Urban Infill: A Courthouse Square for Jacksonville?
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/565451994_q4usv-M.jpg)
Now that the Duval County Courthouse is finally under construction, Metro Jacksonville takes a look at the plans for the remaining courthouse parcels.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2009-jul-urban-infill-a-courthouse-square-for-jacksonville
Ennis,
Did Misty mention getting the planning and architectural community involved in the formative stages of developing the greenspace around the courthouse. I fear plans will be finalized without getting public critique and we'll end up with another Main Street pocket park situation. A poorly designed and ill placed park that is underutilized by the city's public.
For this space to be any bit successful, the homeless situation will need to somehow be cleaned up. Look how nice Hemming Plaza is, yet most people won't walk near there unless they have a group of people with them or there is a large event going on.
Yes - I know the homeless problem is a completely different topic all together, but the unfortunate truth is that a lot of people will avoid areas with homeless lingering around. I hate to be a Negative Nancy, but we need to address topic...
i think it's just a shame that a parking garage came before the courthouse. Now the parking garage, covers a portion, eventhough not the greatest of architectual works, from a full panoramic view from our downtowns arteries. I also think had they gone vertical it would've completed our other structures. This just feels out of place. Here's hoping that the administration knows what they're doing.
Quote from: urbanjacksonville on July 24, 2009, 06:43:09 AM
Ennis,
Did Misty mention getting the planning and architectural community involved in the formative stages of developing the greenspace around the courthouse. I fear plans will be finalized without getting public critique and we'll end up with another Main Street pocket park situation. A poorly designed and ill placed park that is underutilized by the city's public.
Unfortunately, no. There was no mention of getting the public or local planning and architectural community involved.
Quote from: Prax_N_Jax on July 24, 2009, 07:48:18 AM
Here's hoping that the administration knows what they're doing.
lol
Your comments are not necessarily out of place Hurricane. In fact the homeless problem confronts every project that unfolds downtown.
I laughed out loud when I got to the point that the article said and now back to Jacksonville and then there was a picture of crap after all the nice photos of Nashville. Tis a shame that great opportunities continue to be squandered.
Jacksonville doesn't need a new "public square". There are already a lot of parks in the urban core, with more (Brooklyn) planned.
The Klutho Park string has everything it needs to be THE park in the city.....(lots of open, green space, water, city skyline views, baseball field, bandstand, fountain, even tennis courts & basketball court if you wanna count those)..... but it's been neglected for a looong time. That's soon to change, hopefully, with the upcoming parks project.
It'd be very nice to have another green space or mini-park Downtown, but a major "public square" isn't needed and would come at the expense of the existing and neglected parks already in the areas, i fear.
This is actually some positive news on several levels. Some public green space will go a long way in connecting the courthouse with the surrounding city blocks. It will encourage more pedestrian activity as well as create an attractive front door to the courthouse... Also, as much as everyone loves to complain about our courthouse design, take a look at the one Nashville has. At least ours doesn't look like that!
what does the city intend to do with the old courthouse once the new one is finished. Does it not make sense to have a plan in place for that also to avoid our common move/neglect/demo mentality?
I agree, until the homeless issues can be addressed, public spaces downtown are going to be homeless hangouts and not vibrant public spaces. Perhaps if the homeless shelters were spread out across town, closer to potential services and jobs it would go a long way to making downtown a vibrant place again.
(http://www.supladoonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/luneta.jpg)
this is Luneta Park in Manila, Philippines. loving the tree line. this park co habits within the urban core!
(http://bp1.blogger.com/_PjhakWARoVQ/Rr6xyswryEI/AAAAAAAAASQ/QbIQ0jiKA4k/s1600-h/Luneta+Park+Manila+-+the+orchidarium.jpg)
nice lil botanical garden
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2484/3648272926_77028ef6f6.jpg)
Rizal Monument in Luneta Park
I noticed in this picture below that Nashville's building is both its Courthouse AND City Hall. In the photos, the apparent size of their building is smaller than just our Courthouse. How can this be? Are our buildings bloated? I wouldn't be surprised ;) .
