(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/London-June-2019/i-zmjMm6n/0/0438d23b/L/20190617_113611-L.jpg)
Quote
As the mayor's office prepares to move forward with its plans to demolish the Jacksonville Landing, potentially setting the heart of downtown back by another generation, the Jaxson Magazine offers up another successful adaptive reuse example involving a similar structure: London's Covent Garden Market.
Read more: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/covent-garden-market-whats-next-for-the-landing/
St. Paul, MN had some impatient urban hoarders up in arms when they went ahead with demoing some structurally sound, vaguely "historical" buildings.
http://www.startribune.com/ramsey-county-officials-mark-the-beginning-of-demolition-at-former-west-jail-sites/305544311/
The properties sat empty for years, decades since the jail closed.
And now, BAM! Nearly a billion in development is ready to roll there because it's prime downtown land on the river.
https://www.twincities.com/2019/07/23/downtown-st-paul-riverfront-project-presented-in-detail-along-with-788-million-cost/
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on July 25, 2019, 11:34:48 AM
St. Paul, MN had some impatient urban hoarders up in arms when they went ahead with demoing some structurally sound, vaguely "historical" buildings.
http://www.startribune.com/ramsey-county-officials-mark-the-beginning-of-demolition-at-former-west-jail-sites/305544311/
The properties sat empty for years, decades since the jail closed.
And now, BAM! Nearly a billion in development is ready to roll there because it's prime downtown land on the river.
https://www.twincities.com/2019/07/23/downtown-st-paul-riverfront-project-presented-in-detail-along-with-788-million-cost/
I'm sure demolition was the exact reason for that, and will be here too.
London is London, and Jacksonville is not, and never will be. That's the difference.
Norfolk is Norfolk, Detroit is Detroit, Flint is Flint, Thomasville is Thomasville. Yet you can walk the street on a Saturday or Sunday and easily find a cup of coffee or multiple storefront retail spaces filled with places with consistent operating hours. No one said activate an entire city at street level. We're talking about a building. I've pretty sure we've shown enough examples at this point to prove that the size of a metropolitan area doesn't matter when it comes to activating a street at pedestrian level. It's time to stop the excuse making for why DT Jax is still empty.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 02:21:35 PM
Norfolk is Norfolk, Detroit is Detroit, Flint is Flint, Thomasville is Thomasville. Yet you can walk the street on a Saturday or Sunday and easily find a cup of coffee or multiple storefront retail spaces filled with places with consistent operating hours. No one said activate an entire city at street level. We're talking about a building. I've pretty sure we've shown enough examples at this point to prove that the size of a metropolitan area doesn't matter when it comes to activating a street at pedestrian level. It's time to stop the excuse making for why DT Jax is still empty.
Perhaps the local culture, demographics, and climate aren't conducive to a venture like Covent Garden. London is one of the top tourist destinations in the world. Is it realistic to expect anything similar here?
^The local culture of Flint, Michigan isn't conductive to what can be done in London or Jacksonville. However, they still where able to convert a failed festival marketplace into a college building with offices/educational uses upstairs and ground floor retail (Barnes & Noble also serving as a college bookstore) and restaurants (food court serves students and downtown workers). In Toledo, their festival marketplace was converted into a museum and restaurant. In Norfolk, their festival marketplace was converted to a food hall and restaurants. In Tampa, their festival marketplace was converted into office space with a few destination restaurant spaces. In Orlando, their festival marketplace was converted into a tech incubator with a restaurants and bars in select spaces. Local culture doesn't equate to adaptive reuse not being an option for perfectly fine buildings. What city hall is doing is wasteful and not aligned with tried and true successful revitalization strategies over the last 30 years.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 03:10:18 PM
^The local culture of Flint, Michigan isn't conductive to what can be done in London or Jacksonville. However, they still where able to convert a failed festival marketplace into a college building with offices/educational uses upstairs and ground floor retail (Barnes & Noble also serving as a college bookstore) and restaurants (food court serves students and downtown workers). In Toledo, their festival marketplace was converted into a museum and restaurant. In Norfolk, their festival marketplace was converted to a food hall and restaurants. In Tampa, their festival marketplace was converted into office space with a few destination restaurant spaces. In Orlando, their festival marketplace was converted into a tech incubator with a restaurants and bars in select spaces. Local culture doesn't equate to adaptive reuse not being an option for perfectly fine buildings. What city hall is doing is wasteful and not aligned with tried and true successful revitalization strategies over the last 30 years.
