Peyton priority shifting to downtown, riverfront development

[vicupstate]

Does an OPEN DISCUSSION include the possibility of KEEPING the fountain? 

How about having some renderings that include that?  The decision has already been made to toss the fountain, that's why.     

If the parking lot was replaced with a garage, there would be PLENTY of room for an new interactive fountain AND keeping the existing one plus everything else mentioned in the column.  Why not Charette  this whole idea but with ALL options on the table.

[tufsu1]

I'm pretty sure there will be a charette (or similar meeting) in the near future

Sure they drew an alternative that got rid of the fountain...but do you know that they don't have one with it?  Even if they don't, there's always the "no-build" option.

The Mayor and JEDC want public discussion of the riverfront as a whole over the next few years...and that inludes this park....so instead of ASSUMING that the decision has already been made, why not get involved?

[Charles Hunter]

If there are drawings with the existing fountain, why didn't Barton show them to Littlepage?  Or if he did, why didn't Littlepage mention that there are different concepts on the table?  I am afraid vicupstate may be right.  I am sure several of us will be happy to participate in an open discussion process - if there is one.

A question - did the administration's latest proposal for Metro Park / Kids Campus come out of (or was it even discussed) at the recent charette for that space?  Not saying if the administration's proposal is good or bad (although I think it has merit - it even has kiddie water squirters), but if it came out of an "open process."

[Steve]

Every time I hear something about Peyton and downtown, I kind of feel like I'd rather he leave downtown alone.  I just don't think he gets it (nor his administration).

However, I'm open to be proven wrong, and I'd ba happy to admit it if I am

[tufsu1]

A question - did the administration's latest proposal for Metro Park / Kids Campus come out of (or was it even discussed) at the recent charette for that space?  Not saying if the administration's proposal is good or bad (although I think it has merit - it even has kiddie water squirters), but if it came out of an "open process."

from what I've seen, yes....the design folks from HDR were involved in the JaxPride charrette that Ocklawaha and I attended....and they took the ideas from that session back to the office....and some of them showed up in the sketches from the press conference a few weeks ago.

[Charles Hunter]

Cool.  That is encouraging.  Hoping the Friendship Park process will be open, and the Administration will listen to other ideas.

[thelakelander]

I'd like to see Barton and the JEDC come up with a concept that shows both a restored fountain and the kiddie stuff located outside of the current fountain's foot print.  An open discussion would start with all options having an equal opportunity, with the final solution moving forward behind community support.  Imo, there's no need to draw lines in the sand.  The site is large enough for a compromise that can make everyone happy. 

[thelakelander]

Imo, there's no need to draw lines in the sand.  The site is large enough for a compromise that can make everyone happy.

Lately, many have used Chicago's Millennium Park as a good example of public space design.  Does anyone think Chicago's waterfront park system would be better today if they constructed Millennium Park's interactive Crown Fountain over the nearby historic Buckingham Fountain instead?  In other words, don't lock yourselfs into thinking that the fountain can't be restored (replacing the pumps) and that additional water features can't added on site if the fountain remains.

Btw, is there any price tag for this project?  I remember the Mayor mentioned in his visioning press conference that the Metro Park renovations could be as much as $100 million.  To be honest, even with major investment in these spaces, they'll still be isolated pockets of greenery.  A major priority should be given to how these spaces will interact and connect with the surrounding core area.

If we had the option, it would be better to spend minimal upfront dollars on these spaces if $30-$40 million could be shifted for the implementation of a streetcar line that connects DT to Five Points, Springfield and Metropolitan Park.  You'll get more bang for your buck when the line starts to stimulate infill economic development throughout the downtown area, while serving as a direct link between all major downtown destinations.  The money made from an increase in property taxes could then be funneled over time into major public backed upgrades on these sites.

[vicupstate]

I wish instead of running his ideas by Littlepage, the administration would give this forum a chance to give its opinion of there plans.  Littlepage is certainly no more qualified than anyone on this forum to render a judgement on if this is an 'improvement' over the current park.  ANd MANY forumers do have experience in urban planning or architecture or a related field.

I guess when you buy ink by the barrel, you are considered an expert on any topic.

Although, why would ANY plans even exist, if they want public input and all options are on the table?  Shouldn't the renderings be based on what comes out of the charette?

[tufsu1]

the administration does give this forum does a chance....that's partly why Lakelander was invited to attend the press conference

[vicupstate]

the administration does give this forum does a chance....that's partly why Lakelander was invited to attend the press conference

I think there is difference between being invited to the unveiling and being included in the discussion as the plan is being formulated.  The new plan for Metro Park/ Kids Kampus is already designed and funding is being requested now.

Lots of people were invited to the press conference, it doesn't mean they had anything to do with it.

[thelakelander]

You would be surprised how many conversations and ideas that the Administration has listened to from our site over the years.

Our readership hasnt always agreed with them, (obviously) but there have been a number of policy decisions whose outcomes were changed by the Metrojacksonville readership and board.

Here are a few off the top of my head....

- Elimination of JTA's BRT plans for a Downtown busway on Adams, Bay and Forsyth Streets

- Killing the idea of building dedicated busways throughout town.  Now the plan is put buses on existing streets.  People may not consider this a big thing, but we saved taxpayers hundreds of millions and years of embarrassment on this issue.

- Being a catalyst for the Laura Street Streetscape project.  We did a presentation on this concept for Suzanne Jenkins' Downtown Action Plan Committee and with Paul Crawford (JEDC) a couple of years ago.

- I-95 Downtown Signage (most recent)

- The incorporation of the S-Line as a corridor for commuter rail (btw, its highly debatable if the commuter rail and streetcar studies would have happened without Metro Jacksonville's continued promotion of rail as a needed transit component in Jacksonville.)

- Revising the downtown parking meter ordinances.  Unfortunately, we fell short in the second half of this plan (getting Council to purchase smart meters).

[tufsu1]

the administration does give this forum does a chance....that's partly why Lakelander was invited to attend the press conference

I think there is difference between being invited to the unveiling and being included in the discussion as the plan is being formulated.  The new plan for Metro Park/ Kids Kampus is already designed and funding is being requested now.

yes...and members of this forum attended the charette and were actively involved in some of the design ideas.

[mtraininjax]

City and Fountain are a toxic mix, at best.