Urban Infill: 1463 San Marco
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/544194102_eNqVx-M.jpg)
1463 San Marco is the latest urban infill project proposed for San Marco.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2009-may-urban-infill-1463-san-marco
Do they have financing?
What are the top 3 floors? Bullpen offices?
The exterior design is better than much of what we see with craftsman details and integrated sidewalk/entry, but typical lack of creativity in naming the project.
why would someone fence in a building that you want people to visit?
I'm just glad to see a building finally being proposed again. Especially one with a built in parking garage.
(http://www.1463sanmarco.com/p7lsm_img_1/fullsize/1463_Image02.jpg)
Maybe the extra 4' is to help prevent the 1st floor from flooding? That area of San Marco has pretty serious drainage issues.
Regardless, I'm really pleased with this design. The fascade covering the garage is what it is, and there's really no avoiding it considering the government-mandated parking requirements for medical offices. Aside from that, the design is nice. It's got a touch of neo-traditional with the prarie style, but it's still unmistakably new and interesting for something in Jax. Personally, I also think it's the perfect scale for that part of San Marco.
My guess is that the building will be known as the (Your Name Here) building, based on whomever is the primary tenant
Where exactly is this suppose to go? Will people live in this building?
This looks good on paper. I like the integration of the parking garage, much improved over what we currently have downtown. Also great to see more development occurring!
Quote from: Coolyfett on May 27, 2009, 09:34:16 AM
Where exactly is this suppose to go? Will people live in this building?
um... at 1463 San Marco Blvd ... ;)
No one will live there. It's professional offices (almost certainly will be doctor's offices).
Do I see more then just a little bit of Klutho Prairie School here Lake? If I'm right or wrong about that I'll still agree that it looks killer good!
OCKLAWAHA
I like it, but it is 75% parking. Only one floor is offices, one half of the first floor is retail.
I don't see any evidence of rezoning so I guess they have what they need for the height. What are the height limitations in this area and what impact will this have on surrounding residential areas immediately behind this building?
While I don't have a problem with the building, I have a concern for San Marco Blvd. and the surrounding area to absorb and handle the traffic, etc. from what inevitably will be lots more of these taller buildings. I can see this area of San Marco (and Hendricks too?) becoming mini-Riverside Avenues (i.e. the section between I-95 and the Acosta Bridge). Is there a master plan for this area or is it typical Jax - build now and solve problems later?
I'm not overly impressed with the design. Hopefully it is just from the bad rendering program used, but doubtful.
Quote from: JaxNative68 on May 27, 2009, 12:45:29 PM
I'm not overly impressed with the design. Hopefully it is just from the bad rendering program used, but doubtful.
I wouldn't call Sketchup a bad rendering program, although it's really a modeling program and you can help the render quality along with other programs. The images look as though they were straight outputs from Sketchup.
I like the building, personally. While it is unfortunate that half the building is a parking deck, it is far better than having a half acre of surface parking. I am sure the finished product will look great, but the rendering is a little drab. What I am most excited about is the potential this development has to inspire similar developments on the Southbank. This is the kind of infill we need between the historic district and the high rises along the river. There are currently 4 parallel streets from San Marco to the Southbank, so i do not think that traffic will be an issue.......for the time being.
The building looks ok, but hopefully it'll look better as it starts coming out of the ground.
Not the biggest fan of "Med. inspired design" because we alreayd have something like that, San Marco Place. While it looks great, please do not let this become the new building trend for the neighborhood, We need more bold designs that really catch the eye.
Build it yesterday.
This proposal has been looming around for quite a few years now. Glad to see it resurface in a new light.
Quote from: Jason on May 27, 2009, 01:21:11 PM
Build it yesterday.
Silly quantum mechanics standing in the way of progress!
I love the design. I love the fact that it's going to be close to/in the Core. I love that its going to eat up current surface-parking lot space. I love the fact that it's going to be vertical.
How about some excitement and positivity over something getting ready to take off amidst the crapper economy and real estate market?
It looks very similar to the East San Marco sales center on Atlantic, which in turn looks like the East San Marco renderings, which look like San Marco Place. Jacksonville.....The Istanbul of the West....?
Nah, it's just San Marco trying to be a Meditteranean village with too many doctors, bad drainage, and a very taller buildings.
.... add to this the possibility of the Wolfson's expansion and Baptist office building moving forward in the near future and we'll be seeing a lot of changes in that area.