Perhaps you are right. Time will tell. Personally, I don't see a demand for core urban businesses in downtown Jacksonville.
The answer has already been provided. We just kicked out 30 businesses. Now we'll celebrate 10 years from now once five finally open up on the same site after +$20 million spent in tax money. All of it is pure foolishness. We can also fill spaces with other uses (i.e. Flint turning a retail center into a higher education facility).
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 03:41:46 PM
We just kicked out 30.
If the Landing was popular and profitable, would that have happened?
If COJ was a partner with retail management as originally proposed, instead of actively trying to make the place fail, would we be in the same spot today?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 03:47:54 PM
If COJ was a partner with retail management as originally proposed, instead of actively trying to make the place fail, would we be in the same spot today?
Perhaps, perhaps not. I've seen numerous reports detailing the decline of Jacksonville's downtown, including the Landing. What factors would lead me to conclude that a renaissance à la London's Covent Garden is realistic?
What factors would make you believe that there would be zero opportunity for adaptive reuse even if it were not retail? What would make you spend +$20 million in tax money to kick out businesses and demolish without first exploring other options and opportunities?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:02:13 PM
What factors would make you believe that there would be zero opportunity for adaptive reuse even if it were not retail? What would make you spend +$20 million in tax money to kick out businesses and demolish without first exploring other options and opportunities?
Unless an investor is willing to pay for the site, what the authorities do with it is determined by the city government.
In the UK, investment capital is involved in Covent Garden as a profitable enterprise.
https://quoteddata.com/2019/07/capital-counties-pulls-trigger-covent-garden-demerger/
Is there a similar group of financiers interested in the Landing?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 03:52:42 PM
Perhaps, perhaps not. I've seen numerous reports detailing the decline of Jacksonville's downtown, including the Landing.
Do you go downtown and if so, how often?
QuoteWhat factors would lead me to conclude that a renaissance à la London's Covent Garden is realistic?
The success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 04:07:58 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:02:13 PM
What factors would make you believe that there would be zero opportunity for adaptive reuse even if it were not retail? What would make you spend +$20 million in tax money to kick out businesses and demolish without first exploring other options and opportunities?
Unless an investor is willing to pay for the site, what the authorities do with it is determined by the city government.
In the UK, investment capital is involved in Covent Garden as a profitable enterprise.
https://quoteddata.com/2019/07/capital-counties-pulls-trigger-covent-garden-demerger/
Is there a similar group of financiers interested in the Landing?
The previous owner was. He had a deal with COJ to do just that in 2015. That deal died when Alvin Brown lost to Lenny Curry. So yes, there has been interest from the private sector.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMDo you go downtown and if so, how often?
Relevance?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMThe success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
What do those "success stories" have in common with the Jacksonville Landing?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 04:13:48 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMDo you go downtown and if so, how often?
Relevance?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMThe success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
What do those "success stories" have in common with the Jacksonville Landing?
You don't have to look at London as the only example, as there are examples in cities of all sizes. We've profiled similar adaptive reuse projects of failed or aging marketplaces in Toledo (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-toledos-portside-marketplace/), Norfolk (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-norfolks-waterside-district/), Miami (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/before-after-miamis-bayside-marketplace/), Tampa (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-tampas-shoppes-at-harbour-island/), Orlando (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-orlandos-church-street-station/), Flint, Michigan (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/so-jax-may-be-the-only-city-to-demolish-its-landing/), Battle Creek, Michigan (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-battle-creeks-mccamly-place/), and now London. We've also highlighted a possible format (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-an-artists-vision-for-the-landing/?fbclid=IwAR04dc77jdaUMPmpAijUcUOBJZy0T3fzuDqdvHH_FvyUuI-HaEi6VynP5_k) for adaptive reuse to take here at the Landing. We're also literally the only city that has ever totally demolished a Rouse marketplace without replacement. At a certain point, it's our decisions that are the ones out of step with reality.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 25, 2019, 04:18:19 PM
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 04:13:48 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMDo you go downtown and if so, how often?
Relevance?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMThe success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
What do those "success stories" have in common with the Jacksonville Landing?
