Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bobliocatt

Parking

22 posts in this topic

by Bradley Parsons

Staff Writer

In the ongoing deliberations between the City Council and the potential savior of the Shipyards development, parking has emerged as an early sticking point.

Council member Lad Daniels took issue with a requirement for the City to provide parking for the development

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


oh my god ... i completely agree with Lad Daniels 100% (never expect to hear me say that ever again.) while i fervently wish that city council would just get moving and approve Landmar's deal, they are absolutely right that the city shouldn't be expected to guarantee or finance parking.

between this and the article where Shad, Brown, and Jenkins want to cancel some of the BJP overpasses ... it's like a "bizzaro-day" for Jacksonville government, where they actually take pro-urban stances on issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shipyards accord reins public events

Draft agreement also requires city to regulate public speech, assembly.

By GREGORY RICHARDS, The Times-Union

The 7.6 acres of proposed public space at the Shipyards may not be so public after all.

A draft operation and maintenance agreement between Jacksonville and developer LandMar Group says "entertainment or other 'special' public events" will be banned from public areas of the planned downtown residential and office development. Those areas are mainly a riverwalk and a pier jutting 680 feet into the St. Johns River.

At the same time, the agreement gives LandMar the right to reserve those public areas up to 12 times a year for up to three days at a time for "private festival, concession and entertainment events."

"It ain't going to be approved the way it is," City Councilwoman Suzanne Jenkins said of those terms.

Click for entire article:

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._18525381.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^That sounds so stingy of them. I'd like to see the public space have a public use!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Developers have to make money or they will not build. It is as simple as that. They are not charities and will just walk away if naive do-gooders like Jenkins get in the way. I dont personally know why we need more "park space" there when there are acres of underutilized park space downtown as it is. What the city should do is let LandMar build as many residences as they can and fix the existing parks downtown so the new residences will be able to enjoy them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Developers have to make money or they will not build.  It is as simple as that.  They are not charities and will just walk away if naive do-gooders like Jenkins get in the way.  I dont personally know why we need more "park space" there when there are acres of underutilized park space downtown as it is.  What the city should do is let LandMar build as many residences as they can and fix the existing parks downtown so the new residences will be able to enjoy them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The residents of Jax have a hell of a lot of money in this site, and they deserve something for it. San Antonio is known world-wide for it's Riverwalk. Jax can be too.

I don't expect Land Mar to be a philantrophy, but I don't expect them to be greedy either. A well-planned public space will ENHANCE the value of the Shipyards, not detract from it.

It seems like every other day, there is more negative things coming out of this proposed deal. The city should proceed cautiously.

I get the impression that Land Mar is looking to build a gated subdivision only, I can't support that.

At this point, the city has invested millions in this site, Land MAr has invested compartively little. The city should DEMAND it's public space. The JEA site is getting lots of attention, there no reason to think that Land Mar is the only option. Work out a deal that is REASONABLE to both parties. The minute that Jax acts that Land Mar is the only option, the city has compromised it's position.

Greetings from CT, BTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The residents of Jax have a hell of a lot of money in this site, and they deserve something for it.  San Antonio is known world-wide for it's Riverwalk.  Jax can be too. 

I don't expect Land Mar to be a philantrophy, but I don't expect them to be greedy either.  A well-planned public space will ENHANCE the value of the Shipyards, not detract from it. 

It seems like every other day, there is more negative things coming out of this proposed deal.  The city should proceed cautiously. 

I get the impression that Land Mar is looking to build a gated subdivision only, I can't support that. 

At this point, the city has invested millions in this site, Land MAr has invested compartively little.  The city should DEMAND it's public space.  The JEA site is getting lots of attention, there no reason to think that Land Mar is the only option.  Work out a deal that is REASONABLE to both parties.  The minute that Jax acts that Land Mar is the only option, the city has compromised it's position.

Greetings from CT, BTW

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well LandMar does have a reputation for developing upscale gated communities. So I definately wouldn't put it past them. Hopefully, this entire thing will be announced to the public soon, so we can see what they have in store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I tend to agree vicupstate, the city has already put alot of money through subsidies and other liabilities into the shipyards project. I am not for halting development on this,however if these negative items for the city and anti-public space clauses are kept in the agreement, the city should take a deep breath and take possesion of the property themselves per the agreement with TriLegacy.

This would eliminate the ~$3 million possible Tax liability to the city and we would recoup $14 million from TriLegacy.

While this would not make the city whole, they could then put out requests for bids on development for the entire property or smaller "blocks" of it. The city would then have far more control of the public space and it's design, could require that any plan include parking (see below) to handle the development and could use the $14 million to expand the riverwalk and start the parks, even including a singular statement piece such as the waterfall on the pier Landmar is advocating. The money raised from the sale of the land could then be used/guaranteed for payoff of the bonds on the property and development/enhancement of the parks and riverwalk in the "Shipyard development zone", along with parking connections. The developers would have to use the JEA chilling system as well rather than individual chilling stacks for each building.

