At the Jan. 15, 2025 meeting of the DIA, renderings were shared of three options for the restaurant adjacent to Friendship Fountain.
Link to presentation (I leave it to more skilled folk to post individual slides):
CORRECTED LINK: https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2025/01/15/st-johns-riverpark-restaurant.html?ana=e_JA_me&j=38222684&senddate=2025-01-16&empos=p6
(Thanks, marcunelson)
Business Journal article: https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2025/01/15/st-johns-riverpark-restaurant.html?ana=e_JA_me&j=38222684&senddate=2025-01-16&empos=p6
Quote
The three concepts put forward include:
Concept A: an approximately $2 million single-story structure with a 1,000-square-foot ground floor dining porch with a detached and covered dining porch and a detached and covered exterior bar.
Concept B: an approximately $2.7 million two-story structure with a 1,000-square-foot ground floor bar/restaurant, a ground floor serving bar and a 1,500-square-foot second floor viewing terrace with 500-square-feet covered and public access to the second floor that include view finder for a skyline view.
Concept C: an approximately $3 million two-story structure with a 1,000-square-foot ground floor bar/restaurant, a a 1,500-square-foot second floor open sky dining and bar terrace with 500-square-feet covered and a detached and covered ground floor bar.
The goal of each proposal, Cronk said, was to accentuate the proposed building into the surrounding park and the history of the iconic location.
...
DIA board members and District 5 council member Joe Carlucci, in general, embraced Concept C with several considerations still to be hashed out.
"I would lean full bore into concept C," Carlucci told the board. "Zooming out to the bigger picture, this is going to be one restaurant of many that are going to be coming to our riverfront. What we don't want is people to get to one of the best spots on the South Bank and have it be a lesser kind of impression."
This puzzled me
Quote
Jacksonville's Parks Department, which was not able to attend the meeting, expressed its desire that the rooftop not be open as a public capability as the agency said it could not maintain responsibility for upkeep of the space five days a week.
Why would the Parks Dept. be responsible for routine maintenance? Why wouldn't the operator of the facility be responsible?
Initial comments
Concept B - It seems strange the fountain cannot be seen from most of the rooftop viewing plaza
Concept C - rooftop lounge, no restroom on that level
And I agree with the comment of a board member reported in the article - there doesn't seem to be trash space.
Looks like you got a mis-paste on the presentation link, here:
https://dia.jacksonville.gov/cms/getattachment/49dfd311-9798-494b-984f-eac1b069ef11/20250115_DIA-Workshop_CD-Urban-Restaurant-Presenta
I'm a big fan of Cronk Duch and wish they would do every low to mid-rise project in Downtown. At quick glance, I prefer option B.
Here is concept B (couldn't find a linkable picture to the other 2)
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/12904256/cronk-duch-st-johns-river-park-restaurant-rendering.jpg)
I like concept 2 and 3, looks like the rooftop wraps around so you can see the fountain from up there.
Parks Department can barely maintain their existing facilities, so I don't think they should have a say in this to be honest...
A blend of Concept B and C is probably where it needs to land.
Since the Landing is no longer, riverfront dining (specifically patio, beer garden, open air) needs to be re-established.
So is Related off the hook for having to provide a restaurant as part of their project, or will there be two restaurants in that part of the southbank?
I'm really excited that the DIA has been pushing this one forward. It's a fantastic use of the spot, especially after Related moved their restaurant to the back end of their proposed development on the water.
Concept B is the only one that I don't really care for. It doesn't make sense to make compromises to the restaurant (ceiling height, park views) in order to add a second floor if it's just going to be a passive public lookout that no one wants to maintain. Would rather see the lookout added to the top of the pump house instead as has been discussed in the past. Would actually be a fun, unique feature of the park.
I actually don't mind Concept A at all. It's the least spectacular of the three, but it might be the most functional in terms of being a restaurant. Higher ceilings. More natural light. Unobstructed park views. Kind of gives me a Collins Quarter vibe from Savannah, if you're familiar with the Forsyth location on the park.
