Too bad....
QuoteAs the Jacksonville Jaguars unveiled their new brand identity Tuesday afternoon â€" “proud, bold and committed†â€" it was hard not to think of owner Shahid Khan’s attitude toward the city.
full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/2013/02/khan-downtowns-laura-street-trio.html
Khan is a good glimpse into a whole society of hometown investors who shape and define their respective cities. I've been crying for some time now that a key missing ingredient in Jacksonville is a vested backer. Khan is definitely one. Jacksonville needs more freed up private cash allegiant to the city in some way, and it needs more distruptive thinkers who have connections to this cash who can make things happen. VC for the city, essentially.
One thing that is sad is that the city's banking industry has left. A lot of good things that have come about in the city came from the principals of the banks that were founded and based in the city. Now since they have left, most of the companies based in the city are not dependent on the success of the city for their own success.
Too bad that the Trio hasn't panned out yet, or downtown in general. Fingers crossed that reinforcement from such backers as Khan reassure the right people/backers that downtown has bottomed and can only improve.
Hopefully the Trio project will stay on course this time.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/2013/03/historic-downtown-trio-back-in-play.html
I'd love to see the buildings reused. But I'll believe it when I see it. I'm going to expand on my conservative (no pun intended) prediction and say that none of these high-rise buildings will ever see a civilian walking across their lobbies again until they're empty lots. And unfortunately that's what they will all become.
I really hungry so, I hope I end up eating these words too.
Shad Khan finances $3M deal to buy Laura Street Trio
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=539139
Quote
Shad Khan finances $3M deal to buy Laura Street Trio
previous slide
|| pause
next slide
Khan
04/02/2013
by Mark Basch, Contributing Writer
A development company led by Stephen Atkins, with financing from a company led by Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan, has bought the old Barnett Bank Building and the three Laura Street Trio buildings in Downtown Jacksonville, according to City records.
Property records filed Tuesday at the Duval County Clerk's office show two affiliated companies bought the four buildings for a total of $3 million.
A company called Barnett Tower LLC acquired the Barnett building from JDI Adams Street LLC of Chicago. Documents list Atkins as the manager of Barnett Tower. The nearby Florida Life Building, Bisbee Building and the Marble Bank Building, collectively known as the Laura Street Trio, were acquired by a company called Laura Trio LLC.
There is no document filed showing Atkins' role with Laura Trio LLC, but the deeds filed for Barnett Tower and Laura Street Trio show that both sales were "part of one transaction."
The $3 million mortgage for the sale was provided by Stache Investments Corp. Corporate records filed with the Florida Department of State show that Khan is the president of Stache Investments.
mbasch@baileypub.com
Wow :o good news cant wait to see what happens now.
Quote from: JaxJag on April 03, 2013, 12:44:49 AM
Wow :o good news cant wait to see what happens now.
Me too! Cautiously optimistic over the news...I don't think Khan would finance something without good reason.
Looking good. Now the real money will have to be spent. It will be interesting to see how money will be made via ownership of these buildings. I sense that a way will be found. The time has come.
"Stache Investment Corp"
Lol!
Great news though.
I looked at the recorded mortgage and believes it covers not the Trio but the old Barnett Bank Building. Look it up and read the legal description on the last page - begins at the west line of Laura at its intersection with the south line of Adams.
On the Cler's website, search for just "Stache" and you'll find it. It's slightly mis-indexed as "Stache Iinvestment" - investment with two I's.
3 Million is s steal for that property. I am really surprised it hasn't been snatched up before now for redevelopment.
Quote from: Dapperdan on April 03, 2013, 08:03:40 AM
3 Million is s steal for that property. I am really surprised it hasn't been snatched up before now for redevelopment.
IMO, not really. The property is worthless as it stands and it's the cost to develop the property that's expensive.
Im sure theres more to come with this. I dont think Khan would have agreed to financing without an actual plan in being placed. He just said his self it was on "life support". So apprantely things worked out... In Khan's famous words "stay tuned." lol
Correction: On further research, the $3 million was for both the Trio and the Barnett Building.
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 03, 2013, 03:57:32 AM
Looking good. Now the real money will have to be spent. It will be interesting to see how money will be made via ownership of these buildings. I sense that a way will be found. The time has come.
This deal benefits you as much as anyone, Ron. When I wa looking to buy 225 Laura, the prospect of the trio development was the main driving factor, but it looked shakier back then. When the trio turns around, your two properties are going to shoot up in value.
-unrelated- khan is a boss. Only somebody truly awesome would name a company Stache investments.
Quote from: downtownjag on April 03, 2013, 08:47:43 AM
Quote from: Dapperdan on April 03, 2013, 08:03:40 AM
3 Million is s steal for that property. I am really surprised it hasn't been snatched up before now for redevelopment.
IMO, not really. The property is worthless as it stands and it's the cost to develop the property that's expensive.
If the Trio weren't historic structures it's probable someone would have bought them years and demolished the towers, if only to provide parking for the Barnett Bank Building. Hopefully that doesn't happen this go round. The last several proposed projects have all included the Barnett and the Trio property together so they could share parking.
Sooo...that's awesome.
It is awesome. Hopefully something good will come of this!
Any idea of what the plans are yet?
I believe this was the last iteration of the plan, but I doubt its final. We'll see.
QuoteThe plans to renovate the Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank Building into a bustling, mixed-use development in the heart of Downtown Jacksonville have changed significantly since the concept was first presented in May 2010.
- The Barnett Bank Building will house a higher education school and dormitory for an as-yet-unnamed school, said Steve Atkins, managing partner of Linea LLC, the development group that’s pursuing the project.
- A boutique hotel component will be in both the Florida Life and Bisbee buildings and include street-level retail. A restaurant is planned for the Marble Bank Building, and a smaller parking garage than first envisioned will be built on the vacant lot on the corner of Adams and North Laura streets. The smaller parking garage should save about $10 million over the initial concept, Atkins said.
- Apartments are no longer part of the plan.
[/i]
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/08/24/developer-says-evolved-laura-street.html?page=all (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/08/24/developer-says-evolved-laura-street.html?page=all)
Also, from the same article
QuoteAtkins said he is negotiating between two hotel flags: Starwood Hotels & Resorts Inc. and Marriott International Inc. The hotel he envisions would have about 145 rooms.
Atkins said he has a construction loan lined up and that acquiring the buildings from the Chicago bank that foreclosed on them in 2008 isn’t the issue. He wants to make sure the project is ready to go before he closes on the property.
So, given that he has closed on the property, if this quote was right, the project is gonna start going. And that will be super to the duper.
There was un update last year about changing the plan at least partially into a space for an unnamed college or something.
I am curious as to how much of the $9M that was slated for downtown will be going to this project? I wouldn't be suprised if it was a big chunk of those funds. I'm also assuming that there are some pretty concrete plans for these buildings in place since Khan bought off on it.
Times-Union
QuoteSteve Atkins, who leads the purchasing group and has been involved for years with efforts to buy the buildings, said the Barnett building will become a university-level education center with student housing and that a parking garage will be built in the area. But he said he could give no more details before a major unveiling in two weeks.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-04-03/story/jacksonville-group-buys-laura-street-trio-barnett-buildings-downtown#ixzz2PQEkAld5
Man I really appreciate what Khan is doing for this city. That's why I get pissed when people claim he has some other motive. All billionaires are not greedy crooks. He is really a great guy
Quote from: duvaldude08 on April 03, 2013, 01:41:55 PM
Man I really appreciate what Khan is doing for this city. That's why I get pissed when people claim he has some other motive. All billionaires are not greedy crooks. He is really a great guy
Mr. Khan is an astute business man. While all of this is exciting keep in mind that Khan has simply "loaned" the money for the purchase through one of his business enterprises. He has not purchased the buildings. As such he will likely receive substantial "interest" on this loan. He also realizes that a vibrant downtown is good for his investment in the Jaguars. Don't get me wrong, I like the man plenty but lets remember that it is business and a profit making investment for him. My guess is that he has some knowledge that the 3 million loan is a safe venture because of the 9 million for downtown. Let's see how much of that money goes to this structure. It's all good but it's not all altruistic. :)
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 03, 2013, 01:52:12 PM
Quote from: duvaldude08 on April 03, 2013, 01:41:55 PM
Man I really appreciate what Khan is doing for this city. That's why I get pissed when people claim he has some other motive. All billionaires are not greedy crooks. He is really a great guy
Mr. Khan is an astute business man. While all of this is exciting keep in mind that Khan has simply "loaned" the money for the purchase through one of his business enterprises. He has not purchased the buildings. As such he will likely receive substantial "interest" on this loan. He also realizes that a vibrant downtown is good for his investment in the Jaguars. Don't get me wrong, I like the man plenty but lets remember that it is business and a profit making investment for him. My guess is that he has some knowledge that the 3 million loan is a safe venture because of the 9 million for downtown. Let's see how much of that money goes to this structure. It's all good but it's not all altruistic. :)
Of course. He stated "whats good for Jacksonville, is good for the Jaguars." And yes , its an investment no doubt. As he even states, theres a business side to everything. But do you really think everybody in the world is in it for money? Aside from one spark, there have been several other ventures he's dropped money in that have not been talked about much. He was asked why, and he said because its not about him. We can always say " yeah he's nice but.." I just try to refrain from that. He's a good self-less guy.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 03, 2013, 01:52:12 PMMy guess is that he has some knowledge that the 3 million loan is a safe venture
I think this is the most important thing to come out of this so far. Khan has obviously seen the plan and believes it will succeed. The guy knows success so hopefully that is a good sign.
Duval, at no time did I say Mr. Khan's only motivation was money, nor did I question his motivation in giving the loan. I simply pointed out that he is an astute business man. I will add to that the observation that he did not become a billionaire by investing in business opportunities without the potential for a sound return. The investment works for him at several levels and you can bet he did not loan funds that he was not sure of seeing a return on. He is too good a business man for that. Let's not confuse good business with charity. He has plenty of other ways he has shown charity to this community and we all applaud that. He can be both astute in business and at the same time invest in things that will help downtown to grow. :)
Quote from: acme54321 on April 03, 2013, 02:02:16 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 03, 2013, 01:52:12 PMMy guess is that he has some knowledge that the 3 million loan is a safe venture
I think this is the most important thing to come out of this so far. Khan has obviously seen the plan and believes it will succeed. The guy knows success so hopefully that is a good sign.
I tend to agree acme but return on private investment and overall success of the project are two decidedly different things. Khan made a safe bet on his loan. Let's hope that those actually doing the project have a solid plan that will work financially providing us with a successful end product.
The Trio project appears to be the first of many from a newly formed local REIT focusing on urban infill.
Press Release:
Jacksonville Based REIT Acquires Laura Street Trio and Surrounding Properties
Jacksonville, Fla. â€" SouthEast Holdings, a Jacksonville based real estate investment trust (REIT) has purchased a collection of coveted historic downtown core properties for an undisclosed amount announced the group’s president Steve Atkins.
The acquisition includes the Barnett Bank building, an eighteen story tower located on the corner of Laura and Adams Streets, along with the Florida Life, Bisbee and Florida National Bank buildings, commonly referred to as the Laura Street Trio. The collection of buildings has been viewed by many as the key to downtown Jacksonville’s successful revitalization of its urban core.
“I am incredibly gratified by the tireless efforts put forth by our entire team. Everyone we have worked with and the community alike have been committed from the beginning of this effort with real enthusiasm for this project,†Atkins said. “It’s a new day for Jacksonvilleâ€.
According to Atkins, this purchase by the REIT is a strategic move made in support of a much larger initiative to be revealed in the coming weeks. Today’s announcement is coupled with information released by the group yesterday detailing the reorganization of Atkins’ development firm, finalized with a merger agreement of related interests in multiple real estate companies. Atkins Group, Inc., AGI Equities, Dav-Lin Construction Company and Linea, LLC have been consolidated to create SouthEast Development Group, LLC.
The new organization will continue the group’s licensed operations as a Certified General Contractor in the states of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, North and South Carolina and has been qualified for operations in Tennessee and Kentucky. Specializing in design-build construction methodology, company principals have more than 80 years of industry experience and a resume of more than $400 million dollars in total development volume throughout the region. "This merger is a major step in the growth of our company and fully anchors our regional footprint in the southern United States", said company principal Woody Garner. “The SouthEast brand is truly reflective of who we are, our history and where we’ve made our mark in the industry.
Over the past twenty years, our group has built a tremendous resume of work from the Carolinas to South Florida, we want to build on that foundationâ€.
SouthEast Holdings, the affiliated REIT, will primarily make strategic investments in the region, with a particular focus on prime urban-centric, infill style developments. “A REIT provides the optimal vehicle to employ capital investment in the areas we need it mostâ€, said Steve Atkins, Principal and Managing Director of SouthEast, “focusing on city-centers and the unique opportunities they provide can be challenging in the current economic environment. If we can assist with equity investments in key marketswhere traditional financing has been frozen for the last few years, we can facilitate moving projects forward in areas that are ready for unprecedented growth. REITs provide that type of focus, with great upside potential for investors. Our broad business base combined with the strength of the REIT will make for a very successful union. As the market continues to improve, this consolidation of development and investment interests under one flag will make us more competitive and allow the company to expand in many different waysâ€.
The newly affiliated companies are expected to generate business synergies in the design-build arena and drive a significantly improved cost structure that will create a competitive position in the market. With a successful history in the market sectors of commercial office, healthcare, retail, institutional and mixed-use, SouthEast is now poised to add multifamily and hospitality projects to its portfolio within the next 24 months.
Announcements regarding the group’s plans for the properties and the larger initiative will be revealed at a private event on April 17th, coinciding with the OneSpark Festival held from April 17th through April 21st in downtown Jacksonville.
SouthEast Development Group and affiliate SouthEast Holdings will continue to base their operations in Jacksonville, Florida.
Pros: Something will finally happen at this site.
At $3,000,000 that is one of the all time best buys in Florida Real Estate History.
