Author Topic: Convention Center Wars  (Read 9068 times)

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #75 on: August 17, 2018, 09:34:27 AM »
Pretty unfortunate. We're lighting millions on fire to de-densify. How anyone believes this type of strategy leads to pedestrian scale vibrancy is beyond my understanding. I know there's a segment of the population that believes these buildings are ugly and should go. However, from a ROI perspective, I wonder why we never attempted to RFP before deciding to demo. It's little things like that that make many question if we really have a coordinated plan to achieve a long term goal or is every little project being planned and funded in total isolation.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

downtownbrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #76 on: August 17, 2018, 10:14:09 AM »
Not true. What's in the Landing is a food court. Food courts and food halls are two completely different things. The driving principles behind the modern food hall are authenticity, quality and celebration of food culture. These principles tend to be the complete opposite of the traditional American food court, which focus on fast-food mantras of familiarity, predictability and mass production. The most successful food halls also tend to contain interactive layouts by hosting live entertainment and social events, which allows consumers to experience the space in a variety of ways. Many food halls actually have sit-down restaurant's and bars in them as well.


Thank God.  That outdoor seating will be brutal on that side of the river, but I's sure they'll figure that out.

KenFSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3467
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #77 on: August 17, 2018, 10:57:19 AM »
^And if we do demo, it should at least be an improvement on what's already there.

Rimrock's plan for the old courthouse site creates a ton of dead space along Bay Street and hides its best feature (and the river) from downtown, but at least it's adding bodies and restaurants downtown.

But there's no universe where a parking lot and a sad limited-service hotel is a suitable replacement for the Annex property:



I know we've got a fetish for RFPing large swaths of riverfront property as a package, but perhaps one way to encourage denser, more compact use would be to RFP the two properties separately, rather than jointly.

It might cost a little more, but there's no reason that Rimrock couldn't fit everything proposed in that two-block plan onto the old Courthouse site.

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #78 on: August 17, 2018, 11:56:13 AM »
^And if we do demo, it should at least be an improvement on what's already there.

Rimrock's plan for the old courthouse site creates a ton of dead space along Bay Street and hides its best feature (and the river) from downtown, but at least it's adding bodies and restaurants downtown.

But there's no universe where a parking lot and a sad limited-service hotel is a suitable replacement for the Annex property:



I know we've got a fetish for RFPing large swaths of riverfront property as a package, but perhaps one way to encourage denser, more compact use would be to RFP the two properties separately, rather than jointly.

It might cost a little more, but there's no reason that Rimrock couldn't fit everything proposed in that two-block plan onto the old Courthouse site.

Amen to that.  Small is beautiful.  I wish we could divvy up spaces along the riverfront into mini-blocks with narrow streets with mostly clustered 2 and 3 story mixed use structures, creating a waterfront village feel with max pedestrian scale and tenor

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #79 on: August 17, 2018, 12:18:24 PM »
I agree with carving up properties into smaller RFPs. It increases density, the playing field, and encourages more diversity in development participation. With this plan, I'm still not understanding the need to close Market Street for a sprawling five-story stick built apartment complex more suitable for Gate Parkway and East Baymeadows than it is for the Northbank. Still interesting to see no one crying about view corridors. Sleiman was tar and feathered over his plan to block Hogan Street. Perhaps it is more about the man and not the project.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2018, 12:20:17 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

KenFSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3467
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #80 on: August 17, 2018, 12:25:43 PM »
I agree with carving up properties into smaller RFPs. It increases density, the playing field, and encourages more diversity in development participation.

Unless, of course, we don't want to broaden the playing field and encourage more diversity in development participation because it makes it harder to rig the outcome.

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #81 on: August 17, 2018, 12:27:28 PM »
Would Audra Wallace’s replacement be the one to influence these conceptual plans before diving into deal-making?  Small RFPs is exactly what there should be more of, especially along our immediate waterfront.  No more behemoths on the water, especially in core downtown.  If one has access to funding right now for a 3-story middle housing structure in downtown, how easy is that to get done?

