Author Topic: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed  (Read 14711 times)

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #90 on: June 17, 2018, 02:38:06 PM »
Also, good "showcase parks" aren't cheap. For comparisons sake, Curtis Hixon Park in Tampa cost around $26 million back in 2010. Washington Park in Cincinnati was renovated in 2012 for $48 million.

Doesn’t Curtis Hixon host events, perhaps generates some revenue? 

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #91 on: June 17, 2018, 02:52:03 PM »
Fix the parks we have first. Hemming, Confederate, Friendship, we dont need another albatross of a park, especially not downtown.

Take these "city leaders" on a field trip and show them the current parks and the needs of them before committing gross negligence on display for the tourists to see.

Buy out Sleiman, raze the structures, do as they did with the Roosevelt Belk, turn it into green space, while you get proposals for redevelopment and turn the site into a positive taxable revenue stream. Win-Win-Win.

Read Ennis' great article about Confederate Park.... http://www.jacksonville.com/jmagazine/20180617/downtown-column-jacksonvilles-original-central-park-deserves-revival

I can get behind this

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #92 on: June 17, 2018, 03:51:45 PM »
Also, good "showcase parks" aren't cheap. For comparisons sake, Curtis Hixon Park in Tampa cost around $26 million back in 2010. Washington Park in Cincinnati was renovated in 2012 for $48 million.

The new Scissortail Park in downtown OKC is just over $100 million - but significantly larger than this proposal.
Sounds about right. Bonnet Springs Park in DT Lakeland is expected to cost as much as $100 million.
http://www.theledger.com/news/20180220/officials-unveil-detailed-plans-for-bonnet-springs-park-in-lakeland
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 03:53:34 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #93 on: June 17, 2018, 03:58:37 PM »
Also, good "showcase parks" aren't cheap. For comparisons sake, Curtis Hixon Park in Tampa cost around $26 million back in 2010. Washington Park in Cincinnati was renovated in 2012 for $48 million.

Doesn’t Curtis Hixon host events, perhaps generates some revenue? 
Not $26 million worth of revenue. Parks are a quality of life investment. You sell the land and put it on the tax rolls if revenue is desired.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

jcjohnpaint

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1274
  • Jason John- www.jasonjohnart.com
    • Jason John Website
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #94 on: June 17, 2018, 04:34:36 PM »
North Boone Park still has lots of damage existing from the last hurricane.  Check out the crowd control fence replacing the damaged fence off of Park St. Really classy.  There are  still downed lights, fences, and a huge hole in the ground next to the playground. 

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #95 on: June 17, 2018, 06:30:37 PM »
Also, good "showcase parks" aren't cheap. For comparisons sake, Curtis Hixon Park in Tampa cost around $26 million back in 2010. Washington Park in Cincinnati was renovated in 2012 for $48 million.

Doesn’t Curtis Hixon host events, perhaps generates some revenue? 
Not $26 million worth of revenue. Parks are a quality of life investment. You sell the land and put it on the tax rolls if revenue is desired.

Parks, public spaces, or publicly-financed recreation can do both. 

We will see what Curry’s team proposes in terms of costs. 

Btw, Anyone on Sleiman’s payroll, please disclose on this message board:)

City owns a Northbank riverfront parcel in the heart of the CBD, create additional river access and recreation, not just for residents broadly, but this time for the largest cluster of daytime downtown denizens, the CBD office workers.

It's a nice feature of working in an office adjacent to Bryant Park.  We Midtowners often meet up with colleagues and cohorts at the first sign of spring for lunch or for happy hour at “southwest porch” or “Bryant park grill’s” rooftop overlooking the park (yes, you can have commercial interests "in" the park, but the overarching character---the anchor feature---is that it's a park).    In winter, there's the Winter Village and ice-skating.  Hell, LA has outdoor ice skating, don't see why Jax can't have the same thing at this location.  There's movies in the park on summer nights, dancing in the park...I've even attended a 1000+ person pillow fight in Washington Square Park. 

Yes, other Jax parks have needs, but Northbank riverfront green space amidst the largest population cluster in downtown Jax is just plain different and deserves a tad more than the cynicism of this thread.  Sleiman wont do anything with the Landing until he gets his government handout, so I say send him on his way and create a significant, green, active, and waterfront gathering spot for an emerging Downtown community.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:24:12 PM by jaxnyc79 »

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #96 on: June 17, 2018, 07:07:40 PM »
Is this about beating Sleiman or doing something DT actually needs? Have you ever worked in DT Jax? Residents and workers aren't begging for another grass lawn in DT. There's plenty of parks in DT now that could do everything you describe and more...if the city gave a damn to put money into them and maintain them. Any proposal Curry's team in terms of costs should first include a line item to upgrade and maintain the many underutilized spaces we already have and visit. Btw, Hemming is more central.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:10:48 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #97 on: June 17, 2018, 07:15:43 PM »
Why, yes I have!  I started my career in downtown Jax.  Just after graduation from UF, i worked for one of the Big 4 Accounting Firms.  Thanks for asking - I guess you'll have to find some other way to shut me up for lack of credibility and complete irrelevance to the topic:)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:18:16 PM by jaxnyc79 »

