Mayport Cruise Terminal: Finding Common Ground
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/840662973_haH2K-M.jpg)
While Mayport is a shell of its former self, many oppose the very thing that could possibly revitalize this historic village. Can common ground be found?
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-apr-mayport-cruise-terminal-finding-common-ground
We NEED for this cruise terminal to come to Mayport. Unless there is a better location within Jacksonville, this terminal should be built there. One location or another, it needs to get built to help JAX come out of our slump.
I have been shouting this for years. Do not try to stop the change in Mayport try to use the money invested for the cruise ships to shape Mayport to the residents wishes. I wish it were this quite quaint place worthy of preservation but it just seems blighted.
Wouldn't this terminal allow for larger ships and more of them? I see this as a positive definitely. A mixed use area could arise with shops, hotels, etc. Mayport could open up a Mayport museum and eductate people as they wait for their ships. What is the big problem?
That last picture says it all. I'm all for historic preservation, cherishing our history, and keeping the charm of the area.... but I see zero charm there. Safe Harbor seafood is the best thing about Mayport and they are in favor of the cruise ship terminal. This needs to get fast track.
Just because the opponents to this have their own opinions, it doesn't mean they're valid or worth hearing (yeah yeah, I know that's close minded and everything, but its true).
Quote from: Captain Zissou on April 23, 2010, 10:28:14 AM
That last picture says it all. I'm all for historic preservation, cherishing our history, and keeping the charm of the area.... but I see zero charm there. Safe Harbor seafood is the best thing about Mayport and they are in favor of the cruise ship terminal. This needs to get fast track.
Just because the opponents to this have their own opinions, it doesn't mean they're valid or worth hearing (yeah yeah, I know that's close minded and everything, but its true).
Ditto, +1 and all that jazz.
QuoteThe group wants to attract a developer that would build a boardwalk featuring mixed-use buildings and eco-tourism outfitters.
Why can't they do both this and the cruise terminal? Why does it need to be one or the other?
Exactly, I don't see how a cruise terminal and historic charm or eco-tourism or whatever else floats your boat (sorry, too easy) are mutually exclusive.
Quote from: finehoe on April 23, 2010, 10:35:02 AM
QuoteThe group wants to attract a developer that would build a boardwalk featuring mixed-use buildings and eco-tourism outfitters.
Why can't they do both this and the cruise terminal? Why does it need to be one or the other?
The article showcased 3 areas that seemed to have done just that. Maybe someone just needs to break their leg at Mayport for this to get started.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on April 23, 2010, 10:28:14 AM
That last picture says it all. I'm all for historic preservation, cherishing our history, and keeping the charm of the area.... but I see zero charm there. Safe Harbor seafood is the best thing about Mayport and they are in favor of the cruise ship terminal. This needs to get fast track.
Just because the opponents to this have their own opinions, it doesn't mean they're valid or worth hearing (yeah yeah, I know that's close minded and everything, but its true).
I would say Singleton's is a another good thing in Mayport. While I don't personally have any sentimental ties to the area- I'm sure there are many who feel the same about Mayport as many of us on this board feel about Springfield and other historic area downtown. Their opinion should be heard and are just as valid as those who want to debate about saving the fire station on riverside ave.
Mayport and Springfield/Riverside... they are apples and olives as far as the "historic stock" that was/is available.
I agree, but there have been tons of discussion on this site about the Brooklyn area in riverside and it has far less historic stock than mayport. Just saying- people are quick to defend an area they care about and dismiss another area, simply because it doesn't personally have any meaning to them. I for one think Mayport would be better off with a port...but I still want to be able to eat fried shrimp at singletons.
QuoteTheir opinion should be heard and are just as valid as those who want to debate about saving the fire station on riverside ave.
Probably true, but in the cruise terminal situation we are talking about adding to and enhancing the area, with little disruption to the current fabric. Their argument is that it will destroy the charm. The riverside folks are arguing that a specific building will be destroyed. I see a difference there. And I agree with Tripoli, you can't compare mayport to riverside or springfield.
I'm a Jax. Beach guy my whole life. That's not Mayport, but its a lot closer than Springfield, Brooklyn, Riverside which have have never been my backyard or even close. I understand what you are saying and am in favor of the vast majority of historic preservation that is advocated for on this site. I understand taking that viewpoint into account with Mayport, but as was said earlier, they are not mutually exclusive. Likewise, I think core neighborhoods such as Spr and R'side are inherently different than somewhere like Mayport in just about every way, including "charm".
