Jaguars to Develop Shipyards?

[riverkeepered]

I am sure the Jaguars would do a quality job, but is their vision for this property in the best interest of the public?   Shouldn't we at least wait until the CRA is completed?

This is why we need a community-supported vision for developing our riverfront.  Whatever we do with these public properties should be done as part of a coordinated and strategic plan that allows us to realize the full potential of our riverfront.

We have a golden opportunity with the Shipyards, the old courthouse, and the JEA property on the southbank that we will never again have once these properties are developed.  Let's make sure that our decisions maximize the overall benefits to the public and downtown revitalization efforts. 

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=543178

[tufsu1]

^ Agreed

[CityLife]

This is how a big boy city has developed a similar property. If anyone at COJ wants their hand held while reading this, I'd be happy to help out.

http://www.brooklynbridgepark.org/pages/pier-6-rfp

[ProjectMaximus]

I think the Jags vision can easily be molded into one that serves the community well. So yes, I think it can be in the best interest of the public WITH PROPER INPUT AND PLANNING!

[jaxjaguar]

This is how a big boy city has developed a similar property. If anyone at COJ wants their hand held while reading this, I'd be happy to help out.

http://www.brooklynbridgepark.org/pages/pier-6-rfp

That looks too big and expensive for Jax. We should spend more money doing some studies. I'm sure there's some historic value we'd be destroying if we develop this land. I'm scared of change and new nice things. We don't need more apartments downtown the ones we have aren't making enough money. (ok i think I've said everything that needs to be said. Carry on)


In all seriousness though, a development similar to Lake Eola in Orlando would be amazing. Sprawling public green space along the river. Offices, apartments, condos and restaurants, venues for sports, music etc mixed with park space... Yeah I could dig that.

[tufsu1]

Another similar effort is the redevelopment of the Hunters Point/Candlestick Park area in San Francisco

[urbanlibertarian]

If we insist on holding out for "highest and best use" (whatever that means) these properties will probably not be developed in my lifetime.  Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[jaxjags]

 I tend to agree here. Jaguars practice/training facility combined with an Armada soccer stadium might be "good" use of land today, BUT not 20 years from now. At that time a 50 story hotel/condo/appt. building may be best and Kahn can sell it for a profit.

[edjax]

I am sure the Jaguars would do a quality job, but is their vision for this property in the best interest of the public?   Shouldn't we at least wait until the CRA is completed?

This is why we need a community-supported vision for developing our riverfront.  Whatever we do with these public properties should be done as part of a coordinated and strategic plan that allows us to realize the full potential of our riverfront.

We have a golden opportunity with the Shipyards, the old courthouse, and the JEA property on the southbank that we will never again have once these properties are developed.  Let's make sure that our decisions maximize the overall benefits to the public and downtown revitalization efforts. 

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=543178

States most likely no decision for 6 months. The CRA should be done by then I would hope, I mean they have only been working on it for a year or so now. Can't wait too long on this city as it will never happen. Maybe someone like Khan putting a decision date out there will kick someone into action FiNALLY.

[Jtetlak]

I've met with the Jags to discuss their ideas for the Shipyards, as I have with the people who envision Seaglass Tower and with the Riverkeeper. There are also ideas out there for an aquarium and the USS Adams museum. My hope is to convince everyone to work together to put as many ideas as possible into the space so we get the most bang for our buck. I've also suggested putting some sort of adventure sport aspect into the plans, whether it be a zip line across the river or a rock climbing wall on the outside of the tower, as well as a possible downtown beach space with increased water access for the public and maybe even a floating pool. Whatever the plans end up being, clearly we need to decide what is best for the city in the long run before we start building or giving the land away.

[CityLife]

Whatever the plans end up being, clearly we need to decide what is best for the city in the long run before we start building or giving the land away.

How would you suggest deciding what's best for the city in the long run and how would you suggest the city dispose of the land? Yes this is a test...but its open book. The answer can be found by looking at the link I posted earlier.

Unfortunately, our city has dragged its feet too long on the Shipyards and we have a mayor who is going to want some shiny new plans to show the public prior to the next election.....

[CityLife]

http://www.brooklynbridgepark.org/pages/project-development

[AuditoreEnterprise]

I've met with the Jags to discuss their ideas for the Shipyards, as I have with the people who envision Seaglass Tower and with the Riverkeeper. There are also ideas out there for an aquarium and the USS Adams museum. My hope is to convince everyone to work together to put as many ideas as possible into the space so we get the most bang for our buck. I've also suggested putting some sort of adventure sport aspect into the plans, whether it be a zip line across the river or a rock climbing wall on the outside of the tower, as well as a possible downtown beach space with increased water access for the public and maybe even a floating pool. Whatever the plans end up being, clearly we need to decide what is best for the city in the long run before we start building or giving the land away.

Since you talked to them yourself what are their plans for the space? Or is pretty much what everyone else is saying in respect to a practice field.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I'm still trying to grasp what you're trying to say, CityLife.  I mean, the Brooklyn Bridge project already has guidelines on how they would like to see the property developed.  They have it somewhat platted out into the uses that they would prefer to see in each area.  And have assistance money lined up for the winning bid. 

Don't take this the wrong way, but shouldn't they just let the property be, as is, and throw a couple $20M or so to the first large developer that wants to build an Assisted Care Living Facility or a Gated Luxury Condo or something that would encompass the entire area and cater strictly to it's residents.   

Besides, you're not thinking at all about legacy.  If AB were to have his staff draw up a rather impressive RFP with Long Range goals, everyone knows that whomever is mayor when the project is finished will get all the credit.  Can't have that happen!  All or nothing, baby, and let's do it for now!

[CityLife]

I'm saying the exact same thing as the Riverkeeper, just showing an example of how it has been done. Create a development plan with input from the public, and then start cranking the RFP's out as the market dictates. Obviously a lot more complicated than that, but the Brooklyn project and others create a road map of how non-backwater places have created successful public-private partnerships.

Been a long day, I'll try to share more detailed thoughts this weekend...