Urban Core Construction Update - March 2010
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/803691433_dn4mK-M.jpg)
A look at the status of various projects under construction in and around Downtown Jacksonville during the month of March.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-mar-urban-core-construction-update-march-2010
Wow - lots of good stuff happening. Good to see Burro Bags moving forward. Anyone have more info on Jackson's Grill and The Loft? And is that Herschel Street office building new construction? Nice.
The Loft has been advertised in Folio Weekly just as "coming soon" with no real description. I assume it will be another nightlife venue.
Jackson's Grill: http://www.jacksonvilleconfidential.com/2009/12/jacksons-grill.html
The doctors office on Herschel Street is new construction. Actually fits in the neighborhood pretty well.
Quote from: Dog Walker on March 15, 2010, 08:19:38 AM
The doctors office on Herschel Street is new construction. Actually fits in the neighborhood pretty well.
You know, some of the 50's, 60's, (and perhaps), the 70's and 80's buildings also fit into the neighborhood "pretty well". Every fake "old" building that goes up, adds to a sense of historical confusion and reveals the limits of our imagination, regarding the definition of historic. If in ten years riverside continues to slide toward the appearance of a Thomas Kincade painting, yet it satisfies folks desire for safety and nostalgia, is that a good thing?
one another note, those pipes coming off the roof are a little awkward. Grandma's house never had those. No chimney either, I guess fireside chats are out too.
There's isn't anything particularly "fake" about using an architectural style from a previous era. For most of our history, houses were built based on a centuries old building techniques and styles. There's no rule that we have to discard the past every decade. Best to retain the best parts of it as we move forward.
Sure. For example look at our new courthouse. The Acropolis pasted onto the front of an oversize Parthenon. That's recycling and old style for sure. ugh!
Of course it's a forgery to in-fill and redevelop lots in a diverse historic nieghborhood with replicas (albeit watered down). This point has already been stated better elsewhere, but consider this: with regard to tear downs and redevelopement in Riverside/Avondale, it's only newer structures that fall,(post 1950) often to be replaced with the "faux historic style". Now stop and think about how that contributes to a loss of our historic narritive, loss of stylistic variety with in the district, and contamination of the value (monetary and spiritual) of the historic district. What history ARE we making by concouisly re-enginering our architectural heritage? It's quite sad and disturbing in my opinion. Maybe FAKE is the wrong word, but the fact the activity outlined above is usually championed by so-called progressives, is distrubing in it's limited and anachronistic vision for our communities future architectual fabric.
"Using" a style and being influenced by a style are two different things. I dissagree with you that the former is ok, as a rule. And even if it were, the last place it would seem appropriate would be in a "historic district". Think about that. Make refference to styles near by if you must, but it makes no sense to completly mimic 100 year old styles in the 21st century.
The national mall is filled museums, and other structures, that convey history. Think about what we have all in a row, from the Smithsonian "castle", the Modernist Hirschorn Musum (It's a big concrete cherrio with legs, if you haven't seen it), the Native American Museum, which looks like a block of sandstone carved up by martians. Next door to that, sits the botanical garden building, classical, flutted roman (inspired) collunms and 150 years of white paint. While everyone may claim a favorite (or LEAST favorite), I believe what we get from that is harmony (through diversity) and a genuine, narritive history.
This issue is of great concern for me, I remain emotionally invested in the future of the reminaing (shrinking) historic bits of JAx, and I wish that a more enlightened view of development was the rule instead of the exception.
Quote from: Miss Fixit on March 15, 2010, 07:04:04 AM
Anyone have more info on Jackson's Grill and The Loft?
I did not make it there, but Jackson's Grill had their grand opening this past Saturday. I plan to get there in the following week. From what I gathered it is a Blues theme grill and will feature Blues bands there.
