Jacksonville Historical Society: Twelve Worth Saving

[mbwright]

Regarding the Taylor Hardwick Library, I thought it would have been great to have the modern art museum there.    Many do not like the building, but I think it is very cool, and significant for modern architecture.  From what I understand he designed all of the furniture, book racks, and such.  I wonder if any of this remains?  Yes, there are many more than just 12 that are worth saving.  Maybe one day the city will understand this.

[mtraininjax]

Some of the old furnishings from the Library on Ocean are in the 4th floor executive offices of the Main library, some of the items are priceless one of a kind, too bad no one gets to see them in the public. Many of our cities great treasures are locked away from public viewing, just like the minds of some of our so called leaders.

[urbaknight]

So the Laura st Trio and the Barnett buildings are back on the demolisher's minds? What about that huge presentation that was so full of good ideas? Did they just pull the plug or something?

[If_I_Loved_you]

Annie Lytle School-Public School #4 I find this building to be an eyesore remove it! Fire Station #5 at 347 Riverside ave has history behind it. But at it's location if the city can't move it soon tear it down. Guaranty Trust and Savings Bank 101 East Bay Street remove it! Everything else in this story has Pros and Cons but could be reused in the future.

[Timkin]

Annie Lytle School-Public School #4 I find this building to be an eyesore remove it! Fire Station #5 at 347 Riverside ave has history behind it. But at it's location if the city can't move it soon tear it down. Guaranty Trust and Savings Bank 101 East Bay Street remove it! Everything else in this story has Pros and Cons but could be reused in the future.

Don't agree and apparently, neither does the Jax Historic Society, otherwise they would not be on the list.   

If I have to make a guess.. The Laura Trio might end up being spared and the rest of the buildings razed.   Annie Lytle is no more of an "eyesore" than any other landmark sitting unused, boarded up, vandalized, etc.  The Old Claude Nolan Cadilllac Building is in juat about as bad of shape.. Doesn't mean it should be razed.   Same with the Drew Home.   None of these places SHOULD be razed.   But they probably will be , because not enough people value our historic places.    Down the Street in St Augustine, much of the downtown area is at least a century old and some of it several centuries old. Jacksonville could benefit so much from valuing and making points of interest of our historic places, as St. Augustine thrives, doing so.   

Comments such as the previous , is the mindset of those who do not get it. We have destroyed so much of our history.  We need to hang on to what ever remains.  This includes  #4 , The Bank,  CNC,  The Ford Factory, the list goes on.

Or we can raze it all and finish the job started a half century ago.   That would make Jacksonville a real piece of work.

[If_I_Loved_you]

Annie Lytle School-Public School #4 I find this building to be an eyesore remove it! Fire Station #5 at 347 Riverside ave has history behind it. But at it's location if the city can't move it soon tear it down. Guaranty Trust and Savings Bank 101 East Bay Street remove it! Everything else in this story has Pros and Cons but could be reused in the future.

Don't agree and apparently, neither does the Jax Historic Society, otherwise they would not be on the list.   

If I have to make a guess.. The Laura Trio might end up being spared and the rest of the buildings razed.   Annie Lytle is no more of an "eyesore" than any other landmark sitting unused, boarded up, vandalized, etc.  The Old Claude Nolan Cadilllac Building is in juat about as bad of shape.. Doesn't mean it should be razed.   Same with the Drew Home.   None of these places SHOULD be razed.   But they probably will be , because not enough people value our historic places.    Down the Street in St Augustine, much of the downtown area is at least a century old and some of it several centuries old. Jacksonville could benefit so much from valuing and making points of interest of our historic places, as St. Augustine thrives, doing so.   

Comments such as the previous , is the mindset of those who do not get it. We have destroyed so much of our history.  We need to hang on to what ever remains.  This includes  #4 , The Bank,  CNC,  The Ford Factory, the list goes on.

Or we can raze it all and finish the job started a half century ago.   That would make Jacksonville a real piece of work.

Would we have been better off if Jacksonville looked like it did in the 1950's? Then we could have called it Pleasantville.

[Timkin]

Annie Lytle School-Public School #4 I find this building to be an eyesore remove it! Fire Station #5 at 347 Riverside ave has history behind it. But at it's location if the city can't move it soon tear it down. Guaranty Trust and Savings Bank 101 East Bay Street remove it! Everything else in this story has Pros and Cons but could be reused in the future.

Don't agree and apparently, neither does the Jax Historic Society, otherwise they would not be on the list.   

