I don't agree with the argument from a tourism and connectivity standpoint, plus this is a privately financed deal. The USS Charles F. Adams would go great next to that waterfront surface parking lot, in my opinion.
QuoteBy The Times-Union
No reasonable person would oppose bringing back the USS Charles F. Adams as a "floating museum."
But it needs to be somewhere other than the site that supporters want - between River City Brewing Co. and the Acosta Bridge.
That location is in the heart of downtown. The Adams is four stories high - 140 feet if you count the top of its antenna.
The Adams would look out of place; with the shipyards gone, there rarely are large vessels downtown. Downtown is not a port.
It would make more sense to put the ship in the Mayport area. That would be its natural setting; it was home-ported at the naval base there for many years.
For security reasons, it wouldn't be practical to put a "floating museum" at the naval base itself. But the St. Johns River flows nearby.
Some might say that would be too far off Interstate 95.
Not necessarily.
There is talk of putting a cruise terminal at Mayport village. If it happens, there will be a steady stream of tourists into the area, all potential museum visitors.
This could be part of something bigger. Plans already are being made for upscale development at the fishing village.
If the cruise port and floating museum are added, that decaying neighborhood might be transformed into an engine of local economic growth.
If Mayport doesn't work out, look elsewhere. The area is replete with riverfront and oceanfront property.
A compelling argument can be made for the downtown location, of course.
It would go like this:
There are many military reunions here. And the Lone Sailor Statue, Maritime Museum, Memorial Wall and Purple Heart Trail are all downtown. Why not put the museum close to them?
But many attending a military reunion will want to go to Mayport - or at least the general area.
And many tourists and visitors will be going to the Beaches anyway - no matter where the ship is docked.
Jacksonville has a heavy military presence, both active duty and retired. A floating naval museum would be appropriate.
Before it is located anywhere, however, the funding mechanism would need to be carefully studied.
Is the tourist traffic high enough to justify such a ship? Will the taxpayers be expected to subsidize this?
The last thing this city needs is an abandoned destroyer without a market to justify its upkeep.
Such a study should precede any serious discussion of location.
In any case, put the ship in a more logical place than amid downtown's skyscrapers. The port makes sense.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/031208/opi_255950910.shtml
Wow. I 100% disagree with the TU on this. What better place than downtown. If people wanted to go to mayport to see ships... well, they would just go because there are already ships there!
Lets ask Fall River Mass if they mind having ships in the middle of their downtown...
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=fall+river+mass&ie=UTF8&ll=41.704783,-71.161623&spn=0.007353,0.01442&t=h&z=16
I completely disagree as well - it's almost like they wrote this editorial before they realized it was only four stories high. The Aetna Building is like 20, Two Prudential is 21, and Riverplace is 27. Is it going to overshadow anything.
These guys at the T-U don't get connectivity. If you put it at Mayport, how will it help anything?
I would bet that who ever wrote this editorial didn't even bother to research the USS Charles F. Adams website. If they did, they would find out the following.
1. This is a privately financed project.
2. The group wants it in the heart of downtown so it can feed off the connectivity of nearby attractions.
3. There's a rendering on the front page, showing what the ship will look like docked next to the Acosta Bridge.
If the rendering is accurate, this thing will fit in just fine.
(http://www.adamsclassddgvets.org/images102/Fundphoto.jpg)
http://www.adamsclassddgvets.org/
I dont particular like the location in this pic. I dont think it stands out enough. It seems to scrunched in with everything else. Also, is there enough parking and access to the ship at that location?
There's more than enough parking in the immediate area. I'd like to see some of that surface parking disappear with additional infill development.
I wonder if any of the boys at the T-U have ever been to London. They have a 600+ foot WWII cruiser right in the middle of town in the Thames. It is the HMS Belfast:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Hms_belfast.jpg)
Indeed, the TU really isn't thinking this through at all. Like I mentioned before in another tourism thread, you've got to place interesting attractions in the heart of downtown that will make people want to go downtown. This ship would be a great addition...not necessarily a catalyst for mega-tourism, but it would be a step in the right direction.