Cons: If you are not puting a residential rental community like 11E or The Carling, which have booked
at 95% occupancy rates since they were finished, you are missing the entire point of what is killing
downtown. NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE LIVE THERE. A cursory look at the current statistics will reveal a
strong demand for downtown housing that is going unmet. Putting a restaurant into the Marble bank (I
presume a high end one) will be a total waste. Will the college kids be eating there? Has Steve Atkins
ever lived in downtown Jacksonville? A boutique hotel sounds neat until you realize it will do almost
nothing for the rest of downtown. Will this project meet the basic needs of a quality grocery store
downtown , a dry cleaners, a pharmacy? Quality housing for young professionals who move here and
don't want to live in the 'Burbs? Basic entertainment besides consuming alcohol?
I'm happy something is going to happen but I do not like this plan mentioned in the previous thread.
My opinion, humbly submitted.
While I don't know what the final uses of this particular project may be, I disagree on the idea that the previously mentioned uses don't provide better economic benefit than strictly turning all the structures into residential. For example, you'd struggle to get a decent amount of residential into the Laura Trio, to the point where you'd still have a feasible project.
The square footage simply isn't there for the amount of money it takes to bring the buildings back. You'd be better off building +300 units from the ground up in Brooklyn or LaVilla than spending millions to restore these buildings, only to see them fit less than 100 residential units in them.
Nevertheless, if you could pull off a hotel, those are rooms being booked by people who are spending money to eat out at least three times a day, every day. That's going to be more beneficial to a business like La Cena or a place like the Landing than a few extra people residing within that block. Also, a dormitory does equate with people living downtown. While students may not have the same type of disposable income as yuppies, you can pack more of them in there and they'd at least funnel cash into may of the service style businesses and bars.
Also, the Marble Bank isn't the type of building you'd put a dry cleaner or pharmacy into. We have several other lots and spaces more suitable, such as the proposed retail complex on Riverside Avenue across the street from the Times-Union. Anyway, probably most important to that area's street scene is the compact combination of a hotel, restaurant (if it includes outdoor dining) and a school with dorms (and possibly street level retail) is they'll pack that block with people and activity 24/7. With that said, I have no idea what this group has in store for these buildings. However, I'm happy to see them take the risk and wish them financial success.
QuoteI disagree on the idea that the previously mentioned uses don't provide better economic benefit than strictly turning all the structures into residential. For example, you'd struggle to get a decent amount of residential into the Laura Trio, to the point where you'd still have a feasible project.
The square footage simply isn't there for the amount of money it takes to bring the buildings back. You'd be better off building +300 units from the ground up in Brooklyn or LaVilla than spending millions to restore these buildings, only to see them fit less than 100 residential units in them.
Once again, 100 percent agree
Thelakelander, I totally agree. The small square footage of the two high rises would provide only a few residential units. But at 300-400 ft2 per hotel room, at 1-2 people per room 7 days a week, that adds to DT. Also a student complex can be the catalyst for so much more. Just check out Savannah with the arts school. True DT Savannah is mainly hotel rooms. Does anyone see the large spark that happened just today for DT. The Riverside project, the Barnett Bank, the Trio and the start of good infill on the Southbank. Maybe getting closer to "critical mass".
Hotel use for the Barnett Building is optimal for more activity in that area of downtown
I like alot what MusicMan said. Whatever those projects are gonna be, I would rather for them to be maybe a lil' modest and sustainable vs too expensive and ultimately soon to be downsized. You can get away with everything being top notch (hotels etc) in a big major market, not so sure about a city like Jax at this present time. We have seen to much downsizing over the past years, look no further than the Landing; Fill in the blank national brand clothing store turnt the Museum of Plywood that has nice laminated paper signage. Sadly usually once you downsize, there's no coming back.
^I'm not sure residential in the Trio without the addition of a larger connected building is the definition of modest and sustainable.
This is a difficult site. Definitely a dream project. It would be possible, though not likely feasible, to do rentals. Once you reconfigure the existing buildings and add new construction next door (as you'll need to, also - structured parking...will need to be integrated into overall building as site is tight), your basis is already likely too high to be able to charge rents the local DT market can support (you'll never be able to charge higher than $1.50-$1.60psf so long as 11 East and the Carling rents are as low as they are, and new construction involving adaptive reuse of buildings in these configurations and these conditions is pricey to the point where you'll hope for rents pushing $2psf, which is right around the area's high watermark at the Strand). Restaurant parking requirements are much more stringent than rental parking requirements, which are much more stringent than hotel parking requirements (and so on to below):
Restaurant + hotel + bar go very well together.
If I had as much money as Khan, this would be a dream pet project. Khan has so many options here with hotel. He has the ability to 3rd party out operations and pay fees. He can directly partner with a guy like Atkins and pay fees and a promote; that way Atkins is vested. He has so many pieces to play around with...he can develop a really cool hotel concept, or two (2 buildings), and a restaurant. RFP out to local chefs (you get wined and dined like a biatch in the process...I only know from experience :)).
If done right, he would have soooo many options later on. Jax is such a risky hotel market, I'm *sure* that only a guy like Atkins would come in to create a new hotel downtown, but something cool and unique to the market that doesn't rely on downtown office users, convention business, tourists, or budget travelers. You build something right and you have the opportunity to sign a lease with a credit operator and flag it (say a Kimpton), or sell it outright (who knows what will net you more in Jax...it's all a fun test...sell all the improvements outright or negotiate a lease and sell the business separately and sell the land/improvements subject to the lease later on when need be at the drop of a dime to a fixed income investor who will pay a premium for guaranteed monthly income backed by good credit and awesome collateral, etc)
The most creative side of real estate is independent hospitality side. You can have street retail, suburban mixed-use, etc etc, but with an independent hotel + restaurant, you REALLY have to have vision, balls, and patience (as well as spectacular PR agent). You get it going and it's a real high risk, high reward real estate proposition. My firm has done both owner/operator of independent hotels (we recently sold one to Loews after repositioning it to 4 star with 4 star dining), and we have acquired mixed-use deals where a hotel has a 99 year lease for a portion of the space...obviously a certain calibre/flag of a hotel for that type of deal (the risk is on the operator more than the lessor unless you price the hotel-backed income stream too high...which is unlikely).
Plus, the restaurant is the pitching point. An independent restaurant + bar does nothing for a multifamily development, only means something to a condo development when it's a 400 unit high rise with units starting at $1M, and works in older office buildings that offer the space...but Trio doesn't scream office space to me at all, definitely not in Jax. You do hotel + restaurant together with the goal of each feeding the other, and eventually you can get a credit operator/flag who will own and operate the hotel AND the restaurant, likely not one without the other as your F&B business is a huge side of the business and something you want to control.
I don't see student housing working without an actual campus nearby. I *don't* believe that student housing is a positive use of that site. It won't be large enough to really make that much of a difference, and at best you'll see an increased demand for Chipotle, a late night wing place, convenience store, etc. A boutique hotel will better feed downtown attractions, dine-in restaurants, and also put bodies on the street (attrac
Very exciting news! Will somebody lend me $3MM so I can have this opportunity??
Good point Simms
"The most creative side of real estate is independent hospitality side. You can have street retail, suburban mixed-use, etc etc, but with an independent hotel + restaurant, you REALLY have to have vision, balls, and patience (as well as spectacular PR agent). You get it going and it's a real high risk, high reward real estate proposition."
I guess this is all we can hope for to get this town above water again. Lets face it- Jacksonville is bad for business, unless these moves are made together with other great moves. I guess that is why all this shit is happening all at once as it did before the bust. I think it just takes a few investors with such courage and patience to get things going.
Whatever ends up going in the buildings, and even if it all flops right out the gate, if the buildings get restored to readily usable condition, its a huge plus for downtown.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on April 04, 2013, 08:44:18 AM
I think it just takes a few investors with such courage and patience to get things going.
I think thats deinfately it. Seems as if people are willing to take more of a risk with our market now, downtown in particular. I think its also a plus to have a local billoniare investor like Khan. He's passionate about Jax succeeding, so he'd probably take a few more calculated risk than other investors.
PeeJay, good point. If Khan ever has to foreclose on these properties he'll make money right there.
I'll restate my opinion, because I love the points of view expresesed by all parties on this thread.
1. Best deal for the Buyer in recent history.
2. Restaurant in Marble bank, bad idea.
If tomorrow the developer announced he was partnering with Trader Joes (or Whole Foods, or any well known premium grocery store/chain) to place a new concept store into the Marble Bank as the center piece of his redevelopment, this would be a true start to the renewal of downtown. The building is big enough ( and cheap enough) to do something incredibly original, to create buzz across the country, not just downtown, and then put residential around it. Those units would go quickly, and at a premium. Also, this would draw customers from within
the entire county, making use of the billions of dollars of infrastructure already in place and bringing people downtown to spend money, something that is not happening right now. All of the residents currently downtown would have a premium place to walk and pick up groceries, maybe drop off dry cleaning (in a small nook of the building, or the basement) and folks who work downtown could pick up some goodies leaving work on their way home. My ideal is sort of a "Zabars meets Fresh Market" concept, tailored for DT Jax.
I like the old Barnett bank as a better place for the boutique hotel, because there is a need for one downtown. And room inside for a cozy restaurant/bar to serve it's patrons.
As much as I hate to play the debbie downer role (there are numerous other forum participants who fulfill it nicely) I'm skeptical about the possibility of "higher education" and dorms in the Barnett. Presumably this "as-yet-unnamed school" will be some new for-profit, in which case it's difficult to see such a thing attracting much residential interest or other positive impact.
For the other buildings, I can see a boutique hotel working a lot better than residential in those buildings, unless you were to add on an additional connected building or something. There's just too little space. I'd rather see new, larger mixed-use buildings going up on empty lots if that's where we're going. If they can swing it, boutique hotels also have the benefit of making a lot of their income from their restaurants/bars, which attract people who aren't necessarily staying there; as such they have an impact beyond just the hotel portion.
What is the ceiling height inside of the marble bank building?? Why not make it multi-story and do both? You could easily fit a Grassroots Market and a restaurant in there with two floors. You could do a blacksheep-style rooftop bar on top of the restaurant and really make something of the property!
Quote from: Captain Zissou on April 04, 2013, 09:44:50 AM
What is the ceiling height inside of the marble bank building?? Why not make it multi-story and do both? You could easily fit a Grassroots Market and a restaurant in there with two floors. You could do a blacksheep-style rooftop bar on top of the restaurant and really make something of the property!
Ceiling height isn't a problem.
For a grocer like Trader Joes (which is very much a pipe dream, they would better fit in North San Marco if they were to move near the urban core), it would be interesting to see how they would fit a loading dock in there.
Something like a CVS wouldn't have that kind of issue, they typically don't require scissor lifts in their urban layouts.
Kind of off topic, but if you are ever in Chicago the Walgreens in a converted bank building in Wicker Park is really nice. I have a ton of pics (the lady friend got quite mad that I spent over an hour in a drug store on a recent trip) I'll post up tonight if the Suns game gets rained out.
Here's a teaser:
(http://blog.chicagoarchitecture.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Walgreens-Chicago-Illinois-November-2012-023a.jpg)
While that is lovely and impressive, that's like 35 foot ceiling heights for a walgreens. With a more urban format, you could still have a small market on the ground floor and a restaurant above. You could have cut outs in the second floor to let light from the sunlight reach down to the first floor grocer. There are a number of ways to tie the two floors together that would add to the experience of both. A small lobby of sorts with an open stair case heading to the second floor with a balcony looking down on the first would be very cool.
I may be trying to fit too much in that space, as I don't know the dimensions, but a single use for that building seems a little bland.
There techincally is two floors in the building now:
(http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/superphoto/biz_01LauraStreetTri.jpg)
Boom shacka lacka!!!! I say build out the second floor to cover about 60% of the first and then have stair cases and a lift going to the second floor from the main entrance. It looks small for a full blown walgreens, but ive been in a number of Dwayne Reid type stores that were smaller than that. Grassroots in 5 points is (currently) much smaller. I stand by my position of a single floor, single use of that building being too bland.
I'm partial to an upscale dining establishment in the marble bank building....the upstairs could be mroe refined seating with the downstairs being more casual (think of the different themed rooms at Blackfinn).
whatever the use, I think keeping the open plan with the balcony is the way to go
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 04, 2013, 11:26:21 AM
I'm partial to an upscale dining establishment in the marble bank building....the upstairs could be mroe refined seating with the downstairs being more casual (think of the different themed rooms at Blackfinn).
whatever the use, I think keeping the open plan with the balcony is the way to go
Me too. The resturant concept would compliment the hotel aspect of the development. The marble bank set up would make an AWESOME resturant.
Still screams restaurant to me. The urban markets in "starter" cities even the size of Atlanta are typically in much cheaper space. If a hotel is to be done, especially a new or independent concept, F&B is a must and will be as much a draw as the hotel itself. One won't happen without the other, and given the size of the Trio, a restaurant in Marble Bank could be close to half of the entire business, or more depending. You can't really put a restaurant anywhere else...and you'll need the potential branding of the Marble Bank building for the restaurant...2nd floor dining with an open kitchen in the center of the ground floor is a very commonly done concept. You'll need space for a large bar or lounge area as that is the bulk of F&B business for hotel restaurant concepts...you'll want a space that can be activated for the majority of the day.
Also, splitting into two floors ensures that the glass skylight ceiling goes to waste for someone. Do you put restaurant on second floor? Then that eliminates the "openness" that I feel would be part of the draw, you would have more ADA compliance issues, need to develop a restroom core for each floor that will position for a store and a restaurant...very hard to do when the chef will have lots of say in the creative design of the space and will want a fully customizable buildout. Plus...why put the main business on the 2nd floor of a cramped building? That eliminates a degree of visibility and access...you'd want a restaurant to be connected to a lobby of any hotel that you develop, not a market or retail store.
Also, restaurants are the bright spot in American retail right now. Anybody doing retail anywhere is clamoring for restaurants.
