Author Topic: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?  (Read 4451 times)

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7215
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2019, 05:27:08 PM »
Listen to the audio segment here, it's amazing.

100ish locals giving their brief thoughts on what they'd like to see the Landing replaced with.

https://www.wokv.com/news/local/what-could-the-future-hold-for-the-jacksonville-landing-site/fqkesxT70lpGRnWX6wCsbO/

Some of these ideas are just priceless - semi-automatic gun ranges, a homeless shelter, a mega parking garage.

Many totally defy the fundamental laws of space (Amazon HQ2? a theme park larger than Universal?).

My favorite theme though is how many of these ideas for the Landing basically mirror what's already there. Restaurants. Retail. Indoor/outdoor shopping center. Which begs an obvious question.

Notice by the way how many people advocate for a park.

Lol! Yeah we got some comments on social media that I’m pretty sure are plants. I’m surprised they haven’t figured out to create a Jaxson account yet.
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?

avonjax

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2019, 08:26:32 PM »
Never forget this. 18,000,000 of taxpayers money for what? NOTHING! ZILCH! ZERO!  Believe me, no one will drive to downtown to visit another park on the river. It will need constant maintenance, be covered with the homeless and frighten the people who will be staying in the existing hotels and the new ones that are planned. I have seen a lifetime of Jacksonville stupidity. This goes on the list. I don't mind the 18 million but I do mind the state of disaster this will end up being. The "tear it down and they will build" fantasy of the so-called leaders in Jacksonville has NEVER produced anything worthwhile. Just look a few blocks east and across the river and what do you see? YEARS of empty riverfront. And you will see years of empty parking lot where the Annex building once stood. Stop kidding yourselves this is Jax. It's obvious I'm disgusted.

bl8jaxnative

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #32 on: March 10, 2019, 02:38:04 PM »


My favorite theme though is how many of these ideas for the Landing basically mirror what's already there.

Huh?  I didn't notice anyone calling to replace the landing with something that's 85% vacant.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29112
    • Modern Cities
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #33 on: March 10, 2019, 04:17:42 PM »
No one has said they wan't a vacant or mismanaged property.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Florida Power And Light

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #34 on: March 11, 2019, 10:53:15 PM »
At this point,having resided in Jacksonville since the early 80's,currently just three miles from Downtown,I realize it's not a matter of my tax payments,but rather,more a matter of why I would even want to be anywhere near here at this point,the endless Downtown Loop,among other Loop. After all,so many moving to "Jacksonville" in fact land in adjacent counties. I left Clay to move to Duval,something about "Downtown" inclines now to shift far away.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29112
    • Modern Cities
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #35 on: March 14, 2019, 10:10:05 PM »
Another tenant and downtown business has been kicked out in the name of progress:

Quote
Almost seven months after an Aug. 26 mass shooting at Chicago Pizza at The Jacksonville Landing, the restaurant and bar are done.

Co-owner Taya Comastro said Landing management told them they had to vacate the riverfront site by Thursday, according to Times-Union news partner First Coast News.

It comes less than a month after Sleiman Enterprises, which owns the Landing, agreed with city officials to terminate its lease on the property and demolish the structure. That left the future of many of the remaining tenants at the facility up in the air.

Quote
Chicago Pizza owners had wondered as late as March 3 what their future would be, posting on their Facebook page that they did not know how long they had at that site. They said they would have celebrated its 10th anniversary during the weekend of the Nov. 2 Florida-Georgia college football game.

Comastro said they were asked to pay a fee or leave, and they chose the latter since they didn’t know how much longer the Landing will stay open.

Full article: https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20190314/chicago-pizza-shut-for-good-at-jacksonville-landing

"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

marcuscnelson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
  • Generation Z - Totally Screwed
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #36 on: March 14, 2019, 10:15:09 PM »
Now just you wait sir, I'm totally sure that the empty lot will call forward waves of developers to magically turn the Landing into the most bestest thing!

sandyshoes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #37 on: March 15, 2019, 03:49:20 PM »
Begging your pardon, but I'm about to comment after only briefly perusing this thread...has The Landing been deemed structurally unsound?  Is it necessary to tear it completely down?  With some modification, it could make a hell of another performing arts venue, and add to the number of events currently being scheduled at the same time as the Symphony Hall and the T-U Center.  (I know, the parking issue rears its ugly head yet again...just trying to think of other possibilities).  Thanks for your kind indulgence.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29112
    • Modern Cities
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #38 on: March 15, 2019, 04:08:15 PM »
No, the Landing has not been deemed structurally unsound. It's just as solid as anything else in the city. Those in charge or advising the mayors office have a tendency to believe that redevelopment and highest and best use generally calls for demolition first. It's an old school, Robert Moses type of style of thinking from the 1950s, 60s and 70s.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

bl8jaxnative

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #39 on: March 16, 2019, 10:55:38 AM »

There are several reason for removing The Landing:

a) It's a sprawling 1980s suburban shopping mall occupying prime space in the CBD
b) The Landing blocks the heart of the CBD from connecting with the river, a key factor in vibrant downtown across the country.
c) A property half it's size in the same location should be generating 10 times the revenue for the city.
c) The architecture does not fit it's surroundings.
d) There's nothing meaningfully significant about it.
e) New construction allows for a wide variety of options and is incredibly more efficient.

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7215
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #40 on: March 16, 2019, 12:27:08 PM »

There are several reason for removing The Landing:

a) It's a sprawling 1980s suburban shopping mall occupying prime space in the CBD
b) The Landing blocks the heart of the CBD from connecting with the river, a key factor in vibrant downtown across the country.
c) A property half it's size in the same location should be generating 10 times the revenue for the city.
c) The architecture does not fit it's surroundings.
d) There's nothing meaningfully significant about it.
e) New construction allows for a wide variety of options and is incredibly more efficient.