If I have to make a guess.. The Laura Trio might end up being spared and the rest of the buildings razed.   Annie Lytle is no more of an "eyesore" than any other landmark sitting unused, boarded up, vandalized, etc.  The Old Claude Nolan Cadilllac Building is in juat about as bad of shape.. Doesn't mean it should be razed.   Same with the Drew Home.   None of these places SHOULD be razed.   But they probably will be , because not enough people value our historic places.    Down the Street in St Augustine, much of the downtown area is at least a century old and some of it several centuries old. Jacksonville could benefit so much from valuing and making points of interest of our historic places, as St. Augustine thrives, doing so.   

Comments such as the previous , is the mindset of those who do not get it. We have destroyed so much of our history.  We need to hang on to what ever remains.  This includes  #4 , The Bank,  CNC,  The Ford Factory, the list goes on.

Or we can raze it all and finish the job started a half century ago.   That would make Jacksonville a real piece of work.

Would we have been better off if Jacksonville looked like it did in the 1950's? Then we could have called it Pleasantville.

I guess we could have.  Still do not get your point?   

[Debbie Thompson]

If I Loved You, in the 1950's, Jacksonville had a vibrant, energetic downtown.  There were hotels, department stores, and lots of people working downtown. Many of the grand buildings bulldozed for urban renewal still stood then.  By now, instead of the buildings just being considered "old and tired" the way they were viewed in the 1960's during the urban renewal craze, they would have reached the designation of historic and people may be more interested in their preservation.  So I think I may be OK with Jacksonville still looking pretty much like it did in the 1950's.  I think it beats the parking lot pocked downtown we have now.

[thelakelander]

Would we have been better off if Jacksonville looked like it did in the 1950's? Then we could have called it Pleasantville.

Pleasantville or a place with the urban vibrancy of Savannah, New Orleans, Charleston, Seattle and San Francisco.  Now we have entire sections of town that rival a half abandoned rust belt city.

[jamesh1977]

I think having historical landmarks in a city is a great thing, but at what point do we draw the line. Most of these buildings are condemned and collapsing in on themselves. They are more of a hazard and an eyesore than usable property. Why is Jacksonville bent on holding on to the past. Many other cities have allowed large companies to come in and renovate historical buildings, leaving the outside intact. This keeps the historic look of the area, but brings in modern business. The look of the downtown area is so appealing when you drive through Jacksonville, but it's just a lot of empty buildings that are falling apart and a few small shops that are struggling to pull what little foot traffic in they can.

[Debbie Thompson]

Jamesh, I don't think anyone said they were against someone renovating an historic building on the inside.  I think we are saying the City doesn't do enough to save the historic buildings to begin with.  They have a "hands-off" attitude and if the owners don't fix the building, they just tear it down.  Our historic preservation ordinance holds the City responsible for preserving historic buildings. There are already ways on the books for the City to step in before a builidng is "falling apart."

[Timkin]

I think having historical landmarks in a city is a great thing, but at what point do we draw the line. Most of these buildings are condemned and collapsing in on themselves. They are more of a hazard and an eyesore than usable property. Why is Jacksonville bent on holding on to the past. Many other cities have allowed large companies to come in and renovate historical buildings, leaving the outside intact. This keeps the historic look of the area, but brings in modern business. The look of the downtown area is so appealing when you drive through Jacksonville, but it's just a lot of empty buildings that are falling apart and a few small shops that are struggling to pull what little foot traffic in they can.

You are way off on your first statement.  You COULDN'T think that having historic buildings is a great thing ,otherwise you wouldn't be among the masses who have no value, no respect , no consideration whatsoever for the VERY VERY few historic buildings that remain.  The line you are speaking of , doesn't exist and this is practiced more often than you think ,  Less than a week ago a century old building , not even in that bad of shape was razed.  A car hit a brick building and supposedly wreaked so much damage it was considered an unsafe structure. (Totally NOT TRUE,but nonetheless it is now gone). Why? because minds like yours "drew the line"  started mounting fines against the owner of this building until they had no choice but to demolish it. 
    Most of the buildings you are referring to are not in danger of collapsing on themselves.   The School house myself and volunteers spend a lot of our time on, even though it has had no practical maintenance done in it in a half century, it is in no danger whatsoever of collapsing.   Over the years,  idiots have trashed it on the inside, set fire to the burnable elements of it, the last , resulting in the final portion of the Auditorium's roof coming down.  Did no structural damage to the building at all.  Do YOU care?  According to your statement ,probably not. Your very statement is among the mentality of those who would just rather fill landfills every where with old buildings. And, hey you may get your way, but not if I can help it .