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/562467985_E783t-M.jpg)
We're a bigger city than Nashville, so it makes sense that our government buildings would be bigger.
This is their historic courthouse (we tore our old one down for a parking garage). There are other facilities, in the immediate area, that host portions of Nashville's courthouse functions.
Quote from: nestliving on July 24, 2009, 12:05:45 PM
what does the city intend to do with the old courthouse once the new one is finished. Does it not make sense to have a plan in place for that also to avoid our common move/neglect/demo mentality?
I believe the plan is to either set aside the land for convention space or sell the property back to the private sector. That property has been included as a part of the Mayor's visioning process.
Quote from: nestliving on July 24, 2009, 12:05:45 PMwhat does the city intend to do with the old courthouse once the new one is finished. Does it not make sense to have a plan in place for that also to avoid our common move/neglect/demo mentality?
My personal feeling is that we should relocate our convention center to this property, through a public private partnership with the Hyatt Ownership (remember, this building is not owned by Hyatt, but by a franchisee, similar to a McDonalds), then turn teh other facility back into a Transportation Center.
I hope the land is sold to a developer and quality Pedestrian Oriented Design is constructed
Part of me would rather see the lawn sold off to private developers. Another part of me likes the idea of a public space the creates a great looking "front yard" for the courthouse.
Either way, it has to be done right.
A great green space in front of the courthouse would excellent for rallies and that sort of thing if there is enough space to hold that kind of crowd. Have speakers speaking right from the courthouse steps flanked on each side with gardens and maybe a couple fountains. Could be quite a scene.
How many acres is the green space? Will it have utilities to support public events on it? Any tree plantings, fountains, sculpture, seating, lighting, etc. Or, just a great big grassy area??
I'm still waiting for an explanation of the traffic flow between the side streets and the arching road (Monroe) immediately in front of the building. From the drawing in the article, it looks like Monroe may convert from one way eastbound to two way in front of the Courthouse. Is this the plan?
While I recognize the need to keep continuity with Monroe, it sure looks awkward in connecting with this and other area streets and cuts substantially into whatever ambiance the green space might offer city dwellers. In other words, a little of a lot of things but none done right. Just like the building itself!
A real missed opportunity not to line the parking garage "out front" with what will be much needed retail when all the lawyers and their clients "cluster" around this area over the next few years.
I believe that garage does have empty retail spaces along Adams, facing this space and the courthouse. From the courthouse drawings, all I can tell at this point is that there will be a large sidewalk between Adams and Monroe, with green space on either side.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-8214-dec_08_ddrb_agenda_for_web_page_41.jpg)
Looking at the site layout, it might be better to just go ahead and close that weird curved section of Monroe. The money used to construct it, could be put into making the public space in front of the courthouse more impressive.
I'm expecting only the best from our city leaders, perhaps a mobile home park on the riverfront? Or a courthouse made of double-wides... Hey, it would be within the theme of the "city".
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: stjr on July 24, 2009, 05:13:07 PM
I'm still waiting for an explanation of the traffic flow between the side streets and the arching road (Monroe) immediately in front of the building. From the drawing in the article, it looks like Monroe may convert from one way eastbound to two way in front of the Courthouse. Is this the plan?
The graphic posted by Lake makes it clear that Monroe will continue to be one-way eastbound...and that the streets on either side will also remain one-way
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-8214-dec_08_ddrb_agenda_for_web_page_41.jpg)
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 24, 2009, 09:15:38 PM
Quote from: stjr on July 24, 2009, 05:13:07 PM
I'm still waiting for an explanation of the traffic flow between the side streets and the arching road (Monroe) immediately in front of the building. From the drawing in the article, it looks like Monroe may convert from one way eastbound to two way in front of the Courthouse. Is this the plan?
The graphic posted by Lake makes it clear that Monroe will continue to be one-way eastbound...and that the streets on either side will also remain one-way
Tufsu, I can see that possibility but not knowing the width of the road, striping, or the signage, it's not a given that it's not a two-way segment. Especially, if one doesn't automatically take the implication of your one-way comment: That Monroe street's upper angled exit to Pearl Street (which is the right-side vertical street in the drawing that is currently one-way toward the drawing bottom) must be designated "Do Not Enter" facing the oncoming Pearl street traffic and that all traffic taking such exit from Monroe MUST cross Pearl and continue eastward on the remainder of Monroe.