Why would they consider Mayport when that location doesn't have a central magnet for tourism? True, cruisers would disembark there, but placing the museum next to where they get off the ship subtracts from having a true Jacksonville experience. It will just keep them near their ship.
Lake, I think infill would come if the ship is located at the proposed location. Another example of this is the condo complexes that have been built next to the USS Yorktown park called Patriot's Point, back in my hometown.
Good points, CN. My only concern is that the ship itself isnt that significant. I wish we could get a better one basically but this may be all that is available and we could always add more later. I would love to see a WWII era ship downtown and/or a Liberty ship.
I think it would be fun to pull this editorial in five years, especially if it kicks off a bunch of things in the the southbank area.
The only problem with the area is it isn't the most pedestrian friendly area in the world (outside of Friendship Park). Two Prudential Plaza's site plan sucks (one of KBJ's gems of a building), and MOSH looks like a warehouse. The only place to eat is River City Brewing Company, which is laid out like crap. Being cut off from everything by the Main St bridge ramps (which could be brought down to grade someday), and the acosta ramps hurts things a bit.
However, this could be an opportunity to increase use of the water taxi, and dare I say it, the Skyway, with connectivity to the northbank.
Perhaps one day, there can be a garage with some ground level restaraunts.
Interesting that no writer wanted the byline on this op-ed piece -- I'm sure it's the opinion of everyone at the Times-Union?
Whoever came up with this thought needs to have their head (or collective head) examined.
This floating museum would be a welcome addition to the Downtown area. And if we're lucky, maybe it will even be open on the weekends!
Quote from: RiversideGator on March 12, 2008, 12:36:47 PM
Good points, CN. My only concern is that the ship itself isnt that significant. I wish we could get a better one basically but this may be all that is available and we could always add more later. I would love to see a WWII era ship downtown and/or a Liberty ship.
Wouldn't basing a more significant ship (such as an aircraft carrier or battleship) be difficult to do in that location with limited dock space? It looks like they would have to physically move the marina.
A letter out of the T/U today:
NAVY SHIP
Don't block the river
A ship museum docked near the River City Brewery Co. in the river was tried once before and the citizens voted against it. Has this been forgotten?
I don't think the Maritime Museum should be on a rusting ship in our river.
The current is too swift in downtown Jacksonville for a ship to be anchored there all of the time.
Also, I don't like the idea of blocking the river with a large ship.
I like the smaller ships visiting the area for viewing, but I don't like the idea of a permanent docking.
The St. Johns River is too valuable to us, as a city. We should not do anything to mar its worth or beauty.
I am all for a larger Maritime Museum. I think this is long overdue.
BARBARA HALL, Jacksonville
I guess to each his own. I'm amazed that even when a group proposes to pay for something worthwhile, with their own money, people still complain big time. I'd make the argument that the ship enhances the beauty of the river. Afterall, ships have more in common with the river and Jacksonville's history, than the surface parking lot that we are currently blessed with. Luckily, the Council has already given them their approval.
^ For all I know, the above letter writer has a valid point about water currents.
However, the complaint about blocking water traffic is nonsense. The railroad bridge is extremely low, and already blocks all but the smallest of boats from that half of the river.
Quote from: Charleston native on March 12, 2008, 01:22:50 PM
Quote from: RiversideGator on March 12, 2008, 12:36:47 PM
Good points, CN. My only concern is that the ship itself isnt that significant. I wish we could get a better one basically but this may be all that is available and we could always add more later. I would love to see a WWII era ship downtown and/or a Liberty ship.
Wouldn't basing a more significant ship (such as an aircraft carrier or battleship) be difficult to do in that location with limited dock space? It looks like they would have to physically move the marina.
