The Jacksonville Landing's Redevelopment Plan

[Anti redneck]

We all agree the Jacksonville Landing needs to be re-done but the artist renderings are not that exciting. I did not see boat slips or a marina of any kind, its called a Landing for a reason. Also, the restaurants should be on the water, the view is what sells the Landing. I have no issue with a multi use facility such as residential. But the Landing hosts a slew of events and concerts. It needs to remain and become a vibrant part of the Downtown. They need to have reasons for people in the Westside and Orange Park to make the drive the the Landing. Why not a Jimmy Buffets Margaritaville, or Toby Keiths Bar, a Rainforest Cafe, Blue Martini, Red Robin, a Ice Bar. Things that are not here in North Florida. Jacksonville needs to become a destination. The Landing could become a huge gem for tourism. But it needs a vision. Mavericks is always packed and a nice entertainment venue and so is Fionn McCool's but they need more visual security and better lighting from the Hyatt to the Landing. People need the impression that its a safe place to go. Downtown is on the cusp of something huge in 4 years it will not be the same Downtown. I do believe the Aquarium and the USS Adams will happen as well as the redevelopment of the Shipyards property.

Well that's not going to help for a few reasons.

1) That's already the mentality of Jacksonville. Bring in lots and lots of chain restaurants and maybe we'll be closer to being a real city.
2) This is Jacksonville. They are already fighting to keep it from becoming a "destination"
3) Majority of the people here are still affected by "oh this doesn't pertain to me, so I don't care" and that's the problem with the Landing and downtown.
4) The GOB political interests. They want to screw it all up.

Hate to say it, but it's too late for Jacksonville. This "city" was subdued right when they ran off the movie industry. From there, it was just a long, but inevitable implosion of the city. Want to see Jacksonville take off? Change the mentality of this whole entire city. Otherwise, there will always be that inferiority complex.

[simms3]

There is no comparison between SF the city and Jax

Sometimes I like to make comparisons between SF in the 1970s and Jax in the 2010s... 40 years behind sounds about right 

Lol, I get your humor but comparing to when SF was still the epicenter of an entire cultural movement? 

I think Jax has comparisons to Atlanta/Charlotte/Dallas/etc moreso than it will ever have any comparisons to any of the 5 greatest cities of the US, barring any asset for asset (i.e. Landing to Ferry Building).

I think Atlanta/Miami serve as great models for general "new urbanist" development in the SE (i.e. for Jax), but the Landing has no twin in Atlanta, and the waterfront is something a city like Jax can look to a city like SF for redeveloping (definitely don't repeat what Miami did, eww).

We all agree the Jacksonville Landing needs to be re-done but the artist renderings are not that exciting. I did not see boat slips or a marina of any kind, its called a Landing for a reason. Also, the restaurants should be on the water, the view is what sells the Landing. I have no issue with a multi use facility such as residential. But the Landing hosts a slew of events and concerts. It needs to remain and become a vibrant part of the Downtown. They need to have reasons for people in the Westside and Orange Park to make the drive the the Landing. Why not a Jimmy Buffets Margaritaville, or Toby Keiths Bar, a Rainforest Cafe, Blue Martini, Red Robin, a Ice Bar. Things that are not here in North Florida. Jacksonville needs to become a destination. The Landing could become a huge gem for tourism. But it needs a vision. Mavericks is always packed and a nice entertainment venue and so is Fionn McCool's but they need more visual security and better lighting from the Hyatt to the Landing. People need the impression that its a safe place to go. Downtown is on the cusp of something huge in 4 years it will not be the same Downtown. I do believe the Aquarium and the USS Adams will happen as well as the redevelopment of the Shipyards property.

Well that's not going to help for a few reasons.

1) That's already the mentality of Jacksonville. Bring in lots and lots of chain restaurants and maybe we'll be closer to being a real city.
2) This is Jacksonville. They are already fighting to keep it from becoming a "destination"
3) Majority of the people here are still affected by "oh this doesn't pertain to me, so I don't care" and that's the problem with the Landing and downtown.
4) The GOB political interests. They want to screw it all up.

