase the property, you don't draw in the elevated track that would obscure the view. I think that's as far into it as you need to look.
Yes, the Skyway isn't coming down. This development has nothing to do with the Skyway. They are submitting their plans to the DDRB for conceptual approval of the design. You can't see the design/facade if you put the Skyway in front of the rendering. By the same token, the rendering doesn't show the traffic signal at the intersection either.
Putting aside the Skyway thought....I really like this but don't love it. Two things:
1. I hate how we're demo'ing the building at the corner. I see why they're doing it but I still don't love.
2. The dual entry garage thing: I get why; the upper level is residents and the ground level is retail parking. It seems like a lot of parking.
That said this will get approved and honestly downtown will be better for the project.
The more of these, yes, the better. As more people move downtown, they will have no choice but to bring in businesses, restaurants, entertainment, etc., yes, bring the people in and all these things will come in to instigate growth downtown.
Quote from: Steve on April 15, 2022, 04:14:54 PM
Putting aside the Skyway thought....I really like this but don't love it. Two things:
1. I hate how we're demo'ing the building at the corner. I see why they're doing it but I still don't love.
2. The dual entry garage thing: I get why; the upper level is residents and the ground level is retail parking. It seems like a lot of parking.
That said this will get approved and honestly downtown will be better for the project.
What is the history of the building on the corner that you are referring to?
Honestly not sure, and if this building was built in 1975 or something then I'd likely drop the point.
To be clear: I'm not opposing this. Regardless it's a good looking development. I'd hope that perhaps the ground level garage was built to accommodate retail longer term if the market improved and I'd like to learn the history of the building.
All of that said, this is going to be approved, and like I said: downtown would be better with this development than without it. Not every development can be truly perfect. One of my favorite sayings is, "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good." This looks like a good project.
From the Daily Record:
QuoteAccording to DDRB staff, the former Farah's Uptown Deli is not designated a local landmark but is listed as a contributing building within the Downtown Jacksonville Historic District.
The report says the developers will have to work with the Historic Preservation Section of the city Planning and Development Department to ensure the building meets all requirements for demolition.
Quote from: Steve on April 16, 2022, 09:26:48 AM
Honestly not sure, and if this building was built in 1975 or something then I'd likely drop the point.
To be clear: I'm not opposing this. Regardless it's a good looking development. I'd hope that perhaps the ground level garage was built to accommodate retail longer term if the market improved and I'd like to learn the history of the building.
All of that said, this is going to be approved, and like I said: downtown would be better with this development than without it. Not every development can be truly perfect. One of my favorite sayings is, "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good." This looks like a good project.
To have retail along the full length of Church street you would probably need to go up one more story to make the numbers work which obviously raises the cost but they at least have retail/leasing at the corner.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on April 15, 2022, 10:31:23 PM
Quote from: Steve on April 15, 2022, 04:14:54 PM
Putting aside the Skyway thought....I really like this but don't love it. Two things:
1. I hate how we're demo'ing the building at the corner. I see why they're doing it but I still don't love.
2. The dual entry garage thing: I get why; the upper level is residents and the ground level is retail parking. It seems like a lot of parking.
That said this will get approved and honestly downtown will be better for the project.
It was built in the late 19-teens and was one of the first commercial structures along Hogan. It preceded the Jones Brothers furniture building by about 11 years. Hogan/Julia/Ashely/Church west of the site and into LaVilla was mostly residential after the Great Fire. The building was primarily used by Western Union.
What is the history of the building on the corner that you are referring to?
It was built in 1915 and was one of the first commercial structures along Hogan built after the Great Fire of 1901. Hogan/Julia/Ashely/Church west of the site and into LaVilla was mostly residential after the Great Fire. The building on the corner of Hogan/Church preceded the Jones Brothers furniture building by about 11 years. The building was primarily used by Western Union. You can still make out some of the Western Union ghost sign on the building's Hogan Street facade. It was later used for car storage. You can see the driveway leading into what used to be a rolltop door. At various times it was home for the Harry James Insurance company, a bookstore, a printing company, and it was most recently used as Farah's Uptown Deli until about 7 years ago.
For many years the building was owned by the daughter (Mary Lanahan) of Charles Reginald Thebaut, who owned the Allweather Tire Company. Charles Thebaut helped to start both the Gator Bowl and the University of Florida Gator Boosters. There is a City park off Heckshire Drive on his family's former property named after Mary and her sisters. My dad and grandmother were friends of Thebaut's daugthers throughout the years.