You don't have to look at London as the only example, as there are examples in cities of all sizes. We've profiled similar adaptive reuse projects of failed or aging marketplaces in Toledo (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-toledos-portside-marketplace/), Norfolk (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-norfolks-waterside-district/), Miami (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/before-after-miamis-bayside-marketplace/), Tampa (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-tampas-shoppes-at-harbour-island/), Orlando (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-orlandos-church-street-station/), Flint, Michigan (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/so-jax-may-be-the-only-city-to-demolish-its-landing/), Battle Creek, Michigan (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-battle-creeks-mccamly-place/), and now London. We've also highlighted a possible format (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/adaptive-reuse-an-artists-vision-for-the-landing/?fbclid=IwAR04dc77jdaUMPmpAijUcUOBJZy0T3fzuDqdvHH_FvyUuI-HaEi6VynP5_k) for adaptive reuse to take here at the Landing. We're also literally the only city that has ever totally demolished a Rouse marketplace without replacement. At a certain point, it's our decisions that are the ones out of step with reality.
Interesting perspective.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 04:13:48 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMDo you go downtown and if so, how often?
Relevance?
Was trying to better understand your perspective.
QuoteQuote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMThe success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
What do those "success stories" have in common with the Jacksonville Landing?
Tacachale answered it but they're all the same type of failed 1980s festival marketplace concept (most by the same developer) that were successfully updated or converted into something else.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:26:58 PMWas trying to better understand your perspective.
OK.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 04:08:18 PMThe success stories of Flint, Tampa, Orlando, Toledo and Norfolk.
Tacachale answered it but they're all the same type of failed 1980s festival marketplace concept (most by the same developer) that were successfully updated or converted into something else.
My reading leads me to a conclusion at odds with the position that "the same type of failed 1980s festival marketplace concept (most by the same developer)... were successfully updated or converted into something else".
Good luck with your quest.
Are you at odds with the fact that they were all festival marketplaces initially, that they were largely designed/built by the same developer or just simply feel that there's no hope for anything in DT Jax specifically?
FWIW, all the adaptive reuse in the world won't help the Landing if it sits in a desert. Yes, London is a massive tourist destination, but Covent Garden market wouldn't thrive if it weren't in the middle of Covent Garden - which is a bustling, thriving area.
No one is saying that the Landing will become Covent Garden market - or that Jacksonville will become London. But the same basic principles apply.
Quote from: Adam White on July 25, 2019, 05:58:47 PMNo one is saying that the Landing will become Covent Garden market - or that Jacksonville will become London. But the same basic principles apply.
Which basic principles apply in both instances?
The basic principles would be clustering pedestrian scale development and activity in a compact area around the Landing. The result would be more density and foot traffic to help support market rate development and business investment opportunities. The concept pretty much applies to rural towns just as much as it applies to a global metropolis. It doesn't mean you'll get same businesses in Covent Garden Market. However, you won't end up with dead spaces either.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 07:31:13 PM
The basic principles would be clustering pedestrian scale development and activity in a compact area around the Landing. The result would be more density and foot traffic to help support market rate development and business investment opportunities. The concept pretty much applies to rural towns just as much as it applies to a global metropolis. It doesn't mean you'll get same businesses in Covent Garden Market. However, you won't end up with dead spaces either.
Covent Garden was an established urban area for centuries before the market was moved owing to traffic congestion concerns, and the repurposed main structure is utilized by millions of tourists annually, which is what makes it viable, as far as I know. It is a highly-prized residential address as well. Moreover, it is served by a variety of public transport options. What "live spaces" do you envision for the Jacksonville Landing, which possesses none of those characteristics?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 07:31:13 PM
The basic principles would be clustering pedestrian scale development and activity in a compact area around the Landing. The result would be more density and foot traffic to help support market rate development and business investment opportunities. The concept pretty much applies to rural towns just as much as it applies to a global metropolis. It doesn't mean you'll get same businesses in Covent Garden Market. However, you won't end up with dead spaces either.