Of course the neighborhood should be included. They should have a loud voice in the matter. I just wish they would use this as an opportunity to improve Mayport from it's current sad state.
I agree- I grew up in Avondale and there is no comparison to Mayport. My post was more in response to the the comment " Just because the opponents to this have their own opinions, it doesn't mean they're valid or worth hearing" from Zissou. Which is why I brought up Brooklyn, because 98% of people in Jacksonville probably have no clue where it is and could care less about it, but it's still an area that gets discussed on this site.
There is nothing quaint or charming about Mayport in its current state. There are several dozen helicopter sorties that leave from the adjacent naval station every day and the waterfront looks like a wasteland. I'm all for helping out the locals but an obstructionist agenda at any cost for the past two years has allowed 80-100 people to stop much needed progress and economic development for 1.3 million people in the area. Why can't there be a win/win outcome such as - build the terminal and require the cruise ships to by Mayport shrimp each week? Ultimately, the port authority owns the property and should act swiftly to do what is in the best interest of the vast majority.
Olives. My comment was more just a personal (possible unrelated) viewpoint, it was poor taste to bring it into this discussion. I agree with you the very few people know/care about Brooklyn (which is why everyone calls it riverside), but I still don't think the two scenarios are similar.
In one situation, people are fighting development of an area, to their own detriment. In the other, people are just trying to move a building that would be otherwise torn down. If Fidelity had plans for that site that were beneficial to the area and the region, then the two situations could be compared. Fidelity has Zero plans for the site currently, we're just trying to move a building that would otherwise meet a wrecking ball.
so far nothing has been lost...JaxPort delayed the decision because of the bond market and the fact that Hanjin doesn't need the current cruise terminal site until 2013.
that said, things will need to start moving quickly....they have to get a site approved, designed, and constructed in less than 3 years.
Jacksonville definitely needs a better cruise terminal, one that doesn't require ships to go under the Dames, and one that can handle ships with over 4,000 passengers. Take Port Everglades or Port Canaveral, they make millions off the cruise industry. If Jacksonville were to get a better cruise terminal, we wouldn't have to go all the way to Miami or Cape Canaveral to catch a proper cruise ship. And personally Royal Caribbean is my favorite, and to get a ship from them would totally call for a better terminal. No way a Freedom-class cruise ship could make it under the Dames, and I dont even think the Shipping channel is deep enough west of the Dames.
Recession hasn't effected the cruise industry, especially with two new mega-class cruise ships being created during the recession. The poeple in Mayport need to grow up.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on April 23, 2010, 11:40:21 AM
In one situation, people are fighting development of an area, to their own detriment. In the other, people are just trying to move a building that would be otherwise torn down. If Fidelity had plans for that site that were beneficial to the area and the region, then the two situations could be compared. Fidelity has Zero plans for the site currently, we're just trying to move a building that would otherwise meet a wrecking ball.
My reference to Brooklyn was more comparing the shanty and shotgun homes that sat in Brooklyn and were torn down for development that still has not occurred.
Does anyone know if places like Singelton's would be torn down if this went forward? Again, I think Mayport could be millions of times better than it is, but I think an effort should be put forward to maintain the few (very few) gems that it currently has and not just tear everything down and build a new "quaint old looking" fishing village.
Watch the Sunset? They were made they could not watch the Sunset? The 40th city of the US, does not want this because it brings tourist in, but the locals can't enjoy it? @ake........They dont want the economic boost for the area?
QuoteWatch the Sunset? They were made they could not watch the Sunset?
What?
I have a suggestion. Why don't we take all residents of Mayport (all 50) on a road trip to Tampa and show them what it can be like and how it would raise their values. They would change their minds, period. The politicians in this town p me off!
Quote from: iluvolives on April 23, 2010, 02:25:55 PM
Does anyone know if places like Singelton's would be torn down if this went forward? Again, I think Mayport could be millions of times better than it is, but I think an effort should be put forward to maintain the few (very few) gems that it currently has and not just tear everything down and build a new "quaint old looking" fishing village.
There is nothing left along the waterfront between Singleton's and Safe Harbor. The cruise ship terminal site being looked at would be built between them. Thus, if properly planned and developed, you could have continuous mixed-use walkable development, shrimp docks, and public space (integrated with a cruise terminal) along the entire Mayport waterfront. In this scenario, these existing establishments would serve as the bookends for that stretch.