The building on Herschel is a beautiful building and a great tribute to the prairie style. I think remembering and replicating great historic styles adds to a neighborhood, if done well. Clearly the courthouse is not done well, as you can't use pre-fab concrete to replicate stone. The herschel building is done well in my opinion. Also. it's a coastal engineering firm, not a doctor's office.
Courthouse is the only thing really going on. Come on recession/depression/economic depression, go away, shoo! Let's get some or all of our skyscraper developments back on the board!
"HU"
Quote from: Captain Zissou on March 15, 2010, 11:19:43 AM
The building on Herschel is a beautiful building and a great tribute to the prairie style. I think remembering and replicating great historic styles adds to a neighborhood, if done well. Clearly the courthouse is not done well, as you can't use pre-fab concrete to replicate stone. The herschel building is done well in my opinion. Also. it's a coastal engineering firm, not a doctor's office.
It might be a tribute, but it's far from great. Where in being derivative is greatness? Lety's all agree to reserve that word for the pioneirs and the inovators. (who build elsewhere). Ther's nothing artfull about this building, it looks exactly like all the other's put up in the last 5 years (although this one is green). Praire style-lite.
How could the replica old buildings "add" to the nieghborhood? Besides counting addresses.
There's little evidence to show that anyone wonders about this very deeply.
Im glad to see how much is going on. HOwever, Im ready for the real estate market to rebound well. We had some pretty great residental projects in the works that have been canned due to the economy. I was soooo looking to forward to the St John being built.
John Gorrie is being converted into condos right?
Quote from: 9a is my backyard on March 15, 2010, 12:49:27 PM
John Gorrie is being converted into condos right?
Right. I think there are plans for retail along Stockton St. facing the Marybuilt Building as well. Taking down the windowless brick boxes there will be an improvement.
Regarding the Powers Park "reconstruction" that is the best spin I've heard in quite awhile and I don't think that is anything to praise in this update. The City & DOT have destroyed a beautiful greenspace and set a very bad precedent as well. This was a city park with 60+year old Loblolly & Slash pine that was absolutely picture perfect until DOT clearcut 70% of the park and dug a retention pond. In my understanding, city park land is supposed to be protected from this sort of travesty by deed restriction. I can almost guarantee you this will end up being a disgusting eyesore. You know the drill, dig a retention pond, put up a chain link fence and watch the garbage accumulate against it as we've seen all over the city.
This neighborhood was turning the corner before the RE downturn and this is an unnecessary nail in the proverbial coffin. I sold a home to customers a couple years ago that overlooked this park and this was one of the major selling points. This has easily taken away an additional 10-20% of their value. It is disgusting to behold right now. Neither they nor their neighbors were never notified of this work even though DOT says that it sent out notices and no one ever responded. I know several people in the area that would have responded vehemently had it not been planned in secrecy. I see exactly how it happened, someone "in the know" decided that this n'hood wasn't worthy of notice or due process.
Re. the engineering firm offices newly built on Herschel, I see no problem with the building trying to echo its neighbors. In its setback and massing, it was clearly trying to look like a residential structure that had been turned into a commercial structure--a not uncommon circumstance in the neighborhood--which means it was trying to blend into, not disrupt, the historical fabric. I have absolutely no problem with cool, modern new construction in the historic districts, but if the owner/builder doesn't want to go that route, then God bless him for building beautiful, new, historically influenced designs. What's the beef with that? It's clearly new, but doesn't try to bludgeon that fact into your brain.
Quote from: choosing2disappear on March 15, 2010, 10:42:53 AM
Of course it's a forgery to in-fill and redevelop lots in a diverse historic nieghborhood with replicas (albeit watered down). This point has already been stated better elsewhere, but consider this: with regard to tear downs and redevelopement in Riverside/Avondale, it's only newer structures that fall,(post 1950) often to be replaced with the "faux historic style".
