15 Years Later: 1987's revision of 1972 Frankenstein:

[Metro Jacksonville]

15 Years Later: 1987's revision of 1972 Frankenstein:  



All too often plans for downtown are just that. They ignore the political, financial or market realities of downtown and end up on the shelf ignored. - Quote from KBJ's Initial Action Plan for Jacksonville's Core Business District - 1987

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-jul-15-years-later-1987s-revision-of-1972-frankenstein-

[finehoe]

Nevertheless, its biggest flaw was its simplicity.

"Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting itself with ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grandsons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your watchword be order and your beacon beauty. Think big."

Daniel Burnham (1846-1912)

[stjr]

I am sorry, but what is "revealed" by the charettes that is all that inciteful, revealing about, relevant to, or accurate about downtown.  And, I see a disconnect between these "baseline revelations" and the actual recommendations.  So, what is the point? If the below is the basis for their conclusions, I question the competency and common sense of the participants.  

Added to the recommendations (bring the zoo downtown?  Of all the attractions, this land hogging, non-street friendly attraction is the best idea they had?), this looks more like the result of a grade school project than one by visionary and creative professionals.

Another "study" for File 13.  Nearly worthless.

Can you tell us who these geniuses were on the charrettes that are so much smarter than the rest of us?
Nothing about mass transit, historic preservation, improved safety, urban living, making downtown a sustainable community, creating downtown destinations, etc.  Why can't we find the right people to participate in moving downtown forward successfully?

In the end, why don't we simply determine what people want to visit, live, and work downtown based on actual successes?  Just copy the success stories in comparable locations elsewhere and be done with it.  If people in Jax had the answers, we wouldn't need the studies.

The Charrettes revealed several things about downtown.  These include:

1. Estimated that the downtown office market would add up to 400,000sf (or 5 new office towers) within the next 10 years.

Predicting future development is a near futile exercise. Development will come if the right environment exists and the economy justifies it.  Predicting 5 office towers is a worthless observation.

2.That downtown's traditional retail market had died, due to the closing of the major anchor stores.

Nothing inciteful about the observation on losing retail.  Every citizen in Jax knows this answer.

3. Felt that downtown only had a few historic structures worth saving, due to the Great Fire of 1901.

The lack of appreciation for our historic structures borders on incompetence.  Nothing much remained from the fire of 1901 so the very definition of historic downtown structures is buildings built thereafter.  What does a fire in 1901 have to do with determining the value of that post-fire history?

4. Predicted the NE quadrant of downtown offered the opportunity for low density residential infill.

NE quadrant offered infill possibilities? Why talk about infill when the core is dead or dying?  First things first.  And, what do they even mean by the NE Quadrant?  Around the stadium and north?  East of north Main?  All of this?  Why did they even care about that when the focus appears to have been directed at downtown's core?

5. Recognized downtown, as a major governmental center, religious and social welfare center.

Government and social welfare, yes.  Religious, no more so than the rest of Jax, unless you consider FBC the center of our religious community.  No doubt some do, but most don't.  All this aside, again, what is so earth shattering inciteful about this?

6. Recognized city plans to relocate public office facilities away from the river in order to place valuable property back on the tax rolls as high-rise-office development.

A conversation going on since the 60's and still taking place.  Again, nothing new here.

[tufsu1]

I have no problem with #4...it refers epcifically to the cathedral district area....this area is perfect for low-to-medium density residential (as the complex I live in shows)...the core itself and the riverfront should have medium-to-high density residential.

As fo #5, idowntown is a religious center...it has major Baptist, Catholic, Episcopal, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches.