Are we ready for Urban Entertainment?
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-1308-p1010579.JPG)
The city has designated Bay Street as the urban core's entertainment district. Will the free market follow suit or does another area of the inner city have the necessary ingredients?
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/649
All of these are great examples of potential sites. When are we going to have a group of private investors ready to make that leap and create a district like this? Hopefully sooner than later.
I like locations 1 and 3 (Bay St. and Hendricks). It looks like 3 is ready to grow...and is a very nice liveable area that people can walk to from their houses and apartments. Now I am pretty naive on opening a business, but what are the things that are holding back area 3 from becoming huge? Is it property cost? Is it lack of wealthy-enough investors? Is it fear of making a profit? I guess the summary question is why is 3 not already big and established as an urban entertainment region. San Marco square just down the road shuts down pretty early.....except for Square One....but why would 3 be any different just down the road. If there is a reason for San Marco square shutting down/not attracting late night crowds....would the same thing happen in region 3. Is this a behind the scenes issues?
No. 3 - Hendricks, has flooding problems. This was mentioned as one of the major reasons Boomtown recently abandoned it for Main Street in Springfield. Leasing rates and the residential population could also become negatives for start up nightclubs and businesses. There's also a decent amount of gaps on the stretch, as well. Storefronts are separated by parking lots in some areas, a church, I-95, tennis courts and a public library in others. Imo, those would be the major negatives facing Hendricks.
We're ready. We can use alot more than what we have now...but still I think we're ready! ;)
Quote from: thelakelander on November 29, 2007, 01:15:25 PM
No. 3 - Hendricks, has flooding problems.
There's no reason why there should be flooding in that area. It has all been reconstructed...twice! What's the deal?
Low land and high water?? :D
Actually, the city paid huge bucks to put in a big pump station on San Marco, but it still floods at Landon, regardless.
To see why it floods there, take a look at some of the pictures of San Marco being built in the 20s. It was one big area of fill.
It evidently has absolutely no drainage.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on November 30, 2007, 09:35:01 PM
Low land and high water?? :D
Yeah, well maybe $2mil should have covered improving the storm drainage system correctly.
On a more serious note ... I seem to remember (but don't know from where) hearing that the pumping station now in place is just the first of 2 or 3 such things to try to relieve the flooding problem.