Hate to say it, but it's too late for Jacksonville. This "city" was subdued right when they ran off the movie industry. From there, it was just a long, but inevitable implosion of the city. Want to see Jacksonville take off? Change the mentality of this whole entire city. Otherwise, there will always be that inferiority complex.

People are always pretty quick to jump on my posts (actually people on MJ get pretty damn personal), but I am never that negative.  omg

[Tacachale]

^Haha, simms, we do it because you're worth getting into it with.

[Gamblor]

There is no comparison between SF the city and Jax

Sometimes I like to make comparisons between SF in the 1970s and Jax in the 2010s... 40 years behind sounds about right 

Lol, I get your humor but comparing to when SF was still the epicenter of an entire cultural movement? 

I think Jax has comparisons to Atlanta/Charlotte/Dallas/etc moreso than it will ever have any comparisons to any of the 5 greatest cities of the US, barring any asset for asset (i.e. Landing to Ferry Building).

I think Atlanta/Miami serve as great models for general "new urbanist" development in the SE (i.e. for Jax), but the Landing has no twin in Atlanta, and the waterfront is something a city like Jax can look to a city like SF for redeveloping (definitely don't repeat what Miami did, eww).

I am aware the comparisons don't always hold and I tend to make them on more defined issues than broadly. However your response is exactly what I'd hoped for. But let's be clear for any who might not be aware, the comparisons really, really fails, as SF/the Bay area in the 1970's is the epicenter of movementS... the one in the Haight while evolving was still strong, the one in the Castro is finding its legs quickly and rightly not takin' shit anymore, and the one in north beach still had some thump to it. Also across the Bay Bridge in Berkley and down the peninsula in Palo Alto the silicon movement is hatching... I'm sure there could even be a few more I could come up with if I sit and think about it... oh got one, Alice Waters opened Chez Panisse in 1970's and starts her pioneering work on California cuisine. I could go on

So maybe I should have said 1870s... but seriously all jokes aside, your points about comparison are and have been dead on. I personally think you could add Orlando as a good model too, but I could be wrong. Just every time I've been down in the last ten years or so, I get more and more impressed with what they are doing in their urban development.

[edjax]

I think a good comparison would be Louiville.  Both have consolidated governments with rivers in their downtown and are very similar in size with regard to city and metro populations.

[thelakelander]

There's no waterfront and it needs a makeover itself, but Atlanta's counterpart to the Landing is Underground Atlanta. Both were managed by Rouse during their heyday.  As for as cities that are decent comparisons to Jax....Nashville, Norfolk, Louisville, Hartford, Memphis, Grand Rapids, Rochester, Dayton, etc. are all mid-sized waterfront cities worth looking at for both good and bad examples of what to do.

[simms3]

^^^I don't personally think the Underground is a good (or bad) comp for the Landing.  Similarities are superficial.

In terms of cities with waterfronts that are good comparisons - sure we can list out every ville of similar size and look at successes and failures.  I think with our waterfront, though, we should strive to be one of the best.  I think there seems to be a lot more to learn from Baltimore (I deduce that from several MJ threads on Baltimore's waterfront), and I think there's a lot to learn from SF's.  I could honestly give two rats' asses about what Nashville or Louisville or Hartford have or have not done.  They aren't the best waterfronts - nowhere close, and the only takeaways there I see are where they've failed (so we don't repeat).  For successes, I'd rather be bolder - do what Baltimore (riverwalk/clustering, etc) or NYC (piers, etc) or Chicago (riverwalk, etc) or SF (piers, etc) have done, since they've done their waterfronts better than the rest and made full use of them.

SF has piers like Jax has, and a master-planning development policy that has worked extremely well that Jax (and all of those other cities listed) can format for their own use.  Baltimore clearly has done lots of things right.