“Prime space” for a big passive lot? Because that’s the city’s big plan for it.
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?

marcuscnelson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
  • Generation Z - Totally Screwed
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #41 on: March 16, 2019, 02:58:25 PM »

There are several reason for removing The Landing:

a) It's a sprawling 1980s suburban shopping mall occupying prime space in the CBD
b) The Landing blocks the heart of the CBD from connecting with the river, a key factor in vibrant downtown across the country.
c) A property half it's size in the same location should be generating 10 times the revenue for the city.
c) The architecture does not fit it's surroundings.
d) There's nothing meaningfully significant about it.
e) New construction allows for a wide variety of options and is incredibly more efficient.

a) I'll point you to Tacachale's response for that.
b) So we have to tear down the entire thing when a riverfront plaza, such as the one already in existence at the landing, could do the same job? A patch of grass next to water by itself doesn't do anything for a vibrant downtown.
c) You have no proof of this.
c) It's called being distinct and not having everything look the same. A vibrant downtown tends to have distinction.
d) There's nothing meaningfully significant about anything. A new building by itself won't solve that problem.
e) First, you're wrong. New construction is more expensive and not really any more efficient than renovating the existing structure. Second, why does the existing structure need to be demolished before even planning a replacement? I could say demolishing your house allows for a wide variety of options and is incredibly more efficient. Should I bring the wrecking ball around tomorrow before I've even had ideas on what to put there?

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29112
    • Modern Cities
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #42 on: March 16, 2019, 03:01:13 PM »
These are all pretty bad reasons for using public money to demolish with no vetted plan for the future.


There are several reason for removing The Landing:

a) It's a sprawling 1980s suburban shopping mall occupying prime space in the CBD

Local folklore. At 1.4 million square feet and spanning a distance from the river to State Street (if overlayed over DT), Regency Square Mall is a sprawling suburban shopping mall occupying prime space. The Landing is roughly 125,000 square feet (The Dillards at SJTC is bigger) and is an example of a urban retail structure. Actually, all of the Rouse festival marketplaces are examples of retail projects designed for urban districts. Now you may not like the way it looks, but that's not reason enough to spend millions razing.

Quote
b) The Landing blocks the heart of the CBD from connecting with the river, a key factor in vibrant downtown across the country.

False. Several streets in downtown connect you to the riverfront. The Landing does as well. I just walked through it from Laura the other day. Now, if someone simply wants to be able to see the river from Hemming Park, that's another story. Overall, it's a poor reason to raze an entire structure though, since opening up a view corridor can be easily done without taking out 125,000 square feet of useable space.

Quote
c) A property half it's size in the same location should be generating 10 times the revenue for the city.

Poor management by the property owner (this includes COJ who owns the grounds surrounding the buildings) is not a reason to demolish. It's simply a reason to get better management in position.

Quote
c) The architecture does not fit it's surroundings.

Bad reason. Love or hate of architecture is subjective to personal opinion. And what type of architecture fits the surroundings? JEA's block wall of a substation a block or two away? The tilt wall parking garage across the street?

Quote
d) There's nothing meaningfully significant about it.

Not true. From a national perspective, James Rouse and what the festival marketplace concept meant in the 1980s, is more important that anything Henry J. Klutho did locally. Even locally, you'll struggle to find one person who hasn't lived in the city for a few years that's not familiar with it, taking family members or friends to it, taken or met a date there, been arrested there, etc. Quite frankly, it's a locally iconic landmark in a city that has very few places that has catered to a diverse range of cultures, social classes, racial groups, etc. Let it stand 50 years and for sure, it's a historic site every sense of the meaning.

Quote
e) New construction allows for a wide variety of options and is incredibly more efficient.

False. This totally depends on what you're trying to do with the site. It can be more efficient to reuse certain elements for some uses and it can be more efficient to demo and start over for others.

« Last Edit: March 16, 2019, 03:02:50 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

sandyshoes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #43 on: March 17, 2019, 06:57:48 PM »
My lofty imagination is running away and picturing The Landing as our own "Metropolitan Opera House"...how amazing would it be to have another world-class concert/performance hall with a stunning courtyard on the river, to enjoy a glass of beverage during intermission.  All The Met has is a big fountain. WE have the river!  The Landing is already horseshoe-shaped;  just fill in the center with acoustics, etc., [someone with an architectural degree take over, please].  Yes, yes, parking.  I hear you.  I don't want to stop dreaming of possibilities.

jaxlongtimer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
Re: Landing To Be Razed, Are Taxpayers Screwed?
« Reply #44 on: March 17, 2019, 09:27:04 PM »
Got to hand it to New York City... There seems to be no limits to the imaginative ideas for keeping the city vibrant and exciting.  Imagine something like this, the just opened 150 foot tall "Vessel," a new tourist attraction creating unparalleled views of their waterfront, on the site of the Landing.  As a footnote, this development is connected to the equally imaginative and invigorating Highline:





I will start a separate thread on this but it is part of the just opened $25 billion Hudson Yards Project in West Manhattan, the largest private real estate development in US history:

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/inside-edition/new-york039s-039vessel039-is-giving-tourists-a-new-view-of-the-city/1853786313

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vessel-maze-vertical-structure-opens-nyc-s-hudson-yards-n983866

About the creator and the design as art:


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/thomas-heatherwick-vessel-hudson-yards/
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 09:48:34 PM by jaxlongtimer »