If we're willing to spend the money, I really like Concept C. Would love to see both the restaurant and the second floor bar open even more to the park and fountain, and I think the addition of the active f&b space on the second floor really pushes this over the edge in terms of a being a marquee restaurant that could be leverage for weddings, fundraisers, etc. Feels like a more complete 24/7 attraction vs. Concept A, which seems a little more brunch/lunchy.
Been a long-time coming, but you can kind of see the "nodes" concept that Lori Boyer has been pushing for a long time starting to come together with the clusters of park space, dining, and art alongside the river. Hoping to see the trend continue, and curious to see how adding more vibrancy on the riverwalk spills over into the street grid.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 16, 2025, 04:44:39 PM
Concept B is the only one that I don't really care for. It doesn't make sense to make compromises to the restaurant (ceiling height, park views) in order to add a second floor if it's just going to be a passive public lookout that no one wants to maintain. Would rather see the lookout added to the top of the pump house instead as has been discussed in the past. Would actually be a fun, unique feature of the park.
What goes around, comes around [pun intended] - back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
I always thought it looked like a cool thing you could walk up, but I never saw it when it was open. What a shame! That spiral ramp looks like fun!
We can never have any fun in this city
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 16, 2025, 04:44:39 PM
Concept B is the only one that I don't really care for. It doesn't make sense to make compromises to the restaurant (ceiling height, park views) in order to add a second floor if it's just going to be a passive public lookout that no one wants to maintain. Would rather see the lookout added to the top of the pump house instead as has been discussed in the past. Would actually be a fun, unique feature of the park.
What goes around, comes around [pun intended] - back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
Yes, Charles, I remember those days too. At some point, it seems they gated it off. Not sure why, security, skateboarders, or too much maintenance. The original park was cutting edge in its day and quickly became a Jax landmark. I think the fountain was one of the largest in the world at the time. And, there was always a restaurant (Lobster House, Diamond Head, Harbormasters, etc.) adjacent that went through several iterations before becoming River City Brewing. Lessons to be learned here ;D.
(https://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/42/32/42_big.jpg)
(https://vintagejacksonville.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/012780watermarked.jpg)
(https://www.marylmartin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/0000900191.jpg)
A picture before there was any park or Mosh there. The motel in the foreground to the left was a Travelodge. Lobster House to the far left bottom corner. Amazingly, I couldn't find one picture of Diamond Head, a distinctive building with slanted sides and a spire on top in the middle. Was a big hot spot/disco in it's day (1970's).
(https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/120066767_2953151004789999_6195279017994900574_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=536f4a&_nc_ohc=e_v4OWckfVwQ7kNvgEhb84f&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&_nc_gid=AEjDiDr_gA6VUssu3CHbeYC&oh=00_AYBMot2eADvbXMwLk1poXmKjUNA3XshkWfHUySkA0-pQFA&oe=67B13493)
Is that Mary Street, or what is now Rirverplace Drive / Museum Circle to the left of the Travelodge? I think it is the latter. Does anyone remember what Riverplace Drive / Museum Circle was called before it was Gulf Life Drive? I remember Prudential Drive was Miami Road.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 10:44:44 PM
Is that Mary Street, or what is now Rirverplace Drive / Museum Circle to the left of the Travelodge? I think it is the latter. Does anyone remember what Riverplace Drive / Museum Circle was called before it was Gulf Life Drive? I remember Prudential Drive was Miami Road.
Found this map that shows June Street was between Mary Street and the river in that area. Interestingly, with the Main Street Bridge showing, I am guessing this is likely around 1940 something. I note the south end of the bridge was called Gibson, not South Main Street.
(https://i.etsystatic.com/6670895/r/il/24041b/3563039616/il_1588xN.3563039616_5h4e.jpg)
Quote from: Captain Zissou on January 16, 2025, 04:10:44 PM
So is Related off the hook for having to provide a restaurant as part of their project, or will there be two restaurants in that part of the southbank?