My quote above describes the basic characteristics of clustering. This is how the concept manifested itself in Pensacola over the last couple of years:
Full article: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/a-lesson-for-jacksonville-pensacolas-palafox-street/
Before:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/History/Pensacola-Palafox-Before/i-V9gs59C/0/313f5e7c/L/Pcola-11-L.jpg)
After:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Pensacola-May-2019/i-jR48CDB/0/eb907668/L/20190515_212729-L.jpg)
Before:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/History/Pensacola-Palafox-Before/i-5wWjnHt/0/af737c9d/L/Pcola-10-L.jpg)
After:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Pensacola-May-2019/i-3cjz9Rn/0/07384f63/L/20190515_223254-L.jpg)
Here's how the concept has manifested itself in the form of a $5 million streetscape project in downtown Coral Gables in less time than Lenny Curry has been in office:
Full article: https://www.moderncities.com/article/2019-apr-the-makeover-of-giralda-plaza
Before:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Miami/Coral-Gables-Giralda-Plaza/i-3F9B8XN/0/ecea87f9/L/Giralda-Before-1-L.jpg)
After:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Miami/Miami-March-2019/i-s9NWSrX/0/e21fb475/L/20190330_121625-L.jpg)
Before:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Miami/Coral-Gables-Giralda-Plaza/i-Hm58S6g/0/f5151854/L/Giralda-Before-2-L.jpg)
After:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Miami/Miami-March-2019/i-cL8rj9K/0/c8294fd2/L/20190330_111630-L.jpg)
In this particular case, existing buildings with occupied and vacant storefronts were utilized by making the street a place that attracts people and consistent programming of special events.
Interesting.
Don't Coral Gables and Pensacola have significant tourist traffic that Jacksonville doesn't?
Who would patronize a renascent Jacksonville Landing?
Not that I'm aware of. The scenes pictured attract locals more than tourist.
Regarding the Landing, it depends on what goes in it. Before being put out of business with the legal fight between COJ and former management, the Landing's restaurants did good business with the surrounding hotel guests and catering for various events. Some other businesses did fine because they didn't have to rely on foot traffic. So you'd likely be looking at some of the same types of businesses, with a different layout to provide them with more exposure to Independent Drive. I'd assume whatever opens in the future will have to appeal to the existing urban core population base as well, instead of hoping to attract tourist. IMO, ideally, a revamped center would be mixed use where the amount of retail/dining space would be reduced, allowing for complementing uses to fill the remaining space (i.e. revamp of Orlando's Church Street Station). Those complementing uses could be anything from a food hall or public market to a first class visitors center that the COJ is currently planning to squeeze in the back of the nearby performing arts center.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 08:17:14 PM
Not that I'm aware of. The scenes pictured attract locals more than tourist.
I can't seem to locate a source that agrees with that assessment. What did you base it on?
Personal experience with both places and in the case of Pensacola, people who live and operate some of the businesses there. What source are you using to disagree with that assessment?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 08:32:35 PM
What source are you using to disagree with that assessment?
I'm not disagreeing with "that statement". I'm asking you what you based it on.
Also knowledge that Jax does have a decent tourism base. That base just isn't spending as much time in downtown as it could be if the right investments were made.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 08:56:23 PM
Also knowledge that Jax does have a decent tourism base. That base just isn't spending as much time in downtown as it could be if the right investments were made.
Interesting.
What would you consider "a decent tourism base?"
Who would be responsible for making these "investments?"
$3.2 billion generated annually isn't bad:
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2018/05/07/visit-jacksonville-reports-record-breaking-tourism.html
COJ would be responsible for needed investments such as cleaning, maintaining and activating its parks, streets, programming, and ensuring local policies are in place to help guide the market and good pedestrian scale design.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 09:32:39 PM
$3.2 billion generated annually isn't bad:
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2018/05/07/visit-jacksonville-reports-record-breaking-tourism.html
COJ would be responsible for needed investments such as cleaning, maintaining and activating its parks, streets, programming, and ensuring local policies are in place to help guide the market and good pedestrian scale design.
The article you cited is dated 2018 and covers 3 months. It's also based on figures provided by "Visit Jacksonville," whose credibility hasn't been established AFAIK. They are hardly disinterested parties.
Isn't Visit Florida, the statewide marketing organization, in danger of losing its state funding because there are questions about its efficacy and fraud concerns?
No worries, feel free to share another source.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 10:09:55 PM
No worries, feel free to share another source.
I haven't made any assertions that require citing a source, have I?
Are you familiar with Strong Towns?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 10:29:39 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 10:09:55 PM
No worries, feel free to share another source.
I haven't made any assertions that require citing a source, have I?
No, you're just picking around the edges of the statements that we're making. Pensacola is a third of Jax's size and doesn't have so much of a tourism base that it would cover the gap (and as Ennis says, Jax does have a solid tourism base). If clustering can work in Pensacola it can work in Jax.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 25, 2019, 10:59:03 PMNo, you're just picking around the edges of the statements that we're making. Pensacola is a third of Jax's size and doesn't have so much of a tourism base that it would cover the gap (and as Ennis says, Jax does have a solid tourism base). If clustering can work in Pensacola it can work in Jax.
Good luck to you, then.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 07:41:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 07:31:13 PM
The basic principles would be clustering pedestrian scale development and activity in a compact area around the Landing. The result would be more density and foot traffic to help support market rate development and business investment opportunities. The concept pretty much applies to rural towns just as much as it applies to a global metropolis. It doesn't mean you'll get same businesses in Covent Garden Market. However, you won't end up with dead spaces either.
Covent Garden was an established urban area for centuries before the market was moved owing to traffic congestion concerns, and the repurposed main structure is utilized by millions of tourists annually, which is what makes it viable, as far as I know. It is a highly-prized residential address as well. Moreover, it is served by a variety of public transport options. What "live spaces" do you envision for the Jacksonville Landing, which possesses none of those characteristics?
Covent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market. Obviously there was more density - but the area wasn't heaving with tourists and full of shops, restaurants, etc.
One thing London has over Jax is density - even in the less-salubrious areas, there are people living. Downtown Jax needs to get more people living there. Of course, these things don't happen in isolation and will have to develop over time.
But no one is saying Downtown Jax = Covent Garden (or the Landing = Covent Garden Market). But the principles that led to the current state of affairs in Covent Garden (and in the Market) are what can be applied to Downtown and the Landing. The scale might be different (and I doubt any part of Downtown Jax will ever resemble Central London for vibrancy), but things can be done to make it better. And although it's not unreasonable to wonder whether redevelopment of the Landing will make a difference (it can, but won't in isolation), I can guarantee that it stands a better chance than another open space.
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2019, 02:03:58 AMCovent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market.
Interesting. Who told you that?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 26, 2019, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2019, 02:03:58 AMCovent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market.
Interesting. Who told you that?
I can't think of anyone ever telling me that. Why would you assume someone did?
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2019, 06:42:44 PMI can't think of anyone ever telling me that. Why would you assume someone did?
If nobody told you "Covent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market," where did you get that impression?
It could be possible that he was personally familiar with the site prior to its redevelopment.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2019, 08:44:01 PM
It could be possible that he was personally familiar with the site prior to its redevelopment.
It could be. I'd never heard that "Covent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market," so I was curious.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 09:32:39 PMCOJ would be responsible for needed investments such as cleaning, maintaining and activating its parks, streets, programming, and ensuring local policies are in place to help guide the market and good pedestrian scale design.
Why should COJ (meaning taxpayers) be "responsible for needed investments?"
Since when aren't municipalities responsible for the public realm within their limits? That's one of the main reasons we have taxes.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2019, 10:39:27 PM
Since when aren't municipalities responsible for the public realm within their limits? That's one of the main reasons we have taxes.
Why should tax dollars be spent on a moribund area like the Landing?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 26, 2019, 08:34:59 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2019, 06:42:44 PMI can't think of anyone ever telling me that. Why would you assume someone did?
If nobody told you "Covent Garden (as a district) was not particularly thriving before the redevelopment of the market," where did you get that impression?
Probably from experience. In any event - if you have any interest in the topic, this website might be worth your time:
http://coventgardenmemories.org.uk/category_id__40.aspx
And Fiona White (no relation) has this to say about her childhood in Covent Garden:
QuoteIn the 1970's, Covent Garden wasn't the hectic place it is today. Fiona remembers a sense of quietness, the stillness in the streets around the Piazza and the old market area, which were almost deserted of pedestrian traffic, particularly after the market closed. Now she lives in southeast London with her husband and two children. But in the 1970's, Long Acre, where she lived with her parents, and then Mercer Street, where she moved as an adult, were more residential, Fiona recalls. However, there are still a few times these days when she can recapture the feeling of what Long Acre was like when she was a child: 'it's a lovely area to walk down on Christmas Eve when it's quiet and everyone has gone home and then it gives you more of an idea of what it was like'.