[Anti redneck]

People are always pretty quick to jump on my posts (actually people on MJ get pretty damn personal), but I am never that negative.  omg

I wasn't trying to be negative. I was trying to be real. Think about it. People here only go from Point A to Point B, and they want nothing more. They don't want excitement. They don't want an adventure. They don't want entertainment. It's just too late for Jacksonville. Everyone is just set in their ways here. I don't see any hope with saving this town.

[mtraininjax]

Majority of the people here are still affected by "oh this doesn't pertain to me, so I don't care" and that's the problem with the Landing and downtown.

The perception in the burbs is that this is a downtown issue, to be resolved by people affected downtown. When and if it gets resolved, and its something my neighbor tells me about as being cool, I might visit it sometime in the future, but for now, you are in the way of my cable TV, so get out of my life, come back when you are cool and worth my time.

Good ideas on round 1 Tony, now come up with something better for round 2, your cool factor sucks!

[thelakelander]

^^^I don't personally think the Underground is a good (or bad) comp for the Landing.  Similarities are superficial.

In terms of cities with waterfronts that are good comparisons - sure we can list out every ville of similar size and look at successes and failures.  I think with our waterfront, though, we should strive to be one of the best.  I think there seems to be a lot more to learn from Baltimore (I deduce that from several MJ threads on Baltimore's waterfront), and I think there's a lot to learn from SF's.  I could honestly give two rats' asses about what Nashville or Louisville or Hartford have or have not done.  They aren't the best waterfronts - nowhere close, and the only takeaways there I see are where they've failed (so we don't repeat).  For successes, I'd rather be bolder - do what Baltimore (riverwalk/clustering, etc) or NYC (piers, etc) or Chicago (riverwalk, etc) or SF (piers, etc) have done, since they've done their waterfronts better than the rest and made full use of them.

SF has piers like Jax has, and a master-planning development policy that has worked extremely well that Jax (and all of those other cities listed) can format for their own use.  Baltimore clearly has done lots of things right.

At the end of the day, it's definitely not rocket science and a lot easier than many believe. Clustering complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting is the common feature in all the best examples out there. All of these places also put the pedestrian and human scale experience as the highest development priority.

In the Landing's case, one could probably argue that the existing building structure isn't the biggest issue at that site.  It would probably be better for taxpayers having the existing structure updated and retrofitted with new uses. The rest of that cash could then go to the public space and incentivizing complementing infill development on the immediate blocks underutilized blocks surrounding it.

For example, stick those 350 apartments on top of the garage that still hasn't gone vertical, immediately across the street. If extra waterfront public space and less retail square footage is desired, perhaps retrofit the existing structure to the north (including cutting a Laura Street opening), relocate the most successful restaurants (ex. Hooters etc.) then demolish the riverfront structures. After all, the food court is a huge waste and so is most of the specialty retail boutiques.  You could knock out all the interior walls and create several larger spaces with those two floors.

In Baltimore, the most recent Harborplace retrofit converted a portion of the Light Street pavilion's second floor into museum.  Now, the owner is considering eliminating the mall in the Pratt Street pavilion completely:

New Harborplace plan would kill its mall vibe

One of the key upgrades Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. is proposing for Harborplace calls for converting the Pratt Street pavilion from a mall-like space to more traditional street-level retail.

Floor plans included in an Ashkenazy leasing flier show that the company plans to eliminate a central hallway running the full length of the pavilion. Retailers on both the first and second floors would take over that space and move their entrances to Pratt Street and the promenade, or on balconies in the case of second-floor stores.

Ashkenazy would retain some public space in the building to provide access to three stairways and elevators, and stores would also be accessible from those halls. But the plan clearly shows a move away from the mall-style design popular when Harborplace was envisioned as the centerpiece of the Inner Harbor revitalization that began with its opening in 1980.

Full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/blog/real-estate/2014/06/new-plan-for-harborplace-would-kill-its-mall-vibe.html

[downtownbrown]

^^^I don't personally think the Underground is a good (or bad) comp for the Landing.  Similarities are superficial.

