Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed

[JPalmer]

Where's our Ferris Wheel?

[KenFSU]

^One of these two commercial parcels is reserved for the ferris wheel.

The hope is the other can be used to lure in Club Paris.

[civil42806]

should have went with Mooneyham

[Adam White]

My position won't be popular, but I wish waterfront, in every location people gather in Jax, was set aside as well-maintained park space and belonged to the people for their enjoyment and their recreation.  You'd have the water, then the expansive public green space, and then private property interests could start with views of the waterfront and the public greenspace.  So on that principle, I support turning the Landing into a well-maintained and expansive green space with scenic views of the river.

I agree.

[thelakelander]

I don't agree because I'd argue we can do it now and we don't.  We already have green space we don't use. The space in front of the performing arts center is a big waste right now. It can be improved with demolishing ramps and buildings. We also love to plan in a vacuum. This site isn't on an island. What's the plan for the outer square? East lot, etc. If you want a bigger lawn (even the best urban parks are mixed use now), do something with the East lot...it would be a lot cheaper. Overall it comes off as the same shortsided piecemeal approach to revitalization that most previous administrations have brought to the table since the 1950s.

[vicupstate]

It seems to me that if you eliminated the Main St. ramp, did some selected demolition on the existing buildings, turned the interior hallways into lease-able space, you could pretty much turn the existing Landing into something pretty close to what is in Curry's design.  Trim the existing footprint down to 140-150k and you could save money and still create more green space.   

[jaxnyc79]

I don't agree because I'd argue we can do it now and we don't.  We already have green space we don't use. The space in front of the performing arts center is a big waste right now. It can be improved with demolishing ramps and buildings. We also love to plan in a vacuum. This site isn't on an island. What's the plan for the outer square? East lot, etc. If you want a bigger lawn (even the best urban parks are mixed use now), do something with the East lot...it would be a lot cheaper. Overall it comes off as the same shortsided piecemeal approach to revitalization that most previous administrations have brought to the table since the 1950s.

Give the waterfront back to the people in a fuller and greener way (not just in a way for people to go and spend money in a food court), because the river can sell itself, especially with maintained docks and if Lori Boyer's "Activation Initiative" really takes flight.  Let someone repeat the Landing experiment elsewhere downtown, off the river, ideally in a mixed-use context with retail in the lower levels and residential or hotel above, and with an integration with the streets that the Landing has never had.  Let this hypothetical retail endeavor happen when it makes market sense downtown, especially if there's housing and hotel uses sitting atop it and around it to give it a local market and a nearby source of foot traffic. 

Give the compelling natural landmark back to the people in an accessible way, and build a new retail draw further into downtown and off the immediate waterfront to give any future foot-traffic downtown a bit more depth.  Frankly, I've always hated the fact that Jacksonville built a freaking shopping mall right on the water's edge.  It just manifested to me how much disdain the City of Jacksonville has historically held for its River, or at least for "democratizing" the River's Access for the Public Good where people actually live and cluster.  Unless one crosses a bridge or flies overhead or reads a website, one would hardly know Jax is a River City.   

You're right, the city doesn't do it now, but the city's failures are still no reason to abandon ideals.  I wish Berkman Plaza were waterfront Green Space, and the Jailhouse were Berkman Plaza.  Hopefully you get my drift.
   

[jaxnyc79]

@Lakelander, in previous posts, you've suggested Sleiman run the Landing like many of his "successful strip centers" in suburban Jacksonvillle, with perhaps a much-needed Walgreens or some other retail usage downtown.  But the more I've thought about it, Downtown waterfront doesn't need the adornment of luxury high-rises, luxury shopping, 5-star dining, low-end retail, and certainly not a Walgreens.  Make the people of Jax (including the non-wealthy) the first priority, the first order responsibility.  Then let the luxury high-rises and shopping sit along blocks that overlook our waterfront green spaces reserved the people, and frankly, put Walgreens somewhere in the depths of the core.

 

[KenFSU]

I don't agree because I'd argue we can do it now and we don't.  We already have green space we don't use. The space in front of the performing arts center is a big waste right now. It can be improved with demolishing ramps and buildings. We also love to plan in a vacuum. This site isn't on an island. What's the plan for the outer square? East lot, etc.

Broader still, how does this integrate with the countless other urban park projects that the city is juggling or has made commitments to.

By my count, we've got no fewer than 8 other urban park projects on the table already.

- Hemming Park, which the city has pumped over $2 million into in the last couple years
- Friendship Fountain, budgeted for $1 million+ this year
- The District, approved for $18 million in new public parks and riverfront extension just this week
- Emerald Necklace, seeking funding for a $2 million test mile
- Metropolitan Park, promised to the Jags, necessitating a land swap somewhere
- Veteran's Park, a 10-acre showcase park planned between the city, Jags, and USS Adams group
- Hart Bridge Elevated "High Line," a major part of Curry's Hart Bridge ramp removal plan, directly connected to the above noted Veteran's Park
- Times-Union Center plaza improvements, with a price tag in the millions

Is there any kind of unified master plan tying this all together to make sure all of this new parkspace complements each other and fits into some bigger picture, or do they all just exist in a silo, cannibalizing each other while keeping developable land off the books?