Mayport is pretty much represented by Zip Code 32227, and from what I can gather, in 2008, it had an estimated population of almost 5,800 people. That amounts to a bit less than 2 cruise ships of people, using the current Carnival ship. So we have the few holding up the progress of the many in Mayport. This feels like a Cecil Field argument all over again, but Cecil had more zip codes in the flight path and more issues. I don't see 5,800 people standing in the way of a multi-million dollar business for Jacksonville, not when unemployment is almost 12%.
Mtrain, it's not even the entire area of Mayport. Most people in Mayport are in favor of the terminal. It is mostly a very small group in Mayport Village which is the tiny finger of land that runs out along the river next to the navy base. Some of those families have a long rich heritage in the area going back hundreds of years and I can understand their angst, but they happen to be sitting on one of the areas biggest natural resources in a deepwater port location right by the ocean that requires no dredging and has no bridges to block it.
Yes perhaps they missed the port part of Mayport.
???
I have no sympathy for Mayport as-is. For all the talk of being involved and creating a new "Riverwalk East", Mayport residents have shown themselves incapable of maintaining what they already have. Case-in-point? The streetscape of Mayport. New improvement's done to the cry of the residents... "If only we had..." Today that same streetscape is a disaster. There are weeds so tall they could harbor a herd of wildebeests. There is a "welcome" sign that speaks of 1563, yet they have allowed even that to fall into such repair that if LOOKS like it was erected in 1563, and not painted, repaired or cleaned up since the invasion of Northeast Florida, by James Oglethorp in 1741. Look around and some of that trash is still labeled, "Jax Beer", "666", and "Hadacol's" patent medicine guaranteed to make one “Poorer Than Deadâ€.
If we want to be raw, a terminal that truly salutes Mayport would look like a giant discarded BK bag, packed with beer cans and spent condoms.
OCKLAWAHA
Aren't I nice?
Out of curiosity, what impact on the design do the security requirements of Homeland Security/Customs have on access to the waterfront servicing a cruise ship? Does this cause the waterfront there to be closed down to the public, at least when a ship is in port? Will it also restrict the river channel when the ship comes and goes? How does this work now? What impact, if any, is there on the ferry dock and operations? Will hotels for those needing an overnight stay be built in Mayport? Where?
stjr..........you failed to mention roads and parking! Not to mention the infrastructure needed to sustain any sized Cruise Vessel but I am sure that "Gate" can handle most of it! Don't forget about waste treatment also! Personally I think ............if "Mayport" does not want a Cruise Ship Terminal, what the hell........build it elsewhere! I am really frustrated with anything being shoved down anyones throat and there are really too many questions,at this point,that have not been answered! Jaxport has no plan B and I will not let one of my tax dollars fund anything regarding a Cruise Terminal...................let them find a developer and good luck in doing so!
The problem is, there doesn't seem to be anyplace else to put a cruise terminal east of the power lines and Dames Pt. Bridge. No room on Blount Island, especially with the Marines using the entire eastern half of the island. North shore of the river is either residential or Timuquan Preserve, or both; south shore is also residential or the Fort Caroline National Monument. The choice seems to be "Mayport or No Port" for the cruise industry. JaxPort needs to work with the community - something they didn't do the first time around.
Mr Charles............I agree! There is one aspect no one has commented on and that is the spoils that will result from deepening the River at the port end! If there is the amount that I think will be removed, there would be more than enough to make an Island and a roadway to it! But thats just my take on the situation!
Quote from: Charles Hunter on April 24, 2010, 08:47:05 PM
The problem is, there doesn't seem to be anyplace else to put a cruise terminal east of the power lines and Dames Pt. Bridge. No room on Blount Island, especially with the Marines using the entire eastern half of the island. North shore of the river is either residential or Timuquan Preserve, or both; south shore is also residential or the Fort Caroline National Monument. The choice seems to be "Mayport or No Port" for the cruise industry. JaxPort needs to work with the community - something they didn't do the first time around.
Well one of the two groups didn't want to work together but you picked the wrong one. Ideas were solicited but the only idea the NIMBY's had was jaxport can stick it all the way up with a red hot poker.
JefferyS - I stand corrected ... both groups need to be willing to work with the other.
Quote from: stjr on April 24, 2010, 01:49:17 PM
Out of curiosity, what impact on the design do the security requirements of Homeland Security/Customs have on access to the waterfront servicing a cruise ship? Does this cause the waterfront there to be closed down to the public, at least when a ship is in port?