Your observation does seem to be the most plausible one and I will take it on your authority that it is correct unless otherwise overruled.
I am all for an interactive public space in front of the courthouse, however, I am beginning to worry that once again the city has Attention Deficit Disorder.
With public funds hard to get and our local economy fairly stagnant, I would like to see us approach projects one at a time. We must make sure that our parks are unique, have a purpose, and fulfill a need in the city as well as complement the surrounding environment.
We have heard recent talk about improvements to Metro Park, a new park around Friendship Fountain, the new Unity Plaza on Riverside, and now designed public space in front of the Courthouse. We need to focus on an area and get it off the ground before moving to another. I feel our city planners fail to realize that all of these public spaces will not survive with out the public. Why is RAM successful? Because it is close to residential areas and provides a unique service. Why do we see people enjoying a picnic in Memorial Park and not Metro Park? Because people want to walk or bike to a picnic, not drive for 30 minutes and because there are shops and restaurants across the street.
I think Unity Plaza has by far the most potential because of the planned hotel, future restaurant and its location. If this plaza is done right it will create a unique place for intimate outdoor performances.
With regards to a Courthouse Square, I think a logical purpose for right now is to be designed as a space for public rallies, weekend fundraisers. Keep in mind that this area will continue to be a M-F 9-5 area of downtown because no one lives in this part of downtown. No one will drive to have a picnic by the courthouse on the weekends, and RAM and Unity Plaza are going to make Riverside the place to be on Saturdays.
Honestly for right now, I would prefer it to be simple and inexpensive. Make it all grass and plant some trees. In the future, we can look at how Lavilla grows and then remake the courthouse green into a park that fulfills the neighborhood's need. This makes more sense to me and when we do create something in the space, we won't have to wreck millions of dollars of pavers and fountains to do it. Let's leave it as a true green space for the time being and put our energy and money into making Unity Plaza work.
^^ Very, very well said, brainstormer.
I fear all the money spent on Metro Park will be largely a waste until development of The Shipyards takes place. It has all the potential to be another mega Main Street pocket Park.
I do agree that the city continues to spread themselves out too thin. All of these spaces (including Unity Plaza) will be seldom used until they are fully integrated and connected with their surroundings and existing destinations. This is why I keep hammering home the point of connectivity and compact clustering of complimenting uses.
For example, RAM is great for what it is, but because its isolated, we can't get the most out of it. Bridge aside, imagine if it were actually in Five Points or adjacent to the Landing? You would have a tone of people visiting the market and mixing in with the commercial district surrounding it.
At some point, if we really want true vibrancy (quick), we're going to have to pick a central spot and focus on adding a mix of things immediately adjacent to each other to take it to the next level.
Both of you, Vic and Lake are right on.
I don't think Met Park improvements right now are going to make a difference because we still haven't come up with a plan to connect this area with the rest of the urban core. If we develop the Shipyards, incorporate residential units into the area, tear down the expressway between Liberty Street and the Hart Bridge, and add skyway/streetcar to connect the stadiums to the core, I guarantee the city would see the benefits of putting $20 million into Met Park. But until the above happens, the park will continue to be neglected by the public.
I also agree that the city needs to pick one area to focus attention on. Until we have one vibrant spot to use as a model, the city will continue it's back and forth growth. One restaurant opens over here, another closes over there. A building is built here, another one torn down there. We aren't getting anywhere!!! It's so frustrating!!!
I have often wondered what the building is on the right side of the photo. It is equipped with generators and razor wire around the roof... seems alot for such a small nondescript building...
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/599777795_qoB2y-M.jpg)
Quote from: brainstormer on July 25, 2009, 10:06:21 AM
Both of you, Vic and Lake are right on.
