As signs over the last year have indicated, Mayor Curry is in talks with Shad Khan and the Jaguars about developing Metropolitan Park, potentially into a hotel & convention center, via a possible land swap with Shipyards property. Sounds like both sides want to move aggressively on the plan. The benefits being that a Met Park development is closer to the entertainment zone being envisioned around the stadium district, it would not be delayed by remediation, and that ultimately, it would be less expensive to develop Met Park and remediate a portion of the Shipyards property for park space rather than to try to remediate the entire Shipyards property for residential/commercial use.
Please read the full article here:
http://jacksonville.com/metro/2016-11-11/mayor-curry-eyes-met-park-possible-site-riverfront-development-tandem-shad-khan
QuoteMayor Curry eyes Met Park as possible site for riverfront development in tandem with Shad Khan
The high-pitched canopy roof is gone from the amphitheater at Metropolitan Park, leaving behind the well-worn stage as the only remnant of the venue where symphony orchestras, jazz ensembles and rock bands played concerts for crowds spread across the park's sloping lawn.
The half-dismantled amphitheater could be a sign of more far-reaching changes coming for Metropolitan Park and the downtown riverfront.
Mayor Lenny Curry is in talks with Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan about developing a long stretch of valuable, city-owned land that encompasses Metropolitan Park and The Shipyards, two tracts that haven't lived up to their potential for pumping activity into downtown.
"I will tell you everything is on the table and we are in discussions with Shad Khan and his organization about how to get the whole entire area developed, which could include some new use for Met Park," Curry said.
But if the city decides it wants to open Metropolitan Park to some form of private development, there is a catch.
The city would need approval from the National Park Service because back in the early 1980s, federal Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars were used for the park. That $1.7 million grant came with strings attached: a binding commitment to preserve Met Park as an outdoor recreational area that's open to the public.
However, even "forever" has an escape hatch. The federal government will allow conversion of such recreational areas to other uses, provided there is a swap of land that has comparable value and hasn't previously been used as a place for outdoor recreation.
Chief Administrative Officer Sam Mousa said if the city seeks to develop Met Park, the city would create parkland elsewhere so river access isn't diminished.
"Any waterfront development, I'm sure, will include some riverfront park that could replace Metropolitan Park, so all of that is being taken into consideration," Mousa said.
The Shipyards, located immediately next to Met Park, could fit the bill for such replacement land.
In 2015, the Downtown Investment Authority picked Khan to be the master developer of The Shipyards. But after facing delays because of environmental contamination on The Shipyards site, Khan shifted gears and joined the city to finance construction of an amphitheater and indoor practice field next to EverBank Field.
Met Park is directly across the street from where where that new amphitheater, which will be called Daily's Place, is being built.
"Mr. Khan has publicly expressed his interest in developing the Met Park site," said Khan's spokesman Jim Woodcock. "He and the Jaguars have also repeatedly stated their commitment to support the continued revitalization of downtown Jacksonville, with a focal point being a seamless connection between EverBank Field and the St. Johns River. Daily's Place is the first step in that direction and development of Met Park would be a logical next phase."
Khan spoke of his interest in further development at an August groundbreaking ceremony for the new amphitheater.
"We have, across (the street), a great opportunity for a high-end hotel/convention center, which this town really needs," Khan said at the groundbreaking. "It's something we'll try and work with the city on. As you move toward downtown, the city is wrestling with a lot of challenges environmentally. As that's addressed, you can really have growth. It's absolutely important."
The Shipyards and Met Park are comparable in size. The Shipyards covers 46 acres when counting both uplands and river-submerged property. About 30 acres of The Shipyards is high and dry. Met Park is roughly 27 acres.
City Councilman Bill Gulliford said he thinks Met Park is a better location than The Shipyards for what Khan is doing to expand the entertainment zone around the football stadium.
In addition, Met Park isn't plagued with environmental cleanup costs like The Shipyards, which takes it name from the bygone era when it actually was a working shipyard.
"The big gorilla in the room is the fact that we've got contamination on the site, and $13 million or so set aside to address that," Gulliford said.
He said that might not be enough money to clean up the property for the large-scale development that's been envisioned for The Shipyards. But $13 million could be sufficient to get the property in shape for a passive park, and the large-scale development could shift to Met Park, Gulliford said.
If the city tries to convert Met Park to a different use, it won't be the first time Jacksonville has made that attempt.
Back in the late 1990s, the city went through an agonizing attempt to lift the regulations so it could build a new amphitheater with more ticketed performances at the park. University of North Florida President John Delaney, who was mayor at the time, said the city could have found the replacement land, but the city's application faced constant challenges from St. Nicholas neighborhood residents who objected to sound from the concerts.
"We just had very organized community opposition to it, and it was going to take too long and take too much energy, so I pulled the plug on it," he said.
In 2013, City Council President Lori Boyer pored through boxes of documents when the city again assessed the future of the park's amphitheater. A City Council committee determined the city could not afford at that time to obtain other land that could be substituted for Met Park.
Boyer said she's open to considering that option again, provided the city ensures the public has access to the riverfront. She said the city of Louisville is a model for how Jacksonville can do it.
"They've got this great riverfront public space," she said. "Some of it is kids' activities. Some of it is just a grass lawn where people are throwing Frisbees. Some of it is riverwalk. The idea is that the people in the condos and the people in the offices are overlooking this landscaped area and it's lovely, so it's an amenity for them."
She said Met Park is a long way from the downtown core, so moving it closer would be more convenient. But the flip side is that if relocating park space results in pushing new development farther from the core, that adds to one of downtown's biggest weaknesses: it's spread out over such a large area that it's hard to achieve "critical mass" where projects feed off each other, Boyer said.
For instance, a longstanding criticism of the current convention center, located on the side of downtown in the LaVilla neighborhood, is that it's too far out of the way.
The city doesn't have a timeline for bringing forward a proposal, but Curry said he wants to move aggressively.
He said voter approval of the Aug. 30 half-cent sales tax referendum for paying down the city's huge pension debt has injected confidence in private investors about Jacksonville.
"Let's embrace the power we have now," he said. 'We'll be smart about it, but we've got to move. We've got to get things done."[/b]
"But the flip side is that if relocating park space results in pushing new development farther from the core, that adds to one of downtown's biggest weaknesses: it's spread out over such a large area that it's hard to achieve "critical mass" where projects feed off each other, Boyer said."
Yup.
Downtown already suffers from deconsolidation of its popular venues/assists. This would add to the sprawl, with large gaps in between.
But, I guess beggars can't be choosers, eh.
^^ No they'll be moving the park closer to the active parts of downtown which would see it get more use, and a hotel or convention center by the stadium would further cluster the sports and entertainment area....