The national mall is filled museums, and other structures, that convey history. Think about what we have all in a row, from the Smithsonian "castle", the Modernist Hirschorn Musum (It's a big concrete cherrio with legs, if you haven't seen it), the Native American Museum, which looks like a block of sandstone carved up by martians. Next door to that, sits the botanical garden building, classical, flutted roman (inspired) collunms and 150 years of white paint. While everyone may claim a favorite (or LEAST favorite), I believe what we get from that is harmony (through diversity) and a genuine, narritive history.
This issue is of great concern for me, I remain emotionally invested in the future of the reminaing (shrinking) historic bits of JAx, and I wish that a more enlightened view of development was the rule instead of the exception.
Actually, your assertion about only the post-1950 Riverside buildings falling is flat out wrong. Between 1970 and 1995, when the Riverside Historic district was formed, more than 1400 of the 5500 structures that predated 1930 were torn down. Honestly, much of what was built in the district post-1950 was pure crap--just a low-grade commercial response to the opening of the zoning floodgates by city planners.
As an aside, I respect your comments about the Native American Museum on the mall, but--as a DC native--I must urge you to get inside that thing. The interior is one of the most stunning, spiritual places I've ever seen. A true testament to how an architect can craft an interior space to both shock and awe.
Quote from: floridaforester on March 15, 2010, 07:34:26 PM
Neither they nor their neighbors were never notified of this work even though DOT says that it sent out notices and no one ever responded. I know several people in the area that would have responded vehemently had it not been planned in secrecy. I see exactly how it happened, someone "in the know" decided that this n'hood wasn't worthy of notice or due process.
Forester, you wouldn't be talking about those public FDOT hearings that Ock and Tufsu hold up as sterling examples of "American democracy in action", would you? The ones everyone in town is supposed to be informed of and drop everything to rush out become instant experts on or waste time being dismissed as a non-professional that lacks standing in the court of FDOT ideas?
Just like roads become irreversible projects in some mysterious system of cross-approving bureaucracies ("You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours"), it appears you were steamrolled by the mass transit avoiding FDOT road building machine.
do you have any better ideas for public involvement/engagement?
Quote from: tufsu1 on March 15, 2010, 10:44:02 PM
do you have any better ideas for public involvement/engagement?
I think it is the best method if, indeed, notices are actually sent to the affected neighborhood. My guess is that, at most, it was posted inconspicuously once or twice in the Daily Record just in case a concerned attorney living there happened to notice it amongst the numerous other notices.
The point I was trying to make is that this should never have been allowed to happen to a City park in any neighborhood.
floridaforester, I was shocked to see the destruction myself, considering it was a pretty nice passive urban park. Do you know if plans include building the pond as an amenity with landscaping and paths?
Quote from: tufsu1 on March 15, 2010, 10:44:02 PM
do you have any better ideas for public involvement/engagement?
Tufsu, yes. I posted such thoughts on another MJ board where we discussed this a few weeks ago. No time to retrieve now.
Quote from: floridaforester on March 15, 2010, 11:54:26 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on March 15, 2010, 10:44:02 PM
do you have any better ideas for public involvement/engagement?
I think it is the best method if, indeed, notices are actually sent to the affected neighborhood. My guess is that, at most, it was posted inconspicuously once or twice in the Daily Record just in case a concerned attorney living there happened to notice it amongst the numerous other notices.
The point I was trying to make is that this should never have been allowed to happen to a City park in any neighborhood.
nope...PD&E studies requires that notices be sent to folks living within at least 350 feet of the proposed corridor...and my guess is that the Outer Beltway study (which stjr keeps harping on) may have been sent to even more folks than that
Quote from: grimss on March 15, 2010, 09:47:56 PM
Quote from: choosing2disappear on March 15, 2010, 10:42:53 AM
Of course it's a forgery to in-fill and redevelop lots in a diverse historic nieghborhood with replicas (albeit watered down). This point has already been stated better elsewhere, but consider this: with regard to tear downs and redevelopement in Riverside/Avondale, it's only newer structures that fall,(post 1950) often to be replaced with the "faux historic style".