I don't think Met Park improvements right now are going to make a difference because we still haven't come up with a plan to connect this area with the rest of the urban core. If we develop the Shipyards, incorporate residential units into the area, tear down the expressway between Liberty Street and the Hart Bridge, and add skyway/streetcar to connect the stadiums to the core, I guarantee the city would see the benefits of putting $20 million into Met Park. But until the above happens, the park will continue to be neglected by the public.
Met Park is probably the worst public site to invest in right now, imo. Short of maintaining what is already there and removing the fences, its too isolated to spend our limited dollars upgrading first. One day, it will be better connected when the Shipyards is fully developed, but that may take another 20-30 years. Who wants to wait that long for a vibrant waterfront to develop?
QuoteI also agree that the city needs to pick one area to focus attention on. Until we have one vibrant spot to use as a model, the city will continue it's back and forth growth. One restaurant opens over here, another closes over there. A building is built here, another one torn down there. We aren't getting anywhere!!! It's so frustrating!!!
This illustrates how spread out we are. Everyone considers Baltimore's Inner Harbor to be a well planned and vibrant space. However, people overlook how compact it is. If this area were in DT Jax, it would fit between the Acosta Bridge and Berkman Plaza.
Baltimore Inner Harbor up close
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/600015053_n28CN-M.jpg)
Baltimore Inner City Aerial
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/600014980_faZZ2-M.jpg)
Downtown Jacksonville Aerial (same scale with Inner Harbor overlay)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/600015022_6PUdL-M.jpg)
Imagine if we took the $26 million intended for Met Park and invested it on both sides of the river between the Acosta and Main Street Bridge? With places like the TU Performing Arts Center, Omni, Landing, RCB, Friendship Park, MOSH, etc. already established, we'd have a head start in creating a vibrant district in the heart of the core. Drop those $26 million in Met Park and all you will have is a nice spot for isolated short term events near the stadium. Drop it in the heart of the core, in a way that better integrates what's already there, and you just may see people on the sidewalks on an around the clock basis.
I think you'd eat that money up real quick building the Landing 800 space parking garage the city promised to build back in 1985 and haven't gotten around to it.
Yes, you would. In 2004, it was estimated that a new garage would cost around $19.2 million. However, $26 million would stretch pretty far, if used on minor "no-frills" projects that make our existing structures and landmarks better integrated with one another. Examples of projects that don't have to be budget busters but pay off big time include:
A. Water Street Streetcar line (Prime Osborn to Bay/Newnan)
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-4180-waterstreetstreetcar.jpg)
This stretch is roughly a mile. A no-frills streetcar line could be as low as $5 million. However, it would directly connect the convention center (future transporation center) with the Landing, Laura Street, Omni, Hyatt, TU Performing Arts Center and East Bay/Florida Theater. It also gives the city the opportunity to use the Water Street garage for the Landing's additional parking requirments. So for $5 million, you connect a good number of existing destinations with something that has the power to attract infill development on the surface lots in between. Plus it serves as the initial segment of JTA's proposed streetcar system.
B. Friendship Fountain
It has been estimated by the city that it will cost $865,000 to fix Friendship Fountain. Why not spend $2 -$3 million restoring the fountain and greening up the surrounding park to make it more attractive? As time goes on and money is raised, future phases could include the redevelopment of MOSH, RCB and that massive surface parking lot to create a better civic space.
C. Jacksonville Landing Courtyard
No matter what people may think about the Landing or Toney Sleiman, it is downtown's top destination. The city is already spending money to enhance Laura Street. Why not revisit the idea of cutting a 60' wide corridor to connect Laura with the courtyard & the waterfront? Doing this fully integrates the waterfront and courtyard with Laura Street and Hemming Plaza. With a streetcar passing through at Independent & Laura, you now have the opportunity to open entertainment & dining activities in the Landing, up to the rest of downtown, thus spreading infill development north from the river. As for completely redeveloping the Landing, that can come at a later date.