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6983
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #82 on: August 17, 2018, 12:30:39 PM »
I agree with carving up properties into smaller RFPs. It increases density, the playing field, and encourages more diversity in development participation. With this plan, I'm still not understanding the need to close Market Street for a sprawling five-story stick built apartment complex more suitable for Gate Parkway and East Baymeadows than it is for the Northbank. Still interesting to see no one crying about view corridors. Sleiman was tar and feathered over his plan to block Hogan Street. Perhaps it is more about the man and not the project.

The whole plan is just a consolation prize for the site not getting to be a convention center. There's no need to close Market Street and create a super block for this boring design. With a design like this, we'd have been far better off keeping and adapting City Hall.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Bill Hoff

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #83 on: August 17, 2018, 12:44:36 PM »
Why is Jax so afraid of the cluster?

Because the right people aren't making money from it.

Khan just cares about Khan's property. Clustering be damned.

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #84 on: August 17, 2018, 01:49:49 PM »
Walking through the south street seaport today in manhattan. A version of a seaport village from landing to courthouse site would be nice.  Buildings small, clustered, cobblestone streets, no more than 4 stories tall for the most part.

howfam

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #85 on: August 18, 2018, 07:45:02 AM »
^And if we do demo, it should at least be an improvement on what's already there.

Rimrock's plan for the old courthouse site creates a ton of dead space along Bay Street and hides its best feature (and the river) from downtown, but at least it's adding bodies and restaurants downtown.

But there's no universe where a parking lot and a sad limited-service hotel is a suitable replacement for the Annex property:



I know we've got a fetish for RFPing large swaths of riverfront property as a package, but perhaps one way to encourage denser, more compact use would be to RFP the two properties separately, rather than jointly.

It might cost a little more, but there's no reason that Rimrock couldn't fit everything proposed in that two-block plan onto the old Courthouse site.

Amen to that.  Small is beautiful.  I wish we could divvy up spaces along the riverfront into mini-blocks with narrow streets with mostly clustered 2 and 3 story mixed use structures, creating a waterfront village feel with max pedestrian scale and tenor



No!!! None of that Jax Beach mess in our downtown with 3 story structures on the waterfront. This is an urban setting and high rise buildings are appropriate, even on the river. Stop trying to downsize this city by denying the opportunity for high-rise construction like any big city should have. NO MORE STICK-FRAME BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN!!!!!

marcuscnelson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #86 on: August 18, 2018, 10:09:45 AM »
^^^

Small can be beautiful, but we don't need a "waterfront village" in what's supposed to be an urban center. Downtown Jacksonville should look like a city, not a village.

It's totally possible to have pedestrian scale on the ground floor of an urban building, other cities do it all the time. You don't need to limit the size of buildings in order to do that. Manhattan can get away with something like South Street Seaport because it's Manhattan and we aren't. There's plenty of room for villages in other areas, but it shouldn't be on the riverfront we're trying to activate.

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #87 on: August 18, 2018, 11:40:18 AM »
This fetish for monstrous buildings right on the riverfront is ill-advised and insane, haha.  Jax is NOT Manhattan, nor should it be.  Plenty of major, international cities, protect their immediate waterfronts from too much verticality by keeping structures low-rise and a "breathable" feel where there's riverfront access.  You can have as many massive buildings as you want just a block or two off the river, although Jax really has no need for soaring skyscrapers at this point because there's just not that much demand for space and it's really not space-constrained.  But that's no reason to stop development and to fill in the city with density and clustered growth.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28220
    • Modern Cities
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #88 on: August 18, 2018, 01:43:50 PM »
Jax is no Manhattan or even Miami but in this particular location (which is a mega block from the river channel) there's no need to de-densify the little density we do have.
"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: 489
Re: Convention Center Wars
« Reply #89 on: August 18, 2018, 02:10:32 PM »
Jax is no Manhattan or even Miami but in this particular location (which is a mega block from the river channel) there's no need to de-densify the little density we do have.

In my view, the imperative isn't so much density with verticality, but a clustering and diversity of buildings with a range of uses all of which directly open up to the sidewalk to maximize pedestrian access and pedestrian engagement at as many points as possible.  Out of curiosity, who on this thread currently lives in core Downtown Jax, or in a Downtown period?
« Last Edit: August 18, 2018, 02:24:28 PM by jaxnyc79 »