QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2019, 07:20:39 AM
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Ex-mayor that didn't realize back then it was a bad idea and, unsuprisingly, doesn't realize it now. At least now he's not a position to even more money at a bad idea.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 27, 2019, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2019, 07:20:39 AM
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Ex-mayor that didn't realize back then it was a bad idea and, unsuprisingly, doesn't realize it now. At least now he's not a position to even more money at a bad idea.
Unfortunately, our current mayor is lighting money on fire to demolish the building with no replacement. Great strategy there.
Gee Jake, maybe you should have said something sooner?
Quote from: Tacachale on May 27, 2019, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 27, 2019, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2019, 07:20:39 AM
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Ex-mayor that didn't realize back then it was a bad idea and, unsuprisingly, doesn't realize it now. At least now he's not a position to even more money at a bad idea.
Unfortunately, our current mayor is lighting money on fire to demolish the building with no replacement. Great strategy there.
That's a patently false statement. We know that even under the worst case scenario demolition will cost $3M. Redevelopment will cost 10 to 100 times that. Re birthing the same bad idea in Norfolk has already cost $200 million. And if it doesn't sustain high numbers, that cost will climb.
We may disagree over what should happen or if the money is worth it. It's absurdly ignorant to claim that the demo of the building is anything near what it will cost to keep it. Maybe it's worth it. But given how poor of a vision the city has - as so many here love to complain - it's befuddling to then think somehow in just this one case the city will be able to spend tens of millions on something. Even with plenty of public input, the city has failed badly in the past.
^So you want the city to fail with the worst option, which is leaving a permanent hole of dead space in the middle of downtown for a price tag of $22 million and rising (literally the prime result of not having a vision, which is what has led to the chain of questionable, tax dollar wasting events that has gotten us to this point today)? That is pretty absurd when you think about it.
COJ would have been better off leaving Sleiman alone and using its $22 million elsewhere. When left alone, Sleiman actually found a way to breathe some life back into the center before the political fight to drive the place out of business.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 28, 2019, 03:36:49 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on May 27, 2019, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 27, 2019, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2019, 07:20:39 AM
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Ex-mayor that didn't realize back then it was a bad idea and, unsuprisingly, doesn't realize it now. At least now he's not a position to even more money at a bad idea.
Unfortunately, our current mayor is lighting money on fire to demolish the building with no replacement. Great strategy there.
That's a patently false statement. We know that even under the worst case scenario demolition will cost $3M. Redevelopment will cost 10 to 100 times that. Re birthing the same bad idea in Norfolk has already cost $200 million. And if it doesn't sustain high numbers, that cost will climb.
We may disagree over what should happen or if the money is worth it. It's absurdly ignorant to claim that the demo of the building is anything near what it will cost to keep it. Maybe it's worth it. But given how poor of a vision the city has - as so many here love to complain - it's befuddling to then think somehow in just this one case the city will be able to spend tens of millions on something. Even with plenty of public input, the city has failed badly in the past.
Lol, it's cost $22 million just to get to this point and the figure keeps rising. And anything new built there - especially anything worthwhile - will drive it up even more. And that's besides the money we'll spend subsidizing similar uses over in the stadium district.
We could have just kept the money and let Sleiman deal with it. Even a fairly dead Landing will be better than a completely dead grass field.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 28, 2019, 03:36:49 PM
Redevelopment will cost 10 to 100 times that. Re birthing the same bad idea in Norfolk has already cost $200 million. And if it doesn't sustain high numbers, that cost will climb.
How do you get $200 million in Norfolk. What's your source? I can't find anything near that high for Waterside. With that in mind, here is the cost of similar revamps in Tampa:
The Heights Public Market in Tampa cost around $20 million:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/The-long-awaited-transformation-of-the-Armature-Works-in-Tampa-is-nearly-ready-for-its-debut_164809660
Sparkman Wharf's renovation and redevelopment cost around $26.6 million:
https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/news/2018/11/28/channelside-bay-plaza-shunned-both-the-water-and.html
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 28, 2019, 03:36:49 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on May 27, 2019, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on May 27, 2019, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on May 17, 2019, 07:20:39 AM
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. - As the Jacksonville Landing is set to be destroyed and the city officially starts soliciting bids to tear it down, the iconic former mayor responsible for the decades-old landmark has a plea to the city's present leader: let the public help decide its future.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/jake-godbold-makes-heartfelt-plea-as-the-landing-nears-demolition
Ex-mayor that didn't realize back then it was a bad idea and, unsuprisingly, doesn't realize it now. At least now he's not a position to even more money at a bad idea.
Unfortunately, our current mayor is lighting money on fire to demolish the building with no replacement. Great strategy there.
That's a patently false statement. We know that even under the worst case scenario demolition will cost $3M. Redevelopment will cost 10 to 100 times that. Re birthing the same bad idea in Norfolk has already cost $200 million. And if it doesn't sustain high numbers, that cost will climb.
We may disagree over what should happen or if the money is worth it. It's absurdly ignorant to claim that the demo of the building is anything near what it will cost to keep it. Maybe it's worth it. But given how poor of a vision the city has - as so many here love to complain - it's befuddling to then think somehow in just this one case the city will be able to spend tens of millions on something. Even with plenty of public input, the city has failed badly in the past.
My question is what would you propose? The idea of an unkempt piece of dirt NO ONE will go downtown to visit is horrible.