D. Connectivity
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/downtown_positives/RIVERWATCH-PARK-JASON.jpg)
Shown above, Hogan Street Park would be an example of something that would better integrate nearby destinations with each other. In this case, they would be the Landing, the river, Omni and the performing arts center. The key to vibrancy is to set nearby spaces up in a manner that allows integrated activity and use on an around the clock basis. Imagine if a forgotten strip of land like this in the heart of downtown was lined with entrances and outdoor dining from the spaces surrounding it? How much would it cost to add sidewalks, a fountain, landscaping, outdoor seating and signage, that better integrates the surrounding uses with the space? My guess, is that it would be far less than $26 million.
Anyway, I'm sure if we put our heads together, we could come up with more creative/affordable ideas that change the face and energy of the core rapidly, if there were $26 million to work with.
$865, plus to fix the fountain well $700 thou wasted on the mainstreet pocket park could have gone in that direction. This is why I have a problem with the city, they waste money and have poor decision making when it comes to proper planning yet they want more money to waste. Lake your last post make so much sense, but that's the problem, it makes sense.
The thing with adding a few sidewalks, grass, fountain and benches to the street between TUPAC and the Landing is what happens to the functions it now performs? How does the dumpster truck access the compactor in the landing west compactor building? What takes over for the main entrance to the Terry Theater? How does the fire department access the fire truck access down the center of the Landing? .... the Riverwalk? The back side of the TUPAC? Where do the limos park during an event?
Cutting a 60’ swath through the heart of the Landing gives many problems. It takes out one of the escalators, the middle of the roof sign, and a large part of the food court . It reduces the rentable square footage of the building and kills spaces that always seem to be filled. Besides all that it creates structural problems for the building. This would take a lot of the $26m.
I agree though that spending more on Metro park seems unnessary right now but I never go there any more to know what the current status is.
Quote from: Overstreet on July 29, 2009, 03:39:33 PM
The thing with adding a few sidewalks, grass, fountain and benches to the street between TUPAC and the Landing is what happens to the functions it now performs? How does the dumpster truck access the compactor in the landing west compactor building? What takes over for the main entrance to the Terry Theater? How does the fire department access the fire truck access down the center of the Landing? .... the Riverwalk? The back side of the TUPAC? Where do the limos park during an event?
If a decision were made to better integrate the uses, a discussion that resolves these issues could take place. Without diving too much into the issue, a main walkway could be developed with a width that could accommodate special vehicle access (if needed). Jacksonville is full of parking lots so some uses, such as limo parking, could be relocated. As for the main entrance to the Terry Theater, the park/plaza would become the main entrance.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/507099619_EtPuz-M.jpg)
RAM is a great example of a public space designed for both pedestrian and vehicular use. The same concept could be applied to accomodate service uses between the TU center and the Landing.QuoteCutting a 60’ swath through the heart of the Landing gives many problems. It takes out escalators, the middle of the roof sign, the entrance to the food court and that club up on the second floor. It reduces the rentable square footage of the building and kills spaces that always seem to be filled. Besides all that it creates structural problems for the building. This would take a lot of the $26m.
I'll have to look into our archives, but I believe the original deal to open the courtyard was under $26 million. Plans have already been drawn so, structural issues, etc. have been resolved. Those plans could be dusted off, modified where needed and implemented under a public private partnership. This would also benefit the Landing since the area that would come out is common space that can't be leased (excluding Karlene's, which could be located to one of the Landing's current vacant spots). In the long run, such a move would make interior landing spaces more valuable (better visibility) while reducing the center's operations cost (less energy & expense to maintain non leasable areas).
In any event, even if opening the courtyard to Laura Street took the entire $26 million, it would still be a better public investment alone, than sinking it in to Metropolitan Park. While the Metropolitan Park plans are impressive, because the site is isolated, it will never be more than a seldom used green space that does not significantly contribute additional development and vibrancy in downtown. Its isolation is something that can not be solved without significant redevelopment around the stadium, Commodore's Point and the Shipyards. While this can happen, its probably 20 to 30 years down the road.
Whether its Friendship Fountain, enhancing mobility or the Northbank waterfront, dropping that same amount into something that enhances the usability and attractiveness of existing popular destinations and their immediate surroundings, will have a greater positive impact.