Edit: and here's a video of Janet Street Porter interviewing John Lydon in 1978 as they walk around Covent Garden:
https://youtu.be/N35H-59QIbA (https://youtu.be/N35H-59QIbA)
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 26, 2019, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2019, 10:39:27 PM
Since when aren't municipalities responsible for the public realm within their limits? That's one of the main reasons we have taxes.
Why should tax dollars be spent on a moribund area like the Landing?
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 07:16:35 AM
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.[/quote]
Perhaps so.
Reducing crime and homelessness in the area would be a legitimate function of city government.
Demolishing an empty structure is the city's responsibility, isn't it?
Quote from: Adam White on July 27, 2019, 02:42:08 AMProbably from experience.
Probably?
Don't you know whether or not you frequented Covent Garden prior to 1980?
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 11:42:03 AM
Quote from: Adam White on July 27, 2019, 02:42:08 AMProbably from experience.
Probably?
Don't you know whether or not you frequented Covent Garden prior to 1980?
I know I have lived in London for almost 13 years now and - since my mother's family moved here in the early 60s - that I have been visiting the city since the 70s.
I cannot say how or where I know the info, it's just that I do.
Is that answer good enough for you?
Quote from: Adam White on July 27, 2019, 12:23:14 PMI know I have lived in London for almost 13 years now and - since my mother's family moved here in the early 60s - that I have been visiting the city since the 70s.
Fascinating. Yet you post on a Jacksonville forum.
QuoteQuote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 11:38:07 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 07:16:35 AM
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.
Perhaps so.
Reducing crime and homelessness in the area would be a legitimate function of city government.
Demolishing an empty structure is the city's responsibility, isn't it?
No, it's not the city's responsibility to buy occupied buildings for an inflated price, evict the tenants and raze the buildings with no idea of what to do next. If so, we have several vacant strip mall owners all over town that would be more than happy to sell and swim Scrooge McDuck style in their profits off the back of taxpayers.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 01:21:06 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 27, 2019, 12:23:14 PMI know I have lived in London for almost 13 years now and - since my mother's family moved here in the early 60s - that I have been visiting the city since the 70s.
Fascinating. Yet you post on a Jacksonville forum.
I'm from Jacksonville (well, I moved there at the age of seven and didn't leave for good until I was 34). I always assumed I would move back at some point and I might. Who knows. I like to keep an oar in the water in any event. And I always like to know what's going on in my hometown. I think you'll find a number of contributors to this forum are from Jax and live elsewhere.
You can keep having a go at me if you want. It doesn't change the fact that I am correct.
Quote from: Adam White on July 27, 2019, 01:54:23 PMI'm from Jacksonville (well, I moved there at the age of seven and didn't leave for good until I was 34). I always assumed I would move back at some point and I might. Who knows. I like to keep an oar in the water in any event. And I always like to know what's going on in my hometown. I think you'll find a number of contributors to this forum are from Jax and live elsewhere. You can keep having a go at me if you want. It doesn't change the fact that I am correct.
Is that right? ::)
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 01:51:46 PM
No, it's not the city's responsibility to buy occupied buildings for an inflated price, evict the tenants and raze the buildings with no idea of what to do next. If so, we have several vacant strip mall owners all over town that would be more than happy to sell and swim Scrooge McDuck style in their profits off the back of taxpayers.[/quote]
I've been reading TripAdvisor reviews of the Landing. It seems to me the place should have been shut down and razed long ago. in the interest of public safety.
Maybe the city should focus it's redevelopment efforts on crime prevention and mitigating the homeless issue.
This sea lion act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning) is getting old, Wombley. Please knock it off.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 03:00:51 PM
I've been reading TripAdvisor reviews of the Landing. It seems to me the place should have been shut down and razed long ago. in the interest of public safety.
Maybe the city should focus it's redevelopment efforts on crime prevention and mitigating the homeless issue.
My recommendation is to try visiting the area in person. If reading, skip tripadvisor and read newspaper archives on the topic for the last 20 years. You'll have a much better perspective and understanding of the history, challenges and opportunities.
Wait. Is your real name Lenny Curry?
