Design Driving Economic Development

[MusicMan]

Wouldn't it work for Haskell to purchase the TU and build there? I mean, it's next door and there is a ton of room for new construction on that parcel.

[icarus]

Wouldn't it work for Haskell to purchase the TU and build there? I mean, it's next door and there is a ton of room for new construction on that parcel.

It would be better to utilize the land between Haskell and YMCA in front of YMCA. Additional revenue for YMCA while leaving TU for larger development.

[acme54321]

Wouldn't it work for Haskell to purchase the TU and build there? I mean, it's next door and there is a ton of room for new construction on that parcel.

There is a ton of room on Haskell's current site for new construction.

[jaxlongtimer]

I think the pedestrian experience has much more to do with making Downtown an attractive place to open a business, or setup office space within... than the facade of a building. 

Downtown is really good at being a vertical suburb that looks nice on a postcard. On the street level, where life actually happens, its a much less attractive experience.  The amount of glass treatment on floors 12 through 25 has little to do with that street level environment.

That said, complaining that the new Fidelity building isn't iconic enough, is about as close to this as possible:

You are missing my point.  Having iconic structures isn't mutually exclusive to other traffic generators such as you mention above.  I agree all those features are at least as important.  My position is iconic architecture is additive to those elements and, as such, it should be considered as a force multiplier.

Don't get me wrong.  I noted the FIS building is a nice addition to our skyline and clearly a cut above for Jacksonville.  I am just saying we could raise the bar even higher.

Interestingly, below is another cruise terminal, NCL's in Miami, that it appears Haskell here had a hand in (it's featured in an article about them).  This demonstrates how much further iconic design can rise to vs. what we have here now.

[jaxlongtimer]

Wouldn't it work for Haskell to purchase the TU and build there? I mean, it's next door and there is a ton of room for new construction on that parcel.

It would be better to utilize the land between Haskell and YMCA in front of YMCA. Additional revenue for YMCA while leaving TU for larger development.

I can't find a rendering on the internet, but when Haskell first built its current building I recall they had a rendering of their master site plan that included two additional multistory wings, one each off either end of the riverfront structure, each extending toward Riverside Avenue and wrapping around the interior of the property.  With COVID work-at-home and their national and international reach (and, thus, satellite offices), they may not have much need for more space at their headquarters.

Interestingly, per the tax records, Haskell appears to have sold their building and all the frontage land (in two additional deeds) to investors, primarily a Washington (even though the LLC name has Oregon in it) state investment company in 2008 (due to the recession??).  So how the rest of the property gets developed may now be out of Haskell's total control unless they have a side agreement.

[CityLife]

I think the pedestrian experience has much more to do with making Downtown an attractive place to open a business, or setup office space within... than the facade of a building. 

Downtown is really good at being a vertical suburb that looks nice on a postcard. On the street level, where life actually happens, its a much less attractive experience.  The amount of glass treatment on floors 12 through 25 has little to do with that street level environment.

That said, complaining that the new Fidelity building isn't iconic enough, is about as close to this as possible:

You are missing my point.  Having iconic structures isn't mutually exclusive to other traffic generators such as you mention above.  I agree all those features are at least as important.  My position is iconic architecture is additive to those elements and, as such, it should be considered as a force multiplier.

Don't get me wrong.  I noted the FIS building is a nice addition to our skyline and clearly a cut above for Jacksonville.  I am just saying we could raise the bar even higher.

Interestingly, below is another cruise terminal, NCL's in Miami, that it appears Haskell here had a hand in (it's featured in an article about them).  This demonstrates how much further iconic design can rise to vs. what we have here now.

It was designed by an international architecture firm based in Miami. Haskell was on the construction management side. If there was a local entity that wanted to throw a ton of money at an iconic project, I'm sure Haskell would gladly help, but they can't create a market for iconic architecture without the demand or financing.

I agree that Jacksonville has issues with architecture (both landscape and building), but you are comparing projects in world class cities (Miami and Vancouver) or world class companies (Amazon) with Jax. They can build amazing things because they have the demand and market that comes with being a world class city that everyone wants to live or play in. Take a look at these high rises in the works in Miami for instance https://www.thenextmiami.com/these-are-the-21-new-miami-towers-that-will-be-under-construction-in-2021/

Sure, having iconic architecture would be nice, but DT Jax has a lot of things to take care of first before it gets to that stage.