I meant historically significant although I fear that these are all spoken for due to our city's delays in asking for a ship (which apparently continue to this day in some quarters). A carrier would clearly not work there and there are no available battleships anyway from what I understand. This may be the best we can get and it is significant for its era. Here is some more info on the ship:
QuoteUSS Charles F. Adams (DDG-2), named for Charles Francis Adams, III (Secretary of the Navy from 1929 to 1933), was the lead ship of the Charles F. Adams class of guided missile destroyers of the United States Navy.
The ship was laid down by the Bath Iron Works at Bath, Maine on June 16, 1958, launched on September 8, 1959 by Mrs. R. Homans, sister of Mr. Adams, and commissioned on September 10, 1960 and stationed in its homeport of Charleston, South Carolina.
Intended as a follow-on to the Forrest Sherman class destroyers the ship was originally designated as DD-952. Outwardly similar to the Sherman class, Charles F. Adams was the first U.S. Navy ship designed from the keel up to launch anti-aircraft missiles. To reflect the increased capabilities of the ship and to distinguish it from previous destroyer designs, Charles F. Adams was re-designated DDG-2 prior to the ship's launching.
Following commissioning Charles F. Adams took part in recovery operations for Walter M. Schirra's Mercury 8 mission. While engaged in this operation the Cuban Missile Crisis developed and Adams moved to the Caribbean Sea as part of the quarantine forces around the Island of Cuba. In July 1969, Charles F. Adams left its homeport of Charleston and relocated to Mayport, Florida.
Charles F. Adams was decommissioned and stricken from the Naval Vessel Register on November 20, 1992 and held for donation at Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in Pennsylvania. The Saginaw Valley Naval Ship Museum Committee attempted to acquire the ship as a museum and memorial to be located in Bay City, Michigan; however, the cost of preparing the ship for movement through the Saint Lawrence Seaway proved too expensive and the project was abandoned.
As of November 2007, Charles F. Adams remains at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard on Donation Hold status. She is currently scheduled to be preserved by the Adams Class Veteran's Association in Jacksonville, Florida. An application is due March 31st, 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Charles_F._Adams
And a link to the group seeking to bring it here:
http://www.adamsclassddgvets.org/
Assuming the ship is docked properly, the current will not be a factor. The ship (as it sits in the rendering) will be well out of reach of the main channel as well.
Id like to know if the writer of that letter even frequents the DT area and if she is a boater.
interesting view....since when did museums become negatives?
QuoteNAVY SHIP
'Keep it away'
Why do we need a ship, with absolutely no value except as an eyesore or museum, sitting by the riverbank. There would obviously be an additional cost to maintain and manage the ship for the little benefit it would afford. Keep it away.
EMORY THOMAS WELDON
Jacksonville
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/031308/opl_256275277.shtml
Wow.... I am flabbergasted.
Any bets on when the last time any of these people were downtown?
Half of the TU's readers would probably be in favor of public book burnings anyway.
Quote from: Lunican on March 13, 2008, 09:25:17 AM
Half of the TU's readers would probably be in favor of public book burnings anyway.
A little harsh. I just do not think people realize this is a private money project. I would like to see the ship down town to scope out how it plays on the skyline and if it blocks much of the river. I suspect it will be great but I can understand people's trepidation.
There's an image on the first page of this thread. When you look at the targeted site, the "blocking view" angle loses a lot of steam. I could understand the "blocking view" point-of-view....if the site were not at the base of the Acosta Bridge, next to acres of asphalt surface parking lots. It will block the view of the skyline from the seldom used surface parking lot under the Acosta Bridge, but it won't block the skyline view from any of the towers or streets on the Southbank.
Does this need approval from the Coast Guard?
Well, there will be readers that follow the opinion of the TU like sheep. Unfortunately, the TU is rarely right on any opinionated viewpoint and even less likely to get it right when it comes to downtown. That ship will be awesome and if it doesn't come downtown because a bunch of ignorant suburbanites blocked it from coming, i'd be ticked!!!