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #98 on: June 17, 2018, 07:23:17 PM »
I wasn't begging for a lawn when I worked downtown - I really didn't know what to want in downtown Jax, I was just out of school and working hard to impress my bosses at the time.  Now that I've gotten the chance to live in a few places and engage in business travel to a ton more places (including internationally), tons more possibilities for an urban work setting are on my radar than when my world was just downtown Jax.  Central Business District parks, well-designed and maintained, can be inspiring and captivating, offer balance and enrichment to the professional's workday, and can be a key differentiator from office park competition in the 'burbs.  I'm not saying a riverfront green space at the current site of the Landing will address all of Downtown's ills or the lack of priority or strategy at City Hall, but it is not wholly without merit. 
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:25:02 PM by jaxnyc79 »

jaxlongtimer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #99 on: June 17, 2018, 07:34:07 PM »
Lawsuit costs, buying out business leases, paying Sleiman to leave, razing a +125,000SF of buildings, razing a bridge ramp, etc. a few costs to consider that have nothing to do with the costs associated with the design and construction of the space itself. In addition, if the park is going to be worth going to, it could cost tens of millions itself. Just look at Friendship Fountain. We're talking about spending $3 million to fix the fountain less than a decade after it was literally rebuilt.

Let's analyze this.  The costs of  the lawsuit appear to apply regardless of the plans for this property if the City is determined to gain control before its future is determined.  Buying out the leases may also be the same, as well, if the property needs to be emptied for any future changes.  Even a renovation and redeployment of the current structure would likely require removal of all tenants to facilitate any construction.  If things are as bad as people say, the tenants may welcome a release from their leases :).  Razing the ramp, also suggested regardless of the future options, is, per the T-U article, only about $580K, not a major amount in the big scheme of things here.  Razing the building is also pocket change compared to other redevelopment costs.  Based on many plans proposed so far, it looks like some or all of the building gets razed anyway.

So, the only real incremental costs to compare appear to be the costs of renovating the current structure, replacing the current structure with new structures, or replacing the current structure with green space.

Let's say it costs $200 a square foot (possibly a low number given delinquent upkeep and higher finishing standards) to overhaul the 31 year old structure consisting of 126,000 sf (per Wikipedia).  That's a minimum of $25 million.  It doesn't count curing the parking problem, other infrastructure improvements, City incentives that may be demanded by an operator, and a demand for an extended bargain "lease" on the property or a bargain purchase.

Replacing the current structure with new structures will clearly costs over $100 million.  Based on the District, I would guess a developer would ask for at least $25 million in incentives from the City (maybe far more), infrastructure improvements, a parking structure, and again, an extended bargain  "lease" or bargain purchase of the property.

Per Google Maps, the Landing property appears to be no more than about 6.5 acres.  At $25 million, one way or the other, I would think the City could build a hell of a nice green space.  If not, I will take on the contract and deliver for them same.

Some posts appear to continue to overlook the green space option based on current and past City failures to properly vision and manage green spaces.  Based on this approach, we also should kill the Landing rather than keep it going as the City has proven it can't manage that either.  Again, the answer to all of DT's issues is to replace incompetent leadership, not walk away from what may be a great solution.

I also go back to the "chicken and egg" issue.  Demand for green space feeds off surrounding development but surrounding development that feeds off of green space isn't going to happen unless there is such green space.  In such cases, it is for the City to make the first move, especially given the lack of trust in the City and it's track record of failing to deliver on such promises.

I continue to agree that all green spaces should be properly managed and enhanced as Lake advocates but I don't accept that as a reason to overlook this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something that will be a legacy for decades to come.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 08:21:24 PM by jaxlongtimer »

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #100 on: June 17, 2018, 07:41:02 PM »
Is this about beating Sleiman or doing something DT actually needs? Have you ever worked in DT Jax? Residents and workers aren't begging for another grass lawn in DT. There's plenty of parks in DT now that could do everything you describe and more...if the city gave a damn to put money into them and maintain them. Any proposal Curry's team in terms of costs should first include a line item to upgrade and maintain the many underutilized spaces we already have and visit. Btw, Hemming is more central.

Hemming isn’t waterfront, and maybe it’s changed, but it wasn’t much of a green space when I worked downtown.  It felt like a shaded plaza with planters.  It’s a nice feature downtown, but given its location at the front door to City Hall, I’ve always considered it the public space for Jacksonville’s Civic District and not so much for the city’s CBD.  Ultimately, they represent very different vibes in an urban context.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:42:56 PM by jaxnyc79 »

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #101 on: June 17, 2018, 07:58:54 PM »
Lawsuit costs, buying out business leases, paying Sleiman to leave, razing a +125,000SF of buildings, razing a bridge ramp, etc. a few costs to consider that have nothing to do with the costs associated with the design and construction of the space itself. In addition, if the park is going to be worth going to, it could cost tens of millions itself. Just look at Friendship Fountain. We're talking about spending $3 million to fix the fountain less than a decade after it was literally rebuilt.

