The Jacksonville Landing's Redevelopment Plan

[Dapperdan]

I liked the old idea of keeping the Landing shell and building around it. Despite its drawbacks, the Landing is iconic. I would be sad to see it go.  I know it was just built in the 80's but is this another case of tearing down Jacksonville's past ?

[jcjohnpaint]

If history is any guide, what is most likely to happen is that the current Landing structures will be demolished to make way for the new development, but then something will happen and the result will be that the empty land will just sit there for at least a decade.

...and the City will have about $9 million tied up in it while other viable projects die on the vine. 

I don't believe this will happen. I put my money on the project being scaled down to something a little more realistic with a similar footprint.

I absolutely agree.  Even with the bottom part and layout, I like the plan.  I just don't think the towers are going to happen.

[PeeJayEss]

For all the cynics out there, this plan will not fall through any time soon.
It will fall through AFTER the current Landing has been demolished.

[urbanlibertarian]

This is a golden opportunity for the city to sell the real estate under the Landing and get this riverfront property on the tax rolls.

[acme54321]

I agree, sell the land.

[Coolyfett]

If history is any guide, what is most likely to happen is that the current Landing structures will be demolished to make way for the new development, but then something will happen and the result will be that the empty land will just sit there for at least a decade.

YEPP...thats what I see happening.

[avonjax]

I agree, sell the land.

and do what with the land?
The only thing in my opinion that will benefit downtown is a Landing type use. Otherwise it will never be used by the public. We have plenty of die at 5 already.

[avonjax]

I liked the old idea of keeping the Landing shell and building around it. Despite its drawbacks, the Landing is iconic. I would be sad to see it go.  I know it was just built in the 80's but is this another case of tearing down Jacksonville's past ?

I'm with you....
Since most of us agree the towers will NEVER be built why not open up the center to the river. Keep the sign and update what is already there. There is always the land on either side of the structure if Sleiman really wants to do additions or a tower or whatever. IMO this is the idea that would actually get done.

[JeffreyS]

Just don't tear down the Landing without contractual guarantees and penalties to build the plan.

[hksanmarco]

I can assure you that Toney Sleiman has the new proposal worked out.  He's not the person you think he is; when he purchased The Landing and proposed a redevelopment, the City Council shot it down.  This proposal has teeth and will be successful, despite the TU article to the contrary. When The Landing opened 26 years ago there wasn't a single soul living downtown.  Now, they're plenty of people living downtown and more coming--including the development itself. Let us ALL embrace this beautiful plan to make Our City's waterfront world-class!

[RiversideLoki]

I can assure you that Toney Sleiman has the new proposal worked out.  He's not the person you think he is; when he purchased The Landing and proposed a redevelopment, the City Council shot it down.  This proposal has teeth and will be successful, despite the TU article to the contrary. When The Landing opened 26 years ago there wasn't a single soul living downtown.  Now, they're plenty of people living downtown and more coming--including the development itself. Let us ALL embrace this beautiful plan to make Our City's waterfront world-class!

I think my eyes just rolled so far back in my head that I can see the aneurism developing in my frontal lobe.

[I-10east]

Just don't tear down the Landing without contractual guarantees and penalties to build the plan.

+1000

[thelakelander]

I can assure you that Toney Sleiman has the new proposal worked out.  He's not the person you think he is; when he purchased The Landing and proposed a redevelopment, the City Council shot it down.  This proposal has teeth and will be successful, despite the TU article to the contrary. When The Landing opened 26 years ago there wasn't a single soul living downtown.  Now, they're plenty of people living downtown and more coming--including the development itself. Let us ALL embrace this beautiful plan to make Our City's waterfront world-class!

I think my eyes just rolled so far back in my head that I can see the aneurism developing in my frontal lobe.

The few people living in downtown (around 4k) now aren't enough to keep a Denny's open 24/7, much less the restaurants and retail in the Landing.  It was intended to pull a much larger crowd to downtown. That worked for a short time until the luster fell off in the mid 1990s. So, in reality, we had a lot more people working and even shopping in downtown when the Landing opened 26 years ago.  Places like Woolworth and McCrory's were still open then.  There was also life in LaVilla and Brooklyn. Even the Shipyards was still open and employing hundreds of people.

Now let's, get realistic. Even the conceptual plan as designed isn't going to make our city's waterfront "World Class." However, the waterfront space does have a ton of merit and should be done regardless of how plans evolve when the true market reveals itself.

Speaking of the building itself, there's no historical value in it but it is iconic. So is the sign above it. It would be interesting to take a look at the old 2004/2005 plan, which kept/retrofited the main structure, while mixing it with the current idea of demolishing the waterfront buildings.  Assuming the Independent Drive ramps (Not including Ocean Street) could be removed, you'd also end up with a decent sized plot of land for necessary parking/future building. The benefit here is that you'd probably achieve similar results at a much cheaper price to Sleiman and the taxpayer. Such a project could also be phased pretty well because you'd simply retrofit the existing mall structure into whatever the market can support before tearing down the narrow buildings housing most of the restaurants for the plaza. New towers or mid-rise buildings could then be added when the market determines their true feasibility.

[SightseerLounge]

Yeah, just modify the existing structure! If I understand correctly, the land is owned by the city! There is no point to tear down The Landing to have something worse than the courthouse fiasco! People will start to tear down City Hall if more time and money is wasted! Terrible! The stores are there! The parking that is already Downtown needs to be utilized! I think that people in Jacksonville are used to parking at the destination that they are trying to go to in town! Everything can be like that in a urban core! Jacksonville can be ahead of the game if they connect that is Downtown already! Buses, Skyway, Trolleys, and personal automobiles can be used effectively if the city can emphasize a good mix of modes!

The Landing can benefit off of some good planning! Downtown Jacksonville can benefit from some good planning of what is already there! Maybe, I just see the potential!

[IrvAdams]

Here's some Census data for zip code 32202 which seems to be the downtown core area. Interestingly it gives the population in 2010 as 7915 but says it's only 5061 now which I absolutely don't agree with. I seriously doubt it's gone down like that in the last three or four years. Anyway, here it is:

http://www.city-data.com/zips/32202.html