Riverside Village Development Coming To Memorial Park

[thelakelander]

A new mixed use development featuring the adaptive reuse of four buildings dating back to 1909 could be on its way to Riverside's Memorial Park.

Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/riverside-village-development-coming-to-memorial-park/

[Kerry]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

[Steve]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

Yea, let's tear down one of two remaining houses from The Row on Riverside Ave. Good call.

[Tacachale]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

Yea, let's tear down one of two remaining houses from The Row on Riverside Ave. Good call.

Oh, Kerry. Never change.

[thelakelander]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

Context is key. As for the row houses, we do have shotguns (the historical version of the South's row house) in neighborhoods like the Eastside near downtown. For the coming soon type that would better fit your liking, both the District and Vestcor (in LaVilla) have proposed them.

[Kerry]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

Yea, let's tear down one of two remaining houses from The Row on Riverside Ave. Good call.

Yea, I'm not a preservationist.  I am an urbanist.  While the original Row was impressive, what made losing it a shame is what it was replaced with - freeways and corporate buildings.  The City needs to learn to trade up, not trade down.  What comes next needs to be better than what it repalced.  If preservationist had been around 200 years ago we would all still be living in log cabins with no AC or electricity.

[Captain Zissou]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

I came to the comments first to see what negative comments Kerry would make.... he didn't disappoint. 

[Kerry]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

I came to the comments first to see what negative comments Kerry would make.... he didn't disappoint.

Someone has to push for better because no one else is doing it.  Not at the City level, the developer level, or even on this board.  Just a bunch people fine with the status quo or so set in mediocrity that anyone demanding better is just a complainer.  Lakelander posts lots of articles about cities in the region which are doing amazing things and creating places people want to live, work, and visit.  Here in Jax we get all excited about some new coats of paint and signage on some buildings adjacent to an Olmsted Park.  You know how many places would kill for an Olmsted Park and we can't even keep our maintained, let alone use it as designed.  It is a long time past due that Jax steps it up.

http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/about-the-olmsted-legacy

Beginning in 1857 with the design for Central Park in New York City, Frederick Law Olmsted (1822–1903), his sons and successor firm created designs for more than 6,000 landscapes across North America, including many of the world's most important parks. Olmsted’s remarkable design legacy includes Prospect Park in Brooklyn, Boston’s Emerald Necklace, Biltmore Estate in Asheville, North Carolina, Mount Royal in Montreal, the grounds of the United States Capitol and the White House, and Washington Park, Jackson Park and the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 in Chicago. Olmsted’s sons were founding members of the American Society of Landscape Architects and played an influential role in the creation of the National Park Service.

From Buffalo to Louisville, Atlanta to Seattle, Baltimore to Los Angeles, the Olmsteds’ work reflects a vision of American communities and American society still relevant today—a commitment to visually compelling and accessible green space that restores and nurtures the body and spirit of all people, regardless of their economic circumstances. The Olmsteds believed in the restorative value of landscape and that parks can bring social improvement by promoting a greater sense of community and providing recreational opportunities, especially in urban environments.

[Steve]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

Yea, let's tear down one of two remaining houses from The Row on Riverside Ave. Good call.

Yea, I'm not a preservationist.  I am an urbanist.  While the original Row was impressive, what made losing it a shame is what it was replaced with - freeways and corporate buildings.  The City needs to learn to trade up, not trade down.  What comes next needs to be better than what it repalced.  If preservationist had been around 200 years ago we would all still be living in log cabins with no AC or electricity.

In that regard I don't fundamentally disagree. I don't consider myself a preservationist at heart (to be clear - demolition of landmarks is bad and demolition for vacant lots is idiotic). But.....I am a preservationist in regard to Riverside and Avondale. The people voted to be a historic district and I believe that preservation should be closely followed.

[vicupstate]

Jacksonville use to be quite urban. Not just DT but pretty much the whole city. If it had PRESREVD that environment, it still would be. 

[KenFSU]

They should just tear it all down and build something with better density.  They are getting a ridiculously low amount of floor space for all the land being taken up and way to much surface space being used for parking.  Would it kill Jax to get some Brownstones or Row Houses?

I think you guys are throwing out the baby with the bathwater in terms of Kerry's argument.

If you remove 1571 Riverside - which should never be touched (and 1721 Memorial Park Drive to a lesser extent) - from the equation, I actually agree with him in terms of the rest of the area.

Love Memorial Park, eat lunch there at least once a week, probably my favorite spot in Jacksonville.

Would love to see more active uses surrounding it.

The two historic houses aside, the rest of the site could easily pass for a 1980s suburban office park off Baymeadows.

The North Florida Dermatology building is a single-story building with no historical significance surrounded by a moat of asphalt, directly at the east entrance to the park.



The brunt of the property that opens up to Memorial Park is asphalt parking and small buildings set way back from the park.



Happy it's being redeveloped, but would also not be at all disappointed if everything other than the Row house at 1571 was knocked down and replaced with a denser, marquee mixed-use development fronting and complementing our city's premier urban park.

You could do a lot with that triangle of land and all that asphalt just past the Row house.

[Steve]

Ken, I'd agree with you if he didn't say, "....tear it all down.". I don't have a problem with your suggestions.

Personally, I'm not in love with the 1950's era buildings on the site. They don't address the street well at all and have zero distinguishing architecture. Like I said, I'm not hellbent against all demolition, so long as what is replacing the building is better (to be clear, a vacant lot or surface parking lot is NEVER better).

Long story short, I don't have an issue with this proposal. I could see something cooler there, but not every development can be amazing.

[Tacachale]

^If folks want (some of) the buildings torn down, I suppose they could make the new owners an offer and then do what they want with the site. But good luck getting approvals without parking. That's what happened to Spirit Animal.

[Kerry]

^If folks want (some of) the buildings torn down, I suppose they could make the new owners an offer and then do what they want with the site. But good luck getting approvals without parking. That's what happened to Spirit Animal.

Parking requirements is a whole other issue.  Nearly every city worth their salt has either eliminated them or are in the process of doing so.  As long as government mandates that the automobile is a primary design requirement all we are going to get are places designed for cars.

This map is already 4 years old but you can see how many cities are at least 4 years ahead of us.
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2015/11/18/a-map-of-cities-that-got-rid-of-parking-minimums

If the house could be kept then great, but it for sure should not be used as office space.  It needs to be a single family home, a rooming house, or a bed and breakfast.  Heck, an Airbnb is better than another Law or Insurance office.

[Steve]

^If folks want (some of) the buildings torn down, I suppose they could make the new owners an offer and then do what they want with the site. But good luck getting approvals without parking. That's what happened to Spirit Animal.

Urban Transition Area - would be MUCH easier to get through.