Adding a major grocery outlet downtown would be a solid use for the properies. The lack of any convient grocery options, aside from Winn-Dixie, is a major reason many people I know aren't looking for a place downtown.
Maybe one thought would be to use the Marble Bank for the lobby and bar of the proposed hotel.
I'm just glad that these buildings will be stabilized/restored.
Quote from: FSBA on April 04, 2013, 11:54:35 AM
Adding a major grocery outlet downtown would be a solid use for the properies. The lack of any convient grocery options, aside from Winn-Dixie, is a major reason many people I know aren't looking for a place downtown.
There are better options for these properties than a grocery store. Putting a grocery store in that location wont exactly have people relocating downtown in great numbers. However, the Riverside Park development in Brooklyn WILL have a grocery store in the retail development portion. So weve got that covered ;)
If a grocery goes into the Brooklyn project, with Winn-Dixie on Union and the proposed Publix in San Marco, you can forget about another grocery store coming in. If we can figure out how to get a Skyway station at or near the operations center, then this retail complex will be accessible to the Northbank and Southbank via fixed transit.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 04, 2013, 12:22:33 PM
If a grocery goes into the Brooklyn project, with Winn-Dixie on Union and the proposed Publix in San Marco, you can forget about another grocery store coming in. If we can figure out how to get a Skyway station at or near the operations center, then this retail complex will be accessible to the Northbank and Southbank via fixed transit.
Riverside BLVD is screaming skyway extension right now. BAD.
For the marble bank, my thoughts: relocate Visit Jacksonville - unless there's a term option in the lease may be tough. Along the same lines maybe Downtown Vision.
This is all assuming appropriate retail use is the first option
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 01:14:58 PM
For the marble bank, my thoughts: relocate Visit Jacksonville - unless there's a term option in the lease may be tough. Along the same lines maybe Downtown Vision.
This is all assuming appropriate retail use is the first option
???
Yeah ???
The San Marco Publix is a dream that just won't die. Regardless, the site is within walking/biking distance for alot of people within the core and by addressing one of the chief concerns alot of people have about downtown would serve as a magnet to draw more people and shops.
Either way, it is nice that regardless of what happens it looks like the buildings will finally be put to use.
One question: Downtown Jacksonville boast less than 2000 residents, and 95% of the people who work there
drive home at 5 pm. Who exactly is going to fill a high end restaurant inside the Marble Bank?
I would buy into the idea if the owner was a celebrity chef such as Mario Batali aor Bobby Flay, but not another chain place. Fuggedaboutit.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 04, 2013, 03:40:48 PM
One question: Downtown Jacksonville boast less than 2000 residents, and 95% of the people who work there
drive home at 5 pm. Who exactly is going to fill a high end restaurant inside the Marble Bank?
I would buy into the idea if the owner was a celebrity chef such as Mario Batali aor Bobby Flay, but not another chain place. Fuggedaboutit.
That may be true, but I believe that is the number of residents just on the northbank, which is considered the "core". If you add in residents from the southbank, san marco, springfield, and riverside they will all patronize downtown, not just downtown residents.
People in Jax Drive to where they want to eat the Orange Park crowd will drive to the Beach, SJTC or Ruth's Chris for high end dining and they will drive to downtown as well. Where as a chain that can be found all over town will only be supported by local traffic a high end place will have a larger draw. Now of course high end places flop as well but the higher end or "occasion" dinning the less it has to rely on a certain neighborhood.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 04, 2013, 03:40:48 PM
One question: Downtown Jacksonville boast less than 2000 residents, and 95% of the people who work there
drive home at 5 pm. Who exactly is going to fill a high end restaurant inside the Marble Bank?
I would buy into the idea if the owner was a celebrity chef such as Mario Batali aor Bobby Flay, but not another chain place. Fuggedaboutit.
My guess... the same people that eat at Ruth's Chris, Bistro AIX, Mathews, Black Sheep etc. There are over 1,000 companies in DT that wine & dine and are wined dined.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 04, 2013, 03:40:48 PM
One question: Downtown Jacksonville boast less than 2000 residents, and 95% of the people who work there
drive home at 5 pm. Who exactly is going to fill a high end restaurant inside the Marble Bank?
please...how many people live at the SJTC right now?
fact is there are also 50,000+ people that live within a few miles of downtown....I'm sure folks in Avondale and San Marco would frequent a downtown establishment, just as I (a downtown resident) frequent their neighborhoods
Quote from: MusicMan on April 04, 2013, 03:40:48 PM
One question: Downtown Jacksonville boast less than 2000 residents, and 95% of the people who work there
drive home at 5 pm. Who exactly is going to fill a high end restaurant inside the Marble Bank?
I would buy into the idea if the owner was a celebrity chef such as Mario Batali aor Bobby Flay, but not another chain place. Fuggedaboutit.
2,000 residents will struggle to keep a 7-Eleven open, much less a restaurant, pharmacy or grocery market. The concept of a restaurant should work well if it comes along with a boutique hotel. Ruth Chris and Charthouse manage to keep their doors open. I'm pretty sure a good number of their patrons are guest at the adjoining hotels.
Can someone name 5 restaurants downtown that are thriving that do not serve burritos or hamburgers/pizza/wings? Hooters does not count!
(By 'thriving' I mean struggling to keep up with demand for their food/product.)
Last time I checked Chew moved a couple miles to get near some actual people.
Shwaz, your restaurant group is in San Marco.
Also I did not say open a grocery store in the Marble Bank, I said open a new concept hybrid store that would be unlike anything else in Jax or all of NE Florida ( Zabars meets Fresh Market.) Something to generate buzz that could resonate outside of Duval County. Something to serve all the folks who might venture downtown for any reason, such as a football game or a concert. A high end restaurant ( and I love to go to such places) will serve a very limited clientele, and if the hotel is empty on the weekends, chances are it will be too.
If you look at this transaction, you can see that the $3 million went to the Barnett Bank purchase and everything else was included "for free." They are starting with a ridiculously low basis here which allows for a bit more freedom and risk taking than had they paid more. Also, the COJ will probably kick in a bit of $$ to cover new plumbing and electric, or at least a good portion of it.
Here are five: 1. Ruth Chris, 2. Charthouse, 3. Benny's Seafood, 4. River City Brewing and 5. Juliette's.
Come on man, any one of those in 32202?
You're excluding the Southbank riverfront? In that case, two out of that list are in 32202.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 04, 2013, 05:46:37 PM
Here are five: 1. Ruth Chris, 2. Charthouse, 3. Benny's Seafood, 4. River City Brewing and 5. Juliette's.
Side note (NOT trying to hijack the thread!): RCBC should be ashamed to call itself a brewery. Hell, it should be ashamed to call itself a restaurant. Absent the good real estate, that place shoulda been out of business 10+ years ago!
No one's arguing that there's enough residential population downtown. The argument is that the Trio isn't going to work for residential, the layout just doesn't fit. Frankly, the Barnett would be a lot better for residential than they would.
QuoteAlso I did not say open a grocery store in the Marble Bank, I said open a new concept hybrid store that would be unlike anything else in Jax or all of NE Florida ( Zabars meets Fresh Market.) Something to generate buzz that could resonate outside of Duval County. Something to serve all the folks who might venture downtown for any reason, such as a football game or a concert. A high end restaurant ( and I love to go to such places) will serve a very limited clientele, and if the hotel is empty on the weekends, chances are it will be too.
Fresh Market is rumored to be going into the Brooklyn retail project. Nevertheless, no one is venturing from the burbs or out of Duval County to go to a downtown Fresh Market. I'll say the same thing here, I mentioned in the thread about the Haydon Burns Library being purchased for non-profit uses. We should be careful about attempting to dictate specific uses in privately funded projects. Those guys should put whatever in there that makes it feasible for this development to get off the ground. As long as it engages the street, pays property taxes and fits within the overall vision of a vibrant downtown, there should not be a problem. One the major reasons we've failed with downtown redevelopment in the past is because we've micro managed the private sector's innovation and creativity to the point to where most take their money and investment elsewhere.
QuoteIf you look at this transaction, you can see that the $3 million went to the Barnett Bank purchase and everything else was included "for free." They are starting with a ridiculously low basis here which allows for a bit more freedom and risk taking than had they paid more. Also, the COJ will probably kick in a bit of $$ to cover new plumbing and electric, or at least a good portion of it.
There's a ton of money that needs to go into something like this:
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/888996129_LuaRj-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/889006593_Eom8Y-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/888963316_THYVb-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/888954001_7ruCj-M.jpg)
This isn't an easy or cheap deal to pull off and make work.
I'm just giving you a hard time. Whatever goes into the Marble Bank, it has stunning original arhitecture plus a location that in any other city would men a huge success. This blog is about the only place a guy like me can espouse his beliefs about what I think will work, based on what I have seen and experienced in my travels elsewhere.
Developer puts a restaurant there, I will go. But I probably won't drive past my 2 or 3 favorites to get there, unless the food and experince is spectacular. A cool and unique space reminiscent of 'Zabar's meet's Fresh Market' I could see going to on a weekly basis.
Let's add LaCena and Indochine to the list.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 04, 2013, 06:03:39 PM
I'll say the same thing here, I mentioned in the thread about the Haydon Burns Library being purchased for non-profit uses. We should be careful about attempting to dictate specific uses in privately funded projects. Those guys should put whatever in there that makes it feasible for this development to get off the ground. As long as it engages the street, pays property taxes and fits within the overall vision of a vibrant downtown, there should not be a problem. One the major reasons we've failed with downtown redevelopment in the past is because we've micro managed the private sector's innovation and creativity to the point to where most take their money and investment elsewhere.
100% agree.
QuoteI'm just giving you a hard time.
Lol, I actually enjoy these types of discussions. I've always viewed them as a way to learn more and a process that exposes unique and innovative ideas.
QuoteDeveloper puts a restaurant there, I will go. But I probably won't drive past my 2 or 3 favorites to get there, unless the food and experince is spectacular. A cool and unique space reminiscent of 'Zabar's meet's Fresh Market' I could see going to on a weekly basis.
Without a specific reason to go there, I doubt I'd pass a couple of Publix's to spend time in a 'Zabar's meets Fresh Market'. I also wouldn't eat at a restaurant of any kind on a routine basis or else I'd go broke real quick. I've never had a bad meal at Ruth Chris but I only go there once or twice a year. However, downtown and the community are bigger than me and my personal preferences. So, I'd be a big advocate of both concepts if various development groups are willing to spend their funds to enhance downtown and the urban core.
If a project in the Trio works out (to me the Barnett Bank building is pretty, but boring and cookie cutter as far as old buildings go), then I'm sure it could attract investment advisors such as my own firm, which has successfully closed out 5 opportunity funds where each asset is co-invested. We do projects like this in our sleep and have serious capital backing. Jacksonville has not been a target opportunistic market previously for us, and will never be a target market for any of our core/institutional funds. All it takes is one successful project to prove that the market can pan out should other opportunities arise.
While we have all agreed (or most of us anyway) that market forces, ownership, etc will presumably determine the building use, I do think that in this country's most progressive city developers rarely if ever have that luxury. The San Francisco Planning Commission determines every detail for every site in the city what can be built on the site. It even goes so far as to determine the design. The entitlement process here is extreme...a developer will essentially buy a set of plans that already come with an architect and blueprints, so it's quite the opposite of "free market forces". That being said, while the development system out here is quite "socialist", it's run by very smart socialists who obviously do a much better job than the "capitalists/free market" types in Jax or other cities who can't get their act together. Proof that any system is only as good as the people running it.
$3 million for this project is $3 million too much. Its just a mistake to think $3 million on a project thst will cost between $40-$70 million is anything more than a drop in the bucket.
Not a knock on the project but the inefficiencies inherent make it risky to begin with. One Plan called for a new residential building on the dirt on Adama which would help capture efficiencies with the project as a whole. the Floorplates are awful.
A good indicator will be to see if Hallmark does in fact get the $1.34 PSF they're asking. I believe the trio project was previously modeled around $1.05 PSF? If hallmark gets it and proves the demand is there, and I think they will, it definite helps the trio project.
I'm praying its a huge success I'd love to see it happen and in my opinion is the indisputable lynchpin for future residential development downtown.
^^^HALLMARK IS PROFORMA-ING $1.34 AVG RENTS??? WTF, PREVIOUS PROPOSALS OF TRIO CONSIDERED $1.05?
I have been so long removed from such a small, cheap market these numbers don't compute for me at all (and I do have an idea about Nashville, Austin, Raleigh and Charlotte...)
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
No concessions on strand either
Still, someone take all of the land that was transacted with the $3M. I bet we're talking at least a few acres...even at 2 acres you're still talking a land deal of $34/sf, which seems like a steal to me. Prime land in Miami and Atlanta will trade for $200-400psf, prime land here in SF will trade for $4,000psf (a parcel a block away from my office tower just sold for this amount last week).
So you pay $34/sf for the most prime land in the city, have some improvements on them at low or no tax basis, and can sit and wait for the right partner(s) to come along to redevelop the sites. Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.
Lol strand is asking $1.8 PSF on some one beds! Www.skylevelliving.com
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
Na retail in sjtc can sell in the $30's PSF (i think chic fil a was $34 psf actually)but office development land with entitlements is around $8-10 and maybe $15-20 for retail with major frontage.
I'm optimistic about the deal, don't get me wrong, but it wouldn't be the first place I put money.
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
As for concessions, just letting you know that's net effective. Yeah well look at the 2-3 beds they aren't getting it there. It's more so the demand for those than the Jacksonville market. And lol yeah sure we can talk construction cost but talk to Auchter about that. Hopefully it's indicating pent up demand and hallmark will be successful.
I bet San Fran is amazing. Thats all I have to say about that!
Seriously, Jax is incomputably cheap. How is that? I mean I know across all product types that it's typically in the bottom barrel of performance and in the top tier of risk, but is it really that bad?