The national mall is filled museums, and other structures, that convey history. Think about what we have all in a row, from the Smithsonian "castle", the Modernist Hirschorn Musum (It's a big concrete cherrio with legs, if you haven't seen it), the Native American Museum, which looks like a block of sandstone carved up by martians. Next door to that, sits the botanical garden building, classical, flutted roman (inspired) collunms and 150 years of white paint. While everyone may claim a favorite (or LEAST favorite), I believe what we get from that is harmony (through diversity) and a genuine, narritive history.
This issue is of great concern for me, I remain emotionally invested in the future of the reminaing (shrinking) historic bits of JAx, and I wish that a more enlightened view of development was the rule instead of the exception.
Actually, your assertion about only the post-1950 Riverside buildings falling is flat out wrong. Between 1970 and 1995, when the Riverside Historic district was formed, more than 1400 of the 5500 structures that predated 1930 were torn down. Honestly, much of what was built in the district post-1950 was pure crap--just a low-grade commercial response to the opening of the zoning floodgates by city planners.
As an aside, I respect your comments about the Native American Museum on the mall, but--as a DC native--I must urge you to get inside that thing. The interior is one of the most stunning, spiritual places I've ever seen. A true testament to how an architect can craft an interior space to both shock and awe.
My assertion isn't wrong; I just neglected to put it in context. I will correct that. My statement refers to post 1995, but allow me to clarify even further. I'm fully aware that Jacksonville has a horrible track record in regard to demolition of historic structures of all periods; I know this is nothing new. Yet, my larger point is that the battle lines, have changed and that has yet to be acknowledged in a comprehensive way. Ex: we aren't fighting the demolition of the mansions on "the row" in 2010, that fight was lost 30-40 years ago. Today we rally around a tiny wooden bungalow on greenwood ave. Should it be saved? Probably so. Is it as historically significant as any 5 star property from Jacksonville's Architectural Heritage, nope it's not. But we fight to protect it because the battle over the relevancy of historic structures from say 1885-1945 is over in 2010, and the vast majority of whatever is still standing, will still be here 50 years from now (even though it took the loss of most of the best examples from the period to drive this point home). This is fact. If Tony Slieman wanted to knock over a klutho, in 2010 that ain't gonna happen, even though history shows we didn't have much of a problem with that 25-30 years ago. Yet, I repeat that the argument is settled, We value "old buildings" even though it feels like it just happened, it's been that way for some time.
Now if your name is Broward, Hardwick, or Morgan, the story changes. Your assertion that much of what was built was pure crap hardly seems scientific, and frankly it will be difficult to prove one way or the other, since the decision was made (unconsciously I would assume) on expunge as much of it as possible from the historical record of the neighborhood. We'll never know what would have become of (my favorite example, but there are many, many more) the 1661 building (off Margaret st) .It would be 53 years old this year, had it not been torn down. I don't advocate to save everything from the period, but certainly a building such as that, which was known internationally, met all the criteria for preservation.
So instead of educating our community about broadening the definition of what should be considered historic, what I primarily see is that we are quite oblivious to seeing mid century works as valuable and worth saving. Besides all the value you see present in the faux-prairie style building boom, in the greater context of what we have done right and wrong as custodians of our heritage, it reads as a sentimental (and guilty) response to the demolition of years past. Visual harmony is a cop out because the layman's notion of harmony is itself misinformed. Riverside/Avondale evolved naturally as a diverse neighborhood, but it seems to be becoming less so every day.
QuoteAs an aside, I respect your comments about the Native American Museum on the mall, but--as a DC native--I must urge you to get inside that thing. The interior is one of the most stunning, spiritual places I've ever seen. A true testament to how an architect can craft an interior space to both shock and awe.
