Urban Infill: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[jason_contentdg]

1, 2 and 3 are correct but saving Hardwick's old structure??  That thing was ghastly.

While 1661 isn't perfect, its a lot better than most of the stuff they're building around Jax.

Well, here is the problem. 

"Oh, it's good enough for Jacksonville.."

[nestliving]

Ghastly in Design or Condition?

I have not lived in Jax for long but in my opinion when the Hardwick 1661 building was built, It was a suburban design built for a suburban area. It should be our responsibility as residents to appreciate the building for what it is and adapt and reuse it in a way that benefits the changing community while still being true to the design of what should of been a significant structure for modern architecture in Jacksonville.

The new 1661 development is a good development, considering, however it could of gone anywhere, and they chose to demolish a building that had it been given an opportunity, could of been a real asset for Jacksonville.


Cheers,

Shaan

nest-living.com

Sorry to sound like a douche, but could you please use the appropriate phrase "could have" or "could've?" I don't know why but it really annoys me and now that you've done it four times I feel compelled to say something. No offense to you, anyone can make a simple mistake.

As for 1661...I'm sorry, I've never been to the new building and was not familiar with the old structure either, so I have absolutely no insight or opinion to offer. Carry on...

Maybe it's proper for an Australian to say "could of"...I don't know.  The grammar doesn't really upset me as much, obviously.

Funny you say that. I had to actually look it up to see, but he (or she) is right and proved that I am an uneducated shopkeeper. He could of told me something I didn't know.

I was going to respond in typical Australian fashion but was tired.I'll just beat the shit out of him at the pub next time I see him.

Cheers,

Shaan

nest-living.com

[cline]

Well, here is the problem. "Oh, it's good enough for Jacksonville.."

Actually I don't think that 1661 is simply "good enough" I happen to think that it is a great addition to that neighborhood in particular and Jacksonville in general.  I like that more retail is coming into the first floor and creating a more vibrant pedestrian environment.  But I suppose if you prefer an old building with a large surface parking lot separating it from the street then you would be upset with the demolition of the old structure. 

[ProjectMaximus]

Funny you say that. I had to actually look it up to see, but he (or she) is right and proved that I am an uneducated shopkeeper. He could of told me something I didn't know.

I was going to respond in typical Australian fashion but was tired.I'll just beat the shit out of him at the pub next time I see him.

Cheers,

Shaan

nest-living.com

LOL. yes, it is "he" and you're gonna beat the shit out of "him"...although I hope you don't. Don't take it personally, man, we all make mistakes, especially typing in message boards and forums online. For whatever reason though (it's not important to explain), I got frustrated over this one, and since you did it four out of four times I thought it was clearly not just a typo. And I was right...now that you've looked it up, you know the proper wording. 

As for the "uneducated shopkeeper," I'm aware you're just being facetiously self-deprecating, but nevertheless I'll respond. I've just recently nurtured an interest in urban development, transit planning and downtown revitalization...so while I'm quite ignorant of these topics, I've learned a tremendous amount from everyone's opinions, yours among them. I really appreciate all the insight, uneducated shopkeepers' included. 

[nestliving]

LOL. yes, it is "he" and you're gonna beat the shit out of "him"...although I hope you don't. Don't take it personally, man, we all make mistakes, especially typing in message boards and forums online. For whatever reason though (it's not important to explain), I got frustrated over this one, and since you did it four out of four times I thought it was clearly not just a typo. And I was right...now that you've looked it up, you know the proper wording. 

As for the "uneducated shopkeeper," I'm aware you're just being facetiously self-deprecating, but nevertheless I'll respond. I've just recently nurtured an interest in urban development, transit planning and downtown revitalization...so while I'm quite ignorant of these topics, I've learned a tremendous amount from everyone's opinions, yours among them. I really appreciate all the insight, uneducated shopkeepers' included. 

no worries...I am cool with my terrible spelling and writing skills. You should however add modern American design to your list of interests, as it seems as though we need some support in this city. In many major cities throughout the world that building would of been celebrated and in my opinion by having it demolished, was very simple minded. We as a city need to be better at blending architectural styles and quit making new construction look old. The rest of the world has, and it changes the fabric of an area and adds to it's appeal.

One day we are going to be pissed that we as a city destroyed a really cool era in architecture.

FYI. I think that nestliving has a really good collection of design/Urban Infill/Architecture/Sustainability books for you to check out! 

Cheers,

Shaan

nest-living.com

[jason_contentdg]

Well, here is the problem. "Oh, it's good enough for Jacksonville.."

Actually I don't think that 1661 is simply "good enough" I happen to think that it is a great addition to that neighborhood in particular and Jacksonville in general.  I like that more retail is coming into the first floor and creating a more vibrant pedestrian environment.  But I suppose if you prefer an old building with a large surface parking lot separating it from the street then you would be upset with the demolition of the old structure.

It's not an either/or argument for me.  The lot could have been used in a much better way, and I agree with Shaan about the problems the new building carries.

I think the surface lot of the old 1661 could have been in-filled with something and kept the structure itself intact.

Just look at the horrible behemoths they were going to replace the old library with, until finally, a group came up with a plan to use the existing building. 

Rehabs can be done, they're just sometimes not easy...and Jacksonville loves "easy".