I was conservatively estimating 2 acres between Barnett and Trio...maybe it's closer to 4? At 4 acres you're talking $17psf...these are corner DT parcels at Main and Main...that's considered pricey for such land in Jacksonville? People would pay hundreds of millions of dollars for such land in NYC or SF or Boston. People would pay enough for comparable land in those cities to full on construct a 1,000 ft tower. LoL
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:45:22 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
As for concessions, just letting you know that's net effective. Yeah well look at the 2-3 beds they aren't getting it there. It's more so the demand for those than the Jacksonville market. And lol yeah sure we can talk construction cost but talk to Auchter about that. Hopefully it's indicating pent up demand and hallmark will be successful.
I bet San Fran is amazing. Thats all I have to say about that!
I only assume you're referring to net effectives brotha (not in the brokerage fluff puff business here ;)). I've looked at the units and their pricing...I follow the Strand because in my mind it's the only true class A urban multifamily product in the city. I do hope the Hallmark project is successful and I'm sure it will be...it's basically one of a kind in the city so it is easy to differentiate itself. If they are below $1.50psf net effective once stabilized at 220 Riverside, I'll be surprised. I won't be surprised if they deliver/pre-lease with concessions (I'm picturing a free TV, Wifi, gift cards, or something tangible before reduced rent...if reduced/free rent, I think it will speak to sticker shock in the market, which may not be good for urban multifamily going forward).
Lol idk my friend. Possibly the nicest and stable office portfolio just sold for about $120 PSF. One park sold for $20 PSF, granted it was almost totally vacant. Unfortunately downtown isn't main and main for us right now but that really is changing and the trio project helps from a vibrancy standpoint.
You know better than most its because there's just no demand for raw dirt downtown. Plus you can launch a bts for mid $20's PSF in the burbs so you're always fighting new construction with surface parking
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:52:43 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:45:22 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
As for concessions, just letting you know that's net effective. Yeah well look at the 2-3 beds they aren't getting it there. It's more so the demand for those than the Jacksonville market. And lol yeah sure we can talk construction cost but talk to Auchter about that. Hopefully it's indicating pent up demand and hallmark will be successful.
I bet San Fran is amazing. Thats all I have to say about that!
I only assume you're referring to net effectives brotha (not in the brokerage fluff puff business here ;)). I've looked at the units and their pricing...I follow the Strand because in my mind it's the only true class A urban multifamily product in the city. I do hope the Hallmark project is successful and I'm sure it will be...it's basically one of a kind in the city so it is easy to differentiate itself. If they are below $1.50psf net effective once stabilized at 220 Riverside, I'll be surprised. I won't be surprised if they deliver/pre-lease with concessions (I'm picturing a free TV, Wifi, gift cards, or something tangible before reduced rent...if reduced/free rent, I think it will speak to sticker shock in the market, which may not be good for urban multifamily going forward).
Lol yeah, it seems like a new trend too is offering yoga classes and such. I can see some move in incentives, hopefully its notma free tv though lol thats so gainesville! I'm really excited about that area with the new Y, fresh market, and these projects. The best food in Jax is in riverside as well. Yeah I don't know how it was underwritten that cheap either but I think the Bell project in riverside is more expensive as well.
BTS is another concept that doesn't compute with me (again been too far removed from that sort of scene to even think about that). I know the portfolio deal you're talking about...made the news :) (one of those rare instances where Jacksonville, FL comes up in news bits related to real estate)
My whole point since we have even discussed multifamily on this site is that DT is not Main and Main for jobs or for anything, which will and does hinder demand for expensive infill multifamily. I do think, though, that the site has so much potential and with better leadership (now being shown in the private sector?) that these pieces really could become Main and Main in short order - in fact, since this is ownership for ownership rather than ownership for investors, it would be much easier for Khan to "build the greater downtown community" through this single investment. He's got his own backing, an easier timetable, no investors to satisfy or report to, personal appeal, ease of building relationships as who wouldn't want to work with the man, etc. He's really the only local celebrity, and that can really help him with a project like this.
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 09:03:37 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:52:43 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:45:22 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
As for concessions, just letting you know that's net effective. Yeah well look at the 2-3 beds they aren't getting it there. It's more so the demand for those than the Jacksonville market. And lol yeah sure we can talk construction cost but talk to Auchter about that. Hopefully it's indicating pent up demand and hallmark will be successful.
I bet San Fran is amazing. Thats all I have to say about that!
I only assume you're referring to net effectives brotha (not in the brokerage fluff puff business here ;)). I've looked at the units and their pricing...I follow the Strand because in my mind it's the only true class A urban multifamily product in the city. I do hope the Hallmark project is successful and I'm sure it will be...it's basically one of a kind in the city so it is easy to differentiate itself. If they are below $1.50psf net effective once stabilized at 220 Riverside, I'll be surprised. I won't be surprised if they deliver/pre-lease with concessions (I'm picturing a free TV, Wifi, gift cards, or something tangible before reduced rent...if reduced/free rent, I think it will speak to sticker shock in the market, which may not be good for urban multifamily going forward).
Yeah I don't know how it was underwritten that cheap either but I think the Bell project in riverside is more expensive as well.
It is...if I remember correctly it already pushes $1.55-$1.60. This for cheap wood frame stucco apartments wrapping a tilt construction garage. That's a factor of location, though. Brooklyn to your average local renter probably looks like an urban prairie with nowhere to go and potential crime around the corner.
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:06:42 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 09:03:37 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:52:43 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:45:22 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 08:32:48 PM
Lol guessing on trio, but yeah and Strand ownership is consistently getting higher than hallmark for their one beds and studios
Well, duh. It's a luxury highrise on top of structured parking...they *should* be hitting close to $2psf for what I would estimate is the construction cost of that thing (a building like that would be getting closer to $2.50 in Austin, $3.00 in Chicago, probably $5-$6+ here in SF). Also I looked into vacancies...I'm not surprised they aren't giving concessions. Nobody anywhere is giving concessions right now, in any market. Forecasters are thinking that with robust pipelines coming to fruition in some cities/submarkets that concessions might "temporarily come back".
As for concessions, just letting you know that's net effective. Yeah well look at the 2-3 beds they aren't getting it there. It's more so the demand for those than the Jacksonville market. And lol yeah sure we can talk construction cost but talk to Auchter about that. Hopefully it's indicating pent up demand and hallmark will be successful.
I bet San Fran is amazing. Thats all I have to say about that!
I only assume you're referring to net effectives brotha (not in the brokerage fluff puff business here ;)). I've looked at the units and their pricing...I follow the Strand because in my mind it's the only true class A urban multifamily product in the city. I do hope the Hallmark project is successful and I'm sure it will be...it's basically one of a kind in the city so it is easy to differentiate itself. If they are below $1.50psf net effective once stabilized at 220 Riverside, I'll be surprised. I won't be surprised if they deliver/pre-lease with concessions (I'm picturing a free TV, Wifi, gift cards, or something tangible before reduced rent...if reduced/free rent, I think it will speak to sticker shock in the market, which may not be good for urban multifamily going forward).
Yeah I don't know how it was underwritten that cheap either but I think the Bell project in riverside is more expensive as well.
It is...if I remember correctly it already pushes $1.55-$1.60. This for cheap wood frame stucco apartments wrapping a tilt construction garage. That's a factor of location, though. Brooklyn to your average local renter probably looks like an urban prairie with nowhere to go and potential crime around the corner.
Wouldn't dispute that but we know how quickly those areas can become hip. That's where I think the new Y and fresh market will help. What a perfect time for the old fire station right there to be teed up for reuse, maybe Bar 1901??
Exactly. I agree that Brooklyn could explode, but we have never seen anything explode in Jax...so I'm skeptical until it happens. Also, net of the current proposals on the table + 220 Riverside, future developments will have to be more creative, perhaps denser, to really accommodate the type of urban explosion I personally envision for the area. I am *not* a fan of the Y proposal in the least bit in terms of land use, and Riverside Park is expansive land-wise (so is the retail proposal).
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:04:33 PM
BTS is another concept that doesn't compute with me (again been too far removed from that sort of scene to even think about that). I know the portfolio deal you're talking about...made the news :) (one of those rare instances where Jacksonville, FL comes up in news bits related to real estate)
My whole point since we have even discussed multifamily on this site is that DT is not Main and Main for jobs or for anything, which will and does hinder demand for expensive infill multifamily. I do think, though, that the site has so much potential and with better leadership (now being shown in the private sector?) that these pieces really could become Main and Main in short order - in fact, since this is ownership for ownership rather than ownership for investors, it would be much easier for Khan to "build the greater downtown community" through this single investment. He's got his own backing, an easier timetable, no investors to satisfy or report to, personal appeal, ease of building relationships as who wouldn't want to work with the man, etc. He's really the only local celebrity, and that can really help him with a project like this.
It hasn't happened yet the main problem has been fighting existing inventory but class a vacancy is around 7% so there aren't many options left. Plus a lot of users will commit to a guaranteed takedown but won't take all the space upfront which is where there are computing problems.
Definitely agree with your thoughts on Khan and the trio. I wonder though if he just financed the acquisition or is also planning on backing construction? I guess with a credit tenant in hand he would.
I think if he is smart he'll forgo the major effort and $$$ it will take to buy a credit tenant for any use there. I hope he treats his new acquisition as the birth of a mid-life real estate baby, and I hope he feeds and nurtures that baby into a really cool young adult.
My uneducated dream would be to create a really cool hotel concept or two in the Trio along with a shining star of a F&B business helmed by locally big name chefs/pastry chefs/mixologists (something that caters to unique things like Supper Club events, dining in the dark, full on shows, "club/restaurant" events, etc...exactly where you'd host a company party), get RevPar and ADR up to sustainable but noticeably strong levels over years of developing the hotel brand, and go for credit that way either by selling the entire thing to a major hotel operator who will flag it themselves, or by leasing the entire thing to a hotel group like Kimpton.
I would sit on Barnett Bank...it's cookie cutter, which to me says office, rentals, something easy. It's bordering on too small to do mixed-use...I just don't see the feasibility of doing something there right now.
7% is really low, isn't it? Or is that citywide Class A? At 7% in a CBD don't you start getting into development mode if there are no large block spaces left? (though high floor rents in the city's tallest building are like $22-$23 FS right? ... laughable) Also, I find that DT Jax Class A seems to mean something different from tower Class A in other Sunbelt cities. I have a hard time calling a building such as Aetna or BB&T tower or really even WF at this point true class A. Lower slab to slabs, outdated lobbies, cheap elevator cabs (though I'll comment that BofA's elevators are FAST...love 'em, I work about 400 ft up and it takes me about 35 seconds to get up here) limited amenities, ancient building systems, signage on the buildings (ewww from a LL's perspective LoL).
What shocks me, too, is that BofA doesn't have automatic elevator guards...aren't like the 2 or 3 major silk stocking law firms with presences in Jax all in there? Go to any major city and you can tell if a major fin. institution or law firm is in the building by how extensive the security is...I can go into BofA and go to any floor I think, right? I don't recall even needing a card to get up. In my building, we have barricades, human security guards at each elevator bank entrance, AND cards to get up...overkill, LoL.
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:37:18 PM
7% is really low, isn't it? Or is that citywide Class A? At 7% in a CBD don't you start getting into development mode if there are no large block spaces left? (though high floor rents in the city's tallest building are like $22-$23 FS right? ... laughable) Also, I find that DT Jax Class A seems to mean something different from tower Class A in other Sunbelt cities. I have a hard time calling a building such as Aetna or BB&T tower or really even WF at this point true class A. Lower slab to slabs, outdated lobbies, cheap elevator cabs (though I'll comment that BofA's elevators are FAST...love 'em, I work about 400 ft up and it takes me about 35 seconds to get up here) limited amenities, ancient building systems, signage on the buildings (ewww from a LL's perspective LoL).
What shocks me, too, is that BofA doesn't have automatic elevator guards...aren't like the 2 or 3 major silk stocking law firms with presences in Jax all in there? Go to any major city and you can tell if a major fin. institution or law firm is in the building by how extensive the security is...I can go into BofA and go to any floor I think, right? I don't recall even needing a card to get up. In my building, we have barricades, human security guards at each elevator bank entrance, AND cards to get up...overkill, LoL.
Sorry friend I should have specified. 7% class A in the butler/SS market. Yeah it's quite low; but about 130K has opened up with two call centers closing in Libertys Butler Plaza. Those should backfill pretty quickly with the tenants in the market. Those are right around $20 PSF.
CBD you're right on with A class rents and I don't disagree with you on the amount of class a buildings. Yeah I love B of A's elevator speed. That building, as I know you know, was built for the bank and they spared no expense. Maybe 1 enterprise is class A, they just need a credit tenant and I'm sure ownership will spruce it up a bit.
Some of the floors are locked down; that's kinda market standard.
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 09:16:24 PM
Plus a lot of users will commit to a guaranteed takedown but won't take all the space upfront which is where there are computing problems.
Just saw this...we deal with this in sophsticated markets, too (NYC and SF). I'm working on a 220,000 SF lease as we speak where the prospect thinks it's doing us, the landlord, a favor and wants all this flexibility in return...sorry folks it doesn't work that way! We *are* willing to work with you to improve the building to woo you in (i.e. if you want barricades for elevator lobbies, we'll install them...if you need an expanded restroom core because you pack'em in there, we'll even shoulder that freakin expensive cost), but we want a straightforward commitment in return.
Since you and I seem to be the rare poster that actually works in RE, what are your thoughts for the Barnett component, and for Trio? You're obviously much closer to the Jacksonville market than I could ever hope to be.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 04, 2013, 05:43:49 PM
Can someone name 5 restaurants downtown that are thriving that do not serve burritos or hamburgers/pizza/wings? Hooters does not count!
in downtown (northbank only)....Pho, Juliette's, Benny's, Vito's, and Indochine...then we can add the Hyatt restaurant (Currents?), La Cena, Zodiac, and even Fionn MacCool's....I know some aren't jam packed, but they are all still open.....so that's 9 restaurants without counting the 3 on the southbank riverfront or the private clubs.