In terms of cities with waterfronts that are good comparisons - sure we can list out every ville of similar size and look at successes and failures.  I think with our waterfront, though, we should strive to be one of the best.  I think there seems to be a lot more to learn from Baltimore (I deduce that from several MJ threads on Baltimore's waterfront), and I think there's a lot to learn from SF's.  I could honestly give two rats' asses about what Nashville or Louisville or Hartford have or have not done.  They aren't the best waterfronts - nowhere close, and the only takeaways there I see are where they've failed (so we don't repeat).  For successes, I'd rather be bolder - do what Baltimore (riverwalk/clustering, etc) or NYC (piers, etc) or Chicago (riverwalk, etc) or SF (piers, etc) have done, since they've done their waterfronts better than the rest and made full use of them.


SF has piers like Jax has, and a master-planning development policy that has worked extremely well that Jax (and all of those other cities listed) can format for their own use.  Baltimore clearly has done lots of things right.

If former shipyards, blue collar neighborhoods, waterfront are the analogues, you can't ignore Boston. It has all of the above, and Boston is a very small city from a downtown perspective. Tow blocks from the water is the financial district, a marriott convention center right on the water. Screw Baltimore.  Look to Boston to see who has done it right.  All we need is 40 more years...

[jcjohnpaint]

^^^I don't personally think the Underground is a good (or bad) comp for the Landing.  Similarities are superficial.

In terms of cities with waterfronts that are good comparisons - sure we can list out every ville of similar size and look at successes and failures.  I think with our waterfront, though, we should strive to be one of the best.  I think there seems to be a lot more to learn from Baltimore (I deduce that from several MJ threads on Baltimore's waterfront), and I think there's a lot to learn from SF's.  I could honestly give two rats' asses about what Nashville or Louisville or Hartford have or have not done.  They aren't the best waterfronts - nowhere close, and the only takeaways there I see are where they've failed (so we don't repeat).  For successes, I'd rather be bolder - do what Baltimore (riverwalk/clustering, etc) or NYC (piers, etc) or Chicago (riverwalk, etc) or SF (piers, etc) have done, since they've done their waterfronts better than the rest and made full use of them.

SF has piers like Jax has, and a master-planning development policy that has worked extremely well that Jax (and all of those other cities listed) can format for their own use.  Baltimore clearly has done lots of things right.

At the end of the day, it's definitely not rocket science and a lot easier than many believe. Clustering complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting is the common feature in all the best examples out there. All of these places also put the pedestrian and human scale experience as the highest development priority.

In the Landing's case, one could probably argue that the existing building structure isn't the biggest issue at that site.  It would probably be better for taxpayers having the existing structure updated and retrofitted with new uses. The rest of that cash could then go to the public space and incentivizing complementing infill development on the immediate blocks underutilized blocks surrounding it.

For example, stick those 350 apartments on top of the garage that still hasn't gone vertical, immediately across the street. If extra waterfront public space and less retail square footage is desired, perhaps retrofit the existing structure to the north (including cutting a Laura Street opening), relocate the most successful restaurants (ex. Hooters etc.) then demolish the riverfront structures. After all, the food court is a huge waste and so is most of the specialty retail boutiques.  You could knock out all the interior walls and create several larger spaces with those two floors.

In Baltimore, the most recent Harborplace retrofit converted a portion of the Light Street pavilion's second floor into museum.  Now, the owner is considering eliminating the mall in the Pratt Street pavilion completely:

New Harborplace plan would kill its mall vibe

One of the key upgrades Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. is proposing for Harborplace calls for converting the Pratt Street pavilion from a mall-like space to more traditional street-level retail.

Floor plans included in an Ashkenazy leasing flier show that the company plans to eliminate a central hallway running the full length of the pavilion. Retailers on both the first and second floors would take over that space and move their entrances to Pratt Street and the promenade, or on balconies in the case of second-floor stores.

Ashkenazy would retain some public space in the building to provide access to three stairways and elevators, and stores would also be accessible from those halls. But the plan clearly shows a move away from the mall-style design popular when Harborplace was envisioned as the centerpiece of the Inner Harbor revitalization that began with its opening in 1980.

