Author Topic: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed  (Read 11440 times)

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2122
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2021, 10:57:26 PM »
They, or someone, could have made something out of this building. Such a waste in my opinion; waste of money.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!

Peter Griffin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2021, 08:18:23 AM »
They, or someone, could have made something out of this building. Such a waste in my opinion; waste of money.
Short answer, no. Long answer, nope.

There was over a decade for somebody to do something

Nobody would ever sign off on a project that killed somebody during construction, then sat for over a decade in an extremely harsh environment, completely unmaintained and exposed to the elements. That building was barely a building, it was an eyesore, a liability, and a hazard. Goodbye.

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3650
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2021, 08:42:37 AM »
They, or someone, could have made something out of this building. Such a waste in my opinion; waste of money.
Short answer, no. Long answer, nope.

There was over a decade for somebody to do something

Nobody would ever sign off on a project that killed somebody during construction, then sat for over a decade in an extremely harsh environment, completely unmaintained and exposed to the elements. That building was barely a building, it was an eyesore, a liability, and a hazard. Goodbye.

Actually it was the adjoining GARAGE that killed somebody and it was demolished long ago. There was no reason this building had to sit for so many years. In just about any city the size of Jacksonville, it would have been salvaged. The market here was just too weak for that to happen.       
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2021, 09:34:42 AM »
I just want that trash building to go away.   HOpe it happens soon.


There aren't many hi rises that get stuck uncompleted.   But when they do in that sort of state, completely exposed, I don't know of one that was later completed.

Ones that do, like the Fontainebleau Las Vegas, you have a combo of high demand plus the building was mostly done when the project stopped.  It was protected from the elements + such. 


Maybe it could.  IIRC Poland's got a skyscraper that sat exposed for 30 something years that was recently finished.  It'll be interesting to see how that holds up over time. 
« Last Edit: June 18, 2021, 09:46:11 AM by bl8jaxnative »

fieldafm

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4528
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM »
They, or someone, could have made something out of this building. Such a waste in my opinion; waste of money.
Short answer, no. Long answer, nope.

There was over a decade for somebody to do something

Nobody would ever sign off on a project that killed somebody during construction, then sat for over a decade in an extremely harsh environment, completely unmaintained and exposed to the elements. That building was barely a building, it was an eyesore, a liability, and a hazard. Goodbye.

Actually it was the adjoining GARAGE that killed somebody and it was demolished long ago. There was no reason this building had to sit for so many years. In just about any city the size of Jacksonville, it would have been salvaged. The market here was just too weak for that to happen.     

While Berkman II has certainly been an eyesore for quite some time, the reason it sat undeveloped had everything to do with the ongoing series of lawsuits, countersuits, arbitration and foreclosure proceedings that followed the tragic collapse of the parking structure that claimed the life of William Edwards, and injured a few dozen more. 

In fact, the current owner(original general contractor) has been marred in legal proceedings since being awarded the building from those foreclosure proceedings.

There is nothing wrong with the structure of the tower that can't be fixed. It is not in danger of collapsing, nor is structurally unsound.  There are many engineering reports that back that up.

I think many people here are going to be disappointed when they begin to realize that the current demo won't be through a large implosion, that it will take many months to complete... and in fact won't be a complete demolition of the structure.  Unfortunately, the current lead partner of this newest redevelopment effort (Park Beeler) has a far, far worse track record than David Berkman (the original developer... who also once owned various minor league arena football and hockey teams in Jax).
« Last Edit: August 25, 2021, 05:58:45 PM by fieldafm »

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2021, 10:11:15 AM »

There is nothing wrong with the structure of the tower that can't be fixed.

Everything can be fixed.  The question isn't can it be fixed but is it worth it.  I can fix up a 1982 Ford LTD and run it forever.   But it ain't worth the $$$$ compared to just buying a new car.

marcuscnelson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
  • Gen Z - Tired of the status quo
So, to the young people fighting in this movement for change, here is my charge: march in the streets, protest, run for school committee or city council or the state legislature. And win. - Ed Markey

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2122
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #22 on: August 11, 2021, 08:47:24 PM »
Significant demo now underway, shutting down a lane of Bay Street.








Still...in my opinion...WHAT A WASTE!!!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!

jaxoNOLE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2021, 12:18:38 PM »
It's possible the structural issues identified in today's T-U article were caused by the demolition itself -- but it's also possible they uncovered a structural defect during demo that couldn't be seen with the building intact.

With the property's troubled past, I think we're better off starting anew in this case -- even if the current proposal falls through and we're stuck with another grass lot. Too much uncertainty with the current structure. At this point, there's no turning back anyway.

Quote
[JFRD Cheif Keith Powers] said the contractor and engineers working on the demolition had notified city authorities about possible structural instability Friday afternoon.

"They were attempting to take a piece of concrete down from one of the upper stories and it did not act like they thought it should act," Powers said. He didn't specify what raised the workers' concerns.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/crime/2021/08/21/engineers-inspecting-berkman-ii-demolition-structural-integrity/8227163002/

acme54321

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2678
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #24 on: August 24, 2021, 06:44:11 PM »
Back to implosion now... Looks like it should come down in about a month.

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2122
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2021, 08:32:16 PM »
What was the issue or problem with choosing implosion initially?
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!

acme54321

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2678
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2021, 09:15:38 PM »
What was the issue or problem with choosing implosion initially?

Cost

Charles Hunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3512
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2021, 09:37:45 PM »
... and, I think, that the City Hall implosion went somewhat badly.

If the building is unsafe to enter, as was said on the news tonight*, how will the explosives experts be able to plant their charges on multiple levels?

Seems the logical plan would be to drop it onto the grass lot just to the east.


* Yes, I realize the local news may have got the "unsafe to enter" thing wrong.

Fallen Buckeye

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2021, 09:51:31 AM »

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
Re: $135 Million redevelopment of Berkman II proposed
« Reply #29 on: August 25, 2021, 10:58:48 AM »


For those that claim that the integrity of an exposed building like that can be known up front, please note that you were wrong.