Next question please
DT doesn't yet have a cool restaurant. Juliette's is about the most dated place I have been (I think they are or have recently upgraded, but can't imagine it being much better). Was never impressed by Chew (though as ya'll know I Love Orsay and Black Sheep). Bistro Aix has rested on its laurels for like 2 decades now, but has traditionally been what I would consider one of the only "appealing" restaurant concepts from a theme, menu, design standpoint. San Marco.
I think Marble Bank could really be something that most in the city just can't even fathom due to lack of exposure resulting from living in Jacksonville. Marble Bank could be a restaurant/bar-lounge/event space like none other in NE FL. It needs work and a serious capital initiative, but the right creative team and operators can pull it off. Restaurant industry is exploding across the country right now...Jacksonville can join in, too.
Restaurants thrive based on menu, good marketing/PR, price point, decor, following the right trends (or setting them) etc. Black Sheep could do just as well DT as it does in Riverside, same concept...it's the concept that makes it, not necessarily the location that breaks it. I look at Nashville and the hottest retaurant area is now basically still a ghetto.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/dining/the-food-scene-in-east-nashville.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Here in SF the hot restaurant district is the Mission, which is literally gang turf still and you do risk getting caught in a turf war, LoL. I went to Kronenburger last week...no sign, dilapidated building, really dim lighting, grungy rock/house music, the place was filled with a mixture of executive types, hipsters, techies, etc...the place worked, food was fabulous, bar service top notch, the chef has a name around here (he's even from the South, which is so popular nowadays), etc
QuoteDT doesn't yet have a cool restaurant. Juliette's is about the most dated place I have been (I think they are or have recently upgraded, but can't imagine it being much better).
I believe Juliette's is being renovated and upgraded now.
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 11:07:05 PM
DT doesn't yet have a cool restaurant. Juliette's is about the most dated place I have been (I think they are or have recently upgraded, but can't imagine it being much better). Was never impressed by Chew (though as ya'll know I Love Orsay and Black Sheep). Bistro Aix has rested on its laurels for like 2 decades now, but has traditionally been what I would consider one of the only "appealing" restaurant concepts from a theme, menu, design standpoint. San Marco.
La Cena has the location of a cool restaurant. Unfortunately, that's it. Indo/BG is cool, however. Oh, and Chompx2 is real cool.
Pho? I have eaten there (3x). Food was good. I went at night. Never more than 2 tables occupied.
Juliette's: ate there couple months ago: not bad, not special, reasonable value.
Zodiac?
Sorry that I put that qualifying word "Thriving" in my question. Thriving means waiting for a table, like they do at French Pantry. "Thriving" means reservations are possibly required
For the record I think somewhere on MJ we counted 52 restaurants in Riverside-Avondale. Less than 10 are thriving.
Simms, you are very well informed poster but I disagree with your comment about Black Sheep doing just as well DT as in Riverside. I am under the impression they could have put that restaurant anywhere they wanted, and they did not choose downtown. There are a couple hundred apartments/condos within 2 blocks of that location plus a couple thousand people within the neighborhood who have a track record of spending money on food. I don't believe there is anywhere downtown that can deliver that demographic today. The entire RAP area enjoys a
busy nightlife, pretty much throughout the week.
You left out Casa Dora, the only restaurant I have ever been to where the owner screamed obcenities at customers as they left. That was a special evening.
So perhaps this new venture will fill the void nicely pointed out by Simms, "DT doesn't yet have a cool restaurant."
One where folks stand in line to get in. THAT I would look forward to.
First, the crowd at Black Sheep is not a purely (not even majority) Riverside-Avondale crowd, and its certainly not a 5Points crowd. It is definitely a citywide draw. It is a better iteration of Chew (aesthetic, drinks, etc) with a unique Jax amenity (rooftop bar). Yes, the Riverside location is better than a downtown location, but the place would still be thriving in downtown, it would just be in a less interesting, less active area. It would be a self-contained dining experience.
I think we need to know what the other distinctions beside "thriving" are. Actually, I can't seem to recall the purpose of pointing out 5 restaurants downtown that meet this distinction, and I certainly don't understand how many restaurants of such a caliber are supposed to be located in an area the size of Riverside-Avondale.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 05, 2013, 12:32:00 PM
So perhaps this new venture will fill the void nicely pointed out by Simms, "DT doesn't yet have a cool restaurant."
One where folks stand in line to get in. THAT I would look forward to.
Again, I must reiterate: Chomp Chomp. Or please clarify your definition of cool. If "cool" is defined by a 300+ seat restaurant with Bobby Flay's name on it, then to quote Inigo Montoya:
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Back to the topic at hand, I just drove down Laura at lunch, and having something, anything in that Barnett Bank tower will seriously be a big deal, I think even more so than the Trio. It's a big dead space on a block that is otherwise seeing some decent (relatively) traffic lately. I don't understand the higher education thing, but I can't wait to hear more details.
simms: When you say the Barnett is too small for mixed-use, what do you mean? You mean too small for something like the Bank Hotel concept (hotel and apartments) or some kind of office/residence space? Or too small for ground floor retail with anything above it?
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:15:05 PM
Exactly. I agree that Brooklyn could explode, but we have never seen anything explode in Jax...
I don't know...the JTB/Southside and STJC areas kind of exploded
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 05, 2013, 02:02:59 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:15:05 PM
Exactly. I agree that Brooklyn could explode, but we have never seen anything explode in Jax...
I don't know...the JTB/Southside and STJC areas kind of exploded
T2 Laboratories? Too soon?
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 10:30:14 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 04, 2013, 09:16:24 PM
Plus a lot of users will commit to a guaranteed takedown but won't take all the space upfront which is where there are computing problems.
Just saw this...we deal with this in sophsticated markets, too (NYC and SF). I'm working on a 220,000 SF lease as we speak where the prospect thinks it's doing us, the landlord, a favor and wants all this flexibility in return...sorry folks it doesn't work that way! We *are* willing to work with you to improve the building to woo you in (i.e. if you want barricades for elevator lobbies, we'll install them...if you need an expanded restroom core because you pack'em in there, we'll even shoulder that freakin expensive cost), but we want a straightforward commitment in return.
Since you and I seem to be the rare poster that actually works in RE, what are your thoughts for the Barnett component, and for Trio? You're obviously much closer to the Jacksonville market than I could ever hope to be.
^^ LOL, seems reasonable to me though!?!?!
I'm personally convinced the project is the lynchpin to residential development downtown. I liked the original plans that were basically 100% residential. I've heard hotel/resi mix as well for just Barnett and higher education would be great but who pays for the students parking? If a $40K per year employee doesn't want to shell out $90 per month why would a student? I understand it can all be worked into the deal its just a concern. Plus educational will be what, a 10 year lease? At least residential rentals you don't worry as much about the LED.
Idk I don't have all the answers on this one either but I do like your plan.
Quote from: PeeJayEss on April 05, 2013, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 05, 2013, 02:02:59 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:15:05 PM
Exactly. I agree that Brooklyn could explode, but we have never seen anything explode in Jax...
I don't know...the JTB/Southside and STJC areas kind of exploded
T2 Laboratories? Too soon?
LOL
This is pure speculation, but I wonder whether UNF is the higher ed partner they are talking about with the Barnett building. Doesn't UNF already have a relationship with MOCA down the street? I could picture them having a satellite campus focused on art. I know they've got a ton of space on there main campus, but if they are already doing classes at MOCA this could be a logical step.
^Nope, it's not UNF.
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on April 05, 2013, 06:08:49 PM
This is pure speculation, but I wonder whether UNF is the higher ed partner they are talking about with the Barnett building. Doesn't UNF already have a relationship with MOCA down the street? I could picture them having a satellite campus focused on art. I know they've got a ton of space on there main campus, but if they are already doing classes at MOCA this could be a logical step.
I can tell you it's not UNF (I don't know who it is, but I know for a fact not UNF). To answer your question, yes, UNF has classes at MOCA.
Khan academy?:)
Quote from: thelakelander on April 05, 2013, 06:28:52 PM
^Nope, it's not UNF.
So if you know it is not UNF do you have any clues as to who it is?
I was told a while back by a member of the development team that it was an entity with no Jax presence. I don't know who it is but that pretty much excludes everything locally.
Yeah it's certainly not UNF. The news reports just said it was an "as yet unnamed" school. Presumably it's just another for profit, which is a call for ambivalence, to say the least.
I thought there was talks that it was Florida Coastal and wanting to locate students downtown close to law firms.
How amazing would some sort of SCAD branch location or otherwise architectural school be? Thats not even speculation just wishing.
I really like the idea of a SCAD satellite location!! I keep hearing pepole saying another for profit school. That does not really make sense to me as why would there really be a need for housing??? Seems most who attend for profits are already in the working arena or trying to get an education quicker and on a budget. So more likely to live at home and no real need for housing.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 05, 2013, 02:02:59 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 04, 2013, 09:15:05 PM
Exactly. I agree that Brooklyn could explode, but we have never seen anything explode in Jax...
I don't know...the JTB/Southside and STJC areas kind of exploded
True, but in all fairness/honesty, even the SS pales in comparison to the explosion that has occurred in Franklin/Cool Springs, TN or Ballantyne submarket of Charlotte. It's all relative I guess. Even Germantown outside of Memphis exploded at a higher level and more rapidly than SJTC/JTB, arguably. Or Shelby County in Birmingham metro. Jax has grown quickly overall, spread out over large area; I don't think it's seen the transformative explosion of any one particular area as other similar sunbelt cities have seen...TBD whether or not Brooklyn will be that first sort of area.
Quote from: PeeJayEss on April 05, 2013, 01:55:02 PM
simms: When you say the Barnett is too small for mixed-use, what do you mean? You mean too small for something like the Bank Hotel concept (hotel and apartments) or some kind of office/residence space? Or too small for ground floor retail with anything above it?
Ground floor retail with use above it is not "mixed use", it is standard (or should be). I'm saying that due to the size of Barnett (16-17 usable floors, ~10,000 ft plates) and limited elevator core, it would be difficult splitting the building into two uses based on economies of scale. Once you factor building load (surely a high load in an inefficient floorplate layout such as that in Barnett), you're looking at probably 8,000 usable SF max per floor. At most you're fitting in 200 rentals in the whole building (estimating avg 700 SF units, which is common for urban, but likely aggressively small for Jax), or under 150,000 SF class B office (the price to get this building to class B would be like converting a 1950s class B into bottom barrel class A...very expensive...you're not doing class A in this). It'd be difficult to split these possibilities. You have no underwriting on the bottom 1-2 floors (you can't underwrite retail in DT Jax right now, and if it's not retail, it's lobby/common space).
I think Barnett is difficult without a single use tenant who can lease the entire building for 10+ years and back an LOC or guaranty for unamortized buildout costs, etc (i.e. a for-profit college, etc).
Quote from: PeeJayEss on April 05, 2013, 01:55:02 PM
Again, I must reiterate: Chomp Chomp. Or please clarify your definition of cool. If "cool" is defined by a 300+ seat restaurant with Bobby Flay's name on it, then to quote Inigo Montoya:
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I agree. Bobby Flay has a restaurant (that is good) about 2 blocks from where I live now, but he's so commercialized. Cool is local, homegrown chef who is trendsetter rather than follower. Cool is the space...it's getting harder and harder to differentiate now, but it's still possible. In all bluntness, Black Sheep is a replica of at least 50 restaurants in Atlanta at this point, but it's "cool" in Jax because they did have a deep enough capital budget for locally produced interior design, a rooftop bar, a well crafted menu that pays homage to the area, etc. It really wouldn't be that difficult to be "cool" in Jacksonville as there really aren't very many options for anything and most of what's been done in other cities hasn't arrived in Jax yet. There's no "scene" yet in Jax...I'm talking hardcore foodies and individuality. The extent of what's been successful and unique to the market is highlighted in full on this web forum.
Maybe someone can help me understand something. Lake and Simms3 seem to be of the opinion that renovating/completing these buildings will be very expensive. In terms of the Trio, I can see it a little more, but taking the Barnett building for example, how is it any more expensive than building new from the ground up?
The Barnett is completed gutted to the steel columns is it not? If you apportion $1mm to the cost of the Laura Trio and $2m to the Barnett, you have only $2mm invested in the land (significant in size and prime) and the completed Exterior including the brand new windows (a considerable expense in itself). There is no interior demo to do either. Of course the interior has to be built out, but there would be that identical expense with new construction too. I can see there might be some inefficiencies built in, because of having to bring in materials and equipment into a completed building, as opposed to craning stuff in as it goes up. But, would that be that much? Can you guys or someone else enlighten me?
Also, Cameron Khun thought he could make a profit with condos in the building. Would high-finish apartments be that impossible to do, when the same thing (only new construction) is already going up nearby (albeit with tax breaks)?
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 08:54:44 AM
Maybe someone can help me understand something. Lake and Simms3 seem to be of the opinion that renovating/completing these buildings will be very expensive. In terms of the Trio, I can see it a little more, but taking the Barnett building for example, how is it any more expensive than building new from the ground up?
The Barnett is completed gutted to the steel columns is it not? If you apportion $1mm to the cost of the Laura Trio and $2m to the Barnett, you have only $2mm invested in the land (significant in size and prime) and the completed Exterior including the brand new windows (a considerable expense in itself). There is no interior demo to do either. Of course the interior has to be built out, but there would be that identical expense with new construction too. I can see there might be some inefficiencies built in, because of having to bring in materials and equipment into a completed building, as opposed to craning stuff in as it goes up. But, would that be that much? Can you guys or someone else enlighten me?
Also, Cameron Khun thought he could make a profit with condos in the building. Would high-finish apartments be that impossible to do, when the same thing (only new construction) is already going up nearby (albeit with tax breaks)?