Lets get some Falafel carts and Gyro stands on the corner of Hendricks and Prudential and then we'll really be in business!! Bring on the tzatziki sauce!
Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 27, 2009, 01:52:36 PM
Lets get some Falafel carts and Gyro stands on the corner of Hendricks and Prudential and then we'll really be in business!! Bring on the tzatziki sauce!
I support this post.
Is there a timeframe for this thing? Looks good, will fill in the skyline nicely, and will hopefully attract some more downtown businesses.
Built so far from Baptist, Nemours, JOI. What is the point? Just more hodge podge in Jacksonville.
Seriously, this building sucks! I can't believe how many rave reviews it's gotten on this page. It's a post-modern interpretation of an arts and craft building, i.e. stucco with applique detail! Does it get an worse. Anybody who likes this building has obviously not picked up a quality architecture magazine in the last 25 years and/or has never left FL!
Not to rain on your negative and broad sweeping generalizations, but I think most people are excited about what it is and what it means, not what it looks like. Most people have said the design needs work, but new a development in the area is a good thing, especially considering the economy and drought of building proposals.
Quote from: Joe on May 27, 2009, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: Coolyfett on May 27, 2009, 09:34:16 AM
Where exactly is this suppose to go? Will people live in this building?
um... at 1463 San Marco Blvd ... ;)
No one will live there. It's professional offices (almost certainly will be doctor's offices).
In that case blah blah blah...i was curious about intersection, but no one will living there so who cares.
It's at the intersection of San Marco Blvd. and Cedar St. Northeast corner.
Good Buildings = Good Development. They are interlinked. And yes I think it's too bad that people feel so desperate for development that they need to support bad design. Because when the economy turns around, and it will as most economist predict by at the least 2010 (way before this building is finished), all you'll be left with is bad design. If you want to live in a city of multi-story poorly designed post-modern buildings go live in Tampa. You probably don't know this but Jacksonville actually has a history of good design, albeit it's from 40 years ago but the Milam House is one of the most famous pieces of architecture in the world. Let's strive for excellence not mediocrity!
In your opinion, what could be done to the shell of the building to make it more appealing.
I, for one, don't see the architecture in a negative light. The overall plan for the development also makes about the best use possible for a lot of its size and provides a mix of uses.
Also, what brought you to the conclusion that stucco will be the final finish? The rendering is very simple and only intended to give an idea of the scale and orientation of the building, not to be a photorealistic image of the finished product. The finishes could consist of any number of materials.
Milam House...
http://archrecord.construction.com/recordHouses50/03_1963.asp
Jason, I like you're attitude! And I really meant that! However, it's not about "the shell" of the building, architecture is about the design of the entire building and then how it links back to it's surrounding area, i.e. how it speaks to it's community (the renderings/site plan are a clear indication that this wasn't well considered since they lack any description of the surrounding area). Too much of the architecture built in FL and esp, JAX is what I like to call "the developers special". It focuses solely on lot size, height and economy of construction. Architecture is an art and by supporting and designing beautiful buildings we can once again put JAX on the architectural map. For those of you who don't understand that think about all the great big beautiful cities you love, they probably have great architecture or at the very least one symbolically beautiful public building/structure, think Saarinen's St. Louis arc! What's on the Jacksonville post card? Not that I'm at all saying this building needs to be that great, but a little effort on the design would be nice or at the very least call it what it is, another blah building that is helping to infill our city, I have no arguments with that!
Just saw your second question. Answer: because they are all stucco! It's cheap and it gets the water proofing job done. That's why it's the choice material of developers throughout Florida. But you're right it's just a guess, I guess we'll see.
Preach it! :)
Regardless of materials used (and yeah I agree that it probably will be stucco) the architecture should be an enhancement of that section of San Marco Blvd. The intersection, anchored by Peterbrooke and a couple of single story bunkers, is about as plain as it gets.
I completely agree with Ugh... unfortunately Jacksonville's City and development plans are strictly run by the developers with basically a "what does it cost me now" mentality (just look at the professions of who sit on the DRC and planning boards). The have no regard for good design, just their own pockets. No matter how good of a design you throw at them, by the time they build it, they will have turned it into an EIFS or tilt-up concrete box. And the contractors of this city don't help, unless it is an EIFS or tilt-up concrete box they don't know how to build it. So they drive up the cost because they might have to actually think, find actual craftsman and coordinate construction. In the end they VE it into what they can build quick easy and cheap (and of course the developer and city go along with it - decreeing 'in the name of city progress'. Bullshit! Sometimes when I really think about it, it makes me sad to be in the design profession in Jacksonville.