IMHO, the Native American Museum is second only to the I.M. Pei addition to the National Museum of Art across the Mall in appearance. Besides having a stunning and unique interior, the cafeteria has some of the best food in Washington. Certainly the best on the Mall, all with a Native American theme. Roast quail with wild rice, venison, buffalo burgers, corn pudding. Yum!
I am very familiar with the Taylor Hardwick medical office building that was replaced by 1661. It was a cheaply built strip mall with a wavy canopy. The plain box interior was falling down, the flat roof leaked and there was nothing but a parking lot outside. It fell into the same category as the "updating" that J. Brooks Haas did to the outside of the 5 Points Theatre Building; cheap, ugly, crap.
Quote from: Dog Walker on March 16, 2010, 01:30:10 PM
QuoteAs an aside, I respect your comments about the Native American Museum on the mall, but--as a DC native--I must urge you to get inside that thing. The interior is one of the most stunning, spiritual places I've ever seen. A true testament to how an architect can craft an interior space to both shock and awe.
IMHO, the Native American Museum is second only to the I.M. Pei addition to the National Museum of Art across the Mall in appearance. Besides having a stunning and unique interior, the cafeteria has some of the best food in Washington. Certainly the best on the Mall, all with a Native American theme. Roast quail with wild rice, venison, buffalo burgers, corn pudding. Yum!
I am very familiar with the Taylor Hardwick medical office building that was replaced by 1661. It was a cheaply built strip mall with a wavy canopy. The plain box interior was falling down, the flat roof leaked and there was nothing but a parking lot outside. It fell into the same category as the "updating" that J. Brooks Haas did to the outside of the 5 Points Theatre Building; cheap, ugly, crap.
Well, you sure know how to get my attention. I'm not sure where to start. 1661 was nothing like what you have described ( I will show you what you got wrong). It was a premiere example of the Mid century modern style of architecture. When it first opened , 1661 was a featured in a major french architectural magazine; it had an international reputation, it was cutting edge and thoughtfully designed. It did have a lovely folded-plate roof. All buildings roofs will leak if not well maintained. Did you already know that? NPR stated recently that 1/2 of the remaiming buildings by Frank Lloyd Wright are in danger of structural failure, due mostly from neglect (that nice one used in blade runner was on this list). So the fact you heard that 1661 had some leaks ininteresting trivia, but it's silly, to equate that with the building's lack of historical significance. Upon closer inspection you would have noticed a arrangement of colorfull, Italian glazed bricks placed randomly in the exterior, for a whimsical design element. All the meters and other industrial detritus were carefully hidden from view, a fact I am reminded of each time I walk around all those bits bolted to the wall across the street, behind papa john's and FedEx. Another point your unfortunately misinformed about is cost .(I have it written down around here somewhere) It was far from cheap. In fact each office had to be custom built, as each doctor needed different space/ ceiling height requirements, so in many ways the roof provided a unifying element, as well as a design element.
It also doesn't matter from a preservation P.O.V that you think that style is ugly. That irrelevant. This isn't a fashion show, it's our historic record. If we let folks demolish older buildings just because something about it bothers you, what would we have left? The unbiased assessment of its virtue is for future generations to make.
Know the facts next time before you get involved in these public dialogues. UNF has a fine documentary on Hardwick, shot in 2002, you could begin your education there. :)
Perhaps someone could post a photograph of 1661?
Quote from: Miss Fixit on March 16, 2010, 04:25:10 PM
Perhaps someone could post a photograph of 1661?
I'll do it in a flash, if someone would tell me how to upload it.
Pic: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-5303-p1110041.JPG
Pic: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/images/development/downtown_construction_update_-_june_2007/p1000774.JPG
Pic: http://media.photobucket.com/image/1661%20riverside%20ave/asonj23/070106SiteVisitPics-7-18-07-001.jpg
Pic: http://extimages2.living.net/ImagesHomeProd2/FL/idx/photos/neflmlsinc/23/475441.jpg
Quote from: Miss Fixit on March 16, 2010, 04:25:10 PM
Perhaps someone could post a photograph of 1661?
