Khan, Jaguars expect Lot J development to begin early 2020

[Steve]

Why would the Carlucci bill have sent the Jags packing? Is there some other market out there willing to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars without having their downtown folks even look at it? And regardless, why wouldn't they put the blame the mayor for making no attempt to get buy-in from the taxpayers?

If part of this question is are their other cities that will spend stupid amounts of money to get an NFL franchise to move to their city?  Yes. A  butt ton of them.

IIRC it's a little sticky in that the NFL seems to have some concept of protecting regional markets.  As much sense as it may make, the NFL + the Bucs would probably oppose a move to Orlando for that reason. 

But other than that, you have all sorts of folks that may be game from ones that recently lost a team like San Diego and St. Louis to  San Antonio,  Sacramento, Portland, Austin, etc, etc.   Hell, I wouldn't rule out someone buying them to set up shop in Toronto or Mexico City.

I agree with you here. Yes, the Bucs would have to sign off on a move to Orlando, so that's not happening. Toronto is actually a secondary market for the Buffalo Bills, so I'm not sure if they'd sign off or not. San Diego doesn't seem to be ready to foot the bill for a stadium, though if they do I could see them luring the Chargers back as their deal in LA is....not good.

I don't see Austin or Portland or Sacramento for a few other reasons, but St. Louis or San Antonio? I could see it happening.

[Steve]

Ken you make a lot of excellent points. And you're well informed as certainly anyone on this blog. I think a problem not being accounted for is the public views this poorly, at least from the informal polling on Lot J that I have seen, and that may explain the pushback from City Hall.

Agreed.

I actually have no issue with anything the Jags have done. I may not agree, but they are a private organization and have the right to ask for whatever they want. Whether they get it is another issue entirely.

Now, I get the issue with Carlucci's bill. COJ's job shouldn't be to give the Jags the runaround. Either approve it or not. In my eyes based on current law I DO think that the Jags should have been negotiating with DIA if the matter isn't directly tied to the lease....which it isn't (on paper). Everything else was a physical change to the Stadium, which DOES pertain to the lease. Apples and oranges. For example, if Khan wanted to develop the old JEA building, would he go through the Mayor's office or DIA?

At the same time, City Council isn't responsible for the Mayor's office telling the Jags the wrong thing, and neither are the Jags, if Curry's office told them otherwise. I actually think for mega deals like this the Mayor's office is the right place, no offense to Boyer or her board. But the structure needs to be there and FOLLOWED.

Curry's office shoulder's most of the blame for the awful relationship with City Council, though it's rarely 100% one way or the other. that doesn't help things.

Now with all of that said, if I were on Council I'd vote no on this. The amount of money being spent is too great considering the return. I realize the environmental adds costs, and I'm fine with that. It's our property and if someone is willing to develop we should be willing to clean the dirt.

To me, this is the ideal path forward: Do what I said from the beginning - stop putting the cart before the horse. The Jags and their facility are the big issue here. Package this with a stadium renovation (and yes, a larger check would then be written), but then it comes with a lease extension and no more than 1 game exported.

If we're going to approve this, then dump the stupid $65M "loan". Make the Jags go to the private sector for it. If you drop that, it's the $152M that we were led to believe when this first came out. I still think it's a lot, but it's makes more sense. With that said, both sides need to agree that after this, the COJ piggy bank is CLOSED for development money around the stadium until we solve the stadium - lease extension, no more than 1 home game exported. etc.

[Steve]

Additionally, I'd be fine starting on Environmental now on the site and (however they're doing this) moving parking to over the retention pond. This to me could show the good faith effort to partner here.

[thelakelander]

Was the council meeting from last night recorded? I'd love to watch it.

[Ken_FSU]

Was the council meeting from last night recorded? I'd love to watch it.

Buckle up, Lake 

https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/clip/2632?view_id=1&redirect=true

Here's the agenda so you can see what the meeting was supposed to look like:

[thelakelander]

Thanks! Oh that's really wild if they couldn't stick to and follow the agenda.

[Steve]

I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.

[Ken_FSU]

In the meantime, we're going on two full years of dead Landing space. Assuming Lot J is approved something over the next year, full completion of phase one could take up to 2032-33.