You know, it would be great if downtown & historic Springfield could break away from Jacksonville altogether. We could have our own government. It could be the hottest spot in N. Florida without the current administration and all of the suburban know it all's screwing it up. :)
Certainly, none of this garbage should come as a surprise to anyone. The naysayers rarely if ever do any background checks on anything before they start their rants. The ship would be an asset to the entire Jacksonville area. Let's go with the floating museum.
Lake... man I don't know about this. When I read the TU article I sorta found myself in agreement. I don't think the ship should be (right in the middle of) downtown or Mayport. The River wines and bends a lot before hitting the Atlantic. I'm thinking the river near Metro Park and the Stadium. That ship could go some where along Bay Street between Metro Park and the Berkmen Condos. I KNOW I KNOW that's still downtown, but what else is going on in this area?? Putting it near Rivercity Brewing Co. just seems like all the stuff around it will hide it. Shouldn't it stand out?
The best way for something to have success in the downtown core is to cram it in with nearby complementing uses.
Putting it near River City Brewing, MOSH, Friendship Fountain, the skyway station and the maritime museum are the things that will make it successful and bring additional connectivity and needed life to the Southbank. Although smaller than a battleship or air craft carrier, its large enough that while it won't block skyline views, people will be able to see it from I-95, the Northbank and the Main Street Bridge.
The Landmar pier would be another decent location.....if the Shipyards site ever develops (don't hold your breath). Placing it close to Metro Park without other complementing uses nearby will make it just as effective for downtown as that isolated park, the stadium or the convention center.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 13, 2008, 10:36:29 PM
The best way for something to have success in the downtown core is to cram it in with nearby complementing uses.
The Landmar pier would be another decent location.....if the Shipyards site ever develops (don't hold your breath). Placing it close to Metro Park without other complementing uses nearby will make it just as effective for downtown as that isolated park, the stadium or the convention center.
In a way I was thinking that. I guess you were thinking right now. I was thinking years down the road (eastline on the Skyway completed). I see your point. Keyword:
ISOLATED
that's what I've been saying for like 2 entire pages of posts here. Just doesn't seem safe. Sorry.
I think the south bank would really get a pick me up from this. The river Taxi could use this the hospital and the Penisular(if it is built) for another stop. The T.U. should get on board with a private project like this.
no. sorry. have you been to one of these things JS? There's one in Boston, I forget its name but there's 1 weekend a year that it's frequented by attraction goers and that is Halloween; however the crowd is lack luster at best given everybody in new england heads to Salem, MA for obvious reasons.
No ship? No museum? We'll only visit on halloween? Oh the lack of creativity here...
Let's go for a carrier and set her next to the old Southside Generating plant property of JEA. Hell, let's get a short one, a "Geep carrier" from WWII or Korea that is now used for Marine Choppers. Let's set us a small base around it like a WWII camp. Jeeps, tanks, equipment, buildings housing our shipyard history. Toss in a narrow gauge "goverment railroad" to tour the base and docks. Give us a fighter base with a 300' runway, in a palm jungle, set a corsair in there, and a wildcat, and pby... Get a Zero mock up from the disney ride makers that always seems to be in crash and burn mode. Make the whole park a cross between the base on Bah, Bah Black sheep, MASH, Iwo Jima. Don't just stick another ship out by a dock, for GODS SAKE, give her the glory she deserves. Toss in the support... Wouldn't you love to have your photo taken with Halsey? What if you could enter a building on base and be on the bridge of the IJN flagship as Yamamoto says, "All we have done is awakened a sleeping tiger and filled it with a terrible resolve..."
This should be more then another floating piece of gray steel, rather I want to smell the copra, taste the 3% beer, see the daily 3:38 pm bomb run of washing machine charlie, Let's talk about it over chow in the mess hall...
More then a ship, if we built America's theme park - a living museum of WWII, money would pour in from around the world to support memorials, and build displays... Don't believe it? Have you SEEN the Imperial War Museum? If we fail in this mission, and I don't see you again, we'll meet at the Yasukuni Shrine.
Ocklawaha
"I love the smell of napalm in the morning!"