Thanks for asking this.
Related would still have a restaurant from my understanding.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 17, 2025, 07:56:41 AM
Related would still have a restaurant from my understanding.
Yep, it's part of the agreement with the city. A 4,000 sf restaurant on the water, along with a 1,000 foot ship store. Encouragingly, Related would also be required to kick in around $150k annually to maintenance and upkeep of Friendship/St. Johns Park, and convey some property over to the city for future expansion of the public space.
Does anyone know why the Parks Department, and not the operator, would be responsible for maintenance of the restaurant/bar/second-level deck space?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 16, 2025, 04:44:39 PM
Concept B is the only one that I don't really care for. It doesn't make sense to make compromises to the restaurant (ceiling height, park views) in order to add a second floor if it's just going to be a passive public lookout that no one wants to maintain. Would rather see the lookout added to the top of the pump house instead as has been discussed in the past. Would actually be a fun, unique feature of the park.
What goes around, comes around [pun intended] - back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
I remember going up it as a kid, so it must have been opened until at least the early 90s.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
What goes around, comes around [pun intended] - back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
Thanks for sharing, Charles!!!
I MUST track down some photos of this in action. Had no idea, as I didn't get to Jax until the early 2000s
Would be cool (and utilitarian) to see that little bit of history come back.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 17, 2025, 10:47:51 AM
Does anyone know why the Parks Department, and not the operator, would be responsible for maintenance of the restaurant/bar/second-level deck space?
My read is that the quote was in reference to Option B, not Option C.
Option B treats the restaurant and the second-level as separate spaces. The restaurant is it's own thing, and the upper-level is an extension of St. John's Park. So, with Option B, the Parks Department would be responsible for upkeep.
For Option C, the upper level is a private space, rather than a public space, acting as an open lounge and bar under the restaurant operator. So, for Option C, the Parks Department would not be responsible for upkeep, as the deck isn't a public amenity.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 17, 2025, 11:02:03 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 16, 2025, 05:07:05 PM
What goes around, comes around [pun intended] - back in the day, the top of the pumphouse was just that, an observation deck. I recall it was open in the early 1970s, but I don't remember when the City closed it
Thanks for sharing, Charles!!!
I MUST track down some photos of this in action. Had no idea, as I didn't get to Jax until the early 2000s
Would be cool (and utilitarian) to see that little bit of history come back.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 17, 2025, 10:47:51 AM
Does anyone know why the Parks Department, and not the operator, would be responsible for maintenance of the restaurant/bar/second-level deck space?
My read is that the quote was in reference to Option B, not Option C.
Option B treats the restaurant and the second-level as separate spaces. The restaurant is it's own thing, and the upper-level is an extension of St. John's Park. So, with Option B, the Parks Department would be responsible for upkeep.
For Option C, the upper level is a private space, rather than a public space, acting as an open lounge and bar under the restaurant operator. So, for Option C, the Parks Department would not be responsible for upkeep, as the deck isn't a public amenity.
Thanks, I understand your explanation of the Parks Department's concern. That doesn't mean the premis makes any sense. If it is part of the building, maintenance of the deck should be the same as for the rest of the building. If that part of the building is not part of the building, then I agree with Parks, especially since it would involve operation and maintenance of an elevator. Although Related's required contribution to park maintenance could go toward a maintenance contract for the elevator, and possibly for a custodial company to keep the deck clean.
I remember walking up to the top of the pump house in the early 2000s. I moved to town in 2003.
The pump house observation deck has been opened on and off for a long time. When I was in high school, it was part of our skateboard rampage route throughout the Southbank.
During the Peyton years, there are several pictures that we took from the observation deck on opening day from one of the many redesigns over years. Don Redman's big idea this day was to throw coins in the fountain.
There are several younger, skinnier and optimistic Metro Jacksonville members in these pictures. Crazy what almost 15 years of Downtown Jacksonville does to your soul.
https://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-jun-friendship-fountain-grand-reopening (https://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-jun-friendship-fountain-grand-reopening)