Cleaning contamination from Lot J could take up to three years

Jacksonville city officials expect it will take nearly three years at least to perform the environmental clean up necessary for Jaguars owner Shad Khan to begin construction on his proposed Lot J development, meaning the project could take at least seven years to complete.

That timeline, which was revealed in correspondence between Mayor Lenny Curry's office and the Jacksonville City Council Auditor's office, is more than twice as long as the timeline that has been publicly discussed.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/19/lot-j-jacksonville-cleaning-shad-khan/6343750002/

P.S. The remediation aspect makes this whole thing even stranger.

I wonder where the mayor's office got this 33-month minimum timeline from.

Cordish and the Jags have been going off the assumption that remediation would take a year at most.

In fact, there's only $6 million total allocated for remediation in the infrastructure budget for the project (vs. close to $40 million for the Shipyards).

Word was that late 2021/early 2022 was the target for vertical construction if Lot J was approved, with a hope of having Lot J open by the start of the Jags 2025 season. Even during the meeting last night, they were talking about wanting to get moving quickly in 2021 before construction costs skyrocket.

If the 33-month figure is true, that means Lot J couldn't even go vertical until 2024 and couldn't open until 2027/2028 in a best case scenario (with the hotel likely following a year or more behind). That's less than two years before the stadium lease expires, and the entire project has a five-year clawback.

So, Lot J would basically bind the Jaguars to Jacksonville for a couple of years beyond the length of the existing lease. If this is the case, I almost wonder why the Jags don't just throw the public a bone and extend the lease through like 2032 as a goodwill gesture.

And I also wonder why, if the above timeline is true, it isn't equally advantageous to the Jags to negotiate stadium improvements and lease extension in tandem with Lot J. If Lot J really isn't going to open until 2027 or 2028, and the lease expires in 2029, wouldn't the Jags want assurances that the city was going to invest in the stadium prior to committing themselves to a Lot J development with clawbacks stretching into the 2030s?

Nothing makes sense in 2020.

I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.

Both were zany, but this one takes the cake.

Stick around until the end, Paul Harden does a pretty good job playing cleanup on Hazouri's mess.

[fieldafm]

In the meantime, we're going on two full years of dead Landing space. Assuming Lot J is approved something over the next year, full completion of phase one could take up to 2032-33.

Cleaning contamination from Lot J could take up to three years

Jacksonville city officials expect it will take nearly three years at least to perform the environmental clean up necessary for Jaguars owner Shad Khan to begin construction on his proposed Lot J development, meaning the project could take at least seven years to complete.

That timeline, which was revealed in correspondence between Mayor Lenny Curry's office and the Jacksonville City Council Auditor's office, is more than twice as long as the timeline that has been publicly discussed.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/19/lot-j-jacksonville-cleaning-shad-khan/6343750002/

P.S. The remediation aspect makes this whole thing even stranger.

I wonder where the mayor's office got this 33-month minimum timeline from.

Cordish and the Jags have been going off the assumption that remediation would take a year at most.

In fact, there's only $6 million total allocated for remediation in the infrastructure budget for the project (vs. close to $40 million for the Shipyards).

Word was that late 2021/early 2022 was the target for vertical construction if Lot J was approved, with a hope of having Lot J open by the start of the Jags 2025 season. Even during the meeting last night, they were talking about wanting to get moving quickly in 2021 before construction costs skyrocket.

If the 33-month figure is true, that means Lot J couldn't even go vertical until 2024 and couldn't open until 2027/2028 in a best case scenario (with the hotel likely following a year or more behind). That's less than two years before the stadium lease expires, and the entire project has a five-year clawback.

So, Lot J would basically bind the Jaguars to Jacksonville for a couple of years beyond the length of the existing lease. If this is the case, I almost wonder why the Jags don't just throw the public a bone and extend the lease through like 2032 as a goodwill gesture.

And I also wonder why, if the above timeline is true, it isn't equally advantageous to the Jags to negotiate stadium improvements and lease extension in tandem with Lot J. If Lot J really isn't going to open until 2027 or 2028, and the lease expires in 2029, wouldn't the Jags want assurances that the city was going to invest in the stadium prior to committing themselves to a Lot J development with clawbacks stretching into the 2030s?

Nothing makes sense in 2020.

I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.

Both were zany, but this one takes the cake.

Stick around until the end, Paul Harden does a pretty good job playing cleanup on Hazouri's mess.

If the deal was signed this afternoon the Jags could not get environmental approvals, approval to remove the broadcast tower and remediation completed/retention pond filled within 12 months.

Also, LOL at 'construction costs skyrocketing if they don't hurry'.  Labor costs continue to increase, and thanks to Trump's tariff war, disruptions in supply chain thanks to pandemic and continued strong demand for construction... material costs are going in the same direction.

[Steve]

If the deal was signed this afternoon the Jags could not get environmental approvals, approval to remove the broadcast tower and remediation completed/retention pond filled within 12 months.

You answered a question I had been wondering - I know the plan was to fill in the retention pond but didn't know if/what was going on with the guy wire for Channel 12's tower. Are they really removing it?

Seems like it would be WAY easier to leave it, and fence a wide enough space around the base so that it wouldn't interfere with the rest of the parking lot. The wires go up very quickly from the base so achieving 20 foot clearance for the parking lot underneath the wires should still be totally doable. I mean, the (former) Hart Expressway goes under another set of those wires.

[Ken_FSU]

^This might actually be changing here in the next few days.

This is the language that was in the original version of the legislation:



The auditor was very concerned about this provision, and supposedly the Jags have agreed to remove this entire section from the agreement and leave the wire in place.

Obviously won't know for sure until the the revised agreement is finished.

Of course, the Jags would still make the city move it eventually if and when they developed the parking lot as Phase II, but it sounds like it might end up staying in place through Phase I.

[thelakelander]

Would Lot J phase II come before the Four Seasons phase? In the Four Seasons renderings, the Lot J surface parking lot is still shown.

[Ken_FSU]

^Phase II of Lot J would be predicated on Cordish and the Jags finding a major office tenant.

Cordish has said they wouldn't do it speculatively.

If Lot J is up to 10 years out, you've gotta think it'd be another five years on top of that before Phase II is potentially a thing.

Speaking of office tenants, and Lot J, and the 33-month minimum for environmental remediation at the Lot J site, it's interesting to note that when Cordish and the Jags pitched Lot J to the JEA for their new headquarters, they gave an estimated timeline of 12.5 months from award to vertical construction.

https://www.jea.com/About/Lot_J_Best_and_Final_Offer/

Either the mayor's confused, or those soil and groundwater samples the Jags took about a year back came back way, way worse than expected.

[thelakelander]

I'd probably fall on the side of the mayor's office being out of their league with this thing. Some of the timeline dates tossed out over the last few years sounded very suspect with any one familiar with the history of this area. I wouldn't be surprised if there's still some level of contamination at Metropolitan Park as well.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'd probably fall on the side of the mayor's office being out of their league with this thing. Some of the timeline dates tossed out over the last few years sounded very suspect with any one familiar with the history of this area. I wouldn't be surprised if there's still some level of contamination at Metropolitan Park as well.

The blame for this mess starts with the Mayor's mismanagement of the entire process.  He acts like he is the King of Jax and makes little to no effort to be transparent, solicit outside input, subject himself to constructive criticism or to be collaborative or build consensus.  Its a replay of JEA - a prescription for disastrous results.  If he didn't have the Council under his thumb at the time, the pension plan overhaul would have resulted in a similar mess.

But, I would also add Paul Harden and Mark Lamping.  Harden has traditionally "owned" City Hall and should have been attuned better than anyone as to what would happen when this hit the Council.  My guess is he is so used to ramming things through the Council with the Mayor's support and his contributions to Council campaigns that he failed to re-calibrate that maybe some on the Council are changed persons after JEA and might actually resist his efforts.  Lamping has been to the well here enough times and hobnobbed with the Council members regularly, that he, too, should have had the sense to demand involvement of the Council, in addition to the Mayor, from the get-go.  Especially after JEA and given the size of the ask.

Basically, the Mayor, Harden and Lamping seemed to have been banking on the "old way" of doing things with the Council.  Post-JEA, maybe many on the Council and the voters are on a new plane.  Let's hope so.