How this thread feels... (https://i.redd.it/r6x1id4mrwc31.jpg)
Quote from: itsfantastic1 on July 28, 2019, 12:14:35 AM
How this thread feels... (https://i.redd.it/r6x1id4mrwc31.jpg)
;D
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 07:16:35 AM
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 26, 2019, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2019, 10:39:27 PM
Since when aren't municipalities responsible for the public realm within their limits? That's one of the main reasons we have taxes.
Why should tax dollars be spent on a moribund area like the Landing?
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.
It's a $1M for the demo and no more than $1.5M for the leases. For a city with a $1.4 BILLION budget, it costs less than a rounding area to remove The Landing from the riverfront.
The rest of that money was spent to deal with the bad legal situation the city had put itself in. IMHO that's where the real issue is, having a vision along with day to day execution that ensures that things do not get to that point.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 03:39:34 PM
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 03:00:51 PM
I've been reading TripAdvisor reviews of the Landing. It seems to me the place should have been shut down and razed long ago. in the interest of public safety.
Maybe the city should focus it's redevelopment efforts on crime prevention and mitigating the homeless issue.
My recommendation is to try visiting the area in person. If reading, skip tripadvisor and read newspaper archives on the topic for the last 20 years. You'll have a much better perspective and understanding of the history, challenges and opportunities.
Well said. Thank you.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on July 28, 2019, 02:05:21 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 07:16:35 AM
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 26, 2019, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2019, 10:39:27 PM
Since when aren't municipalities responsible for the public realm within their limits? That's one of the main reasons we have taxes.
Why should tax dollars be spent on a moribund area like the Landing?
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.
It's a $1M for the demo and no more than $1.5M for the leases. For a city with a $1.4 BILLION budget, it costs less than a rounding area to remove The Landing from the riverfront.
The rest of that money was spent to deal with the bad legal situation the city had put itself in. IMHO that's where the real issue is, having a vision along with day to day execution that ensures that things do not get to that point.
This is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it. It was $15 million to buy the building, which last sold for $5 million and had no one else interested in it, $1 million (if not more) for demo, $1.5 million to buy out a few tenants, and over $4 million to settle the legal issue Curry started. So $22 million to turn it into a grass field.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 28, 2019, 03:59:21 PM
This is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it. It was $15 million to buy the building,
Don't get all "you're wrong" when you don't know the basics. Do real research. It is impossible to buy something that you own.
But that would then explain the mush of anti-logic that sprins forth.
he city spent $15 million to get Sleiman out of the lease. They did this because, all things considered, it made the most sense. As many proponents of remodeling The Landing have pointed out, is not a cost of demolition. You would need to do this to do what they support, remodeling and repurposing The Landing.
It is a cost that applies to all options going forward.
^The city wouldn't necessarily have to pay to remodel the building. That's a huge inaccurate assumption you're making. Also paying Sleiman $15 million to get him out of the lease as the option making most sense is more opinion than fact based. Just for my better understanding of your perspective, what were the other options on the table that made paying Sleiman and eliminating a couple hundred downtown jobs the best option?
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on July 30, 2019, 10:15:38 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on July 28, 2019, 03:59:21 PM
This is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it. It was $15 million to buy the building,
Don't get all "you're wrong" when you don't know the basics. Do real research. It is impossible to buy something that you own.
Did your 'real research' not turn up the fact that Sleiman Enterprises owned the buildings and everything inside of them? The cost of the acquisition also included the City purchasing the physical assets owned by Sleiman, not just a lease buyout.
I think you are missing the point. While you are correct that the $15 million was for buying out his 99 year lease and not physical demolition, the whole point of the buyout was to remove someone who had a legal right to operate in the space and allow the city move forward with unilateral redevelopment. If Sleiman and the city could've agreed on a development strategy, then there is no buyout cost (or at least not $15 mil).
What I think is getting mixed is that there are two factors this site has issue with; 1) Jacksonville seems to think redevelopment means demolishing and starting over and 2) the buyout amount was so large, it makes people question the City when the previous administration's development was derided as "too expensive" when in total it cost $12 million.
Right now, the city has (or will have) spent nearly $22 million and regardless of the purpose parts of that money had, all they have to show for $22 million is an empty lot (for the time being).
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
^The city wouldn't necessarily have to pay to remodel the building. That's a huge inaccurate assumption you're making.