Here's my two cents. I don't know all of the requirements but the waterfront area servicing a cruise ship would be closed off when the ship is moored.
"MOBILE, Ala. -- Carnival Fantasy's arrival in Mobile brought something new to Cooper Riverside Park -- a pair of police officers to keep people away from lines that secure the vessel while it's dockside at the Alabama Cruise Terminal.
At 885 feet, Fantasy is 158 feet longer than Holiday, the first ship Carnival placed in Mobile. That means both mooring lines and the required security zone around the cruise ship extend farther north along the Mobile River.
"We can't let people near those lines unless they're line-handlers," said Sheila Gurganus, the terminal's general manager. "If they were to snap, it would be a danger to whoever is around them."
Located between the terminal and the Arthur R. Outlaw Mobile Convention Center, the 3-acre Cooper Riverside Park was developed by the city in the mid-1990s at a cost of about $4 million. One of the few spots for public waterfront access in downtown Mobile, it has become popular with both locals and tourists.
Gurganus said the Cooper Riverside officers are on duty whenever Fantasy is in port, normally every other Thursday, every other Monday, and every other Saturday, from about 6 or 7 a.m. until 4 or 5 in the afternoon. "We never stop anybody from going into the park," Gurganus said."http://blog.al.com/live/2009/12/longer_cruise_ship_means_extra.html
With that said, there currently is no public waterfront access at the site where the terminal has been proposed. So if anything, a properly coordinated terminal could include public waterfront access where it currently does not exist. That would be a plus for the community.
QuoteWill it also restrict the river channel when the ship comes and goes? How does this work now?
Doubt it. In both Mobile and Norfolk, I witnessed other ships come right by. Here is a shot of one passing the moored cruise ship in Mobile a few weeks ago.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/837077646_oCUcz-M.jpg)
QuoteWhat impact, if any, is there on the ferry dock and operations?
At the least, more traffic would bring more revenue to sustain ferry operations. Without the additional traffic, the ferry would probably terminated or heavily subsidized by taxpayers to remain operational.
QuoteWill hotels for those needing an overnight stay be built in Mayport? Where?
Other than a small hotel at the Heckscher/9A interchange, the current cruise terminal has not resulted in hotel growth. Since ships won't be coming most of the week, existing hotels are more likely to benefit from the terminal than new construction.
Btw, it seems like Mayport is split on this issue. The commercial side of the community (shrimpers, Safe Harbor, etc.) wants the terminal. Without the extra customer base to market to, the waterfront will most likely continue to decline.
Quotestjr..........you failed to mention roads and parking!
Judging from the other terminals mentioned in the article and the original JAXPORT terminal plans, parking would be accommodated within the structure. The road should be fine. It will take a lot more than an occasional cruise ship to bring congestion.
A spoils island should work just fine, in fact the island under the Dame Point Bridge already has some pretty high ground on it and the whole could be elevated enough that we could greatly expand the port, and not just passengers. The expense would be a tunnel to access the thing. A new draw bridge, perhaps placed under the Dame Point Bridge, could easily clear the larger Panamax Ships headed for Hanjin, Mitsu or Talleyrand. The Union Pacific recently abandoned the Kinzie Street drawbridge in Chicago, has a lift span of 170 feet, and may now be for sale. The new Panamax ships will have a maximum width of 105.64 feet, and at least one Strauss Trunnion bascule bridge draw span exceeds 260 feet. Built alongside the Dames Point one could go the whole 260 on a new bridge or perhaps 120-130 feet if the span was constructed UNDERNEATH. Either way, the bridge could be built for both rail and highway access.
As for Bartram Island and the channel, due to the Dame Point Turn, under and just West of the bridge, I doubt the center north shore of the island could be used. The shipping channel is VERY close to the island shoreline and any loss of control would send a vessel slamming into dockside. That same center area of the island might be suitable for other smaller installations. However, at both ends the channel moves away from the Island leaving at least as much distance as exists between Blount Island and the channel. Thus both the East 1/3 and the Western 1/3 of Bartram could be solid port.
If we can't build at Mayport, which forces tourists to make a LONG trip through Jacksonville, I'd be in favor of going after the smaller 20% of the cruise business that uses smaller ships and build the terminal DOWNTOWN. We already have a Cruise Line that calls on Downtown on a regular schedule with 4 ships, the American Spirit, Glory, Star, and Independence. See: http://www.epicjourneys.com/AmericanCL.html for details. Perhaps we could still build a downtown terminal and attract several more specialty cruise lines to our city.