If we do create a large park space here I hope that they incorporate larger shady trees into it. Even if That means waiting years for them to fill out and using something temporary in between. I can't stand seeing Florida parks that try to emulate northern open space parks. It's simply too hot most of the year here for people to take advantage of. At the very least the walkways need to be shaded. Baldwin Park in Orlando has been mentioned several times as a place we should try to emulate in one of our upcoming urban projects. While I agree, there is a severe lack of shade here (I'm a BP resident). The parks are pretty to look at, but hardly anyone uses them March-October because it's simply too hot and there's nowhere to get away from the sun. Even the benches are in the open.
Quote from: Gamblor on November 12, 2016, 07:42:00 PM
^^ No they'll be moving the park closer to the active parts of downtown which would see it get more use, and a hotel or convention center by the stadium would further cluster the sports and entertainment area....
That's one (incorrect) way of looking at it. Most others, including Boyer, see spreading such development further towards the stadium as moving it further away from the core.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on November 13, 2016, 11:28:52 AM
If we do create a large park space here I hope that they incorporate larger shady trees into it. Even if That means waiting years for them to fill out and using something temporary in between. I can't stand seeing Florida parks that try to emulate northern open space parks. It's simply too hot most of the year here for people to take advantage of. At the very least the walkways need to be shaded. Baldwin Park in Orlando has been mentioned several times as a place we should try to emulate in one of our upcoming urban projects. While I agree, there is a severe lack of shade here (I'm a BP resident). The parks are pretty to look at, but hardly anyone uses them March-October because it's simply too hot and there's nowhere to get away from the sun. Even the benches are in the open.
A very valid point.
The lack of critical mass with the Northbank is indeed an issue. I assume this means the Prime Osborn becomes something else? What impact does this have on the Hyatt? What is the current Hotel occupancy DT on the Northbank and the Southbank? This Convention Center would need to be pretty big and expensive to bring the kind of events that would bring ADDITIONAL visitors rather than cannibalize existing Hotel business.
Nothing to see here until we have a real plan.
This will be great because the extension to the sky way is going to go over there, right?! HAHA!
Further from the core?? Some people act like the stadium is across the Hart Bridge. Its what a ten minute walk at best. I was just home in Oct and walked from The Landing to the stadium in no time. Guess we should just let it stay empty waiting for some miracle to happen on 34th street. I hope all goes well and a good plan is reached and then lets see some cranes.
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on November 14, 2016, 07:33:35 PM
Further from the core?? Some people act like the stadium is across the Hart Bridge. Its what a ten minute walk at best. I was just home in Oct and walked from The Landing to the stadium in no time. Guess we should just let it stay empty waiting for some miracle to happen on 34th street. I hope all goes well and a good plan is reached and then lets see some cranes.
It is further from the Landing than the current Convention Center. How is that working out? It would help if the Jail was moved. With the Jail and Maxwell House serving as an impenetrable wall between the Northbank core and the Stadium district, it had better be one helluva of a great park on the other side of Bay St.
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on November 14, 2016, 07:33:35 PM
Further from the core?? Some people act like the stadium is across the Hart Bridge. Its what a ten minute walk at best. I was just home in Oct and walked from The Landing to the stadium in no time. Guess we should just let it stay empty waiting for some miracle to happen on 34th street. I hope all goes well and a good plan is reached and then lets see some cranes.
No one is saying you can't handle the walk. But clustering is about activating adjacent (preferably denser) spaces to amplify the vibrancy. In more successful urban spaces, during a 10-minute walk you might pass by 100 storefronts with activity, rather than the half a dozen or so that we would have.
I guess it's about time for me to finally finish up that Baltimore article ;-)
Quote from: vicupstate on November 15, 2016, 04:49:34 AM
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on November 14, 2016, 07:33:35 PM
Further from the core?? Some people act like the stadium is across the Hart Bridge. Its what a ten minute walk at best. I was just home in Oct and walked from The Landing to the stadium in no time. Guess we should just let it stay empty waiting for some miracle to happen on 34th street. I hope all goes well and a good plan is reached and then lets see some cranes.
It is further from the Landing than the current Convention Center. How is that working out?
There is a lot less between The Landing and the Convention Center than The Landing and Everbank. You've got the Hyatt, multiple bars/restaurants along Bay St (and Forsyth/Adams), Churchwell Lofts, Berkman, etc then a half mile walk and you hit Intuition, Manifest Distilling, The Arena, Baseball Grounds heading east. What's in between the Landing and the Convention Center? Then once you get there other than the CC you're in a ghost town.
Then the train station can go back to being a train station.
You make a good point about everything West of The Landing being a dead zone and the East side being better for the first few blocks. However, once you pass Liberty Street you have a substantial walk before you get to Intuition. After Intuition it is another 1/4 mile plus to the Metropolitan Park property line. Unless there is something really positive breaking up those distances, it is going to be a problematic to create pedestrian linkage and synergy.
The rule of thumb is that 1/4 mile radius is the max distance someone will walk to reach a destination.
Between the Landing and Convention Center you have Omni, Times-Union Center for the Performing Arts, multiple restaurants along Forsyth/Adams and a direct shot on the Skyway to bridge the mile between the two. Soon, there will be two or three additional multi-story residential developments (at least one with street retail) and the first phase of JAXIS. With that said, neither a convention center in its current location or at Metropolitan Park is ideal. Just more of the same with additional tax money being thrown into the pot. However, at this point all we can do is wait to see what type of proposal actually materializes.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 15, 2016, 08:48:15 AM
You make a good point about everything West of The Landing being a dead zone and the East side being better for the first few blocks. However, once you pass Liberty Street you have a substantial walk before you get to Intuition. After Intuition it is another 1/4 mile plus to the Metropolitan Park property line. Unless there is something really positive breaking up those distances, it is going to be a problematic to create pedestrian linkage and synergy.
The rule of thumb is that 1/4 mile radius is the max distance someone will walk to reach a destination.
The reality is that it will be problematic to create pedestrian scale synergy. Whatever happens around the stadium will simply end up being another node of activity that's a mile east of the Northbank core. Converting the Shipyards into a park (an idea that certainly has its merits) isn't going to change that.
^Downtown housing is pretty much at capacity. The LaVilla developments being built are affordable housing, so that pretty much makes the expense of retrofitting an old building like the Barnett or Ambassador a deal killer. Then with the particular site selected, it's not bad at all. On the surface, the area may seem isolated, but it's a quick walk over a pretty short bridge to everything in Brooklyn. It's also a stone's throw from two Skyway stations. So residents will have quick free public transit access to both the Northbank and Southbank. Last, when these projects are completed, along with JAXIS, there will be activity in the immediate vicinity that does not exist today.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 07:31:20 AM
I guess it's about time for me to finally finish up that Baltimore article ;-)
Yeah I think so!
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 09:26:49 AM
It's also a stone's throw from two Skyway stations. So residents will have quick free public transit access to both the Northbank and Southbank.
:o TOD?! It just took 3 decades...maybe we're on a 30-year delay and TOD is gonna start springing up everywhere.