I still don't understand the underlying point though...is Jax supposed to snap it's finger and attract a multi-billion dollar corporate relocation with world class architecture or is the City supposed to force Vystar, FIS, or whatever local player is investing Downtown (already with incentives) to build something above and beyond what they can afford?

[Adam White]

If we can get the St Johns County and mandarin people to skip dinner at Chili's once a month and come downtown instead, that's millions of visitors right there.  We don't need to pull in school trips from Oklahoma to make downtown lively, we just need our own citizens to embrace it.  Cultural uses on the shipyards site, dining and drinks on Bay and Laura, the new fancy Marriot for a staycation away from the kids, all of this would help.

This.

[Adam White]

I think the pedestrian experience has much more to do with making Downtown an attractive place to open a business, or setup office space within... than the facade of a building. 

Downtown is really good at being a vertical suburb that looks nice on a postcard. On the street level, where life actually happens, its a much less attractive experience.  The amount of glass treatment on floors 12 through 25 has little to do with that street level environment.

That said, complaining that the new Fidelity building isn't iconic enough, is about as close to this as possible:

I agree Mike. Too many seem to have a "build it and they will come" outlook. I'd rather downtown be full of low-rise, "boring" buildings that are actually being used. As you said, when you're walking around on the sidewalk, the height of the buildings isn't really evident anyway. Having stuff to do at street level is what counts.

[thelakelander]

If we can get the St Johns County and mandarin people to skip dinner at Chili's once a month and come downtown instead, that's millions of visitors right there.  We don't need to pull in school trips from Oklahoma to make downtown lively, we just need our own citizens to embrace it.  Cultural uses on the shipyards site, dining and drinks on Bay and Laura, the new fancy Marriot for a staycation away from the kids, all of this would help.

This.

For Downtown, I'd even start smaller by focusing on catering to the urban core population and workforce first. Handle the basics for the existing population and that buzz will naturally attract those that live and work further away.

[Adam White]

If we can get the St Johns County and mandarin people to skip dinner at Chili's once a month and come downtown instead, that's millions of visitors right there.  We don't need to pull in school trips from Oklahoma to make downtown lively, we just need our own citizens to embrace it.  Cultural uses on the shipyards site, dining and drinks on Bay and Laura, the new fancy Marriot for a staycation away from the kids, all of this would help.

This.

For Downtown, I'd even start smaller by focusing on catering to the urban core population and workforce first. Handle the basics for the existing population and that buzz will naturally attract those that live and work further away.

That sounds very reasonable and not impossible at all.

[bl8jaxnative]

If we can get the St Johns County and mandarin people to skip dinner at Chili's once a month and come downtown instead,

Your valuation of dinner at Chili's is wildly different than 87% of the other people out there.  Ain't gonna happen.

[thelakelander]

^ That's why I say, screw them. They moved there for a reason. For downtown's sake, worry about accommodating the people who live, work and play there already or nearby. Don't spend time trying to appeal to people who don't want to spend considerable time there. Let them enjoy the suburbs they prefer.

[Peter Griffin]

^ That's why I say, screw them.

Geeze, man, no need to talk down on people who like the suburbs. Not everybody is an urbanite on here, you know.

[BridgeTroll]

^ That's why I say, screw them.

Geeze, man, no need to talk down on people who like the suburbs. Not everybody is an urbanite on here, you know.

It's the politics of the day... not on your side?  Screw em.... don't think like your group?.. screw em.  Don't live in your neighborhood?  Screw em.  We no longer bother to convince or cajole or bargain or compromise... we just screw em.  It's why things are the way they are..

[thelakelander]

You took that the wrong way. Perhaps my words were too harsh and short to the point. Nevertheless, my point has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with sound revitalization strategy.  If you want a neighborhood to succeed, you prioritize making it work for the population that uses it first, before spending money on schemes to lure people who could largely care less about it. Serve your current population adequately first and the rest will come naturally because they'll be attracted to be vibrancy and special sense of place that doesn't exist in other areas. Thus screw worrying about attracting suburbanites right now. We've spent billions and have nothing but complete failure to show from investing in that strategy sense the 1950s.