I was coming here to apologize for my "they left out the Skyway from the renderings" comment.
But then, I looked at the plans again, from the DDRB Agenda Package, where I can zoom in better than in the Jaxson article. Yes, they are keeping and restoring the JONES BROS FURNITURE signs on the north and south walls of the historic building. However, the only people who will be able to see it are residents of apartments on the north side of the new building, people in their 5th-floor courtyard, and the random Skyway passenger. The view from the point of view of the East Perspective (sheet 25) will be mostly the Skyway structure and some of the ground floor facade. The Jones Bros sign will be completely obscured. Once the hypothetical viewer walks far enough west to clear the Skyway, they will be looking almost straight up to see the sign.
Again, I'm glad they are doing adaptive re-use of the Jones Bros building, including both of the iconic signs. It just bugs me that the artwork used for "Design Review" doesn't accurately represent what people in the real world will see.
QuoteBoard debate
The board members overall praised the project during the April 21 meeting, although Craig Davisson said he would like to see the new construction design simplified before it returns for final review to be less "busy."
Davisson, an architect and principal for Studio9 Architecture, said the design can pay homage to the historic Jones Bros. building in a "more sophisticated way."
He said the design is "not far off" from the look he would prefer but the building's accents and stripes in the renderings are "completely overcooked."
"The building, when I see it, just the image it gives off, it kind of utilizes all the trendy architecture you see today. And I'm saying this a lot, it's already dated before it's built," Davisson said.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/ddrb-advances-new-design-for-jones-bros-furniture-building
(https://i.imgflip.com/6dek2n.jpg)
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 21, 2022, 07:45:10 PM
QuoteBoard debate
The board members overall praised the project during the April 21 meeting, although Craig Davisson said he would like to see the new construction design simplified before it returns for final review to be less "busy."
Davisson, an architect and principal for Studio9 Architecture, said the design can pay homage to the historic Jones Bros. building in a "more sophisticated way."
He said the design is "not far off" from the look he would prefer but the building's accents and stripes in the renderings are "completely overcooked."
"The building, when I see it, just the image it gives off, it kind of utilizes all the trendy architecture you see today. And I'm saying this a lot, it's already dated before it's built," Davisson said.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/ddrb-advances-new-design-for-jones-bros-furniture-building
(https://i.imgflip.com/6dek2n.jpg)
Nope, not Vestcor.
Had a discussion about this project with a group of prominent architects/designers a couple days ago, they had the same sentiment - love the adaptive reuse, the new construction portion needed to be more subdued. Would be great to have more actual architects on the DDRB, we'd get better products.
Taste is obviously subjective, but I like the design the developer proposed, and I personally don't think Jacksonville is in a position to complain that any proposed architecture is "too trendy."
I look down Laura Street every morning when I'm walking into my office, and it literally looks like a bomb went off. This is our showcase street, leading our "explosive downtown momentum," and you've got (in order):
1) A decrepit abandoned billboard
2) The building next to Chamblins, that looks like it's crumbing in on itself
3) A boarded up Snyder Memorial Church with broken windows and caution tape
4) The tattered remains of the Florida Life, Bisbee, and Marble Bank buildings, surrounded by barbed wire and graffiti.
The surrounding blocks are littered with dead corridors and surface parking lots.
Despite all this, you've got a developer in Corner Lot that is willing to assume the risk of investing in downtown Jacksonville, because - as they told the Business Journal this week - they think it's important and no one else seems willing to do it.
In my opinion, we should be getting out of their way, thanking them for including street-level retail uses, and letting them execute their vision.
To me, it's just very symptomatic of Jacksonville's baseless municipal arrogance that we tell a developer that their proposal is "completely overcooked."
Who else is in line proposing a better alternative?
We don't need perfect products at this point.
We need adequate products moving forward swiftly.
73 vacant buildings in downtown Jax. We've developed THREE in the last six years.
We are THIRTY YEARS behind former sister-cities like Nashville and Charlotte because our public sector constantly thinks it's smarter than it actually is when it comes to downtown development.
Fill the DDRB with architects and let them all be hyper-critical when we're in a position to be choosy and it doesn't require a 25%+ subsidy to get any project off the ground.
The RFP for private development at the Landing should be a good reality check in terms of what position we're currently in.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 21, 2022, 11:27:11 PM
Taste is obviously subjective, but I like the design the developer proposed, and I personally don't think Jacksonville is in a position to complain that any proposed architecture is "too trendy."