^Haha, the Skyway is an underutilized economic development tool. It's one of the primary reasons Jax was able to land the Omni and attract Rouse to invest in the Landing back in the 1980s.
If there was a convention center and hotel, it would seal the deal that if a Skyway extension did occur, it would go out to the stadium.
I do think the Jail needs to be moved eventually with this being one of several reasons. However, there are some cool and creative ways to energize a beautiful new park where the shipyards are that will cost a fraction of the price that the environmental cleanup will take. Also, I want there to be greenspace on the river that is preserved. That part makes a lot of sense to me.
From a market perspective, the worry of subsidizing another decent sized hotel in downtown is that it would cannibalize the Hyatt. Taxpayers "invested" about $20 million in that one. It also doesn't seal the deal for a Skyway expansion, unless the Jags and COJ have some extra pennies to help pay for its construction. If that were the case, it would have been extended to EverBank Field decades ago.
If it's possible to save millions on cleanup by converting portions of the Shipyards into greenspace, perhaps that's the way to go with that property. Downtown certainly isn't lacking in its amount of underutilized property. So if millions can be saved by making it a park, that could free up millions for a large amount of other unfunded needs.
With that said, we're lying to ourselves if we think a long linear park bordered by a jail and coffee house is going to result in any amount of consistent pedestrian traffic along East Bay between the Northbank core and Metropolitan Park. The distance is too great, the connectivity is too limited, the climate is too tropical and the area's density is too low. It could be very nice but from a walkability perspective, it would be more like the green spaces on Chattanooga's Northshore or Detroit's Belle Isle as opposed to Millennium Park in Chicago. The majority of people will drive to get there and they'll drive to get to their next destination when it's time to leave the space.
I'm meeting-free for the next hour, so humor me while I speculate based on what we currently know.
First of all, we know that Curry has something major in mind for downtown. This shouldn't come as a surprise. During his first year in office, he was very candid in his admission that there would be no money for downtown until his pension plan was passed. Once his plan was approved, he said, he would turn his attention to downtown. With the bill passed, he seems laser-focused on cementing a legacy via downtown transformation. And, for a guy who usually speaks in measured terms, he's talking big. "We are going to transform downtown," Curry told the Times-Union staff two weeks ago. "It's coming ... This is not going to be small-time stuff over the next few years. Everything is on the table — the Shipyards, Berkman, Metropolitan Park, the old city hall, the old courthouse, a convention center, a hotel district. By [the end of 2018], you will have seen real development in and around that whole area from the Shipyards and Met Park to Berkman without question. It won't be a concept and conversation. It will be work done," Curry said.
Curry was very clear that the developments he is discussing involve private dollars aided by logistical support from the city, which obviously suggests a continued partnership with Shad Khan and the Jaguars.
A few thoughts/predictions/questions:
1) Curry told the Times-Union that major development(s) will be announced beginning early next year. This certainly points to the Jaguars State of the Franchise presentation in January as the most likely landing spot for the first major announcement. At the very least, I'd look for Curry and Khan to announce details of a Metro Park redevelopment. Wouldn't be surprised to hear more Shipyards news either, as a Met Park development may necessitate a land swap with that property.
2) I'm not sold, however, that Metro Park will be used for a new convention center, at least not in the traditional sense of the term. First, without going quite vertical, I don't see how a modern convention center of reasonable size fits onto the Met Park property, let alone a convention center/hotel. Secondly, the bed taxes only spread so thin, and I don't see us being in a position to put down $200 million+ for a competitive center. Third, the idea of cramming a 500,000+ sf convention center into Met Park seems to contradict Khan's desired use for the property. "Mr. Khan has publicly expressed his interest in developing the Met Park site," said Khan's spokesman Jim Woodcock. "He and the Jaguars have also repeatedly stated their commitment to support the continued revitalization of downtown Jacksonville, with a focal point being a seamless connection between EverBank Field and the St. Johns River." Not sure that erecting a fortress like convention center on the site achieves that goal of connecting Everbank to the St. Johns River.
3) My best guess is that Metro Park, based on past statements by Khan, will be less hotel/convention center, and more luxury hotel/conference center. Maybe 100,000 sf of meeting space. Perhaps some retail/restaurants on the ground level. And I'd put money on a rooftop restaurant as well. In fact, even though the original Shipyards plan will likely never come to full fruition, you get the idea that certain aspects may be piecemealed and modified as plans adjust. Wouldn't be at all surprised if the project looks a lot like the hotel previously proposed in the original Shipyards presentation:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/3883790227_Thn87SV-L.jpg)
I totally see the thought process behind the hotel from the Jaguars perspective -- it fits their strategy of luring more festivals to town and turning Jaguars home games into weekend-long events featuring major Saturday night performances at the amphitheater, and having their own hotel in the stadium district allows them to control that experience even more -- but as Ennis mentioned above, I've always been worried about the cannibalization effect. Further, with Phase I of the District possibly featuring its own 200-room hotel, I question whether the market can support up to 550 more rooms per night (assuming Khan's original plans for a 350-room hotel).
4) As part of that seamless connection between Everbank Field and the St. Johns River that the Jaguars desire, I'd also look for the announcement of a pedestrian bridge linking Daily's Place with the Metro Park development, over the highway. This overpass has been mentioned as a "Phase II" addition to Daily's Place since the amphitheater was first announced, which leads me to believe that Met Park discussions have been going on for quite some time now.
(https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/5976235/Jax_rendering_0003_Jags-Amp-Renderings1B.0.jpg)
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see the overpass extend directly into a Riverwalk, as we saw in some of the original Shipyards renderings:
(https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mUbgmNWoWAo18kqCU0r8Xi4Jc2s=/902x507/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3418500/SHIPYARDS_PLAY_1_CREDIT_POPULOUS.0.jpg)
5) I'd count on Khan's Metro Park development to also feature quite a bit of riverfront greenspace as well. Curry pretty much implied as much, saying "There will be green space, significant green space, built into everything we do down there." It makes sense. I don't know if I'm crazy about the idea of surrendering the entire Shipyards in a landswap, so it would be great to maintain some existing park acreage at the Met site. I also think we'll see at least one more restaurant/entertainment piece on the Met Park property as well.
6) I slightly fallen in love with the idea of a signature riverfront park at the Shipyards, but like I stated above, I don't think it would be prudent to sacrifice the entire Shipyards property in a Metro Park landswap, nor do I think it would be necessary if we get creative with greenspace at Met Park and in other riverfront development. In fact, I still hope the city petitions for obsolescence first with Met Park before being bound to an acre-for-acre landswap because, let's face it, Met Park hasn't been relevant for a long time and really never used the full 27 acres for public parkspace. In a perfect world, I'd love to see the left half of the Shipyards (yellow) capped for parkspace, and the right half (red) fully remediated for unrestricted development.