Even bigger question, is there a genuine public demand for all this riverfront park space? The only real frames of reference in urban Jacksonville are Metropolitan Park, which is a ghost-town (though the location is terrible), and Memorial Park in Riverside, which is gorgeous and moderately popular, but it never feels particularly crowded either. Even the riverwalk is surprisingly quiet on the weekends.

I get the sentiment for returning the waterfront to the people, but let's also be realistic here. There's no shortage of publicly accessible waterway in Jacksonville. We've actually got more shoreline than any other city in the country. 22 miles of beaches. 40 miles of intercoastal. Longest stretch of St. Johns River in the state. Miles of public riverwalk. I don't necessarily know if a downtown waterfront park is a major public attraction by itself in Jacksonville like it is in Louisville.

Any Landing development should include public greenspace on the river, but giving the entire plot to the public when there's a possibility that most the public would rather spend their leisure time at the beach, that's not maximizing use of the land either.

[FlaBoy]

It has worked pretty well for downtown Tampa with Curtis Hixon Park. It would be the location of all events downtown. It would render Metro Park useless for the most part and probably end most of the programming at Hemming Plaza which would be diverted to this new park.

[thelakelander]

@Lakelander, in previous posts, you've suggested Sleiman run the Landing like many of his "successful strip centers" in suburban Jacksonvillle, with perhaps a much-needed Walgreens or some other retail usage downtown.  But the more I've thought about it, Downtown waterfront doesn't need the adornment of luxury high-rises, luxury shopping, 5-star dining, low-end retail, and certainly not a Walgreens.  Make the people of Jax (including the non-wealthy) the first priority, the first order responsibility.  Then let the luxury high-rises and shopping sit along blocks that overlook our waterfront green spaces reserved the people, and frankly, put Walgreens somewhere in the depths of the core.

Lol you're talking theory but not applying it to the context and history of the setting. The site is already publicly owned and the riverfront can easily be accessed by anyone at anytime. A return of anything would mean a return to maritime related industry. When it comes to retail, people do need the services and you have a space that could accommodate them facing Independent Drive....not the riverfront. When it's all said and done the sketch represents a path to blow a ton of public money without significantly improving anything.

[thelakelander]

It has worked pretty well for downtown Tampa with Curtis Hixon Park. It would be the location of all events downtown. It would render Metro Park useless for the most part and probably end most of the programming at Hemming Plaza which would be diverted to this new park.

DT Tampa's layout is different. Curtis Hixon Park would be more applicable to Friendship Fountain and MOSH. It was a remake of the art museum and park on the Hillsborough River.

[jaxnyc79]

@Lakelander, in previous posts, you've suggested Sleiman run the Landing like many of his "successful strip centers" in suburban Jacksonvillle, with perhaps a much-needed Walgreens or some other retail usage downtown.  But the more I've thought about it, Downtown waterfront doesn't need the adornment of luxury high-rises, luxury shopping, 5-star dining, low-end retail, and certainly not a Walgreens.  Make the people of Jax (including the non-wealthy) the first priority, the first order responsibility.  Then let the luxury high-rises and shopping sit along blocks that overlook our waterfront green spaces reserved the people, and frankly, put Walgreens somewhere in the depths of the core.

Lol you're talking theory but not applying it to the context and history of the setting. The site is already publicly owned and the riverfront can easily be accessed by anyone at anytime. A return of anything would mean a return to maritime related industry. When it comes to retail, people do need the services and you have a space that could accommodate them facing Independent Drive....not the riverfront. When it's all said and done the sketch represents a path to blow a ton of public money without significantly improving anything.

C'mon, standing outside the Hooters or in the mall plaza is not the sort of waterfront activation we're talking about.  History of the setting is what I thought we're trying to escape, not use as framework for the future.  I like the idea of the Landing as core green space in the heart of the business district, presupposing that its high profile keeps up its maintenance.
   

[thelakelander]

The waterfront is bigger than the Landing. You could have the Landing and do everything you mention immediately on either side of it for a fraction of the cost. Also we razed the history (the wharfs, docks, seafood markets, warehouses, etc.) 70 years ago. If we preserved it, we could have something as authentic as San Francisco's Embarcadero or Savannah's River Street neither of which are demolishing riverfront sites in their cores for front lawns.

[thelakelander]

This one is pretty clear. The new Landing is Lot J next to the stadium. We're seriously considering hundreds of millions to.....de-densify downtown. Unbelievable...