Here's some details as listed today:
Description: Bartram Island Dike Raising
Location: Bartram Island, FL
Owner: Jacksonville Port Authority
Engineer: CH2M Hill, Inc.
Price: $2,074,083.00
THOUGHTS?
OCKLAWAHA
Well, the western end of Bartram (ne Quarantine) Island is unsuitable for a cruise terminal for the same reason as the western side of Dames Point - west of the JEA lines and the DP Bridge. The eastern end is an interesting possibility - once the Army Corps is through with it for the channel deepening project. Don't think the entire island could become port, if that is where the Corps dumps spoil from maintenance dredging. Of course, you'd still have to get the Coast Guard to approve the Ock Draw Bridge, and I would bet the port interests would want an option that had no piers in the river.
I would like to see some more study of the eastern end of the island. Interesting thoughts, Ock.
You lose a portion of the economic benefit a terminal would bring to the community by isolating it, which is what would happen by placing it on an island in the middle of river. Review the cities showcased in this article. Their cruise terminals are very well integrated with the communities they are located in. They happen to be within walking distance of several other local attractions, museums, retail and dining areas. Whether its Mayport, Downtown or whatever, Jacksonville should do the same to maximize the benefit of this investment in the community.
Correct Lake, but as my post pointed out, for the large ships, if we don't build at Mayport, Bartram Island might be the next best thing. More then any passenger benefit, it certainly could be used to greatly expand our container port, using the entire island. Lastly, if the island had to be used for some of the passenger vessels, then perhaps a smaller specialty terminal, along the lines of the Jacksonville Landing - Shipyards projects could be located downtown. Currently we have no welcome for the American Cruise Lines that use our downtown faithfully. Why Tony or other interests haven't jumped on this I don't understand. Small cruise ships is a real area of the business that is booming - nobody seems to be watching. Think about the wealthy retiree, tourist or business traveler, who want the solitude and personal service of a small ship. Some of these are big hitters of business and industry and we have no red carpet awaiting their arrival.
In short I'm suggesting without Mayport, we build on Bartram Island for FREIGHT and passengers, plus a smallish, but exquisite center downtown, that could perhaps double as a Jax Visitors Center.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: CS Foltz on April 24, 2010, 08:27:11 PM
Jaxport has no plan B and I will not let one of my tax dollars fund anything regarding a Cruise Terminal...................let them find a developer and good luck in doing so!
and good luck to you in having sole control on how/where your tax dollars are spent!
Well tufsu you forget one important fact...............I am not the only person in my district that just happens to feel that way! I am but one true, but there is something to be said for numbers as in more than one or ten or one hundred. I do have representation on the Council and they atleast listen to what their constituants have to say about an issue. I have all ready contacted mine and he agrees to a point with my issues regarding funding for anything! I remind you $58 Million Dollars in the hole to start with so just where do you suggest public funding will come from?
JaxPort has its own Board...and will likely float bonds for the terminal...so there wouldn't be any direct tax impact...and it won't need City Council approval.
Here is a nice photo that shows a "Jax" cruise ship vs a new mega ship...
(http://granddaddy43.smugmug.com/Vacation/Cruise-on-Oasis-of-the-Seas/DSC0300/840871782_7RFmG-L.jpg)
I built a house in Mayport Village a couple of years ago, got stuck in the market plunge, now, stuck in having a cruise ship terminal at my front door. Mayport Village is small, the infrastructure can not handle a cruise terminal unless JAXPORT is going to pay me market value for my home and everyone else as well. plus, shore up the infrastructure, it should not happen. I was counting on gentrification (normal assumption in a waterfront area) when Vescor bought the property on the waterfront. I feel really duped by this whole deal. Welcome to Florida !
It galls me how everyone can talk about what should or should not happen in an area where they do not live, work or have any vested interest. Put a friggin cruise ship and all of the accompanying problems in your front yard and come back and tell me what you think about it. Talk is cheap.
Jaxport owns the land and can do what they please, tough cookies.
Jaxport may own the land but without selling enough Bonds to float the financing.........won't take place anytime in the next 5 years or later! Wait I know........JEDC will buy them all up with our tax money and pay 1.5% right?
You honestly expect me to know the answer to that question?
Nope!
Quote from: CS Foltz on May 25, 2010, 09:22:47 PM
Jaxport may own the land but without selling enough Bonds to float the financing.........won't take place anytime in the next 5 years or later!
from what I understand, JaxPort believes it can float up to $40 million fairly easily
Roaletta...may I suggest you check the property values in the Channelside area of Tampa....they increased significantly (outpacing the rest of the area) from 2000-2006...in part because of the urban vibrancy created by the expanding cruise business....this could happen in Mayport too.