(https://s12.postimg.org/evcivsr31/Shipyards.png)
Based on comments in the T-U article, we can speculate that the left half of the Shipyards, at the least, may be being looked at for use as parkspace (Boyer noted that she pictured condo residents overlooking the adjacent park). From what I remember of the environmental report, the left half of the site is slightly more polluted as well. You would hope that shoring up the capping to the left side for parkland and fully remediating the right side probably gets us close to, and hopefuly even slightly under, a $20 million price tag for remediation. It'll be expensive either way, but we've got $13 million in the coffers already, and it needs to have been done years ago. If it's not an acre-for-acre swap with Metro Park, there could even be some opportunity to maintain some riverfront greenspace on the right side as well while still developing the bulk of the land.
7) Assuming this happens, and the right side of the property is opened up for development, mixed use would obviously be ideal.
8 ) Totally agree with those who say that an empty, passive park isn't necessarily the key to enhancing connectivity between downtown proper and the stadium district. I do, however, think that it's more connective to have the park bridging downtown and the stadium district than it is to have the park on the outskirts where it is now. I also think the park will be designed to encourage regular use. Even though the stadium complex is being enhanced with music festivals in mind, I think we'll still see a park capable of handling concerts, events, holiday celebrations, etc. And, you can bet your bottom dollar that one of the primary features of the public park will be the USS Adams. Unless something has changed in the last couple of weeks, the USS Adams will be here in Jacksonville by end of this year, or early next year. Wouldn't be surprised at all to hear an announcement formally made early next year that it's finding a permanent home at the Shipyards, maybe in that same spot that was considered a few years ago prior to Khan's Shipyards plans:
(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wjct/files/styles/x_large/public/201507/USSAdams_85.png)
9) As previously mentioned by another poster, I would hope for a park that is architecturally interesting and generous with shade. Louisville's Waterfront Park was mentioned as a possible inspiration for a Shipyards park. Looks a little dull from the aerials, but it's hard to know without spending time there personally. I also think that without interaction with the river, you aren't capitalizing on the potential of the space. Kayak/paddleboard/dragonboat rentals seem like a no-brainer (especially with a secondary spot across the river at the District).
10) Purely speculation, but I have a funny feeling that Curry also has something in the works with Shad Khan regarding Berkman II. If you'll recall, Khan's original proposal called for the removal of Berkman II and replaced it with the "live" portion of his Shipyards vision, featuring residential and recreational spaces, a restaurant, and a marina. Again, call me optimistic, but I could see an arrangement where the city pays for demolition in return for Iguana redeveloping the site. I'm sure there would be complaints about giving Khan the keys to the kingdom, but this might be one of the concessions that Curry was talking about when he said, "You can't please everybody. If you try to please everybody, you are not going to get things done, and maybe that's been part of the issue downtown in the past." This might be a stretch, but Curry pretty much promised significant progress on the Berkman within the next two years. And you've got to think that, assuming the other pieces fall into place (Coastline beautification, Shipyards remediation), doing something with Berkman II suddenly seems like a much more valuable proposition. Plus, the luxury condo market is heating back up (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2016/11/15/residential-experts-right-time-for-new-condo.html)
11) Curry mentioned that everything was on the table, including bringing down the old Courthouse and the City Hall Annex. Long term, to me, this seems like a much more logical place to either build a new convention center, or expand the Hyatt into a larger convention space, as Ennis suggested a few years ago. With that adjacent parking lot about to get dynamited into oblivion, seems like it would be a much better, more central waterfront location for a convention center than Metro Park.
12) Question for those more knowledgeable about water taxis than I am. We know that Skyway expansion to the stadium, District, and residential neighborhoods is likely very far out, and very expensive. Curious if you guys think that water taxis, in the absence of Skyway coverage, are a viable form of people circulation. For example, we have four water taxis in service right now, with only five stops total (the Landing, Met Park, Wyndham, Doubletree, and Friendship Fountain).
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/834d44_bd8958112c8d4bb380eb41d80e068936.jpg/v1/fill/w_359,h_183,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/834d44_bd8958112c8d4bb380eb41d80e068936.jpg)
Let's say we doubled or tripled the fleet, reduced the fare, and expanded the loop to include Five Points*, Brooklyn*, Baptist*, Coastline Drive, the Shipyards/arena/baseball grounds*, the District, and San Marco, is this an effective, cost-efficient (relative Skyway expansion) way to move people? I honestly don't know, but on the surface, it feels like it might make sense. Can't be that much more expensive than buses, can it?
*Plans are already under way to add these stops.
Anyway, thanks for humoring me. Super intrigued to see how this all plays out.
Like I said, I'm optimistic by nature, but I've got a good feeling about these next couple of years.
If Metro park is too small for a Convention Center wouldn't the Old City Hall-courthouse site be MUCH too small? Particularly with the courthouse parking lot no longer part of the equation.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 15, 2016, 06:06:24 PM
If Metro park is too small for a Convention Center wouldn't the Old City Hall-courthouse site be MUCH too small? Particularly with the courthouse parking lot no longer part of the equation.
Yes. Without the space of the old parking lot, the courthouse space is substantially smaller than the current convention center.
Jacksonville would be pretty foolish to build a +500,000 square foot convention center. Even 200,000 square feet would be pushing it. Something with 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of exhibition space should be sufficient for our secondary market. Also, I can't see water taxis being a viable form of transportation as long as the fare is $5/person one way.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 09:09:18 PM
Jacksonville would be pretty foolish to build a +500,000 square foot convention center. Even 200,000 square feet would be pushing it. Something with 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of exhibition space should be sufficient for our secondary market. Also, I can't see water taxis being a viable form of transportation as long as the fare is $5/person one way.
A 100k sf center may work in the courthouse space. At that point, though, you start to question whether it's worth the cost at all, versus spending the money on something else.
From my perspective, a 100,000 to 120,000 square foot exhibition hall, combined with the Hyatt's existing 110,000 square foot of meeting space and 996 hotel rooms is as about as cost efficient as we can get for a convention center solution. We'd upgrade an existing underutilized and complimentary space with the exhibition space the Prime Osborn lacks. That adds up to a significantly larger space than the Prime Osborn and it's as centralized as it can get.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 09:09:18 PM
Jacksonville would be pretty foolish to build a +500,000 square foot convention center. Even 200,000 square feet would be pushing it. Something with 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of exhibition space should be sufficient for our secondary market. Also, I can't see water taxis being a viable form of transportation as long as the fare is $5/person one way.
Totally agree with this. I'm far from convinced that a modernized convention center is a top 10 need for Jacksonville, but I'm fully convinced that it would be a fool's errand to try to compete with Atlanta or Orlando with a 500,000+ square foot facility. 150,000 thousand square feet of modern exhibition space, in a more appealing location, feels like it would be a sweet spot for Jacksonville.
Also, was just reading the Professional Convention Management Association's top two trends for convention space:
Quote1) The definition of meeting space will evolve.
While conversations about convention centers typically include square footage figures and meeting room numbers, more meeting planners are looking for one essential adjective to describe the space inside a convention center: flexible.