They are both correct. Im really not trying to take sides here, Simms and i havent always agreed, but hes knowledgable in this area. Rehabbing is more expensive than new construction. There are always hidden challenges, not to insert a random, unaccountable ghost cost, but it's true. demolition is most always the cheapest part of the project, and downtown land has next to no value (right now).
The inefficiency of older Floorplates is one of the largest reasons these old buildings are difficult. Older buildings, those that were constructed before central hvac, have lots of corners so everyone had access to windows and cross breezes. An old buildings floor plate may have a "u" shape whereas newer ones are rectangular. So you can't fit as many apartments, offices, or whatever in it and have more dead space. There are larger, unleasable "core" areas of the buildings like hallways. Its called a buildings core factor or loss factor. theyre huge percentages in older buildings. To your point, you're using the same amount of materials (if not more, because space planners have to be much more creative to maximize units) which is at least the same cost, to build out less units.
Khun was doing condos because he could "cash out" of the project faster, it's going to take a long time for those buildings to cash flow as apartments. Look at Carling and 11E; most apartment projects in town with that occupancy rate have traded, but not these. They have higher rents than average too!
The project can probably make money, but not at a rate comparable to other projects where an investor can put the same money.
Thanks for your input downtownjag.
If we were talking about the Ambassador Hotel, I think all your points would be on target, especially about 'hidden' problems. But what is 'hidden' in a building gutted to the steel superstructure?
Your comment about windows seems more applicable to an office use, but apartments and condos would require windows in every unit and in most of the rooms in every unit. The same with a hotel use.
Can anyone locate Khan's floorplans for condos? That would show the eficiency or lack thereof of the floorplate.
As far as Carling and 11E. , isn't the Vestcor's modis operadi to hold their properties? There original plans were to convert to condos after a few years. Of course the great crash has delayed that obviously. And speaking of 11 E. and Carling, their SF is in the 700 and BELOW range, which Simms3 considers too small for this market.
My guess would be that the Barnett is a viable project on it's own, but the group of four has to be done as a unit to get the full effect/benefit both for the city and the developer.
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 11:01:32 AM
Thanks for your input downtownjag.
If we were talking about the Ambassador Hotel, I think all your points would be on target, especially about 'hidden' problems. But what is 'hidden' in a building gutted to the steel superstructure?
Your comment about windows seems more applicable to an office use, but apartments and condos would require windows in every unit and in most of the rooms in every unit. The same with a hotel use.
Can anyone locate Khan's floorplans for condos? That would show the eficiency or lack thereof of the floorplate.
As far as Carling and 11E. , isn't the Vestcor's modis operadi to hold their properties? There original plans were to convert to condos after a few years. Of course the great crash has delayed that obviously. And speaking of 11 E. and Carling, their SF is in the 700 and BELOW range, which Simms3 considers too small for this market.
My guess would be that the Barnett is a viable project on it's own, but the group of four has to be done as a unit to get the full effect/benefit both for the city and the developer.
I don't think you did it intentionally, but you breezed right over my point about efficiency of Floorplates. An efficiently built structure would be a rectangle with a small core factor. An inefficient plate is one with lots of turns and corners that are hard to plan and then lease.
It is an inefficient Floorplate, most old buildings are. Your leasable area is much less in comparison to the building as a whole. If you want to see the plate, go to COJ.net. Kuhn didn't have an answer no one else does. Again, he was going to sell them as condos, not lease them.
Yes, I believe Vestcor holds most of their properties but these two were developed as Condos, not Vestcors typical project. I think Simms was referring to the SQ FT of the average suburban apt, but yes dt rental buildings are typically more dense.
I would agree with you that the Barnett by itself would be easier, except for there's no way the amount of units you can fit into that building justify structured parking, which is an absolute must have.
Quote from: downtownjag on April 06, 2013, 11:34:19 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 11:01:32 AM
Thanks for your input downtownjag.
If we were talking about the Ambassador Hotel, I think all your points would be on target, especially about 'hidden' problems. But what is 'hidden' in a building gutted to the steel superstructure?
Your comment about windows seems more applicable to an office use, but apartments and condos would require windows in every unit and in most of the rooms in every unit. The same with a hotel use.
Can anyone locate Khan's floorplans for condos? That would show the eficiency or lack thereof of the floorplate.
As far as Carling and 11E. , isn't the Vestcor's modis operadi to hold their properties? There original plans were to convert to condos after a few years. Of course the great crash has delayed that obviously. And speaking of 11 E. and Carling, their SF is in the 700 and BELOW range, which Simms3 considers too small for this market.
My guess would be that the Barnett is a viable project on it's own, but the group of four has to be done as a unit to get the full effect/benefit both for the city and the developer.
I don't think you did it intentionally, but you breezed right over my point about efficiency of Floorplates. An efficiently built structure would be a rectangle with a small core factor. An inefficient plate is one with lots of turns and corners that are hard to plan and then lease.
It is an inefficient Floorplate, most old buildings are. Your leasable area is much less in comparison to the building as a whole. If you want to see the plate, go to COJ.net. Kuhn didn't have an answer no one else does. Again, he was going to sell them as condos, not lease them.
Yes, I believe Vestcor holds most of their properties but these two were developed as Condos, not Vestcors typical project. I think Simms was referring to the SQ FT of the average suburban apt, but yes dt rental buildings are typically more dense.
I would agree with you that the Barnett by itself would be easier, except for there's no way the amount of units you can fit into that building justify structured parking, which is an absolute must have.
I just don't think the floorplate issue matters very much except with offices. Office needs change often, at my job we move people around all the time, so you need lots of flexiblity.
Someone isn't going to need to 'annex' someone else's apartment unit. They would just move to a bigger unit. I don't recall Khun's floorplans being ackward or in inordinate amount of space being devoted to hallways, etc. I was hoping to refresh my memory, if someone saved them off. Where/why would Khun's floorplans be on coj.net? I assume you mean the existing floorplate of the building?
I agree with Stephen that the atypical nature of the project scares off the typical lenders and contractors, but someone that has done this elsewhere, would see this as viable, I would think.
Kuhn had an answer, it just that answers doesn't work now because no one will finace a condo these days. I don't understand why the same floorplan with apartment level finishes wouldn't work the same here as it did/does for 11 E. and Carling. Both of those buildings have a much smaller footprint. They also cost more to buy, and had demo costs that Barnett would not have. If memory serves, Kuhn was going to have 150 or so units, versus the 100 or so that 11E. and Carling have.
The parking garage issue probably kills viability more than anything, but 220 Riverside has that expense too. Would giving Barnett/Laura Trio the same tax breaks make this work?
700 SF is not an average suburban footprint and is considered a good average for urban rental properties in much larger markets than Jax. 11 East Forsyth is a roughly 187,000 SF building across 17 floors and contains 127 rental units. Even at a load of 30% per floor and units starting on the 3rd floor, I am getting to 900 SF average apartment size, which is a suburban size though it makes sense because these apartments are considered "loft" to a degree and "loft" apartments are larger.
I think the Barnett is a much more inefficient floorplate than 11 East. Compile that with the fact that Vestcor + debt = over $24MM for their 11 East project, which is $189K per door. That's FAR more expensive than the all-in development cost of 220 Riverside. In fact, here's the disconnect - yes Vestcor has an attractive loan structure (they still weren't cash flowing enough to service it and needed a "refi" with the city a few years back), an apartment building I used to live in in Atlanta which now has rates at about $1.80psf average (net effective, or $1300/mo across units at 97% occupancy at sale signaling average size of 700 SF) just sold for $185K/door with room for new owner to spend an additional $8K/door in upgrades.
There is just this disconnect because Vestcor built the project like it could charge rents approaching $2psf and I believe it's down at $1.20-$1.30psf, still, today. So as you can see rentals in renovated buildings in DT Jax are a financial feasibility challenge.
The challenge with office users in the Barnett is also the floorplate size and compatibility. There are hardly anymore users who don't now value open, efficient floorplans. It will be more expensive to fit the same amount of employees on a floor at the Barnett as [insert average bland postwar DT Jax box here], which means a company must lease more space. And given the U-shape that DTJag mentions, it's hard to multi-tenant a floor in that building unless you can find office users such as dentists or startup law firms who can work in bowling alleys.
That is not to mention the overall dismal office market in DT Jax where you'd be hard-pressed to find users at all. Not knowing much about student housing + classroom space, seeing similar buildings being fully used by Georgia State in Atlanta or Rush University and others in Chicago or Pace University in New York, I know it seems to work for them. Hopefully current ownership can find such a school to take the entire building.
I think you can easily do hotel in the Barnett, but then you just destroy what I think is your only option for the Trio...methinks reserve hotel for Trio and it can be cooler anyway than a hotel in the Barnett (what city doesn't have Courtyard in a building like the Barnett at this point?...boring and not as challenging from a development perspective)
Round and round we go on the floor plate issue. The last developer that had the project under contract specialized in rehab.
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 12:50:06 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 06, 2013, 11:34:19 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 11:01:32 AM
Thanks for your input downtownjag.
If we were talking about the Ambassador Hotel, I think all your points would be on target, especially about 'hidden' problems. But what is 'hidden' in a building gutted to the steel superstructure?
Your comment about windows seems more applicable to an office use, but apartments and condos would require windows in every unit and in most of the rooms in every unit. The same with a hotel use.
Can anyone locate Khan's floorplans for condos? That would show the eficiency or lack thereof of the floorplate.
As far as Carling and 11E. , isn't the Vestcor's modis operadi to hold their properties? There original plans were to convert to condos after a few years. Of course the great crash has delayed that obviously. And speaking of 11 E. and Carling, their SF is in the 700 and BELOW range, which Simms3 considers too small for this market.
My guess would be that the Barnett is a viable project on it's own, but the group of four has to be done as a unit to get the full effect/benefit both for the city and the developer.
I don't think you did it intentionally, but you breezed right over my point about efficiency of Floorplates. An efficiently built structure would be a rectangle with a small core factor. An inefficient plate is one with lots of turns and corners that are hard to plan and then lease.
It is an inefficient Floorplate, most old buildings are. Your leasable area is much less in comparison to the building as a whole. If you want to see the plate, go to COJ.net. Kuhn didn't have an answer no one else does. Again, he was going to sell them as condos, not lease them.
Yes, I believe Vestcor holds most of their properties but these two were developed as Condos, not Vestcors typical project. I think Simms was referring to the SQ FT of the average suburban apt, but yes dt rental buildings are typically more dense.
I would agree with you that the Barnett by itself would be easier, except for there's no way the amount of units you can fit into that building justify structured parking, which is an absolute must have.
I just don't think the floorplate issue matters very much except with offices. Office needs change often, at my job we move people around all the time, so you need lots of flexiblity.
Someone isn't going to need to 'annex' someone else's apartment unit. They would just move to a bigger unit. I don't recall Khun's floorplans being ackward or in inordinate amount of space being devoted to hallways, etc. I was hoping to refresh my memory, if someone saved them off. Where/why would Khun's floorplans be on coj.net? I assume you mean the existing floorplate of the building?
I agree with Stephen that the atypical nature of the project scares off the typical lenders and contractors, but someone that has done this elsewhere, would see this as viable, I would think.
Kuhn had an answer, it just that answers doesn't work now because no one will finace a condo these days. I don't understand why the same floorplan with apartment level finishes wouldn't work the same here as it did/does for 11 E. and Carling. Both of those buildings have a much smaller footprint. They also cost more to buy, and had demo costs that Barnett would not have. If memory serves, Kuhn was going to have 150 or so units, versus the 100 or so that 11E. and Carling have.
The parking garage issue probably kills viability more than anything, but 220 Riverside has that expense too. Would giving Barnett/Laura Trio the same tax breaks make this work?
You're breezing over the rent you would have to charge for residential in order to even break even... Which would be FAR above market for the floor plan you could fit in the Trio.
The Barnett Building is very valuable in my opinion, but the catch 22 is that you'll need to build a garage to make it work... Which forces you to buy the Trio and deal with the can of worms they pose. The bright side is you can build an attached building which gives you some flexibility for the Trio buildings.
It's a project with tremendous costs and risks.
I traveled for a couple years with Broadway Tours and almost always picked the Historic hotel choice, if given that option. I loved the history of the places, especially the lobbies and common areas. Most importamtly, for me, was that all the rooms/suites had a different floor plans. No two were alike, and after a few months of cookie cutter Hyatts and Hiltons, something diferent was always welcome. Sometimes you would get two rooms, or one large one, sometimes two bathrooms even, and almost in every instance you got a bigger space, which for serial travelers, is a big plus. A little more room to stretch out in was never a downer on the road. I think this approach would work great at the Barnett Building, offering all different sizes and shapes of rooms for the clientele. I could also see a setup where some floors were for short stays and other floors were for extended stays, minimum one week. Choice is good, options are good. Still think the Bisbee and Florida life could be awesome apartments/condos, great views from both buildings.
They could be awesome apartments/condos. However, the developer paying for such a conversion would just be burning their money. If you're in development to turn a profit, there are simply much better and less riskier ways to make money.
Quote from: fieldafm on April 06, 2013, 05:27:16 PM
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 12:50:06 PM
Quote from: downtownjag on April 06, 2013, 11:34:19 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on April 06, 2013, 11:01:32 AM
Thanks for your input downtownjag.
If we were talking about the Ambassador Hotel, I think all your points would be on target, especially about 'hidden' problems. But what is 'hidden' in a building gutted to the steel superstructure?
Your comment about windows seems more applicable to an office use, but apartments and condos would require windows in every unit and in most of the rooms in every unit. The same with a hotel use.
Can anyone locate Khan's floorplans for condos? That would show the eficiency or lack thereof of the floorplate.
As far as Carling and 11E. , isn't the Vestcor's modis operadi to hold their properties? There original plans were to convert to condos after a few years. Of course the great crash has delayed that obviously. And speaking of 11 E. and Carling, their SF is in the 700 and BELOW range, which Simms3 considers too small for this market.
My guess would be that the Barnett is a viable project on it's own, but the group of four has to be done as a unit to get the full effect/benefit both for the city and the developer.
