Landing bill moves forward without preservation funds, but mayor may veto

[fieldafm]

Really not trying to be a cheerleader here... but out of Lake's list, Sleiman brought some of these companies INTO Jacksonville.  Not listed above is a national restaurant and a big national retailer that either have a lease option signed or is in the process of building out a location... both new to Jacksonville.  

I'm on one side of this business, and I can say if someone came to me with the same type of demand the Mayor's office has floated(sign an agreement so I can get money from the city)... it would just tell me they have no idea how business works and the conversation would end very quickly.  

I once was part of a group that tried to acquire a very large property to develop(I spent 6 months personally putting together a proposal before we ever went to the property owner)... during negotiations to buy the property word got out that a very large retailer had sent out a scout team to the property next door.  As soon as that got out, the deal went South b/c the property in question tripled in price overnight.  Discretion is of upmost importance in the early stages of many commercial development projects.  

Believe me, you would never know who Walmart's real estate team was if your paths ever crossed.  

*Just before someone says it, Walmart has no interest in the Landing lol

[cline]

There is no arguing that that is an impressive list of tenants.  However, it is easy to attract these types of tenants when your specialty is cookie-cutter suburban strip malls.  Those are the places these types of tenants look for in Jacksonville (unfortunately).  Suburban strip malls are a far-cry from the "specialty retail" that The Landing has to offer.  I am skeptical that some of the tenants will be willing to make the transition (i.e. take a chance) to locate at The Landing even if they are guaranteed "X" amounts of parking spots.  

That being said, I think it was great that Sleiman was able to get Chicago Pizza to open up at The Landing, I just don't know if some of the others will follow suit though.  

There was quite a lot of interest from several big name retailers and restaurants that wanted a Landing location but never committed because of the parking issue.  It's not a Jacksonville issue, it's not a Sleiman issue, it's not a facility issue...it's a parking issue.

Fuddruckers is one of the most visible.  Built out began with a franchisee owner but his business went south and construction stalled.  Corporate would have taken over the project but it didn't meat their parking criteria.

It wasn't a franchisee problem with Fuddruckers.  It was that the parent company (Magic Brands LLC) went bankrupt.  

4. Parking - They would need between 77-87 dedicated spaces.  The Landing has none at this point.

Aren't there around 300 spots dedicated to The Landing in the current adjacent parking lot?

[Jim]

They didn't file for Chapter 11 until last month.   The problem I'm speaking off took place almost 2 years ago.

EDIT:
But those are COJ owned and the Landing can't dedicate 80 as dedicated solely to Times Grill.

[Jim]

Yes, but I believe the initial delays were caused by corporate having money problems.

At any rate, I guess another question would be (and this may be a whole other topic) if COJ was to give The Landing its parking, how would it ensure that 70-80 spots in the new lot were dedicated solely to Times Grill, for instance.  How would they enforce that?  The spots in the new lot wouldn't be any more "dedicated" than the spots in the existing lot.

No more than it can be enforced with any strip mall, entertainment complex, regional mall, etc...   But you'd have the volume of spaces to ensure than each tenant has X amount of available spaces.

Say you have 100 spaces total and you're looking a a chain that wants 80 but you already have a few smaller tenants who are "allocated" 30 total between them.  So even though you have 100 total, you'd only have 70 that could be "allocated" from your pool of spaces to the new chain.

While the Landing may have 300 right now (and city owned at that), it's very likely that all 300 are accounted for.  Possibly even twice over.

[cline]

I accidentally deleted my post (quoted below) that you were referring to while trying to modify it.  Sorry about that.

Yes, but I believe the initial delays were caused by corporate having money problems.

At any rate, I guess another question would be (and this may be a whole other topic) if COJ was to give The Landing its parking, how would it ensure that 70-80 spots in the new lot were dedicated solely to Times Grill, for instance.  How would they enforce that?  The spots in the new lot wouldn't be any more "dedicated" than the spots in the existing lot.

[thelakelander]

^Probably the same way every other retail center (SJTC, Regency, Avenues, etc.) has a certain number of spaces set aside per square foot that they are trying to lease.  The 300 spaces now, are there for the existing tenants.  Even with 300 additional spaces (bringing the total up to 600), what can take place at the Landing is going to be limited compared to the grand redevelopment Sleiman proposed when he first purchased the center.  