"People no longer want to be shut in a room for a long period of time," Claire Smith, Vice President, Sales and Marketing, Vancouver Convention Centre, says. "Their attention spans are shorter, and they crave more opportunities to move around, meet people and share ideas."
Smith admits that the shift in human behavior can be challenging for some convention centers.
"It can be hard to respond to behavior changes when you're a brick and mortar," Smith says. "There are limitations to adjusting a physical space."
However, many meeting planners are overcoming those limitations, and Smith highlights that previously under-utilized portions of convention centers are playing an important role in attendee engagement.
"The foyer is the new meeting room," Smith says. "We're seeing groups use that space in ways we never would have imagined with attendees sitting cross-legged on the floor to participate in pop-up dialogues and full session presentations specifically scheduled for the foyer."
2) What's outside will matter even more.
Earlier this year, at the CEIR Predict Conference, Bob Priest-Heck, President and COO of Freeman, highlighted that an emerging generation of attendees looks at venues in a new light.
"Millennials don't see the convention center as the place where the event is happening," Priest-Heck said. "They look at the whole city as the venue."
Smith agrees, citing the 2011 Risk Insurance Management Society Annual Meeting as a prime example. From events at off-site destinations throughout the city to a sponsored sailboat with custom logos in the harbor outside the convention center, Smith says the organization is very conscious of using every inch of a destination to elevate the experience.
"It's important to celebrate the cities we're meeting in," Smith says.
Reading this got me thinking. A convention center proper at Metro Park doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's room for a hotel, meeting space, ballrooms, etc. but it seems like it would be hard to squeeze an exhibition hall onto that property. But what if Daily's Place - nearly 100,000 square feet of climate-controlled flex space connected to the hotel/conference center by pedestrian bridge -- served as the exhibition hall. You could even leverage the amphitheater for conferences. You'd have to work around football season, but this actually sounds like the type of quirky venue that might differentiate Jacksonville from the big boxes and help land some mid-tier conventions that would otherwise think the city too vanilla to host.
On water taxis, I've been thinking about this a lot as of late. The current fares are expensive, but we work through an outside company, and I don't believe that the taxis are subsidized to nearly the extent that other public transportation in Jacksonville is. What's to stop JTA from getting into the water taxi business? Just in the last week or two on these boards, we've talked so much about the benefits of Skyway expansion in terms of connecting places like San Marco, Riverside, Brooklyn, Baptist/Aetna, the stadium district, the District, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm still in favor of Skyway expansion as a long-term transit solution, but couldn't achieve similar connectivity at a fraction of the cost, in 10% of the time, with infinitely more flexibility, with a water taxi loop?
Pardon my poor MS Paint skills, but something like this:
(https://s11.postimg.org/3vgcao2lv/Untitled.png)
Call me crazy, but isn't this something that could potentially get a
ton of commuter, recreational, event and tourist use if the service was reliable, headways were decent, and cost was more in line with bus fares?
We talk so much about how underutilized our river is, it seems like it would be a great way to get people interacting with the St. Johns, perhaps on a daily basis. You could even expand into Ortega or further into San Marco, have weekend service from downtown to the zoo, vary routes by time of day (extended commuter routes in the AM and PM), etc.
We also talk about Baltimore alot. Kevin Plank, founder of Under Armour, just purchased the Baltimore Water Taxi service outright (http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2016/08/22/more-details-on-the-new-water-taxi-stops-under.html) with the intention of increasing the fleet and adding new stops. He's already bought 10 state-of-the-art new water taxis with free wifi, 50-person capacity, and Uber integration. Total cost, $6.5 million (for context, we spent $4 million on escalators for Skyway stations alone this year and it would cost $15 million per track mile to expand).
Again, big Skyway supporter, but a strong water taxi service (rather than the four-boat, five-stop loop we currently have) seems like such a great opportunity in the short-term with a very high bang-for-the-buck.
While we are discussing sinking hundreds of millions into the Stadium District, maybe it is time to seriously discuss demolishing the ugly-as-homemade-sin elevated Commodore Expressway. Given the reduced number of workers DT compared to the past and all the money going into the area, maybe now is the time to demo and bring it down to ground level starting at the Eastern edge of Metro Park.
It is and always will be a physical and mental divide between the River and everything else in the area. It is not getting any younger either.
P.S. A plan to move the jail, even if long term, would be great too.
Quote from: KenFSU on November 16, 2016, 12:38:36 AMOn water taxis, I've been thinking about this a lot as of late. The current fares are expensive, but we work through an outside company, and I don't believe that the taxis are subsidized to nearly the extent that other public transportation in Jacksonville is. What's to stop JTA from getting into the water taxi business? Just in the last week or two on these boards, we've talked so much about the benefits of Skyway expansion in terms of connecting places like San Marco, Riverside, Brooklyn, Baptist/Aetna, the stadium district, the District, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm still in favor of Skyway expansion as a long-term transit solution, but couldn't achieve similar connectivity at a fraction of the cost, in 10% of the time, with infinitely more flexibility, with a water taxi loop?
Pardon my poor MS Paint skills, but something like this:
(https://s11.postimg.org/3vgcao2lv/Untitled.png)
Call me crazy, but isn't this something that could potentially get a ton of commuter, recreational, event and tourist use if the service was reliable, headways were decent, and cost was more in line with bus fares?
We talk so much about how underutilized our river is, it seems like it would be a great way to get people interacting with the St. Johns, perhaps on a daily basis. You could even expand into Ortega or further into San Marco, have weekend service from downtown to the zoo, vary routes by time of day (extended commuter routes in the AM and PM), etc.
We also talk about Baltimore alot. Kevin Plank, founder of Under Armour, just purchased the Baltimore Water Taxi service outright (http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2016/08/22/more-details-on-the-new-water-taxi-stops-under.html) with the intention of increasing the fleet and adding new stops. He's already bought 10 state-of-the-art new water taxis with free wifi, 50-person capacity, and Uber integration. Total cost, $6.5 million (for context, we spent $4 million on escalators for Skyway stations alone this year and it would cost $15 million per track mile to expand).
Again, big Skyway supporter, but a strong water taxi service (rather than the four-boat, five-stop loop we currently have) seems like such a great opportunity in the short-term with a very high bang-for-the-buck.
Don't forget that Baltimore also has heavy rail, light rail and even a free bus service called the Charm City Circulator serving the Inner Harbor, downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Even there, the water taxi is more of a tourist oriented service than true transit for commuters. So like a horse and carriage ride in a tourist district, it's more of complementing piece (with no TOD/land development stimulation opportunity) as opposed to an outright alternative.
Quote from: KenFSU on November 16, 2016, 12:38:36 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 09:09:18 PM
Jacksonville would be pretty foolish to build a +500,000 square foot convention center. Even 200,000 square feet would be pushing it. Something with 100,000 to 150,000 square feet of exhibition space should be sufficient for our secondary market. Also, I can't see water taxis being a viable form of transportation as long as the fare is $5/person one way.
