What Should Be Done With Downtown Jacksonville?

[heights unknown]

Regarding the Laura Trio, my vision of those buildings is to leave them intact, and somehow add on a supertall (50 stories) skyscraper over, in, and around them, integrate the new into and within the old. Just a thought.

[Bridges]

Good lord.  I hope people are leaving better suggestions than the "amusement parks" and "bulldoze everything and start new" suggestions in this thread.

[strider]

I suspect the ferris wheel idea would more closely follow the London Eye rather than a full on amusement park idea.  Due to location and land issues.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Eye

Street car from the river north to 20th street is what I think should be done.  The skyway is going to Riverside, so Springfield area should get streetcar first.  It also is more likely to spur brand new development as there isn't any at all now to speak off and the parks are in that direction.  First step the parks and then to 20th?

[tufsu1]

The property needs to remain public and again an amusement park will make Jacksonville a destination and NOT a pass through town

I'm not aware of any public amusement parks...don't they all have gates and charge admission?

as for being a destination, I agree completely...but that is best done at least in part by creating something uniquely Jacksonville...not by building another theme park in Florida

All that said, I could support a ferris wheel close in to downtown...similar to what now exists in Atlanta...but let's be real, we aren't London (not Atlanta either) and people will not pay $25 to go up and see our skyline.

[Bridges]

Street car from the river north to 20th street is what I think should be done.  The skyway is going to Riverside, so Springfield area should get streetcar first.  It also is more likely to spur brand new development as there isn't any at all now to speak off and the parks are in that direction.  First step the parks and then to 20th?

And this is something that we already have a plan in place for.  Well, up to 8th and then over to UF Shands.  If we just got out of our own way and let the Mobility Plan work as intended, we could see real organic growth.  But instead we forget the plan, stop it at every turn, and then shoot for pie in the sky.  Hell, we don't even have to debate where the funding would come from for something like this.  It's all in place.  Just let it work like it is supposed to. 

We get that going, and it works like we all believe it will, then it makes it so much easier to sell an extension of the line if that is what looks to be the best option.

[Noone]

If they are not going to do the right things with it, or even, if they are not going to do anything with it, just bulldoze it and leave it empty, or bulldoze it and build every building new, with all blocks filled in with buildings and skyscrapers with NO parking garages, parking lots, or empty parking lots! Use it or lose it!!!

great.  how much towards the construction of these skyscrapers are you personally guaranteeing, heights unknown?  20%?

more? 

Just depost a check for the amount of the construction for the thing you would like to see, and then I think its easier to take your suggestion with more seriousness.

Shipyards- $36,500,000 of (taxpayer) money gone.
Landmar- 16 acres of Public Space reduced to 8 acres
Shipyards III- Jacksonville Civic Council and who is the director?
                     JaxChamber and who is the Director?
                     JCCI and who is the director?
                     OED and who is the director?
                     DIA and who is the director?
                     CRA
                     Vision 2025
Anyone, where is the 24/7 Public Access to Shipyards III a trophy asset that can provide a unique retail opportunity to our St. Johns River an American Heritage River a FEDERAL Initiative in our new highly restricted DIA zone?

[Keith-N-Jax]

Thanks for the link to Imagine Downtown, I sent in a few ideas myself today.

[Noone]

Good lord.  I hope people are leaving better suggestions than the "amusement parks" and "bulldoze everything and start new" suggestions in this thread.

Does anyone have a clue as to what all the construction activity that is going on right now on the Shipyards property? it's next to Hogans Creek.

All Pre Vision 2025 release
All Pre CRA/DIA in the USA release
All Pre PFPF COJ asset release
All Positive

[Keith-N-Jax]

One Ferris wheel doesn't mean a full blown amusement park. I am sure the idea behind that would be something like the London Eye. I just don't see that as a bad idea for the shipyards area. 

[JeffreyS]

Obviously there is not just one thing that fixes DT but the first one on my list would be Complete the Laura street trio project. The second would be outside of DT connect the Skyway all the way into San Marco. Third priority open the Landing to Laura.

[I-10east]

I don't like that 'breezeway' proposal for the Landing. It's too anti-retail and destructive of the existing infrastructure. I like the idea of readapting infrastructure into other things opposed to tearing it down. This is what I would do with the Landing. I'm obviously scrapping the notion of the gimmicky breezeway in which all of Jax would flock to in amazement to see the St John's River from Laura Street...

For now, I would keep to basic Horseshoe shape of the Landing, with the escalators, upstairs and all. Transform the dying second floor food court area into a club ala Mavericks, or maybe full service restaurant(s) space like American Grill etc. Move all of the existing ground floor retail into one side of the horseshoe; Transform the other side of horseshoe retail into large adaptable space (tearing down inner walls etc); An indoor go-cart track is just an example as to what they could do with it (I'm not saying that it has to be that). People would be more excited with that, versus basically tearing down most of the Landing.       

[ProjectMaximus]

-Continue to incentivize/subsidize residential non-luxury residential as much as possible
-Continue to recruit, attract, and incentivize more economic development and relocation to the area, with a focus on downtown
-Extend the skyway into Brooklyn and San Marco
-Implement the streetcar system connecting Riverside, Downtown, Sports District, and Springfield. Eventually add Murray Hill, Avondale, LaVilla, etc.

[NoFxfan]

Get this Skybridge built:

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-mar-skybridge-jacksonville

I will hopefully be doing my internship at baptist downtown soon, and I know they shuttle most of their employees in from other parking lots... This bridge would eliminate that.