I think we all can agree that a more vibrant Landing would be a great thing for downtown.  With additional dedicated parking, the center would have a much better chance at upgrading tenant mix within the existing structure and give the city the opportunity to collect rental income on prime waterfront property.  At some point, when the market comes back and another administration is in city hall, that same lot could accommodate additional retail development and a multilevel garage.  

[thelakelander]

While the Landing may have 300 right now (and city owned at that), it's very likely that all 300 are accounted for.  Possibly even twice over.

Sleiman owns the East lot now.  However, the Landing has 600 less spaces than it had a decade ago.  When the Adams Mark came to town, the city gave them the Daniel Building's spaces.  I think we can all agree that the tenant mix hasn't been the same.

[fieldafm]

Correct... the parking garage at Adams Mark was originally earmarked for the Landing.

You know, its funny... take a look at the City of Jacksonville Beach.  They begged people to redevelop the center of Jax Beach for the better part of two decades.  When they began to work with Sleiman Enterprises, things got done. 

Jax Beach wanted revitilization and they got it.  Kinda makes you wonder if Jacksonville really wants a better downtown?

Downtown must have consistent, energized and ambitious civic, business and government leadership with a shared vision, greater ambition and a willingness to consider new ways of thinking about Downtown. We have often sold ourselves short, adopting a “get by” attitude toward Downtown’s revitalization and many other aspects of our city.

-Turning the Corner: Rethinking Downtown

[thelakelander]

It really seems like many want downtown redevelopment, as long as Sleiman isn't a part of the process. Bring Ben Carter downtown and I'd bet he'd get his dedicated parking with no debate.

[fieldafm]

Absolutely!  Great point about Ben Carter!!

Meanwhile.... a once proud downtown crumbles into obscurity.

I can understand the misconceptions people have about commercial development b/c they don't understand how the business works.  Heck, I have no idea about farming so I couldn't logically speak to the trials and tribulations of the agricultural industry.  My grandfather had a farm growing up, but the only thing I knew about farming was that 1) he did it 2) he taught me how to drive a tractor 3) he taught me that I didnt want to do it for a living and 4) his pigs, cows and oranges sure were tasty.

You can't just go putting out potential tenants name in the paper if you don't even have at the least a lease-option signed.  Even then, you don't publicly spout off names.  So to go to a realtor/restaurant and say 'sign this and I'll betcha we can get you what you want from the guvment'... well, that's just not how business is done.

Also, to the point that people are worried that Sleiman just wants the parking lot to resell it in the future... well, it just isn't common for a company like Sleiman Enterprises or Regency(or others) to buy land, develop the land, sign tenants, and then sell off the property.  Over the last few years, people have been selling some properties but this is mainly due to a bad economy and the company needing the immediate cash b/c their credit lines have been eliminated or signficantly reduced.  Commercial development is usually a long term investment... not unlike the reason you would buy a mutual fund that focuses on dividend earnings.  You usually don't buy something for the dividends it would pay you over the next 10-20 years, just to sell it a year later.  You want the recurring income over the years.

[Keith-N-Jax]

Why ruin our Holiday with this. ,,jus kidding. Wake me when the nightmare is ova.

[Jim]

In addition, Peyton said...that adding parking would detract from the goal of making Downtown more viable as a walkable, vibrant urban environment.

Making Downtown a more pedestrian friendly and walkable environment was one of Peyton’s earlier talking points in the presentation to more than 80 members of the civic organization.

Is he intentionally patronizing this city? 

[Keith-N-Jax]

I am not following that one. Would detract? The only detracting from the goal of the city becoming a walkable, vibrant, and urban environment is the COJ itself.

[tufsu1]

In addition, Peyton said he believes the Landing has sufficient parking in and around the area and that adding parking would detract from the goal of making Downtown more viable as a walkable, vibrant urban environment.

“I don’t accept parking as the problem,” said Peyton.

can't say I disagree

[tufsu1]

I am not following that one. Would detract? The only detracting from the goal of the city becoming a walkable, vibrant, and urban environment is the COJ itself.

it is quite simple really....the provision of more parking (especially when subsidized) makes it all the easier for people to continue to drive.