Totally agree with this. I'm far from convinced that a modernized convention center is a top 10 need for Jacksonville, but I'm fully convinced that it would be a fool's errand to try to compete with Atlanta or Orlando with a 500,000+ square foot facility. 150,000 thousand square feet of modern exhibition space, in a more appealing location, feels like it would be a sweet spot for Jacksonville.
Luckily, all past discussion of a convention center in town has not talked about attempting to compete with Atlanta, Chicago, Orlanodo, etc. It's been about competing with cities like Huntsville, Birmingham, Daytona, Mobile, etc. We currently have less than 80,000-square-feet of exhibition space. The places I just mentioned range between 93,000 to 220,000 square feet of exhibition space. You'd also be looking to directly tied to a large hotel and within walking distance of bars, restaurants, retail, cultural attractions, etc. So the vibrancy of the blocks surrounding a convention center can make or break the experience and a facility's ability to compete.
QuoteAlso, was just reading the Professional Convention Management Association's top two trends for convention space:
Quote1) The definition of meeting space will evolve.
While conversations about convention centers typically include square footage figures and meeting room numbers, more meeting planners are looking for one essential adjective to describe the space inside a convention center: flexible.
"People no longer want to be shut in a room for a long period of time," Claire Smith, Vice President, Sales and Marketing, Vancouver Convention Centre, says. "Their attention spans are shorter, and they crave more opportunities to move around, meet people and share ideas."
Smith admits that the shift in human behavior can be challenging for some convention centers.
"It can be hard to respond to behavior changes when you're a brick and mortar," Smith says. "There are limitations to adjusting a physical space."
However, many meeting planners are overcoming those limitations, and Smith highlights that previously under-utilized portions of convention centers are playing an important role in attendee engagement.
"The foyer is the new meeting room," Smith says. "We're seeing groups use that space in ways we never would have imagined with attendees sitting cross-legged on the floor to participate in pop-up dialogues and full session presentations specifically scheduled for the foyer."
2) What's outside will matter even more.
Earlier this year, at the CEIR Predict Conference, Bob Priest-Heck, President and COO of Freeman, highlighted that an emerging generation of attendees looks at venues in a new light.
"Millennials don't see the convention center as the place where the event is happening," Priest-Heck said. "They look at the whole city as the venue."
Smith agrees, citing the 2011 Risk Insurance Management Society Annual Meeting as a prime example. From events at off-site destinations throughout the city to a sponsored sailboat with custom logos in the harbor outside the convention center, Smith says the organization is very conscious of using every inch of a destination to elevate the experience.
"It's important to celebrate the cities we're meeting in," Smith says.
With Next City, we've been doing "unconferences" the last few years. We've held meetings in parks, bars, medical centers, etc. However, that's a completely different animal from a trade show. We have less than 100 people at the unconferences and even they are subdivided into smaller groups.
QuoteReading this got me thinking. A convention center proper at Metro Park doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's room for a hotel, meeting space, ballrooms, etc. but it seems like it would be hard to squeeze an exhibition hall onto that property. But what if Daily's Place - nearly 100,000 square feet of climate-controlled flex space connected to the hotel/conference center by pedestrian bridge -- served as the exhibition hall. You could even leverage the amphitheater for conferences. You'd have to work around football season, but this actually sounds like the type of quirky venue that might differentiate Jacksonville from the big boxes and help land some mid-tier conventions that would otherwise think the city too vanilla to host.
Indoor practice fields for football are pretty common. However, them being used for convention meeting space is not. Probably because they'd be off limits the majority of the year.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 09:09:18 PM
On water taxis, I've been thinking about this a lot as of late. The current fares are expensive, but we work through an outside company, and I don't believe that the taxis are subsidized to nearly the extent that other public transportation in Jacksonville is. What's to stop JTA from getting into the water taxi business? Just in the last week or two on these boards, we've talked so much about the benefits of Skyway expansion in terms of connecting places like San Marco, Riverside, Brooklyn, Baptist/Aetna, the stadium district, the District, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm still in favor of Skyway expansion as a long-term transit solution, but couldn't achieve similar connectivity at a fraction of the cost, in 10% of the time, with infinitely more flexibility, with a water taxi loop?
Pardon my poor MS Paint skills, but something like this:
(https://s11.postimg.org/3vgcao2lv/Untitled.png)
Call me crazy, but isn't this something that could potentially get a ton of commuter, recreational, event and tourist use if the service was reliable, headways were decent, and cost was more in line with bus fares?
We talk so much about how underutilized our river is, it seems like it would be a great way to get people interacting with the St. Johns, perhaps on a daily basis. You could even expand into Ortega or further into San Marco, have weekend service from downtown to the zoo, vary routes by time of day (extended commuter routes in the AM and PM), etc.
We also talk about Baltimore alot. Kevin Plank, founder of Under Armour, just purchased the Baltimore Water Taxi service outright (http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2016/08/22/more-details-on-the-new-water-taxi-stops-under.html) with the intention of increasing the fleet and adding new stops. He's already bought 10 state-of-the-art new water taxis with free wifi, 50-person capacity, and Uber integration. Total cost, $6.5 million (for context, we spent $4 million on escalators for Skyway stations alone this year and it would cost $15 million per track mile to expand).
Again, big Skyway supporter, but a strong water taxi service (rather than the four-boat, five-stop loop we currently have) seems like such a great opportunity in the short-term with a very high bang-for-the-buck.
I actually think this is the type of out of the box thinking we need. My question is, what are the largest and most successful water taxi/ferry transit programs? We are laid out in a way that this makes a lot of sense in comparison to some other cities.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 16, 2016, 05:30:32 AMCall me crazy, but isn't this something that could potentially get a ton of commuter, recreational, event and tourist use if the service was reliable, headways were decent, and cost was more in line with bus fares?
We talk so much about how underutilized our river is, it seems like it would be a great way to get people interacting with the St. Johns, perhaps on a daily basis. You could even expand into Ortega or further into San Marco, have weekend service from downtown to the zoo, vary routes by time of day (extended commuter routes in the AM and PM), etc.
You'd think that something like that to avoid traffic from say Riverside into downtown would be tempting. One thing that would be a factor for commuters using the water taxi service between downtown and the neighborhoods south would be the idle zone between the Fuller Warren and Main St bridges, that could add considerable time.
^Sometimes it's better to keep things simple, even if the simple solution was figured out more than a century ago.
At the end of the day, transit success really boils down to frequency, cost, corridor capacity and routing ability to penetrate where people want to go.
Here's some major issues Jax would need to overcome for a water taxi to be anything more than a tourist service or narrated sightseeing tour.
1. Most of your urban core population centers and pool of potential transit riders aren't on the river. You can focus on those few destinations on the map, but you'd also limit your pool of potential transit users to them.....which isn't a good thing for longevity.