WOW! I really actually thought this building was going somewhere else, but thanks for pointing it out Jason! HOLY **** does JAX even have a zoning department? I mean really talk about a building that is completely out of scale with it's surrounding area! While yes, this is not the intersection of distinction, it does have a scale! Jeez, think Five Points retirement home or the retirement home over in Murray Hill, they both destroy the fabric, esp. Murray Hill!!! This is what bad developers and bad buildings do!!! And no, I don't think all development is bad, I'm very pro good development!
Most people view architectural renderings with horse blinders on. Notice the rendering did not bother showing the surrounding/adjacent buildings . . . that is because it did not want you to notice how out of touch it really is. If it isn't in the rendering the average citizen won't think about it. Also there is no really material distinction in the rendering, leaving the viewer to imagine a much more rich feeling than is actually going into the building. The rendering is nothing more than a developer slight of hand.
Quote from: JaxNative68 on May 29, 2009, 02:57:12 PM
Most people view architectural renderings with horse blinders on. Notice the rendering did not bother showing the surrounding/adjacent buildings . . . that is because it did not want you to notice how out of touch it really is. If it isn't in the rendering the average citizen won't think about it. Also there is no really material distinction in the rendering, leaving the viewer to imagine a much more rich feeling than is actually going into the building. The rendering is nothing more than a developer slight of hand.
And this is what kills me about this particular rendering, it was done in using a program that deals in real world scale, it's not like it's hand rendered. It's very easy to at least get the surrounding buildings massed out. There's a reason they didn't.
JoeMerchant / JaxNative68, right on!!! It would take all of 5 minutes to add context to those renderings!!!
not to mention materials
I agree with JaxNative and Ugh... This thing accomplishes a lot in that it has managed not to be an empty lot with a bunch of bums and hookers hanging out. Beyond that, I'm not feeling "killer" about it. This is called design by Stucco joint. Without that, its an econo box with a post-modern cornice. The scale is so out of whack for that area - that's why there's no context shown (as was said before) because they didn't think about it. What's really bothersome is that huge wall of parking slapping you upside the head. So, 40% of the building looks like it is dedicated to actual human use. Either someone read the zoning code wrong or this building is too big for its britches. Perhaps this scale of monster was not intended for this area. Jason, you are blind if you think San Marco is just a bunch of bunkers - want to see bunkers? Try any commercial area in the NW quadrant. There is a walking presence in this area and it works. This building is Herzog and de Muren's toilet brush!
I didint' say all of San Marco was filled with bunkers, just that intersection.
Also, that section of roadway is on the outskirts of a mid to highrise medical district that is destined to eventually be gobbled by taller buildings. I agree that it will dwarf its surroundings in the short term, but it will eventually fit right in with future midrise development.
Well, say what you want but you have to love the optimism in this:
Quote from: Jason on May 29, 2009, 03:21:12 PM
Also, that section of roadway is on the outskirts of a mid to highrise medical district that is destined to eventually be gobbled by taller buildings. I agree that it will dwarf its surroundings in the short term, but it will eventually fit right in with future midrise development.
Jason, I'm sorry but I'm going to have to kindly disagree with you again. This building is not on the outskirts of a mid-to high rise medical district, there is one mid-rise medical building on that side of the I-95 overpass on that street. Architecturally speaking, the overpass acts as a barrier and those two sides shall never again be linked...not without serious urban planning, which is most likely not going to happen. Let's be realistic, this building will not provide any kind of link to the downtown San Marco Area. And it's very sad if they are planning to raze that whole area of one story buildings to put in multi-stories. A two-lane street that can barely handle the traffic it currently has, will not be sufficient enough to handle all the employees that will occupy multiple multi-story buildings on that street. Therefore, the street will need to be widen, and before you know it poof, any chance at improving that area and/or making it pedestrian friendly will be gone! I would much rather see an improvement of the fabric that is already there. It could actually be a very nice and walkable street. As Hank said "Perhaps this scale of monster was not intended for this area". It would be better off in the downtown San Marco or Brooklyn.
Wait, there's a downtown San Marco?!
Scrap these plans and throw up Modis #2 at this location.