Our historic preservation ordinance MAY hold the City responsible for preserving historic buildings, but the City is doing a next-to-nothing job of doing that.

Jacksonville has done a poor (at best)  job of EVER preserving anything.  Private entities such as Preservation SOS are tired of the same old same old and are combating the mindless City of Jacksonville, to save some of our historic places.

[Ormonde]

Historic Architecture represents our past. We all have a past. Which makes us what we are today. Without a past, We are a shell of what we can be in the future. We should band together to make sure that protection laws and standards are enforced. We need to gather signatures and prove we mean business. I will show up anytime to support this cause. I am horrified when I hear of us losing more of our Architectural Heritage in Jacksonville. I have seen so too many Architectural Gems in Jacksonville disappear. A real shame. We have lost parts of the Fabric of our Archtectural Heritage and Identity of our city. Forever lost. Nothing can replace them. These cultural losses lessen the value and beauty of our city. Enough is enough. We have so many other successful examples of keeping Historic Architecture in tact. Everyone is accountable for their actions. The officials  and city politicians who are letting these things occur need to be held accountable for their actions. Protection Laws and standards enforced. We need to ensure all of these building and structures get the historic designation and protection they deserve so that  no one can alter our citys Architectural Heritage and Identity. No one has that right. Corporate bullies wanting prime property and wanting to raze a historic building. Greed is no excuse. And is unacceptable. A city with no Architectural Identity is just another city. We have a very unique and eclectic Architectural Identity here. Let's keep it intact and protect that at all costs.

[Timkin]

^   This sounds like the posting of a preservation-minded person . 

[jamesh1977]

I think having historical landmarks in a city is a great thing, but at what point do we draw the line. Most of these buildings are condemned and collapsing in on themselves. They are more of a hazard and an eyesore than usable property. Why is Jacksonville bent on holding on to the past. Many other cities have allowed large companies to come in and renovate historical buildings, leaving the outside intact. This keeps the historic look of the area, but brings in modern business. The look of the downtown area is so appealing when you drive through Jacksonville, but it's just a lot of empty buildings that are falling apart and a few small shops that are struggling to pull what little foot traffic in they can.

You are way off on your first statement.  You COULDN'T think that having historic buildings is a great thing ,otherwise you wouldn't be among the masses who have no value, no respect , no consideration whatsoever for the VERY VERY few historic buildings that remain.  The line you are speaking of , doesn't exist and this is practiced more often than you think ,  Less than a week ago a century old building , not even in that bad of shape was razed.  A car hit a brick building and supposedly wreaked so much damage it was considered an unsafe structure. (Totally NOT TRUE,but nonetheless it is now gone). Why? because minds like yours "drew the line"  started mounting fines against the owner of this building until they had no choice but to demolish it. 
    Most of the buildings you are referring to are not in danger of collapsing on themselves.   The School house myself and volunteers spend a lot of our time on, even though it has had no practical maintenance done in it in a half century, it is in no danger whatsoever of collapsing.   Over the years,  idiots have trashed it on the inside, set fire to the burnable elements of it, the last , resulting in the final portion of the Auditorium's roof coming down.  Did no structural damage to the building at all.  Do YOU care?  According to your statement ,probably not. Your very statement is among the mentality of those who would just rather fill landfills every where with old buildings. And, hey you may get your way, but not if I can help it .

Our historic preservation ordinance MAY hold the City responsible for preserving historic buildings, but the City is doing a next-to-nothing job of doing that.

Jacksonville has done a poor (at best)  job of EVER preserving anything.  Private entities such as Preservation SOS are tired of the same old same old and are combating the mindless City of Jacksonville, to save some of our historic places.

I DO CARE. I think you may not have read my entire comment or misunderstood. I was commenting on the fact that, according to this list, the shotgun houses are "rapidly deteriorating beyond economical repair" and "a demolition permit is allegedly being sought" for the Guaranty Trust and Savings Bank. My opinion is only based on what I'm reading in this article.

I do feel some of these buildings are hazardous. Public School #4, as you pointed out, is host to vandals. They are idiots, but they are at risk of getting hurt in buildings like this one. It's in an isolated area with little to no maintenance.

Someone has to maintain these buildings. I don't think the city is going to step in anytime soon to help with this. I was only suggesting that instead of labeling these buildings as historic, expecting an already financially drained city to fix them,  we sell them to companies in the agreement that the exterior remain the same. That allows the building to stay, the city to make a profit and bring more businesses to the downtown area.