Full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/blog/real-estate/2014/06/new-plan-for-harborplace-would-kill-its-mall-vibe.html

I am curious if that garage is being built to sustain other weight such as more level (if needed) or residential. 

[simms3]

At the end of the day, it's definitely not rocket science and a lot easier than many believe.

Yes, but difficult politically.  What's hilarious is the fact that both public/private leaders want to take all these trips all the time to see what Charlotte's doing with its non-waterfront downtown and see if anything applies to Jax's waterfront (just as an example).  Or taking a trip to Omaha or Kansas City, etc etc.  All of these cities kinda' suck in the grand scheme of things (relatively speaking).  I mean compared to cities we could be learning from - why learn from another city that's learning from another?  Go straight to the source!  If it's how the SE Sunbelt cities have decided to grow up, Charlotte's literally just copy catting Atlanta.  Go to Atlanta!

I'm positive public/private sector leaders from NYC, SF, Chicago, Boston, etc aren't taking trips to other cities to "learn" what they need to be doing with their own.  I'm pretty sure leaders in those cities know what needs to be done (through common sense) and they just work to make sure these things happen!

And IF Jax leaders feel they must travel and tour other cities to learn what to copy or what not to do, why they hell do they not just choose the best places?  Why go to Kansas City or Indianapolis?  I'm pretty sure KC and Indy are trying to emulate Chicago.  So why not go straight to the source: Chicago?

Clustering complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting is the common feature in all the best examples out there. All of these places also put the pedestrian and human scale experience as the highest development priority.

Duh, but leaders in Jacksonville have NEVER yet been able to figure that one out, even after all their trips to Kansas City, Charlotte, Indianapolis, etc. 

In the Landing's case, one could probably argue that the existing building structure isn't the biggest issue at that site.  It would probably be better for taxpayers having the existing structure updated and retrofitted with new uses.

My argument all along.  And the reason why the Ferry Building IS a prime example for the Landing.

The rest of that cash could then go to the public space and incentivizing complementing infill development on the immediate blocks underutilized blocks surrounding it.

However, a proper retrofit of the Landing, including proper programming and carry costs (we are talking PATIENT money here that still needs a proper risk-adjusted return) could easily (and should) be even more expensive than a new multifamily structure.  Type III multifamily in the SE is EXTREMELY cheap to put up (because honestly, it's pretty shitty stuff - we aren't talking concrete and steel, but rather pine).  In contrast, they are building 67 HUD units here in SF for $700K/unit (nearly 10x per unit what it costs to put up class A mid-rise apts in the SE).  Totally embarrassing.

For example, stick those 350 apartments on top of the garage that still hasn't gone vertical, immediately across the street.

Lost opportunity for sure - Parador could have partnered with Sleiman/Tony for a promote structure, with the overall partnership bringing more equity in to perhaps reduce those crazy City subsidies that would not be as necessary with a multi component mixed in, and then Senkbeil could have earned a promote on his partnership with Sleiman for providing his multifamily expertise - no equity other than sweat equity invested!...honestly, partnerships like these are what is missing in Jacksonville (to my estimation).  I don't think they're readily used or easily understood, but it's how everything gets done in other cities.

Sleiman/Senkbeil could comingle investments, keeping the same general parameters and rolling proceeds into the Landing deal for a sort of doubling down, if you will (perhaps finding a well-capitalized partner for a preferred stake, playing with debt and finding alternative options out there and really structuring the Landing deal to get it done).  Conversely, had Sleiman/Senbeil partnered with Parador, I would think they would ask for a piece of the upside in the office building, which presumably is "bound to take off now" with all that parking (lol).

Whatever, nobody seems to know how to take advantage of the immense risks posed in the Jax market.  And the city has set way too many precedents of just giving shit away (ala Parador), so why would anyone take the hard road and set up complex partnerships to work things out for everyone's mutual benefit when the city will just cow tow and give tax payer dollars away to short-term bail out someone's position or bad investment?

relocate the most successful restaurants (ex. Hooters etc.) then demolish the riverfront structures.

This is partly where a retrofit becomes expensive.  Not all tenants have relocation rights and if they do, most with credit/name recognition and good attorneys bargained for a fee (aka Hooters).  A successful redeveloper of the Landing becomes a true partner with all of his/her tenants and works diligently with them to ensure that a retrofit is both in their best interest and his - or they are aggressive and go a completely different route with a rapid overhaul and a booting/buying out of tenants.

If I were Sleiman, I may not want a Hooters if my programming has changed dramatically.  New tenants (aka the guy who owns Black Sheep, Intuition, or any other local purveyors) *may not* want to be near Hooters either.  You have to really pick and choose where you're going to go and where makes the most sense.  Sacrificing a wee bit of credit and not really getting the rents immediately in return (probably incentivize the hell out of smaller local guys with abatements and % rent to fixed rent conversion, along with hefty TI's and warm vanilla shell deliveries with leeway on "their" architects' plans and how they want to spend their TIs, etc)

I guess you really have to be a believer and an intense active manager, and have the ability to not lose sleep at night.

After all, the food court is a huge waste and so is most of the specialty retail boutiques.  You could knock out all the interior walls and create several larger spaces with those two floors.

I think this part of the Landing has some of if not the most potential as-is.  It's the section of the Landing I see most closely resembling all of the other successful public markets in the country.  You don't always want large bays - in fact, in my vision for the Landing I would avoid them unless I'm going to personally invest in and cultivate a specialty grocer/food store/market like Grassroots, or unless I were going to really shoot my wad on getting something new/credit to town like Sur La Table (which would want prime downstairs space with signage/views outside on both sides and into the atrium).  Maybe you can fit a theater on the 2nd floor?  Theaters aren't really money makers though, unless in most cases you have 16+ screens, which is not happening here.

However, I would bring food uses and some retail downstairs and look at converting upstairs to boutique office space, or even some small boutique hotel (I don't see the latter happening in Jax, but could be worth a shot - would DEF need a hotel expert from another market where such hotels exist).

In Baltimore, the most recent Harborplace retrofit converted a portion of the Light Street pavilion's second floor into museum.  Now, the owner is considering eliminating the mall in the Pratt Street pavilion completely:

New Harborplace plan would kill its mall vibe

One of the key upgrades Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. is proposing for Harborplace calls for converting the Pratt Street pavilion from a mall-like space to more traditional street-level retail.

Floor plans included in an Ashkenazy leasing flier show that the company plans to eliminate a central hallway running the full length of the pavilion. Retailers on both the first and second floors would take over that space and move their entrances to Pratt Street and the promenade, or on balconies in the case of second-floor stores.

Ashkenazy would retain some public space in the building to provide access to three stairways and elevators, and stores would also be accessible from those halls. But the plan clearly shows a move away from the mall-style design popular when Harborplace was envisioned as the centerpiece of the Inner Harbor revitalization that began with its opening in 1980.

Full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/blog/real-estate/2014/06/new-plan-for-harborplace-would-kill-its-mall-vibe.html

I'm very familiar with Ashkenazy and know someone there.  They are well-capitalized, have a definite expertise in urban retail, have an incredible cost of capital for their investment strategy(s), and as an investor/landlord are definitely not comparable to anyone in FL outside of perhaps Miami (where AAC has a presence).  They are known for paying record psf pricing for retail in lots of markets and still coming out with pretty robust high double digit (+) returns.

Honestly, Sleiman should have put himself in front of them and begged them to join him in a co-invest.  Or insert other rare but similar firm.  Instead he hastily grabbed a suburban/SE multifamily/REIT expert.



I think it boils down to a lack of experienced real estate guys in Jax.  As I'm writing this, that's my conclusion.  There are a few, but just a few.  And their experience is still pretty limited.  There is a reason why most successful/innovative firms across all types of $$ (small but reputable/successful developer-GPs, private equity, hedge funds, specialty REITs, large-scale lenders, etc) are mostly located in a handful of larger talent-pool cities.

Sleiman over a decade now should have done his DD on who's out there and who he might be able to partner with to finally do something at the Landing.  Sounds like he threw a hasty hail mary, decided on a whim he was fed up and was going to do easy multi, went to nearby Atl and found the first expert he could convince to sit down with him (and granted he did find an expert, someone I certainly would love to sit down with).  Clearly isn't going to focus on retail/special use/hotel/office because he didn't sit down with any other experts in those realms in Atlanta.  And there are quite a few up there - lots of really talented people.  Atlanta seems like it's prime for deals right now, though, and Jax is probably seen as a bit too risky - could be a barrier.  Maybe wait for later in the cycle and hope for someone who knows it's late in the cycle and can work around that.

Heck a few years ago I was talking with some guys at Weingarten and they knew who Sleiman was when I mentioned I was from Jax.  So Sleiman does know people around (granted WRI is also in retail).  He did get one of the foremost experts in multifamily in the entire country!

But I feel like he completely missed the boat on landing someone who knows how to turn the Landing around to what I feel is truly an active community use and profit maker.

[tufsu1]

I'm positive public/private sector leaders from NYC, SF, Chicago, Boston, etc aren't taking trips to other cities to "learn" what they need to be doing with their own. 

well then, I'm positive you are wrong

[simms3]

^^^That's really your world isn't it?  I never hear of this sort of thing, though perhaps it goes on.  The most I hear is "well Bloomberg's doing x in NYC and it's worked out well because y", but it doesn't take a convoy of city leaders and front page news articles highlighting the trip to figure this stuff out.  On the RE side of the private sector, lots of people work different markets as a natural part of their job...same dialogue, "we know what's going on in NYC or Boston" or "but that's why we're 'us' and Houston isn't", etc.


Anyway, I promised some pics of the Ferry Building, so I went there for a late lunch today and snapped some crappy pics with my iPhone.  My lunch mate even took a nice Tinder moment for me hehe

Vendors are constantly all around the Ferry Building - like the Landing, the building itself is owned by a partnership led by EOP, however, the land all around the building is mostly public (Port of SF and City of SF land).


During a morning/afternoon commute rush or a lunch rush (not in these photos), the crowds crossing The Embarcadero are incredibly thick, people running and jostling, tourists taking their time, etc.


Still an active ferry terminal serving ~15-20,000 ferry commuters a day.


The size is very similar to the Landing and there is a single main atrium with 3 little branches that bring people through from the city side to the waterfront side (and you can walk around and remain outdoors)...so very similar set up as the Landing.


About 50 retailers/vendors/restaurants in the Ferry Building, so again - very similar in size and scope to the Landing.

Ownership worked very hard and paid a good bit of money and waited patiently for success initially, but right from the start of the building's revival, the list of tenants has been almost entirely local and pretty top notch (i.e. ownership was selective, and vendors were selective in going there, and it's worked out for everyone).

What you see here in the Ferry Building is pretty much how it goes throughout the entire city of SF, which is why it has this incredible reputation for being a truly world class foodie city and why residents are such snobs, but, the Ferry Building offers that nice waterfront setting, has excellent programming, and brings a higher concentration of amazing vendors under the same roof - there's always a nice vibe of people watching, a little bit of hustle combined with a relaxing and inviting atmosphere.















Outdoors is a nice hangout.  Many of the restaurants have openings out to the back (you can enter from inside or from outside on the waterfront), with covered outdoor seating, etc.  It's a nice relaxing spot - great for a "breather" from work life in the financial district.







List of vendors/retailers:

http://www.ferrybuildingmarketplace.com/merchant_list.php


What's not shown is the event space and the office space.  Overall, such a great example for the Landing.  The Landing could be a central hub for Jacksonville's growing group of small craft/quality oriented business owners.  Put them all under one roof, help with programming as landlord, help them out initially, and share in the upside of their success!