Sorry, the Southbank! The Skyway stop says San Marco :)
Quote from: Ugh... on May 29, 2009, 03:47:20 PM
And it's very sad if they are planning to raze that whole area of one story buildings to put in multi-stories.
There are no buildings on the site. The little building with no windows, that was on the corner, has already been demolished.
Quote from: Jason on May 29, 2009, 03:21:12 PM
I agree that it will dwarf its surroundings in the short term, but it will eventually fit right in with future midrise development.
I was referencing the above.
He never said they would. They're plenty of surface lots that can be built over. However, soem of those occupants in those low buildings probably want to raise them up a little bit for flooding puposes.
In Jason's defense: I'm not saying, I'm just saying.
Stand in that intersection (or use Google Earth) and look north and tell me what you see two blocks away. You'll notice Baptist Eye Institute, Regional Cancer Center, Nemours, and other medical offices.
Density and highrises have gobbled up every bit of historic Jax since the inception of Cowford and the eventual birth of the highrise building. I'm sure the farmers that once inhabited the northbank would be turning in their graves after seeing what replaced their once sleepy little cattle crossing. Just as those that inhabit the neighborhood in subject would gasp at a towering 100' monster shadowing their store or home. Sure, you could argue that this building could easily squat on one of many vacant lots further north, however, it would hard to argue that this area will forever remain a single story casual shopping district sitting between two burgeoning districts (San Marco Square and the Southbank Medical and office district).
Wouldn't you say that the Modis building looked out of place in the midst of the downtown core when it was built? Now look at it. It blends in nicely with all of the other towers surrounding it. Call me optimistic, but I still believe that this area will eventually grow taller as the core fills up and spreads outwards.
And with regards to the architecture, or lack thereof, it is all in the eye of the beholder and our opinions are our own.
Screw the stucco, just put bubblewrap over it and paint it brown.
I may be a bit of an idealist, but I agree that the area between San Marco Square and I-95 will eventually be full of buildings of this size or larger. It will be interesting to see what effect that has on the residential neighborhoods between San Marco Blvd and Hendricks Ave.
Jason, good architecture is not subjective it is learned! And yes, there are good architects and there are bad architects just like there are good and bad accountants, good and bad doctors, etc. You know I like a lot of wines but I certainly would never claim to be a wine connoisseur. But you are right my opinions are my own, although I feel pretty confident saying that any quality architect would agree with me.
The fact is this building simply does not fit into it's context and this issue was never seemingly addressed. I'm not sure why you feel so strongly about defending a poorly designed building, maybe you're the designer? not sure. But regardless, I am not saying to not to build up this area, I'm promoting thoughtfulness of design and context which is afterall what good architecture is all about. If I was looking at thoughtful proposal of a mid-rise building with thoughtful renderings I would most likely be on your side because good progress and good development are good! I cannot however sit here and say that it's OK to propose mediocrity for the sake of progress.
As Captain Zissou said "It looks very similar to the East San Marco sales center on Atlantic, which in turn looks like the East San Marco renderings, which look like San Marco Place. Jacksonville.....The Istanbul of the West....?" How can that be good?
Oh and the Modis building is an architectural jem!
I have no ties to the design whatsoever, nor am I an architect, but am in the engineering field. I've seen hundreds of proposals both local and abroad, great and horrible, and honestly see this proposal as an attractive and effecient use of a small peice of property that will fill a need that adheres to an obviously outdated and ineffective development overlay all while containing the parking within the building allowing for zero lot line dense infill to surround it further ehnancing the walkability of the district.
Whew! That is one helluva run on sentence! :)
For the record Ugh... I'm enjoying this debate and appreciate your input. New blood is welcomed here at MetroJax and it seems you have a good head on your shoulders, despite your love for the "cube farm" in Ponte Vedra... :)
I agree that the Modis is an architectural gem.
For everyone else, here are a couple Goggle Earth snapshots of the site and its surroundings. You should be able to picture the proposed building. It should be a little bit shorter than the Eye Institure building a couple blocks away.
The site in question is the northeast corner across from Peterbrooke (see center of photo 1)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/DowntownfromSanMarco-1.jpg)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/DowntownfromSanMarco-2.jpg)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/DowntownfromSanMarco-3.jpg)
Quote from: Ugh... on May 29, 2009, 04:51:11 PM
Oh and the Modis building is an architectural jem!
So you think it's ugly?
Any updates going on with that project?