Quote from: Rosaletta on May 25, 2010, 09:10:35 PM
I built a house in Mayport Village a couple of years ago, got stuck in the market plunge, now, stuck in having a cruise ship terminal at my front door.
Almost everyone makes bad investment decisions at some point during their life. Them's the breaks.
Rosaletta, I'd swap homes with you in a heartbeat to be near some local seafood joints, markets and water. I'll also be happy with a cruise terminal nearby. I'll take that over my condo conversion in the middle of the congested Southside anyday. The only drawback is the helicopters constantly buzzing overhead.
Quote from: reednavy on May 25, 2010, 09:32:41 PM
You honestly expect me to know the answer to that question?
Yes we expect you to know a great many things.
Quote from: Coolyfett on May 26, 2010, 04:34:05 PM
Yes we expect you to know a great many things.
Oh yes, I'm the most knowledgeable person on this matter by far, not.
Quote from: CS Foltz on May 25, 2010, 09:22:47 PM
Jaxport may own the land but without selling enough Bonds to float the financing.........won't take place anytime in the next 5 years or later! Wait I know........JEDC will buy them all up with our tax money and pay 1.5% right?
Then you either stop JEDC from taxing you or you are screwed. There! I answered the question.
CS Foltz if you are so against Mayport then figure out where they are going to put on instead, that is east of the Dames. I have posted many spots, though you seem not like them either.
Quote from: thelakelander on May 26, 2010, 02:58:21 PM
The only drawback is the helicopters constantly buzzing overhead.
in downtown, we call that character :D
Mattius92 ....I have no problems with any of the alternative locations you have proposed. My proposal involved using the dredging spoils from deepening the St Johns for the Dames Point Container Facility! Re-cycling material should be cheaper plus that material could be either piped or barged to a designated area. That material could also be used to construct an elevated causeway for vehicle acess.......several ways to do it, but have not seen much enthusiasim for that idea! Would rather waste perfectly good land which could be used for other things, but what do I know! Keep in mind that the deepening to be done will generate millions of cubic yards of material and makes sense to me to use what we got!
So your idea is to put a cruise terminal at the Dames Point Container Terminal. Or the spoils island near the Terminal?
Both ideas are interesting, we do have to keep in mind that halfway through Blount Island is where the power lines cross. So no cruise ships can get to the western half of the Island. Now the Eastern Half seems alright, however it is being used by the marines.
I am working on a Google Earth overlay for this. However I am not sure which location you were referring too.
I hate to be negative, but I think were going lose out on this. They are taking TOO long to make a decision and break ground. The clock is ticking and they are still undecided. I hope it comes to frutation.
duvaldude08.............I kinda hope we lose out on this! There are way too many unaswered questions for me to be real comfortable with this! Besides, the current administration is too slow about most things other than taxing and feeing the public! To me it is not a question about build it and they will come, but why build it using taxpayer money on basically what is a crap shoot! Mayport deserves better and so does Jacksonville!
Quote from: CS Foltz on June 10, 2010, 02:45:09 PM
duvaldude08.............I kinda hope we lose out on this! There are way too many unaswered questions for me to be real comfortable with this! Besides, the current administration is too slow about most things other than taxing and feeing the public! To me it is not a question about build it and they will come, but why build it using taxpayer money on basically what is a crap shoot! Mayport deserves better and so does Jacksonville!
I would much rather see a cruise terminal there than nothing. Mayport is dead. The resturants out there gets little business. Even the business state that they want to see it happen. This could also mean jobs and money coming into Jacksonville.
I suspect that the cruise terminal is coming back to the Mayport site. JPA is just checking off a few more boxes to strengthen its "conclusion" and waiting out and wearing down its opposition. Given the economy, the time could not be better for them to make their push. It's hard to turn down the economic boost when people are struggling. The opposition has an obstacle that it didn't have a couple or more years ago.
Where is CS and his yelling?
Cruise terminal choices narrowed to Mayport and undisclosed alternative
http://jacksonville.com/business/2011-01-11/story/cruise-terminal-choices-narrowed-mayport-and-undisclosed-alternative
Lots of Dots to connect.
What is the position of the city council candidates and Mayoral candidates?
Is this being discussed in the JCCI study Recession,Recovery, and Beyond?