I don't think you did it intentionally, but you breezed right over my point about efficiency of Floorplates. An efficiently built structure would be a rectangle with a small core factor. An inefficient plate is one with lots of turns and corners that are hard to plan and then lease.
It is an inefficient Floorplate, most old buildings are. Your leasable area is much less in comparison to the building as a whole. If you want to see the plate, go to COJ.net. Kuhn didn't have an answer no one else does. Again, he was going to sell them as condos, not lease them.
Yes, I believe Vestcor holds most of their properties but these two were developed as Condos, not Vestcors typical project. I think Simms was referring to the SQ FT of the average suburban apt, but yes dt rental buildings are typically more dense.
I would agree with you that the Barnett by itself would be easier, except for there's no way the amount of units you can fit into that building justify structured parking, which is an absolute must have.
I just don't think the floorplate issue matters very much except with offices. Office needs change often, at my job we move people around all the time, so you need lots of flexiblity.
Someone isn't going to need to 'annex' someone else's apartment unit. They would just move to a bigger unit. I don't recall Khun's floorplans being ackward or in inordinate amount of space being devoted to hallways, etc. I was hoping to refresh my memory, if someone saved them off. Where/why would Khun's floorplans be on coj.net? I assume you mean the existing floorplate of the building?
I agree with Stephen that the atypical nature of the project scares off the typical lenders and contractors, but someone that has done this elsewhere, would see this as viable, I would think.
Kuhn had an answer, it just that answers doesn't work now because no one will finace a condo these days. I don't understand why the same floorplan with apartment level finishes wouldn't work the same here as it did/does for 11 E. and Carling. Both of those buildings have a much smaller footprint. They also cost more to buy, and had demo costs that Barnett would not have. If memory serves, Kuhn was going to have 150 or so units, versus the 100 or so that 11E. and Carling have.
The parking garage issue probably kills viability more than anything, but 220 Riverside has that expense too. Would giving Barnett/Laura Trio the same tax breaks make this work?
You're breezing over the rent you would have to charge for residential in order to even break even... Which would be FAR above market for the floor plan you could fit in the Trio.
The Barnett Building is very valuable in my opinion, but the catch 22 is that you'll need to build a garage to make it work... Which forces you to buy the Trio and deal with the can of worms they pose. The bright side is you can build an attached building which gives you some flexibility for the Trio buildings.
It's a project with tremendous costs and risks.
I think that was Dav-Lins original plan and I like it best. The new resi building would help regain some efficiencies of the project.
Looks like Jim Bailey is excited...
QuoteFrom the publisher: James F. Bailey Jr.
When the Great Fire of 1901 wiped out what was then our Downtown, heralded architects Henry Klutho and Edward H. Glidden led a rebirth of the charred city center â€" much like a phoenix rising from the ashes.
Three buildings, now called the Laura Street Trio, designed by these two must have inspired a community in the early 1900s that was devastated by the Great Fire.
Last week, we finally received the long-awaited news that the Laura Street Trio and old Barnett Bank Building in the city's heart might actually come back to life after sitting empty and deteriorating for more than a decade.
Is lightning about to strike twice in Downtown Jacksonville?
The importance of this development for the entire community cannot be overstated.
Since it was reported that a group led by Jacksonville developer Steve Atkins has purchased the historic buildings with plans to restore them to their century-old glory, there has been a buzz about Downtown that I have not seen in a long time.
It's as if Atkins and his team have managed to send a giant spark into the core of the city, which makes it only fitting he intends to reveal his detailed plans for the buildings during Downtown's One Spark festival next week.
Let's talk about the importance of the four buildings.
The oldest is the former Florida National Bank, which many refer to as the Marble Bank, on the corner of Forsyth and Laura streets.
In 1902, shortly after the Great Fire flatted the city core, Glidden designed the building in the Classical Revival style.
In 1916 it was renovated to include a large room with a skylight, but during a 1950 refurbishing the ceilings were dropped, covering the skylight and the plaster detailing.
In 1976, then as the Jacksonville National Bank, the lowered ceilings were removed and the building was restored to its grand appearance.
The second building constructed, the Bisbee Building, was designed by Klutho in the Prairie Style and built next to the Marble Bank building on Forsyth Street.
It opened in 1908-09 as a 10-story high rise, the first in Jacksonville.
There are three interesting historical facts about the Bisbee Building: it was designed to be only 26 feet wide, but the high demand for office space spurred the owner to have Klutho double the width; it was the first reinforced concrete high rise in the Southeast; and it was in a race against two other 10-story buildings to become Jacksonville's first skyscraper.
The second Klutho-designed building is the Florida Life Building, which opened in 1911-12. It faces Laura Street and is next to the back wall of the Marble Bank.
Another Klutho masterpiece, the St. James Building, was restored during former Mayor Ed Austin's administration. Today it is City Hall on Hemming Plaza. When it opened, the Florida Life Building was the tallest in town.
The former Barnett Bank Building, which has been closed for more than a decade, sits at the corner of Laura and Adams streets. With 14 stories, it opened in 1926 as the tallest building in Jacksonville.
The structure was built by the same contractor, James Stewart Co., that constructed Madison Square Garden in New York City.
This is not the first attempt to bring these iconic structures back to life.
Mayor John Delaney recognized their significance in 2002 when he had the City purchase the Laura Street Trio with a plan to sell them to a private developer.
Atkins is a Jacksonville native with a passion and a vision for his hometown. He has been working on this deal since 2010, when he first proposed a $70 million plan to restore the four buildings.
By pulling off the purchase of the four buildings from the city for $3 million â€" with a financial loan and political boost from Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan â€" he is now off and running.
I've spent some time with Atkins. We talked about all of Downtown and what it takes. I've heard his plans and I've experienced that passion.
I do believe this is the real deal.
I can't wait to hear and see the details Atkins and his team unveil next week. Just this first piece of news has been like a shot of adrenalin to those of us who believe if we unlock the potential of our Downtown, it will make Jacksonville a top-tier city.
But, let's not be naïve. While bringing these four historic buildings to their original grandeur and then filling them with office workers, restaurants and residents is a great step, it is only a step.
There is much to do, which means the rest of us can't just sit around as spectators.
When these buildings reopen, we can't let their value be stifled by the environment around them. When people walk out on the street, they have to see Downtown as an exciting place to be.
There are many organizations with good intentions and some great work is being done to fill lingering voids, but we all need to row in the same direction and change perceptions.
We need bold leadership to address issues, from enforcement to homelessness and encourage pioneers, entrepreneurs and small business.
We need real leadership to revitalize the 25-year-old Jacksonville Landing, which Atkins calls the "crown jewel" of Downtown; clean up Hemming Plaza; save and restore the Bostwick Building; and implode the old courthouse and former City Hall on the riverfront so they can become economic and entertainment engines that contribute to Jacksonville's quality of life.
As for lightning striking twice Downtown â€" I have heard the clap of thunder. And I welcome it.
jbailey@baileypub.com
(904) 356-2466
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=539172
I am sure he is excited as he supports downtown efforts and sits on the DIA. I was intrigued by the comments he made about the Landing. Wonder where discussion is headed on the DIA? I agree with the comments highlighted below.
Quote
I do believe this is the real deal.
I can't wait to hear and see the details Atkins and his team unveil next week. Just this first piece of news has been like a shot of adrenalin to those of us who believe if we unlock the potential of our Downtown, it will make Jacksonville a top-tier city.
But, let's not be naïve. While bringing these four historic buildings to their original grandeur and then filling them with office workers, restaurants and residents is a great step, it is only a step.
There is much to do, which means the rest of us can't just sit around as spectators.
When these buildings reopen, we can't let their value be stifled by the environment around them. When people walk out on the street, they have to see Downtown as an exciting place to be.
There are many organizations with good intentions and some great work is being done to fill lingering voids, but we all need to row in the same direction and change perceptions.
We need bold leadership to address issues, from enforcement to homelessness and encourage pioneers, entrepreneurs and small business.
We need real leadership to revitalize the 25-year-old Jacksonville Landing, which Atkins calls the "crown jewel" of Downtown; clean up Hemming Plaza; save and restore the Bostwick Building; and implode the old courthouse and former City Hall on the riverfront so they can become economic and entertainment engines that contribute to Jacksonville's quality of life
He's right. Whether people like Sleiman and the Landing or not, it sits in the heart of the Northbank and is downtown's largest draw. It makes no sense to believe we can successfully breathe life and vibrancy in the heart of the core, totally ignoring it in the process.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 08, 2013, 08:49:15 PM
He's right. Whether people like Sleiman and the Landing or not, it sits in the heart of the Northbank and is downtown's largest draw. It makes no sense to believe we can successfully breathe life and vibrancy in the heart of the core, totally ignoring it in the process.
I agree Ennis and at the same time am thinking to myself what a challenge that will be in the current political climate. Tony has aligned himself very closely with Richard Clark and along with his open criticisms, deserved or not of local political practices he may have a very bumpy road addressing the needs of the Landing. Having said that the reality is that in spite of the ongoing criticisms of the Landing it is always the place that is featured when Jacksonville is shown on the National stage. I really don't see a true and complete downtown rebirth without a great deal of attention to reshaping and updating the Landing.
Not that I want the city owning the improvements, BUT one has to wonder the legalities of the lease agreement Toney has with the city. It's still my guess that the city really screwed itself over - either that or there's nothing the city can feasibly do if there's nobody else out there who wants the Landing.
You just know that it's a lowball ground lease given the fact that Toney can just sit on the Landing as-is and do nothing, and you have to wonder how it was structured - it must be a very lessee friendly document.
Noooooooooooooooo!
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/04/15/developer-pushes-back-unveiling-of.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/04/15/developer-pushes-back-unveiling-of.html)
QuoteAshley Gurbal Kritzer
Reporter- Jacksonville Business Journal
QuoteThe unveiling of the redevelopment plans for the Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank Building has been delayed.
The plans were to be revealed at a “private event†Wednesday evening, after the dedication of the newly restored Jacob’s Jewelers clock and before the official start of One Spark.
But SouthEast Group, the development group that acquired the buildings in late March with a mortgage from Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shahid Khan sent out an email last week, saying it was pushing back the big reveal:
“Like us, many of our supporters, colleagues and friends are also big supporters of OneSpark, the world’s first crowdfunding festival, which kicks-off on Wednesday, April 17 at 6 p.m. in Hemming Plaza downtown.
“So that we can all participate in the excitement, SouthEast Group is moving its launch event from April 17 to a later date after the closing of the OneSpark Festival. Look for a new invitation to join us in the coming weeks for a private event where we can celebrate the purchase of the Barnett Bank and Laura Street Trio buildings and share with you the next steps in downtown Jacksonville’s revolution.â€
Steve Atkins, managing director of SouthEast Group, did not return a phone call seeking comment. In August 2012, Atkins shared a $40 million redevelopment plan for the properties with the Business Journal that included a higher education component in the Barnett Bank Building, and a boutique hotel component in both the Florida Life and Bisbee buildings, to include street-level retail.
At that time, Atkins said, a restaurant was planned for the Marble Bank Building, and a smaller parking garage than first envisioned was to be built on the vacant lot on the corner of Adams and North Laura streets.
The question that still hangs over the deal is how the redevelopment will be financed, whether that’s through a combination of public subsidies, new market and historic tax credits, traditional debt and equity, and the depth of Khan’s involvement in the redevelopment.
D'oh. Oh well, it gives us something to talk about after One Spark is over.
What does One Spark have to do with them unveiling their plans? Sounds like the event is being used as an excuse to delay to me. Sharing the plans at a well attended event is the way to get momentum and excitement behind the vision for the Trio. Perhaps there has been a bump in the road regarding plans and finances. Interesting that they did not give an alternative date for unveiling their plans if indeed One Spark was the reason.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 15, 2013, 02:30:26 PM
:-\What does One Spark have to do with them unveiling their plans? Sounds like the event is being used as an excuse to delay to me. Sharing the plans at a well attended event is the way to get momentum and excitement behind the vision for the Trio. Perhaps there has been a bump in the road regarding plans and finances. Interesting that they did not give an alternative date for unveiling their plans if indeed One Spark were the reason.
+1
Quote from: simms3 on April 09, 2013, 12:16:14 AM
Not that I want the city owning the improvements, BUT one has to wonder the legalities of the lease agreement Toney has with the city. It's still my guess that the city really screwed itself over - either that or there's nothing the city can feasibly do if there's nobody else out there who wants the Landing.
You just know that it's a lowball ground lease given the fact that Toney can just sit on the Landing as-is and do nothing, and you have to wonder how it was structured - it must be a very lessee friendly document.
The lease wasn't something negotiated by Sleiman and the City. He just took over the existing land lease made with Rouse. It's no secret that the remaining term of the land lease makes financing terms unfavorable in relation to the kinds of terms they usually have. I think it is also innacurate to say he is 'doing nothing', the Landing is currently at its highest occupancy levels in over 15 years. They have been very aggressive with getting all of the large restaurant spaces occupied (all are occupied except for the space above Fionn MacCools, which they rent out to private parties and/or use it to entertain their own guests) and filling the first floor. Even with the exit of Body Central, they've temporarily backfilled the space until a long term lease is signed (which they do a lot, it's hard to argue against that strategy).
We can talk for days about the assumption of the ground lease, what's normal for ground lease, etc.
Look, when it all boils down Sleiman likely has a lessee friendly ground lease (probably one of the things that attracted him to the Landing in the first place). It probably has 50+ years of term left (I think original term was ~75 years?). If he can sit on that lease and still give rent relief, sign % rent deals, etc, it can't be that crazy of a rate (remind me if there is any tax abatement and therefore burnoff for the Landing?).
I've seen these deals properly done in other [more cooperative] cities...neither the city nor Sleiman are following proven procedure here. Sleiman won't get attractive term financing for the Landing as is, and likely his best bet for a construction loan for the redevelopment would be from the city (which would never fly in Jax). There are some fixed-income groups out there who might be interested in sticking a subordinated high yield mezz facility on top of someone else's primary, which stinks for Sleiman but might be one of the only financing options.