Let's analyze this.  The costs of  the lawsuit appear to apply regardless of the plans for this property if the City is determined to gain control before its future is determined.  Buying out the leases may also be the same, as well, if the property needs to be emptied for any future changes.  Even a renovation and redeployment of the current structure would likely require removal of all tenants to facilitate any construction.  If things are as bad as people say, the tenants may welcome a release from their leases :).  Razing the ramp, also suggested regardless of the future options, is, per the T-U article, only about $580K, not a major amount in the big scheme of things here.  Razing the building is also pocket change compared to other redevelopment costs.  Based on many plans proposed so far, it looks like some or all of the building gets razed anyway.

So, the only real incremental costs to compare appear to be the costs of renovating the current structure, replacing the current structure with new structures, or replacing the current structure with green space.

Let's say it costs $200 a square foot (possibly a low number given delinquent upkeep and higher finishing standards) to overhaul the 31 year old structure consisting of 126,000 sf (per Wikipedia).  That's a minimum of $25 million.  It doesn't count curing the parking problem, other infrastructure improvements, City incentives that may be demanded by an operator, and a demand for an extended bargain "lease" on the property or a bargain purchase.

Replacing the current structure with new structures will clearly costs over $100 million.  Based on the District, I would guess a developer would ask for at least $25 million in incentives from the City (maybe far more), infrastructure improvements, a parking structure, and again, an extended bargain  "lease" or bargain purchase of the property.

Per Google Maps, the Landing property appears to be no more than about 6.5 acres.  At $25 million, one way or the other, I would think the City could build a hell of a nice green space.  If not, I will take on the contract and deliver for them same.

Some posts appear to continue to overlook the green space option based on current and past City failures to properly vision and manage green spaces.  Based on this approach, we also should kill the Landing rather than keep it going as the City has proven it can't manage that either.  Again, the answer to all of DT's issues is to replace incompetent leadership, not walk away from what may be a great solution.

I also go back to the "chicken and egg" issue.  Demand for green space feeds off surrounding development but surrounding development that feeds off of green space isn't going to happen unless their is such green space.  In such cases, it is for the City to make the first move, especially given the lack of trust in the City and it's track record of failing to deliver on such promises.

I continue to agree that all green spaces should be properly managed and enhanced as Lake advocates but I don't accept that as a reason to overlook this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something that will be a legacy for decades to come.

I can get behind this.  Yes, I agree that curry’s proposal for the Landing site deserves consideration and has some merit.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #102 on: June 17, 2018, 09:03:21 PM »
Why, yes I have!  I started my career in downtown Jax.  Just after graduation from UF, i worked for one of the Big 4 Accounting Firms.  Thanks for asking - I guess you'll have to find some other way to shut me up for lack of credibility and complete irrelevance to the topic:)
I'm not trying to shut you up. I'm offering a counter to your opinion that we need this site to be a park and nothing else. In reality, we don't and the majority aren't asking for it.....especially if it takes up needed financial resources that can be applied to areas of greater need.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #103 on: June 17, 2018, 09:07:18 PM »
Is this about beating Sleiman or doing something DT actually needs? Have you ever worked in DT Jax? Residents and workers aren't begging for another grass lawn in DT. There's plenty of parks in DT now that could do everything you describe and more...if the city gave a damn to put money into them and maintain them. Any proposal Curry's team in terms of costs should first include a line item to upgrade and maintain the many underutilized spaces we already have and visit. Btw, Hemming is more central.

Hemming isn’t waterfront, and maybe it’s changed, but it wasn’t much of a green space when I worked downtown.  It felt like a shaded plaza with planters.  It’s a nice feature downtown, but given its location at the front door to City Hall, I’ve always considered it the public space for Jacksonville’s Civic District and not so much for the city’s CBD.  Ultimately, they represent very different vibes in an urban context.

You're kind of making my point. Hemming, the Main Street Pocket Park, the County Courthouse lawn, the Northbank Riverwalk (on the river), the East Lot (on the river), Friendship Fountain (on the river) can all be a lot of things they aren't, if properly invested, maintained and coordinated with the outer square that surrounds them.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Non-RedNeck Westsider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4507
  • Politically Agnostic
Re: Curry's Plan for the Landing Revealed
« Reply #104 on: June 17, 2018, 09:12:21 PM »
Any proposal Curry's team in terms of costs should first include a line item to upgrade and maintain the many underutilized spaces we already have and visit. Btw, Hemming is more central.

I've been beating that drum on the other threads regarding existing parks and public funding. 

Plenty of money for new;  Zero money for maintenance.
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams