Berkman II: Ideas floated for blighted building

[strider]

I keep hearing how bad it looks, how bad it reflects on the city and yet how else was this supposed to be handled?  It was tied in lawsuits and now the owner wants to do sell it to someone who can do something with it.  I suppose we tax payers could foot the bill to tear the thing down, but is spending that kind of money to make the skyline look alittle better the best use of our limited resources? Would not funding things like the Laura Street trio a better investment and end up doing more positives for Jacksonville than this structure still sitting can ever hurt us?

[tufsu1]

8 years it's been sitting there? 8 years?!!! That is completely embarrassing for our city.

Jax is not alone in this.  The Orlando area has an office tower just off I-4 that was never finished (and is rumored to be torn down soon), and downtown Clearwater has a condo shell too.

[thelakelander]

I was told it would cost at least $3 million to demolish.  What's currently in place is roughly $12 million of infrastructure. Evidently, although the structure is sound, there's some extra costs associated with modifying the design from larger condos to smaller apartments. 

[Captain Zissou]

8 years it's been sitting there? 8 years?!!! That is completely embarrassing for our city.

Jax is not alone in this.  The Orlando area has an office tower just off I-4 that was never finished (and is rumored to be torn down soon), and downtown Clearwater has a condo shell too.

I don't know if you can equate the Eyesore on I-4 to Berkman.  The Majesty Building was proposed by a non-profit and funded by donations.  The circumstances of its demise are vastly different than those of Berkman

[downtownbrown]

5 million dollars. The developer asked DIA for 5 million measly dollars several years ago. DIA said no.  It's a matter of leadership and priorities.

[I-10east]

I don't know if you can equate the Eyesore on I-4 to Berkman.  The Majesty Building was proposed by a non-profit and funded by donations.  The circumstances of its demise are vastly different than those of Berkman

Does that change the fact that it's an eyesore? I know, Jax is the only city with problems, that's what people here wanna hear...There's always this 'taking up for every city outside Jax' attitude here, it never fails...

[Gunnar]

5 million dollars. The developer asked DIA for 5 million measly dollars several years ago. DIA said no.  It's a matter of leadership and priorities.

I keep getting the impressions that developers can't develop without governement hand-outs, or did they just ask for infrastructure improvements ?

[Captain Zissou]

I don't know if you can equate the Eyesore on I-4 to Berkman.  The Majesty Building was proposed by a non-profit and funded by donations.  The circumstances of its demise are vastly different than those of Berkman

Does that change the fact that it's an eyesore? I know, Jax is the only city with problems, that's what people here wanna hear...There's always this 'taking up for every city outside Jax' attitude here, it never fails...

I'm not taking up for anything.  The Majesty Building is still owned by its original developer, who refuses to take on debt and is relying on donations for the additional $14M to finish the project.  That's a totally different animal than a building that is currently owned by someone who is actively trying to sell it, but unable to find a buyer due to the financials not making sense.  Both are eyesores that may not get finished for a while, or ever, but one is due to a crazy developer's delusions of grandeur and the other is due to market economics not supporting the project.

[thelakelander]

5 million dollars. The developer asked DIA for 5 million measly dollars several years ago. DIA said no.  It's a matter of leadership and priorities.

I keep getting the impressions that developers can't develop without governement hand-outs, or did they just ask for infrastructure improvements ?

In a downtown market as unhealthy as DT Jax's, most can't. Without some form of financial assistance, most are better off taking their money and investing elsewhere.

[Gunnar]

5 million dollars. The developer asked DIA for 5 million measly dollars several years ago. DIA said no.  It's a matter of leadership and priorities.

I keep getting the impressions that developers can't develop without governement hand-outs, or did they just ask for infrastructure improvements ?

In a downtown market as unhealthy as DT Jax's, most can't. Without some form of financial assistance, most are better off taking their money and investing elsewhere.

But shouldn't there be a better way than straight out giving the developers money but instead making the place more attractive to invest in ? Tax credits are one thing, changing rules and regulations another but infrastructure seems like a win-win, too.

Heck, the city could even give property away for free if a developer is going to build something on it (or restore the existing building).

Now, seeing some of the asking prices for downtown ruins or empty lots, I can see where that property would not offer a good ROI in this market, but wouldn't the city giving away incentives serve to artifcially inflate these asking prices ?

[thelakelander]

But shouldn't there be a better way than straight out giving the developers money but instead making the place more attractive to invest in ? Tax credits are one thing, changing rules and regulations another but infrastructure seems like a win-win, too.

Heck, the city could even give property away for free if a developer is going to build something on it (or restore the existing building).

Of course. Several things have to be done simultaneously.  However, in the case of Berkman Plaza II, there's not much you can do "short term" to change market conditions to make finishing that project feasible without some type of public assistance.

[downtownbrown]

But shouldn't there be a better way than straight out giving the developers money but instead making the place more attractive to invest in ? Tax credits are one thing, changing rules and regulations another but infrastructure seems like a win-win, too.

Heck, the city could even give property away for free if a developer is going to build something on it (or restore the existing building).

Of course. Several things have to be done simultaneously.  However, in the case of Berkman Plaza II, there's not much you can do "short term" to change market conditions to make finishing that project feasible without some type of public assistance.

that's right.  This isn't a normal downtown strategy question.  It's a one off budget item to fix the blighted project.  Well worth $5M if you ask me.