(http://ufhealthjax.org/about/Images/university-medical-center.jpg)
2. Then there's the entire FEC bridge issue that would screw up reliability. If you can't reach your destination because the train stops on the bridge (happens alot), then service frequency, timing and reliability hampers ridership growth.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/453319694_9DdJD-M.jpg)
3. You'd also lose the ability to stimulate TOD. Stimulating complementing land development to incrementally build ridership should be a big component of urban transit planning. Who sets the water taxi operator/developer team on fire first when they propose some real density (like illustrated in the graphic below) around a stop in Riverside or San Marco's River Rd?
(http://www.goodyclancy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/alexandria_braddock-metro-plan_goody-clancy-900x615.jpg)
4. The best ferry services are routes where you literally have no viable alternative to cross a large body of water (not paralleling the edge of the water's edge). Examples would be the Staten Island Ferry or Washington's ferry routes across Pudget Sound.
(http://media.silive.com/advance/photo/2010/05/8534997-standard.jpg)
(https://northwesturbanist.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/ferry-route-map.png)
These are just a few challenges off the top of my head that a water taxi service would have to overcome to be considered a reliable option for every day commuters.
The other thing would be weather conditions. However, the way the city is built around the river provides a ton of opportunity for something more in comparison to most other cities. There is a lot of population around the river especially if compared to building a Skyway line to the Stadium or through Brooklyn to 95. There is almost no difference in close population down Bay or Riverside Ave and just going along the coast on a ferry. The FEC is certainly an issue though.
^ Except a big part of the Skyway/BRT discussion involves expanding into areas away from the river, like Springfield, Baymeadows or Southpoint. Also, Jax isn't really that unique in the grand scheme of things. For example, Charleston, Norfolk and Baltimore are three East Coast settings worth taking a look at to provide a picture of how something could possibly work in Jax. However, I'm not aware of any of their services acting as a replacement for traditional forms of public transit.
I would love an expanded ferry system. I used it in Seattle and it was great. As a St Nick resident and Brooklyn employee, I would take it to work, take it to play in downtown and take it to the stadium to watch the Jags lose.
^Don't get me wrong, you're preaching to the choir in terms of water taxi being an outright, exclusive alternative to Skyway connectivity. Skyway expansion would be the reliable, permanent solution that would spur transit-oriented development. But in the medium-term absence of said Skyway connectivity, I don't know, I kind of like the idea of a water taxi loop as a complimentary, secondary system that could potentially be implemented in short order for less than the cost of one mile of Skyway track.
Just by placing water taxi stops at Riverfront Park and Memorial Park, which the city already owns, and Weaver Riverside Park beside the Yates YMCA, you'd immediately connect San Marco, Riverside, and Brooklyn with all of downtown's major employment centers, either directly, or via Skyway connection. You note that riverfront stops would limit the pool of potential riders, but I'd counter that all three stops are still within reasonable walking distance for many, many people as well.
Going the other way, you'd also directly connect thousands of downtown residents to amenities in the surrounding neighborhoods that aren't readily available downtown. Brooklyn Fresh Market, Riverside Publix, Yates YMCA, Unity Plaza. Memorial Park. San Marco Theater. Etc.
And for the tourists, you'd have a loop that hits or is within a quarter mile walk of the Landing, Friendship Fountain, the MOSH, the Cummer, San Marco Square, Five Points, Veterans Memorial, the Baseball Grounds, Everbank Field, Daily's Place, MOMA, Hemming Park, the Main Library, Florida Theater, Times-Union Center, the Symphony Hall, potentially the USS Adams, and whatever new developments may come.
Yes, you'd have to contend with weather, and trains, and idle zones, etc. And yes, no city has ever magically solved its transit issues with water taxi alone. But to me, it seems like it would be a natural way to provide some extra connectivity and synergy between downtown districts and neighborhoods, get a few cars off the road, and leverage our most valuable asset - the St Johns River. You could even brand the system and design the taxis in a way that ties in with the local community, then market the shit out of it as something unique.
Can't see a universe where such a system doesn't provide some measure of utility to the city, increase quality of life for residents, and pull in some tourists as well.
I guess what I'm getting at is that in no way is it a substitute for a public transit system designed to attract the transit dependent and choice riders for commuting purposes. It's just a mutually exclusive service catering to a niche demographic. The same could be said for a streetcar that only serves downtown, that also shares lanes with automobiles.
Here are a few of my random thoughts on this:
1. My read is that Ken's right, that we're talking about a land swap with Metro Park being developed and the Shipyards becoming park space. This isn't a bad arrangement: Metro Park is underused as a park due to being so far out, and the Shipyards has a lot of issues to overcome before real development happens there. It could be much better as a waterfront green space; in fact, pretty much anything is better than what we've got.
2. Signs point to the development being, or at least including, a convention center and hotel. Khan wants these, they were in his last Shipyards plans, and the announcements have hinted that's what it will be. There's probably some other stuff being included.
3. Whatever it is, it's worth remembering the last Khan proposal. This centered heavily around his desired practice field and amphitheater. There, the deal was for Khan to take the Shipyards (for free), with taxpayers still paying for cleanup. All future revenue would be tied to the Shipyards, and Khan wouldn't have even developed it all himself - he was going to parcel it off. This was a bad deal and the thing that stopped it was the city's new CAO, Sam Mousa. Mousa returning to City Hall is one of the best things to happen in Jacksonville in recent years. Whatever this deal is, it was negotiated with Mousa and the city, so we can expect it will at least be better from our end.
4. That said even if it's a great deal, the issues of connectivity and lack of clustering brought by Laurie Boyer and others are very real. If we move the park space closer to the core, but take the potential for a convention center out of it, it's not as much of a gain as it could be. The issue of a new hotel cannibalizing the Hyatt's business, and that of other urban core hotels, is also a problem, especially considering the incentives that went into building the Hyatt.
5. That said, the Stadium District is where it is, and has been for a very long time. Though it's not in the core per se, it's reasonably well clustered area already, and there's a lot of opportunity to do more. While not ideal from a clustering perspective, a convention center there wouldn't have the problem that the Prime Osborne has had for most of its existence of being surrounded by multiple empty blocks. It would be a stone's throw from a number of other things. It will be nice to see continued development there.
6. I wouldn't get hopes up about a Skyway extension to the stadium. Other than game days, it likely wouldn't increase ridership that much anyway. People will still drive instead.
7. As with many other recent developments, I don't see any Northbank projects reaching their full potential until the Northbank residential base increases. Brooklyn and the Southbank will help, but people in those places don't now, and won't in the future, be walking anywhere on the Northbank. Increasing that would also reduce the issue of nodes being separated from each other. This is often a missing piece in our plans.