It works best when their's some sort of beef on the BBQ.
Hey, there's another shop in our "Be in WWII for a day Theme Park". Good old deep fried fingers, or rare ribs cooked over a flash flame of jellied petro...ummm good.
Ocklawaha
Quote from: Ocklawaha on March 14, 2008, 11:30:15 PM
No ship? No museum? We'll only visit on halloween? Oh the lack of creativity here...
Let's go for a carrier and set her next to the old Southside Generating plant property of JEA. Hell, let's get a short one, a "Geep carrier" from WWII or Korea that is now used for Marine Choppers. Let's set us a small base around it like a WWII camp. Jeeps, tanks, equipment, buildings housing our shipyard history. Toss in a narrow gauge "goverment railroad" to tour the base and docks. Give us a fighter base with a 300' runway, in a palm jungle, set a corsair in there, and a wildcat, and pby... Get a Zero mock up from the disney ride makers that always seems to be in crash and burn mode. Make the whole park a cross between the base on Bah, Bah Black sheep, MASH, Iwo Jima. Don't just stick another ship out by a dock, for GODS SAKE, give her the glory she deserves. Toss in the support... Wouldn't you love to have your photo taken with Halsey? What if you could enter a building on base and be on the bridge of the IJN flagship as Yamamoto says, "All we have done is awakened a sleeping tiger and filled it with a terrible resolve..."
This should be more then another floating piece of gray steel, rather I want to smell the copra, taste the 3% beer, see the daily 3:38 pm bomb run of washing machine charlie, Let's talk about it over chow in the mess hall...
More then a ship, if we built America's theme park - a living museum of WWII, money would pour in from around the world to support memorials, and build displays... Don't believe it? Have you SEEN the Imperial War Museum? If we fail in this mission, and I don't see you again, we'll meet at the Yasukuni Shrine.
Ocklawaha
Alright, if the attraction was huge with rides, then I'd go for it. I had no idea it could be like that!
Quote from: gatorback on March 13, 2008, 11:14:43 PM
that's what I've been saying for like 2 entire pages of posts here. Just doesn't seem safe. Sorry.
The location would be just about the same as Battleship Cove (home of the USS Massachusetts) in Fall River, MA, near I-195.
http://www.battleshipcove.org/
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/urbanjax7816/FallRiverMA-battleship.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/urbanjax7816/FallRiverMA-battleship1.jpg)
As for blocking views. Here's an image of what the ship will look like, placed next to the Acosta Bridge.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/urbanjax7816/qcache_LtVVY2x-ukEJ_www.jpg)
That hardly blocks any views. The readers who sent letters to the TU must own a boat docked at the adjacent marina and would hate for their "yacht" to be dwarfed by a Navy ship. Doesn't make for good bragging rights, ya know?! ;)
Gator, Im not sure when you went to see the Constitution, and the WWII destroyer next to it, but every time I have been there, its been busy as hell with school groups and tourists. Also, the only people who go to Salem is the tourists, most people from mass know that the witch trials actually occurred in what is now known as Marblehead (among other places)
Consider for a moment that MOSH has school groups almost every day. How cool would it be for them to do a morning at MOSH, lunch in friendship park, and then a couple of hours on the Adams... It would be a great local spot for school groups, as well as tourists when they come downtown.
Ok. I like the idea now for the kids as the do kids enjoy the ships I agree. It would be something I suppose. As for Salem, all the real cool young adults go to Salem for fright night and party their you know whats off.
Quote from: Steve on March 12, 2008, 10:05:52 AM
I completely disagree as well - it's almost like they wrote this editorial before they realized it was only four stories high. The Aetna Building is like 20, Two Prudential is 21, and Riverplace is 27. Is it going to overshadow anything.
These guys at the T-U don't get connectivity. If you put it at Mayport, how will it help anything?
I totally disagree, too. I would like to see that ship to make its home downtown. We certainly need more attactions there than what we are trying to offer.
