Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson
does the top image of the old naval redevelopment seem to be "mirror imaged" to anyone else? the geography seems all backwards.
i was hoping any new proposals would include removal of the 3 distasteful parking/sotrage structures. that area would provide a great view with a residential development to the same height of the existing towers.
also, nobody seems to be discussing the transportation corridor that would be needed from the cruise terminals to downtown lodging and entertainment. i am assuming st claude will be the main way in and out, but that area isn't exactly the city's best foot forward in terms of first and last impressions for tourists potentially coming on and off the boats there and travelling downtown. maybe some aesthetic improvements and street improvements should be considered to spruce the area up a bit.
|
Yes, the top image must be mirrored. I also agree that transportation to the FQ/CBD must be part of any cruiseship development - whether that be down St. Claude, or just a continuation of the Riverfront Line (personally, I'd like both).
I also think that site could be something big and self-contained, like a resort space. It's somewhat isolated, and surrounded on 2 sides by water. It can still include apartments and a film school, but I think it should be a destination unto itself, especially if cruise ships will be docking nearby.
Another thing I don't understand is why the port insists on using this site as another cruise dock. It's just a bit too far from where people want to go. This is why 6-flags never worked. Also, I never see the dockspace along the Riverwalk/Convention Center completely full. With the new Riverwalk Outlet concept, I'd try to cram more ships there than in a single-family residential neighborhood. I think it'd even be cool if cruiseships parked along diagonal docks on the river to get more ships into the same amount of space (this is how riverboats used to park in the river a hundred years ago).