Uh no, I thought you meant the original 1661.
How would I upload photos?
my bad. i don't even remember what it looked like, and i grew up in 5 Points.
Page 3 of the PDF file below features a 1958 article in Florida Architecture by Robert Broward with a picture of the original 1661 building. This interesting article focuses on the status of Jax architecture up to 1958. Included also are pictures of outstanding contemporary architecture of Jax and renderings of the "Atlantic Coast Line" building (now CSX) and proposed City Hall and Courthouse (by the Hyatt):
http://www.docomomofl.org/57.years.broward.pdf
I for one am glad they resurfaced Riverplace, my god that thing was awful.
Quote from: reednavy on March 16, 2010, 09:00:30 PM
I for one am glad they resurfaced Riverplace, my god that thing was awful.
Next, they need to look at Riverside Avenue near Memorial Park area and the entire length of Stockton Street. Both are equally big messes and becoming un-drivable.
Quote from: stjr on March 16, 2010, 09:04:16 PM
Next, they need to look at Riverside Avenue near Memorial Park area and the entire length of Stockton Street. Both are equally big messes and becoming un-drivable.
No kiddin, it has gotten worse since I got here in 2006.
I wonder if that horrific I-10 / I-95 project is going to improve the traffic situation, particularly on Riverside Ave. where 1661 and the Publix square is located all the way down! The Historic District is essentially a "thru-way!"
From 4:00 to 7:00 there are miles of cars, bumper to bumper heading towards Roosevelt and Blanding. This area along with its roads I do not believe was built to withstand this kind of treatment.
This will not help that traffic that much as there are few options that take you away from downtown towards the south well.
It doesn't matter if they're taking city streets or not, at some point, they'll wind up on Blanding or Roosevelt because those are your only true options.
Overall though, once The Big "I" is done, traffic will reduce some, but probably not in large numbers.
Quote from: Miss Fixit on March 16, 2010, 04:25:10 PM
Perhaps someone could post a photograph of 1661?
Several different shots here....
http://s663.photobucket.com/albums/uu353/sickertus/jax/
Quote from: braeburn on March 16, 2010, 09:59:46 PMFrom 4:00 to 7:00 there are miles of cars, bumper to bumper heading towards Roosevelt and Blanding. This area along with its roads I do not believe was built to withstand this kind of treatment.
One word.....NO. Riverside is probably the best place in town to implement a starter rail line of some sort. It has decent density, its pedestrian scale and it has traffic congestion issues. Unless, some one is going to buy, demolish and tear down the properties along Park Street (like Five Points) to widen the road, you're only real viable option is efficient dependable mass transit.
I have to be honest... I much prefer 1661 in its current state. To each his own.
IMO Friendship Park was Hardwick's best accomplishment by far.
The resurfacing and/or repair of Riverside Avenue along that corridor is long overdue. Even some of the potholes they filled in a few years ago are already in disrepair.
Also, I asked in the last construction update... does anyone know what restaurant is going in at the spot on Forsythe???
Regardless of appearances and architectural merits, the current form of 1661 does much more for the neighborhood. Its retail bays are full of great tenants that really add to the walkability of the area.
I agree about riverside ave. I probably look like a drunk driver as a drive from memorial park to saint vincents. I am determined to avoid every pothole, no matter what.
Is the space in Avondale (across from the casbah, next to underwoods) finish??I noticed it fell off the update.
Stevsie,
Walked by on Saturday. It looks like most of the work is complete. The signs are up on the outside.
Much like South Florida, Jacksonville used to have an abundance of cool mid-century modern buildings, and again like South Florida, Jacksonville has rushed to tear way too many of them down and replace them with some faux "historical" style. In Miami-Dade and Broward, the replacement of choice seems to be Mediterranean, and in Duval the preference seems to be Prairie-style.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on March 17, 2010, 10:21:54 AM
Regardless of appearances and architectural merits, the current form of 1661 does much more for the neighborhood. Its retail bays are full of great tenants that really add to the walkability of the area.