[Noone]

One Ferris wheel doesn't mean a full blown amusement park. I am sure the idea behind that would be something like the London Eye. I just don't see that as a bad idea for the shipyards area. 

+1

[thinknik]

I think downtown is defined by its waterfront and that Jacksonville has all the basics needed to have a successful waterfront downtown.   

Climate. Waterfront. Commerce. People. Desire. 

So while in the "talking in a forum" mode ... one thing that might, or might not help would be to take a look at the things that are causing failure.

Who knows, a great neon ferris wheel with laser light show might be what gets the people of Jacksonville to think of downtown as the place to be. 
Trying to keep an open mind for what works for the community is always good. 

In any case, I offer you this excerpt from PPS and apologize in advance if posting excerpts from other websites is forbidden.  I don't think Ethan Kent will mind.     

http://www.pps.org/reference/waterfrontsgonewrong/

Mistakes by the Lake, River, or Sea
By Ethan Kent

In cities around the world, waterfronts are showing new signs of life. Parcels once dominated by industry or highways are now opening up to redevelopment, offering enormous opportunities to create new public spaces and rejuvenate old ones. Too often, however, decision makers hungry for solutions latch on to uninspired design and development plans that constrict public use.

Many things can suck the life out of a waterfront redevelopment, even those that start out with the best intentions. Some waterfronts are effectively privatized with one-dimensional commercial activity like hotels or convention centers, others with housing that discourages non-residents from using the space. Even when land is set aside for parks, they can fall short of the mark because they've been designed only for passive use or highly structured recreation. Since most waterfronts often start out in decrepit shape, any type of development tends to be welcomed. Yet when one particular use is allowed to dominate, the long-term potential of the waterfront is degraded.

Based on our experience with waterfronts around the world, PPS has assembled the following list of common pitfalls to help communities avoid these mistakes so that they can achieve the best possible future for their waterfronts.

Where Waterfronts Go Wrong

Mistake #1: Single-Use Developments, Not Multi-Purpose Destinations

City planners in Vancouver tell us these high-rise residential towers along the waterfront have prevented public use from flourishing.
Predictably, waterfront planning that stresses big, stand-alone projects results in isolated, single-use (not to mention very expensive) development. And any time a single use dominates an area, other activities are squeezed out.

Mistake #2: Domination by Autos

Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct is a barrier between downtown and the waterfront.
The waterfront should be one of the main destinations in any city, not a place to pass through in a car. Yet many cities–including New York, Seattle, Barcelona and Paris–have greatly hindered access to their waterfronts by capitulating to the auto. Raised freeways, wide roads, and parking lots dominate waterfront views, cutting people off from what should be a wonderful public asset.

Mistake #3: Too Much Passive Space or Too Much Recreation

Much of Portland Oregon's waterfront is taken up by passive areas without a diverse variety of activity.
Passive areas where people can sit or stroll are successful when they connect to destinations where more activities are available, forming a diverse whole. But when the waterfront is limited to natural areas, which are often seen as a healthy contrast to the city, the place loses the vibrant qualities that draw many people to the water. By the same token, recreational activities that use up a large amount of space, like playing fields, are especially difficult to integrate into a waterfront if you want to have a lively setting throughout different times of day and different seasons. Natural areas and recreational areas work best when mixed with other sorts of destinations.

Mistake #4: Private Control, not Public Access

The push for luxury waterfront condos yields a limited return for the broader public.
The privatization of waterfronts comes in many forms, including luxury housing and high-end commercial developments. There are also less obvious ways that waterfronts have been commandeered that often get overlooked. Fences, a lack of crosswalks, poorly-marked entrances, walkways that terminate at private property–all these measures serve to make waterfronts feel less public and more private.

Mistake #5: Lack of Destinations

New York's Battery Park City maintains public access throughout, but lacks the fine-grained layering of activity necessary to create great destinations.
Even well-designed and maintained waterfronts that provide excellent public access may not necessarily fulfill their potential as gathering places. If there are no special places that draw people, then the intrinsic vibrancy of waterfront gets squandered. Creating popular destinations doesn't mean relying on big projects. Rather, it involves layering smaller attractions that work together: A small boat dock, a restaurant, and a playground, if combined the right way, can all build off each other and enliven a
waterfront much more than any single use ever could.

Mistake #6: A Process Driven by Development, Not by Community

Fast growing cities around the world, like Panama City, are quickly ceding their prime waterfront space to development.
Many waterfront planning efforts are led by "development corporations," but when development is the primary objective, public goals and public process get left behind. As with any public space, the knowledge and desires of the community should form the framework for shaping waterfronts. When a city hands over the future of its waterfront to developers, the essential public spirit of the waterfront is compromised. Development is a necessary component of this process, but not the only point. It should fit within the community's vision, not override it.

Mistake #7: Design Statements

Although the Quadracci Pavilion in Milwaukee, Wisconsin sits right by the waterfront, it does nothing to support activity in the surrounding public spaces.
Many waterfronts today have become the site of stand-alone, iconic buildings. These buildings stand as design statements that neither foster lively public use nor connect their ground floor activity to the surrounding public spaces. In fact, these projects dampen public activity and diminish any sense of place. Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, Santiago Calatrava's Quadracci Pavilion at the Milwaukee Art Museum, and Dominique Perrault's Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris are all symptoms of this same disease.The success of a waterfront revitalization that relies on attention-grabbing design to draw people will be short-lived at best. Once the novelty wears off, there must be something substantial that keeps people coming back again and again.