If Landmar then would like to compete on the merits of their plan against other developers or groups of developers they could.

For parking they could potentially include a Skyway loop connecting the Bay street line to the FCCJ campus station as described inthis thread this thread. (Residential highrise development should include on site parking as part of the structure) with limited onsite for Offices.

Everytime I am in downtown I think about the jogging paths, bike paths, marinas, etc on the Lake and Lincoln Park in Chicago that cover such a huge area, from the stadium/museum district all the way to Lincoln park. I have been amazed at how that area is always busy, with the marina, the museums, sport complex, parks... I am sure this sound familiar to all of us here.

With the water links to Springfield, Prime Osborne/ Lavilla, Riverside, San Marco, St Nicholas, Arlington, Orange Park, Ortega there are so many possibilities as the city grows to really embrace these features AND provide much needed park enhancement and fitness areas by connecting these features through riverwalks, jogging paths, bike paths, parks, etc.

Will it be cheap? I hope not, Is it inexpensive? some of it, Is it feasible? with vision, Will it cost the city a fortune, not directly I don't think so.

Imagine living in a highrise that overlooks the stadium, the river, and metro park. Taking the skyway to work at Fidelity, Bluecross, BOA, etc. Have a Dr appointment, go to Baptist or possible St Vincents. Want Dinner just pick a place anywhere, north or southbank. Need groceries, try the store that will (one day hopefully) replace the downtown Winn Dixie, the Riverside Publix, The "Whole Food Market" (wishful thinking) at the Radison site, The Kings Ave Publix, etc. Going to a movie in San Marco (at theone screen cinema that is already there, or maybe a multiplex in a tower near the Maxwell house plant). Taking a jog from home along the riverwalk, to Springfield and back to the Riverwalk, near the Prime Osborn, over to Riverside Park, to Memorial Park, back along the Riverwalk, across the Acosta, along the Southbank riverwalk up to Main st then across the river, returning back to the Shipyards, or one of many other paths that would open up with cleaning up what the city already has along with "building bridges" between those that are not already connected.

Downtown would truely be one area and residents would have many additional options that do not easily exist today because they can't get off the road.

I know I am "preaching" to the choir on this, but wanted to connect some of the dots that the city has laid out there in my mind, and some of what I think is possible over the next 10 years in this city. Plus to solicit feedback on my thoughts (which of course include and in some cases built on and many of those from other individuals on this site).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine living in a highrise that overlooks the stadium, the river, and metro park. Taking the skyway to work at Fidelity, Bluecross, BOA, etc. Have a Dr appointment, go to Baptist or possible St Vincents. Want Dinner just pick a place anywhere, north or southbank. Need groceries, try the store that will (one day hopefully) replace the downtown Winn Dixie, the Riverside Publix, The "Whole Food Market" (wishful thinking) at the Radison site, The Kings Ave Publix, etc. Going to a movie in San Marco (at theone screen cinema that is already there, or maybe a multiplex in a tower near the Maxwell house plant). Taking a jog from home along the riverwalk, to Springfield and back to the Riverwalk, near the Prime Osborn, over to Riverside Park, to Memorial Park, back along the Riverwalk, across the Acosta, along the Southbank riverwalk up to Main st then across the river, returning back to the Shipyards, or one of many other paths that would open up with cleaning up what the city already has along with "building bridges" between those that are not already connected.

^I absolutely LOVE this paragraph! Here, here! :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a true urban city. I think we can get there. How long it takes depends on spreading the vision to the general public and city officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacksonville should think bigger on LandMar deal

By RON LITTLEPAGE

Here's an interesting quote from Ron Littlepage's editorial concerning the potential Shipyards deal.

Actually, the answer to that may be hidden in plain sight.

Metropolitan Park contains 23 acres and the adjacent Kids Kampus contains 10 acres. To put it bluntly, neither is designed well.

Kids Kampus is nice, but it's not exactly located in a hot spot for kids. Why not move it to a redeveloped park around Friendship Fountain on the Southbank so it would be near the kid-magnet Museum of Science and History.

Then redesign both it and Metropolitan Park to turn them into a showcase, people-friendly park.

That's 33 acres of potential that could anchor an extraordinary downtown park system that begins there and extends all the way to the Fuller Warren Bridge with other destination points along the way.

For example, turn the riverfront parking lot at the county courthouse into a public park and fulfill the promise of creating an artists area and market under the Fuller Warren.

In negotiating the LandMar proposal and other downtown projects, such as the new courthouse, the City Council and the Mayor's Office should keep their eyes on the bigger prize because Jacksonville indeed needs, deserves and should have an outstanding downtown park.

And it's achievable with bold thinking.

Entire Article

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._18532364.shtml

I understand the need and desire for more city parks, but I think the city should focus on fixing up the Hogans Creek park areas from 8th Street to the Shipyards, before investing millions in new park space.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the Shipyard's pier, maybe planners should attempt to make it more of a destination, because the current plan is quite suburban oriented. Good examples would be Navy Pier in Chicago or Pier 39 in San Fransico.

Navy Pier

http://www.dam.brown.edu/people/glin/Chica...s/navy-pier.jpg

Pier 39

http://arch.ced.berkeley.edu/kap/images/p392.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am realy confused here...

I understand the JEDC wants more parks downtown on the riverfront, and thats all well and good. However, and I know I am revoicing things previously said, Why in the world are we letting such a large, potentially beautiful park go to waste. I mean the sucker is huge compared to Confederate park, and any of the pocket parks they would want to develope. Sure its not the size of a Central Park, but still, it covers atleast as much area is the core downtown area. Going back to the Central park as an example.. Look at the quality and level of the developments directly beside Central Park. They are Huge, High quality, and on average, high Society type devlopements. If the JEDC realy wants the downtown area to grow. Fix that park. make IT the center peice for the JAX park systems. People like to live on the water, There are equally as many people (myself included) that would want to, if not prefere to live next to a well used, well funded, and well maintained Park. Jacksonvilles downtown area has far more to offer than jsut a river. Fix the Hogans Creek Park, Open the Adjacent property to dense residental and Comercial development, and watch people flock to it. To top it off, there is relativly easy access to i-95.

Anyway, It just frustrates and confuses me as to why such potentially valuable land both on and next to the park is left for all intesive purposes to bums. Shouldn't this be just the type of thing the JEDC would want to focus on??!

If you want to see just how large the park is, go to maps.google.com, click on "satallite" in the upper right hand corner, Search for Jacksonville fl, and zoom into downtown. There is the Hogans creek park, a noticible landmark to the north of downtown.... Anywa, Just venting...

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Josh and Lake: Y'all are right. It is silly to advocate more and more parkspace when the parks that we have are not maintained or well laid out and there arent enough residents downtown to benefit from them anyway. It is easy for a gadfly like Littlepage to say, make them include more parkspace, when he has no financial stake in the deal and no clue about making money. As to the LandMar design, I always thought it was mediocre and I dont know why they dont just stick with the original TriLegacy design, especially considering that they already have people with deposits (including Wayne Weaver) waiting for their condo building to be started. Also, they had something of a Navy Pier in their proposal as I recall. It was a vastly better and less tacky design than the LandMar crap, in my opinion. Of course, I am not sure we can expect better from someone who builds suburban gated communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RiversideGator i totally agree with you. It makes no sense to make all this additional park space just to have it become under maintenenced later on. Jacksonville parks are boring. The Landscaping is down right ugly! My Father just came home from a Biz trip in Dubai and the pictures of their park spaces are absolutely gorgeous!! Fountains, soaring palms, colorful florals, winding sidewalks, and shade coverings all compliments each other. Furthermore the parks there, just like any other urban enviroment, are lined with shops and residences. It seems like our city's idea of a park is a straight path cut through a grassy field. "Voila! a Park!" No! The powers that be need to get a grip and redevelope/design the parks that we have and make them more attractive. Hint: Fountains, flower gardens, etc. Think of how great it would be to transform hogans creek into a thriving central park lined with boutique shops, gardens, fountains, and condo residences. Also it would be nice if we could widen the creek to allow for small leisure cruises or paddle boats to tour the area, sort of like the riverwalk in San Antonio. Well its just a thought. :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Ah, if only our city had the balls do something creative with our park system. But who am i kidding! :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I agree that the downtown parks, for their prime location are kinda underwhelming. My all-time favorite park in Jax is Stinson Park. It's on San Juan, on the Ortega River, right next to the drawbridge that takes you into Ortega. It's a beautiful park, and it even has an artificial beach and a dock. I took some pics, and I'll post them....someday, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is my favorite place in the whole city!!!!!!!!! It used to be such a dump, but now it's absolutely beautiful. It's a wonderful example of what can be done to beautify our city. I love going there to walk, talk, or whatever. I'd love to see your pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see your pictures.

So would I, lol. But my family has a bad habit of taking rolls of pics and forgetting about them or never getting around to getting them developed. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that the Stinson Park renovation would have had some private backing being in an upscale residential neighborhood.

My favorite thing about that park would have to be the view of downtown from across the river. It is also a great place to watch the sun rise.

I wonder if the city could lobby some sort of financial support for the renovations of Clutho (or is it Cluthlo?) and Confederate Parks? The problem is that not to many people in Jax really give a hill of beans about the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that there are those that do really care about the parks, myself and propably every other Jax resident on this forum, but ask the average resident if they have even heard of Confederate Park and you will get a "nope". I have been a Jax resident since '98 and was aware that there were parks in that area but was unaware of the name, much less their previous grandure until a couple years ago. I would DEFINITELY love to see these parks restored and am a firm believer that their rehabilitation will do wonders for Springfield and Downtown.

My point is that if there were more support from the locals (mainly monetary support) then an extensive renovation would be much more likely. The JEDC needs to focus more on it like jjoshjl said and make these parks the centerpiece of the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.