The building was built for retail. It can't be used for something else without remodeling.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
Also paying Sleiman $15 million to get him out of the lease as the option making most sense is more opinion than fact based.
Insiders have stated it so. If you can prove them wrong, please do.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
.................eliminating a couple hundred downtown jobs the best option?
A couple hundred jobs? Since you claim to value facts, let's talk about FTEs. HOw many FTEs were there at The Landing as of Jan 2019? Or do facts only matter when they're consonant with your feelings?
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 03, 2019, 03:15:38 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
^The city wouldn't necessarily have to pay to remodel the building. That's a huge inaccurate assumption you're making.
The building was built for retail. It can't be used for something else without remodeling.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
Also paying Sleiman $15 million to get him out of the lease as the option making most sense is more opinion than fact based.
Insiders have stated it so. If you can prove them wrong, please do.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 30, 2019, 11:15:28 AM
.................eliminating a couple hundred downtown jobs the best option?
A couple hundred jobs? Since you claim to value facts, let's talk about FTEs. HOw many FTEs were there at The Landing as of Jan 2019? Or do facts only matter when they're consonant with your feelings?
1. It could be adapted for a variety of uses, including modern retail, for less money than we're spending to create a field.
2. The only people who have ever said that are the ones rationalizing the project. It can be easily proven wrong by the fact that we could have spent $0 and has something that's not a field.
3. LOL, moving the goalposts is a sign you don't have a real argument. At any rate, there were more jobs than there are now (none) or will be for years at least.
LOL, moving goal posts and selecting a date after years of the city working to put places out of business. Definitely a poor argument.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 25, 2019, 07:41:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 25, 2019, 07:31:13 PM
The basic principles would be clustering pedestrian scale development and activity in a compact area around the Landing. The result would be more density and foot traffic to help support market rate development and business investment opportunities. The concept pretty much applies to rural towns just as much as it applies to a global metropolis. It doesn't mean you'll get same businesses in Covent Garden Market. However, you won't end up with dead spaces either.
Covent Garden was an established urban area for centuries before the market was moved owing to traffic congestion concerns, and the repurposed main structure is utilized by millions of tourists annually, which is what makes it viable, as far as I know. It is a highly-prized residential address as well. Moreover, it is served by a variety of public transport options. What "live spaces" do you envision for the Jacksonville Landing, which possesses none of those characteristics?
Your arguments are a pain in my rear. Just admit you hate Jax or DT or whatever your agenda is. Tearing down the Landing is the final blow for me and Downtown. I don't get your point. You have contributed nothing constructive to this conversation. And I'm still reading.
Quote from: Wombley Womberly on July 27, 2019, 11:38:07 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 27, 2019, 07:16:35 AM
COJ is spending $22 million in tax money there now. Way too much IMO for a vacant lot.
Perhaps so.
Reducing crime and homelessness in the area would be a legitimate function of city government.
Demolishing an empty structure is the city's responsibility, isn't it?
[/quote]
I know I'm late to the party but as I recall the Landing wasn't empty.
This will be another horrible black eye for DT. Just look at the empty lots everywhere DT now. People who have been coming to this site for years know that this is doomed to be an overgrown empty lot for god knows how many years. There is a promise of litter and homeless people hanging out on the site for years. Then we will get to hear all the complaints about the homeless problem and how anyone who goes near the place feels unsafe. They will avoid that section of the Riverwalk due to trash, poor maintenance and panhandling. There will be no one interested in developing the site maybe ever. History is not on our side. This is the greatest fiasco in Jax not in 30 years but probably 50 years. When and if Lot J is developed it will be the place that folks from the burbs come to visit and quickly race back to their subdivisions. If you think I'm wrong research the Shipyards, La Villa and numerous other sites and then you will realize the gaping holes where City Hall Annex and Courthouse, the Southside Generating Station, The Jacksonville Shipyards and numerous other sites have sat empty for years. There has been no real development boom near the 7 year old courthouse. Even though it would seem that a massive building would encourage some. Of course we do have a lovely parking lot where the Greyhound bus station used to stand. But this time I'm pointing fingers at our wonderful mayor Lenny who promised we wouldn't recognize downtown when he got through with it and so far he's upheld his promise. There will be nothing left to recognize when he is finished.