I look down Laura Street every morning when I'm walking into my office, and it literally looks like a bomb went off. This is our showcase street, leading our "explosive downtown momentum," and you've got (in order):
1) A decrepit abandoned billboard
2) The building next to Chamblins, that looks like it's crumbing in on itself
3) A boarded up Snyder Memorial Church with broken windows and caution tape
4) The tattered remains of the Florida Life, Bisbee, and Marble Bank buildings, surrounded by barbed wire and graffiti.
The surrounding blocks are littered with dead corridors and surface parking lots.
Despite all this, you've got a developer in Corner Lot that is willing to assume the risk of investing in downtown Jacksonville, because - as they told the Business Journal this week - they think it's important and no one else seems willing to do it.
In my opinion, we should be getting out of their way, thanking them for including street-level retail uses, and letting them execute their vision.
To me, it's just very symptomatic of Jacksonville's baseless municipal arrogance that we tell a developer that their proposal is "completely overcooked."
Who else is in line proposing a better alternative?
We don't need perfect products at this point.
We need adequate products moving forward swiftly.
73 vacant buildings in downtown Jax. We've developed THREE in the last six years.
We are THIRTY YEARS behind former sister-cities like Nashville and Charlotte because our public sector constantly thinks it's smarter than it actually is when it comes to downtown development.
Fill the DDRB with architects and let them all be hyper-critical when we're in a position to be choosy and it doesn't require a 25%+ subsidy to get any project off the ground.
The RFP for private development at the Landing should be a good reality check in terms of what position we're currently in.
That must be over 75 days for the Ford on Bay negotiation period with Hardwick done as well without a whisper.
Laughable we had the arrogance to turn down Lot J. That's sure worked out great!
Laughable we had the arrogance to turn down Lot J. That's sure worked out great![/quote]
Could the 'Toaster Oven' attached to Daily's Place feasibly be converted to a concept similar to the Cordish Live venues? It seems like that could affordably serve the purpose of housing a "Jax Live" or something similar. The structure is already built and is within the vicinity of Lot J plus it is completely underutilized for the money spent.
Quote from: JPalmer on April 22, 2022, 07:49:18 AM
Could the 'Toaster Oven' attached to Daily's Place feasibly be converted to a concept similar to the Cordish Live venues? It seems like that could affordably serve the purpose of housing a "Jax Live" or something similar. The structure is already built and is within the vicinity of Lot J plus it is completely underutilized for the money spent.
Thats actually not a terrible idea. There's already a stage attached too.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 21, 2022, 11:27:11 PM
Taste is obviously subjective, but I like the design the developer proposed, and I personally don't think Jacksonville is in a position to complain that any proposed architecture is "too trendy."
I look down Laura Street every morning when I'm walking into my office, and it literally looks like a bomb went off. This is our showcase street, leading our "explosive downtown momentum," and you've got (in order):
1) A decrepit abandoned billboard
2) The building next to Chamblins, that looks like it's crumbing in on itself
3) A boarded up Snyder Memorial Church with broken windows and caution tape
4) The tattered remains of the Florida Life, Bisbee, and Marble Bank buildings, surrounded by barbed wire and graffiti.
The surrounding blocks are littered with dead corridors and surface parking lots.
Despite all this, you've got a developer in Corner Lot that is willing to assume the risk of investing in downtown Jacksonville, because - as they told the Business Journal this week - they think it's important and no one else seems willing to do it.
In my opinion, we should be getting out of their way, thanking them for including street-level retail uses, and letting them execute their vision.
To me, it's just very symptomatic of Jacksonville's baseless municipal arrogance that we tell a developer that their proposal is "completely overcooked."
Who else is in line proposing a better alternative?
We don't need perfect products at this point.
We need adequate products moving forward swiftly.
73 vacant buildings in downtown Jax. We've developed THREE in the last six years.
We are THIRTY YEARS behind former sister-cities like Nashville and Charlotte because our public sector constantly thinks it's smarter than it actually is when it comes to downtown development.
Fill the DDRB with architects and let them all be hyper-critical when we're in a position to be choosy and it doesn't require a 25%+ subsidy to get any project off the ground.
The RFP for private development at the Landing should be a good reality check in terms of what position we're currently in.
Bro. It's not all or nothing. You're catastrophizing. We're talking about the decorative icing on a proverbial cake. Being open to substantive input is a strength, especially when public dollars are involved. Not that they need to, but if Bold Line needed to revise the aesthetic of their facade a bit, that's nothing.