Ya know that is the only place that I can think of that won't obstruct the view of the river from the office buildings without it being to far from the core. Maybe that's why its shoved in next to the acosta instead a place with more space and possible room for expansion. IE: Maritime or Military Museum.
What's going on with this - any updates?
Why not open a big Navy museum and have 2 or 3 of these ships in the middle of the St Johns river. For a little extra charge a watertaxi will bring you from the Navy museum to the ships!
How about between the Hart en Downtown bridge?? Doesn't block any views and would be a great tourist attraction. ;D
Quote from: Beloki on September 18, 2008, 10:47:42 AM
Why not open a big Navy museum and have 2 or 3 of these ships in the middle of the St Johns river. For a little extra charge a watertaxi will bring you from the Navy museum to the ships!
How about between the Hart en Downtown bridge?? Doesn't block any views and would be a great tourist attraction. ;D
it's a nice feel good idea but it seems like every podunk town has a battleship, aircraft carrier, submarine open as a "museum" what could be done to make one here in JAX unique and able draw visitors?
^ The ships could be active air defense.... Just a thought. :)
To make the ship a museum really doesn't leave you much room for creativity, however, if the ship was used as a hotel or entertainment complex we might then have something unique.
Quote from: Jason on September 18, 2008, 11:28:21 AM
^ The ships could be active air defense.... Just a thought. :)
To make the ship a museum really doesn't leave you much room for creativity, however, if the ship was used as a hotel or entertainment complex we might then have something unique.
I have never seen the navy give a ship to a city for that purpose, if if can be done, why not?
But then again the big question in if JAX could support a venue like that? the experience of the landing doesn't bode well
An entertainment complex with a small museum sounds interesting, but I wonder if it could survive on its own. It would probably be better off if it were a part of a larger experience.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 12, 2008, 03:24:10 PM
I guess to each his own. I'm amazed that even when a group proposes to pay for something worthwhile, with their own money, people still complain big time. I'd make the argument that the ship enhances the beauty of the river. Afterall, ships have more in common with the river and Jacksonville's history, than the surface parking lot that we are currently blessed with. Luckily, the Council has already given them their approval.
5years later.
Wanted to bump this because the USS Adams is a positive project for Downtown. DIA Board meeting today. We now have people jumping in the river, Swimming in the river, paddle boarding in the river, Kayaking in the river, fishing in the river. Let's have a Navy ship in the river Downtown. This project is time sensitive and shovel ready like mile point.
This project will tell everyone to Visit Jacksonville.
Uh no. In Mayport? Another bone head idea to hurt downtown tourism. Its called the "Shipyards" for a reason.
I heard that the ship is going in the shipyards. I think that's the best possible place, much better than on the southbank.
Quote from: urbaknight on September 23, 2013, 03:32:33 PM
I heard that the ship is going in the shipyards. I think that's the best possible place, much better than on the southbank.
+1
It was on the agenda at today's DIA meeting.
Mike Saylor gave a committee update on the USS Adams to the entire DIA Board.
Remember it was an IBM Smarter Cities Challenge recommendation.
Shared some positive benefits during Public comment and let's hope that the DIA gets ahead of this game changer project that will make Downtown a Destination and not a pass through.
I don't have an opinion one way or the other about the ship's home. But, referring back to the TU editorial, can we please once and for all dispense with the idea that a cruise port at Mayport will inevitably lead to tourists flocking to the area? Why does this argument persist when more tourist-oriented cities like Tampa and Miami appear to get virtually no additional tourist traffic due to their cruise ports? Anyone who knows better, please set me straight, but my observation is that cruise passengers fly or drive into town, get on the boat, and set sail. I've read many accounts of the chamber of commerce types in those other towns coming up with one scheme after another to get passengers to spend just one or two nights extra in port. To my knowledge, they've never managed to do it. What in the world makes anyone believe Mayport would be any different?
I believe the Mayport Cruise Terminal ship has already set sail and not going to happen.