I agree about riverside ave. I probably look like a drunk driver as a drive from memorial park to saint vincents. I am determined to avoid every pothole, no matter what.
Is the space in Avondale (across from the casbah, next to underwoods) finish??I noticed it fell off the update.
Well I understand what your getting at, but you can define VALUE (to the neighborhood) in many different ways. Had it not been demolished, it could be contributing as a unique historic structure. The inside could have been adapted for Einstein's or subway; a modern extension could have been built into a portion of the parking lot....
It doesn't take too much imagination to make it's survival economically viable. As for the condos upstairs? Build it elsewhere. Aren't folks on this thread gripping about the traffic congestion in that exact spot?
None of this was ever a real option because the people in the community, the stewards of the building in a sense, forgot about the big picture. If downtown, a parking garage now occupies the land where a Klutho once sat derelict, the garage creates income and convenience for many, but right and wrong of that situation should be obvious to all who read this.
Are we capable of learning from past mistakes? Collectively, this town is still living in denial. (on many issues, actually).
I know we have to move forward, but I see little evidence that tomorrow will be any better.
QuoteIt also doesn't matter from a preservation P.O.V that you think that style is ugly. That irrelevant. This isn't a fashion show, it's our historic record. If we let folks demolish older buildings just because something about it bothers you, what would we have left? The unbiased assessment of its virtue is for future generations to make.
Know the facts next time before you get involved in these public dialogues. UNF has a fine documentary on Hardwick, shot in 2002, you could begin your education there. Smiley
OK, facts. I grew up in a modern house that Bill Morgan designed for my mother. J. Brooks Haas was an investor in one of my father's businesses. Bob Broward is a personal friend and was a neighbor. I am familiar with architects and their work having hired a few for my own projects.
Taylor Hardwick is a good one. His innovative use use of space in the Hayden Burns library is fantastic. That said, every architect has his bad projects, frequently from restrictions placed on him by clients, sometimes by just bad design.
1661, the medical office building, was architecturally a bad project. Access to the offices from the parking lot was difficult. Because of the strip mall layout, the office interiors were dark and cramped. Many of the roof leaks were from skylights that had to be added post construction. At the end of its life it was almost empty of tenants because better spaces became available and Riverside Hospital had closed. While visually appealing from the outside, it did not fill it's function very well, became obsolete and could not be re-purposed.
As I think I mentioned earlier, my high school, uncle's insurance company and my childhood pediatrician's office were all Hardwick designs.
I made many visits to the Main Library.
Unfortunately, I associate the 1661 building with getting shots.
How is William Morgan doing?
I was emailing him a few years ago about one of his houses on the Intracoastal side of Jacksonville Beach. I highly recommend his books on indigenous architecture of the Americas, such as
Precolumbian Architecture of Eastern North America.
One of the interesting things about discussions involving saving historic structures is that very often the very historic structure being saved was only built because something else had been torn down. Then also, how does a downtown make room for the future historic structures? In other words, if everything is saved, then the architecture evolution of the area stops. People like the old downtown library, yet something else worth saving was torn down for it to be built. Which is better? The newer building is historic in its own way.
The choices are difficult and yet required so that the next Klutho or Morgan or Broward can have their place.
Just for the record, I am talking about commercial space as residential historic districts, I believe, need to be treated somewhat differently. However, in both cases, there will always be some “natural†selection as buildings burn or otherwise get damaged and the choice will be made for us. This seems like it should be enough to open space up for the new in residential matters but is not in commercial areas. Hence, the difficult choices.
Quote from: strider on March 20, 2010, 11:32:45 AM
how does a downtown make room for the future historic structures?
That shouldn't be an issue in downtown Jacksonville with its abundance of empty lots.