I worry about the location of Monroe in front of the Courthouse, I already got lifted off my feet and slammed to the floor once, can anyone spell, OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING? I was IN that Post Office! We first thought the air force (Tinker AFB / NAS) had dropped a B-1 bomber in the middle of the city. When some of us old fart Vietnam Vets shouted "NO!, THAT WAS A BOMB!" I realize it's a one in a million risk, but that millionth time is a true MF!
Decorative security walls? Blast dirverters? Note how the new Federal Courthouse has completely blocked the threat of a major explosion with planters, plazas, walks and stairs. IT'S ALL ABOUT SECURITY. Hell I live, breathe, eat and drink transportation, but I'm not real fond of Ryder Trucks.
I agree that the Mayors big idea, should be between Berkman and the Acosta Bridge (BTW, ACOSTA? WHERE THE HELL IS THE ORANGE PAINT?) That landing connection doesn't have to take out the middle of the sign, it wouldn't even have to take out the second floor. If we wanted that open connection it could be done like a castle gate with business on two sides and above.
How far would those millions go in establishing "The Jacksonville Stars," bronze statues on the Riverwalk? They cost around $10,000 each.
As for the Courthouse Green, bravo COJ, now "your finally using our brain." (Babe Hardy) The splash pond in front of the Nashville Courthouse is awesome. I'm amazed that as "The River City By The Sea," has so few water features.
OCKLAWAHA
Ock....you have a better idea of what should be going on downtown than the current Administration does! Not only have we wasted 16 Million Dollars to this point but we appear to be on track for another 230 Million. Somehow I just don't think that Mayor Johnny get the point. It is not prudent to make up a plan as you go along but to have one in place to start with! No one seems to take this into consideration , not to mention just how are we to pay for this edifice? I will not support another tax hike in anyway shape or form until the current Administration gets its financial house in order. The days of just writing checks to try and solve problems is over! The COJ can not afford to write any more checks that the public has to fund!
Maybe we are just approaching the issue from the wrong direction. How about we just set some prefab bldgs on some barges the COJ can lease and anchor a new courthouse on the St Johns? That would be quick and easy and would not cost 230 Million Dollars. When the river turns green no worrys theres the lawn! Security would easy...power could come from shore units or run cables to each bldg! Cheap easy and quick!
I believe each county is required by the state to provide county court facilities that meet standards. CS, your standards might be lower than the state's and the judges'.
Your probably correct.....but trying to think outside of the box! No matter what edifice is erected it will be over budget, mismanaged and the only ones who will make out will be those in the inner circle of power. You and I will get to pay for it. If the barge idea is out in left field.....there are plenty of mothballed ships that could be positioned anywhere along that section of river....tie it into the water street end and go from there. I just have reservations about how we are going to pay for Mayor Johnny's white elephant from hades! No public input.....no planning , other than outside interests as well as workers, no vision of what could be rather than what will be. This has a tendency to ruffle my feathers because this is a blatant example of ignoring common sense!
I'm no fan of the federal government but I've got to admit they did a pretty good job on the federal courthouse. A very functional building for a pretty good price.
And right behind it is going to be an architectural monstrosity that is so poorly planned that courthouse workers are going to need Segways to get from place to place in any reasonable amount of time. It looks like an explosion in a column factory crossed with a shopping mall. Are the judges afraid of heights? Why couldn't they build UP?
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on August 17, 2009, 04:48:33 PM
I'm no fan of the federal government but I've got to admit they did a pretty good job on the federal courthouse. A very functional building for a pretty good price.
I agree. Much of that is due to Uncle Sam going vertical. Had we done this for the County, we would have something that is much better for Downtown AND cheaper for the taxpayers. Unfortunately, our pleas went ignored and unanswered. I don't get it since it seems so obvious.
A future problem is that adding on to the County building will be difficult, but with a tower, one could have always built a second (or third, etc) tower on an adjacent block and connected them with a common ground floor and/or cross walks. And, if the building is ever "sold" or abandoned, its adaptive reuse might be easier with a tower than an oddly designed government-style building.