Quote from: Mike D on September 23, 2013, 09:15:22 PM
I don't have an opinion one way or the other about the ship's home. But, referring back to the TU editorial, can we please once and for all dispense with the idea that a cruise port at Mayport will inevitably lead to tourists flocking to the area? Why does this argument persist when more tourist-oriented cities like Tampa and Miami appear to get virtually no additional tourist traffic due to their cruise ports? Anyone who knows better, please set me straight, but my observation is that cruise passengers fly or drive into town, get on the boat, and set sail. I've read many accounts of the chamber of commerce types in those other towns coming up with one scheme after another to get passengers to spend just one or two nights extra in port. To my knowledge, they've never managed to do it. What in the world makes anyone believe Mayport would be any different?
A cruise port in Mayport would significantly increase the amount of traffic using the Mayport Ferry. Without it, don't be surprised if the ferry disappears for good in a few years.
But the ferry should be completely separate from the cruise terminal. In fact, it would be a bad argument to bring the ferry into the discussion when forecasting the impacts of a cruise terminal. The ferry is a negligible operation - building an expensive cruise terminal and the related infrastructure where a benefit is that the totally unprofitable ferry business worth a few grand may survive is like saying let's build a convention center so we get a major show just once (and to me it's like saying let's spend millions to extend the Skyway to Brooklyn so we can serve just a few more potential passengers).
I can understand there being difficulty convincing a material amount of passengers to stay an extra night or two in a homeport. But most cruise ship passengers are pressed for cash as it is, and have saved up for the cruise, not for the town. Other wealthy cruise ship passengers don't come in numbers, but also wouldn't spend time in Jax. They might drop a few thousand at Bal Harbor Shops in Miami Beach and stay an extra night at a 5 star hotel, using the spa, buying a few drinks and a nice meal. Those one/two people who do that are spending a lot more in the local economy than 10 Carnival/Royal Caribbean cruise line economy passengers staying 2 nights extra.
But there are certainly intangible benefits to more visitors of any net worth having to drive through the city on the way to Mayport. Jax doesn't get lots of visitors outside of the TPC, and I don't think a cruise terminal would necessarily bring more far reaching visitors who don't already come from adjacent states to go to the Gator Bowl or the FL-GA game, but it never hurts. Make the stretch from the airport/95N/95S over to Mayport very attractive and user friendly with well-placed CVB billboards to local attractions and you could have return visitors. You won't convince them to come otherwise until someone manages to make Jacksonville an automatic destination like Tampa, Charleston, New Orleans, FTL, MIA, and other nearby home ports are.
The disadvantage that Mayport has is its location.
New Orleans - they dock right downtown
Charleston - they dock right downtown
Miami - they basically dock right downtown and 5 minute drive from South Beach
FTL - they dock somewhat close to downtown, 5-10 minute drive max?
Tampa - they dock right downtown
Jacksonville - they dock in a poor shipping village somewhere in the city limits but it doesn't feel like it...kind of a tough sell to keep visitors in if they already aren't doing it in more logical places like Miami
USS Adams part of the Jaxtoberfest celebrations today at Shipyards. A POSITIVE event. Starts at 5:30
Rumor has it Khan is All In.
I am looking forward to the USS Adams being downtown.
One mistake many communities make is spreading their cultural and civic attractions over a large area when it is intuitive that they attract more visitors and are more successful when they are closer together. Jacksonville has a limited number of attractions to begin with so I think it is better if the ones we have are clustered together. It would also make things like a CityPass (a single ticket that gets people into Cummer, MOSH, Maritime Heritage Center, and Museum of Modern Art) more attractive to visitors and even residents. They can park once and get to most attractions on foot.
At some point in the history of this thread the concern of river current was brought up. Several cities have ships permanently docked on rivers. The HMS Belfast is docked on the River Thames in central London, the USS New Jersey is docked on the Delaware River across from Philadelphia, NYC has the USS Intrepid on the Hudson River, and there are literally countless others. This concern is a non-starter for me.