8. After having some discussions with folks, I'm no longer convinced that the Courthouse space is the best location for a convention center. There's just not enough actual space; the parking lot disguised how small the lot is. The footprint is smaller than the Prime Osborn, which is seen as being too small (among other issues). The Hyatt expansion Lake mentions above might still be good, though that requires tearing down the old City Hall building, which is much more functional than the old Courthouse. A centrally located convention center would still be the best deal, if the land and finances worked out.
9. As others have touched on, no convention center project should be made with the intention of competing with major centers like Orlando. Instead, it should be about getting a slice of the pie that would be easy for us with a better facility. It should also be done with the added goals of enhancing downtown, and freeing up the Prime Osborn to become a train station again.
10. All this aside, I look forward to hearing about what the projects will entail. It's a good time for urban Jacksonville right now.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 16, 2016, 12:25:43 PM
^ Except a big part of the Skyway/BRT discussion involves expanding into areas away from the river, like Springfield, Baymeadows or Southpoint. Also, Jax isn't really that unique in the grand scheme of things. For example, Charleston, Norfolk and Baltimore are three East Coast settings worth taking a look at to provide a picture of how something could possibly work in Jax. However, I'm not aware of any of their services acting as a replacement for traditional forms of public transit.
I don't think anyone is saying it should replace plans for transit into Springfield and Southside. I think it was an idea in the meantime to make meaningful connections for our biggest nodes of activity in the urban core without spending $150 million dollars. What would be the difference between a water taxi route and extending the Skyway to the stadium down Bay St or down Riverside Avenue? I would love to see the Skyway expanded but doubt the money is there anytime soon to do it all the way to the Stadium or to the Riverside Arts Market.
I've always wondered why Metro Park was built in such a remote location. Found out today - via a Times-Union interview with Jake Godbold - that it was pretty much a last-minute decision resulting from panic. Godbold's original proposal for Metro Park (and the vision that the federal grant was secured upon) involved replacing Water Street with a truly urban park/esplanade connecting two soon-to-be-completed developments, the Jacksonville Landing and the Prime Osborne Convention Center.
Would have likely looked something like this:
(https://s12.postimg.org/zf4o7f2bh/Untitled2.png)
The City Council rejected Goldbold's plan, refusing to close Water Street.
Florida Gov. Bob Graham tried to take the grant money from Jacksonville as a result, leaving Godbold less than two weeks to come up with a plan B. WJCT had long wanted to build a performance stage and park around its studios, so rather than lose the money, Godbold agreed to develop in that area.
My apologies if this is common knowledge, but I thought it was really interesting, and certainly explains the odd initial placement.
Also, even though Metropolitan Park currently stands at around 27 acres, this came as the result of several expansions over the last 30 years. The original park was a modest 10.8 acres. The land swap discussions that we've heard in the Times-Union rest on a 27-acre swap, but I'd wonder if we're only legally bound to the 10.8 acres originally built out with the help of the grant.
I find Godbold's original proposal to be an interesting one. Too bad it fell through.
Flaboy, I just noticed your last post. I'll respond tonight.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 16, 2016, 12:33:35 PM
I would love an expanded ferry system. I used it in Seattle and it was great. As a St Nick resident and Brooklyn employee, I would take it to work, take it to play in downtown and take it to the stadium to watch the Jags lose.
I too have used the Washington State Ferry system extensively and it is incredibly beneficial for those who live on the peninsula, however........it is incredibly expensive to maintain and is heavily subsidized by motor fuel taxes to make up the gaps at the fare box.
I am not against it per se, but having lived there, I see people who choose to live extra distance from the Seattle core on the basis of the ferry. In this case ferrys propogate the same level of sprawl that critics of highways abhor.
Finally I think ferrys in Jax are a non-starter. We already own a ferry at Mayport that has been treated like ugly stepchild that no one wants to keep but everyone wants someone else to get rid of. Our transportation policy and thinking in NE Florida just doesnt support ferries.
Everyone wants easy access, but no one in Florida wants to pay for it. So highways will continue.
I think Ock has it right for any TOD to/from any major development in Jacksonville, whether it is Khans, Rummells, Davis'es or whomever. Streetcar.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 15, 2016, 07:31:20 AM
I guess it's about time for me to finally finish up that Baltimore article ;-)
+1 Brother and an "Amen" to 2015-305. Shipyards JUMBO Public Fishing Pier.
Quote from: FlaBoy on November 16, 2016, 03:11:10 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 16, 2016, 12:25:43 PM
^ Except a big part of the Skyway/BRT discussion involves expanding into areas away from the river, like Springfield, Baymeadows or Southpoint. Also, Jax isn't really that unique in the grand scheme of things. For example, Charleston, Norfolk and Baltimore are three East Coast settings worth taking a look at to provide a picture of how something could possibly work in Jax. However, I'm not aware of any of their services acting as a replacement for traditional forms of public transit.
I don't think anyone is saying it should replace plans for transit into Springfield and Southside. I think it was an idea in the meantime to make meaningful connections for our biggest nodes of activity in the urban core without spending $150 million dollars.
I understood the idea. I just don't agree with the assumption that a water taxi can be any meaningful substitute for actual public transit in Jax's landscape. Doesn't matter whether we're talking about a Skyway extension, running a bus as a circulator down East Bay or even a community shuttle. They'd all be more useful and efficient for moving commuters than a water taxi on the St. Johns.
QuoteWhat would be the difference between a water taxi route and extending the Skyway to the stadium down Bay St or down Riverside Avenue?
1. Most of downtown's residents and workers aren't on the riverfront. The Skyway being a few blocks north, makes it more accessible to those north of Bay.
2. The Skyway connects to other modes (First Coast Flyer, local bus, Greyhound....one day...Amtrak), a water taxi would not.
3. The Skyway is high frequency. You'd need a ton of water taxis running at the same time to compete with frequency and capacity.
4. Cost. If you're trying to save money, just run a bus down East Bay. If that's the primary goal, it would be easier to implement and operate than running a water taxi as public transit.
Honestly, I would like to see water taxis connect more of the greater Jacksonville area to downtown. The river cuts straight through the county. There's more communities that lie on the river than Riverside and San Marco. Something like that could really move downtown forward as an actual hub of activity.
There was a study done for this about a decade ago. Its feasibility didn't turn out to well. Part of the problem was accessibility to the river from the region's major employment centers and destinations. Ferries for transit work best when they cross a body of water with little to no alternative as competition for usage. We have too many river crossings and the one we do have, we struggle to keep it afloat. I'll try to find a link to that old study.
Part of the problem, where do you put the Ferry Terminals? By definition, they have to be on the river, probably some of the most expensive real estate around. Except for downtown, nearly all riverfront property is residential, and much of it single family. What riverfront neighborhood wants a Ferry Terminal next door? If the FT does not have parking, do you have buses going through the neighborhood? That adds even more to the subsidy needed.
As Lake said, the FEC RR Bridge might as well be a wall for any routes from the south.
Here's that 2008 study I mentioned:
http://www.jtafla.com/pdf/Waterborne/JTA_TPO_WaterborneStudy.pdf