The ground lease likely has *nothing* to do with the inability to finance a redevelopment of the project (unless there is some crazy legalese in that document that has nothing to do with term and all to do with rights and restrictions). Barring any craziness aside, lenders are more scared of Jacksonville itself, of downtown Jax, of alternative retail in a very non-alternative retail friendly/experienced city, of the city and its lack of vision/support for such projects, of the fact that Sleiman hasn't done a similar deal and has no partner who has, etc etc.
For slapping a perm on the project (which would indicate no redevelopment prospects without conversion flexibility), what traditional lender can underwrite MTM/% rent/temp deals to produce a debt yield for it? Could it be a CMBS deal? Not a capital markets guy, but probably that before a traditional loan - and being that the buyer pool for the Landing is currently limited if not nonexistent, the pool might become further limited if the deal comes with a CMBS assumption.
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2013, 06:07:12 PM
For slapping a perm on the project (which would indicate no redevelopment prospects without conversion flexibility), what traditional lender can underwrite MTM/% rent/temp deals to produce a debt yield for it? Could it be a CMBS deal?
My Google translate app couldn't convert this into English!
QuoteIt probably has 50+ years of term left
It was a 50 year lease when Rouse signed it. That's one of the issues.
^^We're on the same timetable today, oddly. That still means there is what ~24 years of primary term left? You sure there aren't options remaining? Especially at a 50 year term, you would think there would be options at FMV or some similar scenario (it's not like this land will ever not be subject to a ground lease with the city...it will doubtfully ever be private land nor should it).
Your loan maturity is going to be 10 years or less anyway, and your construction loan is going to be even shorter, allowing time for 2-3 more buyers after you (well...presumably, but this IS Jacksonville). I think the risk is not the ground lease...it's the fact that this is the Jacksonville Landing in downtown Jacksonville, FL. And both sides, Sleiman and the city, feel like the other needs to step up and neither is working with the other. If I were a lender, I sure as hell wouldn't want to get mixed up in that.
The city has proven totally inept as a partner in deals such as this and Sleiman isn't exactly the prince of urban redevelopment or partnering with major entities such as the City, LoL. I'm sure the terms of the ground lease are the least of a lender's concern, and I even doubt that the ground lease is the biggest of Sleiman's fish to fry. The market itself is completely antagonistic and no party here knows how to work the crappy market and turn it around in the project's favor.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 15, 2013, 02:30:26 PM
What does One Spark have to do with them unveiling their plans? Sounds like the event is being used as an excuse to delay to me.
of course it is
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 15, 2013, 09:49:55 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 15, 2013, 02:30:26 PM
What does One Spark have to do with them unveiling their plans? Sounds like the event is being used as an excuse to delay to me.
of course it is
It's all Jacksonville speak for, "Never mind, we got nothin, sorry but just forget about it."
If memory serves, Sleiman pays NO rent for the land because the promised parking was never provided.
I think Sleiman is sitting pat until he gets his mayor.
Quote from: vicupstate on April 16, 2013, 08:40:02 PM
I think Sleiman is sitting pat until he gets his mayor.
well he's donated to Alvin's re-election...so for now, he appears to be hedging bets
Any more news on this? Did they give a date for the rescheduled reveal?
not yet.
It's awesome that this just disappeared. Sorry, Urban Core. Maybe next time. :'(
Disappointed in the delay in revealing the plans for the trio and Barnett. But not really surprised. What conditions seem to be preventing progress on this kind of project? I meander while I have my nightly beer.
One condition is surely the overwhelming lack of existing foot traffic in the core; that is, existing residents, workers, and “non-event type†daily visitors. One cannot just “wish†the foot traffic to appear, but foot traffic is absolutely necessary for survival of most businesses in a core environment. The kind of foot traffic needed is the kind which will have increased almost naturally over time, which means that it is there to stay, and will only disappear over time, giving investors time to do whatever they have to do, such as bail or bring something else in to inject activity.
Another factor causing problems is the overall poor economy; banks are not willing to lend on a project for which there seems to be no confident or solid return on investment. How is anyone going to make money on these rather large and, at least for two, awkwardly designed buildings? Unless there is a solid contract for a large school or university for the Barnett, or perhaps a large company willing to fill it to 60 percent, what else can offer a solid infill probability for the Barnett?
It is possible for someone of great personal wealth to invest $60 million into the buildings, but they had better have a solid plan in place to make money with them, or they will sit, partially filled.
If more buildings in the core were smaller, it would be easier for more smaller investors to find a method of making money with them. Then the projects would take less investment up front, and less risk. For example, the building I purchased for the bookstore/cafe was small enough for me to renovate, and just right for me to utilize to the fullest to make money with it. If the building had been much larger, I could not have done the project. If it was much smaller, it would not have been big enough for me to make enough money. As it is, I really wish it was about 30 percent larger, so I could place within it a large section of adult books for the core deviants.
The building next door to my bookstore, purchased about a year ago, which I’ve had to delay on renovation because of other projects, is also the right size. Purchased for only $290K, the building will cost me about $600K to $700K to renovate to a condition wherein I can make money on all three floors. The point being that we need more small buildings like this so that not only will more small investors like me be able to buy and renovate them, but they are small enough so that its easier to find ways to make money with them.
Imagine the project of having to arrive at a plan to make money with the huge Barnett Bank building? And at least two of the trio buildings seem to have designs making it somewhat difficult to arrive at a solid plan to make money with them. And look at the location of the trio. There is no adjacent existing activity to lend connectivity, or a neighborhood feel to the project. This isolation causes difficulty in arriving at good building use. If there were many smaller or medium sized buildings, all being together along several blocks, then the growth could be more natural, as each adjacent building is developed along the way.
Unless there is a huge commitment from some single entity, or perhaps two smaller entities to fill most of the Barnett building, its going to be quite difficult to make money with the building.
The real strength in downtown revitalization will come with gradual, sometimes small, sometimes an occasional larger, investments which have solid plans to make money with the buildings. Unless somebody has very deep pockets, to buy and renovate without a solid plan for utilization is not enough to allow survival while enduring years of upkeep of a mostly empty building.
Unfortunately we have few small and medium buildings in the core for the small investors to purchase, renovate, and fill with money making entities. Perhaps one answer is for a “group†of small investors; dedicated, and impassioned “core†individuals, to form an investment entity so that they could “do†small or medium sized buildings.
Business survival in a core, whether retail, apartments, condos, or offices depends on an existing core population of residents, workers, and visitors -- its called “foot trafficâ€. As this foot traffic increases, then more types of businesses can prosper within the core. If is fruitless for a certain business type to attempt to open in the core until the “foot traffic†population achieves a certain level. Each kind of business has its “foot traffic level†threshold. Below it, and there is failure. Above it, success.
So, one might say that as the foot traffic population gradually increases in an core, the dynamics emerging as a consequence of this increase, will allow more types and sizes of businesses to prosper. Until the foot traffic increases, nothing will happen.
So, what do those interested in core development do? .... wait and endure many years of very slow infill into the core? After all, time, will eventually bring infill, if only because the outlying suburbs will begin to fill up, forcing people back into the core.
There must be some kind of artificial boost or force to speed up the process of core infill. And that’s partially what things like “Art Walk†and “Programming†Hemming are meant to do. And I suppose the boosts come from grants to businesses, and tax breaks too.
What other boosts, tricks, investments, machinations, grants, persuasions, tax breaks, etc, can increase the rate at which a stable core population “foot traffic†can be forced upon the core?.... for once a certain population threshold is achieved, once the foot traffic reaches a certain point, then the most powerful pressure of all will be in place, which is that of the natural draw, a powerful invitation, a feeling of necessity, to all investors, entrepreneurs, residents, and visitors -- which says that, the core is the place to be now -- the core is where the money is, where the people are, where the future is.
The first and second generation malls and the business parks have had there day -- the St. John’s Town Center is having its day. Soon, the city core will once again have its day. The trick is to somehow, by whatever means, “force†an increase of the stable core population toward the threshold level, because doing so, will not only bring more residents into the core, but it will put in place the powerful natural condition wherein everyone will “want†to move into the core with all types of businesses. Most important, residents will want to move into the core.
Its much like starting a fire. One must work to arrange conditions so that the natural work and magic of the fire can begin. If nobody prepares conditions for the fire, there will be none. Once a fire is started, it continues by way of natural laws, only requiring a little guidance and feeding from those who started it.
Because of poor or wet kindling, or because of a capricious wind, some fires are difficult to start, and thus require more work and sacrifice, but because of the difficulty, the flame is more beautiful.
Excellent poiints Ron. Your point about the number of small to medium size buildings is why it is so important to stop demolition of buildings like those that use to line LaVilla (ie 'Worman's). Sure they may not be architectural masterpieces, but they allow organic growth to happen more easily versus new construction.
Residential growth is what I think will bring the foot traffic. Just don't know if the numbers work to do it yet.
I like Mr. Khan's attitude toward the Football Team, the City, and how he feels the City and the Jaguars should fit snuggly together like a well fitted piece within a puzzle board. He's a straight shooter and tells it like it is. I also like what he said relative to the City's image and stature is very important to the Jaguars and complements the Jaguars and is paramount to the success of the Jaguars, and if I am not incorrect, I think he also means vice versa. Great guy in my opinion.
Quote from: I-10east on March 05, 2013, 02:10:47 PM
Hopefully the Trio project will stay on course this time.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/2013/03/historic-downtown-trio-back-in-play.html
I hope the new buyer doesn't wreck ball these downtown gems and leave an empty parking lot there. The potential for these four old gem buildings is unlimited to say the least. If they do "wreck ball" these downtown gems, they'd better build a 900 foot 60 story tower there in that spot, which is dead center in the middle of the downtown core. What about a residential/office/commercial tower with 12 stories of parking garage at the bottom? A major tenant would have to be found though. Pipe dreams you say? Well my forum name is "Heights Unknown," so why not dream big relative to project in this vane which would soar to "heights unknown?"
To put it bluntly in regards to Mr. Khan's investments in Downtown and the Laura Trio, a super vibrant and successful downtown is not only good but "super" for the Jaguars and Jacksonville's interests and image nationwide!
Quote from: MusicMan on April 03, 2013, 06:16:47 PM
Pros: Something will finally happen at this site.
At $3,000,000 that is one of the all time best buys in Florida Real Estate History.
Cons: If you are not puting a residential rental community like 11E or The Carling, which have booked
at 95% occupancy rates since they were finished, you are missing the entire point of what is killing
downtown. NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE LIVE THERE. A cursory look at the current statistics will reveal a
strong demand for downtown housing that is going unmet. Putting a restaurant into the Marble bank (I
presume a high end one) will be a total waste. Will the college kids be eating there? Has Steve Atkins
ever lived in downtown Jacksonville? A boutique hotel sounds neat until you realize it will do almost
nothing for the rest of downtown. Will this project meet the basic needs of a quality grocery store
downtown , a dry cleaners, a pharmacy? Quality housing for young professionals who move here and
don't want to live in the 'Burbs? Basic entertainment besides consuming alcohol?
I'm happy something is going to happen but I do not like this plan mentioned in the previous thread.
My opinion, humbly submitted.
@ MusicMan.....I agree wholeheartedly. They need to put something residential, and not low key residential but something big in there "residential wise," and then add the entertainment aspect into the equation relative to supporting the additional people who would live in that residential tower. I also think that a high end restaurant and a boutique hotel is a waste as well; if you put in a restaurant and hotel, put ones in there that everyone, low income, middle class and rich alike would be apt to frequent. They need to sit down and really think and plan carefully relative to the use of these fantastic jewels in downtown Jacksonville!
I think it's a very double-edged sword. I love a lot of the housing options downtown, but compared to Riverside (or SJTC for many of my friends), there's much less to do. Unless I worked downtown, or were able to get a kickass place for a steal, living there is a tough sell. Not having very appealing transit options between neighborhoods cancels out the advantages of the central location.
Yeah, that's a problem. Hopefully, some of these connectivity issues can be resolved soon. In the past, I've had several friends select Riverside, San Marco and even Tapestry Park over staying in downtown because they viewed those locations as being more vibrant.
Quote from: JFman00 on May 20, 2013, 11:18:32 PM
I think it's a very double-edged sword. I love a lot of the housing options downtown, but compared to Riverside (or SJTC for many of my friends), there's much less to do. Unless I worked downtown, or were able to get a kickass place for a steal, living there is a tough sell.
I disagree...I live downtown (work on the southside) and am never at a loss for things to do...as to the transit point, you are somewhat correct, although I would contend that no neighborhood in jax. has good transit connectivity
Most downtowns in America aren't the "cool" place to live. Lower Manhattan only became a still only sort of desirable neighborhood in the past 15 years (it's certainly cheaper). Midtown is also not the place to live. Downtown Boston (Fidi/Downtown Crossing) is dead, a couple of projects going up around Chinatown. The District/Downtown DC is almost exclusively office/government. The Loop in Chicago pales in comparison to South Loop, West Loop, River North/Streeterville. The Financial District in SF is pretty dead except for millionaire 40 year olds who live in the condos to the south. You definitely want to be in Midtown Atlanta before Downtown Atlanta. Etc etc.
So nothing new on this?
nope
There is an article in the June edition of the Resident Community News for Avondale, Ortega, Riverside and Murray Hill about this deal on page 13. I think Ennis knows where to go online to download from the Resident paper. Perhaps he may post it if possible, I can't find anything in it that links to a PDF. Anyway, as to current statues the paper tried to contact Stephen Atkins for comments and his phone was indicated as being disconnected. They were unable to find out anything more.
Here's a link to the article:
QuoteThe Old Testament tells of a prophet named Ezekiel who saw dry, lifeless bones in a valley. God gave him a vision and told him to prophesy to the bones. When Ezekiel did, the bones connected to each other, stood on their feet and became a great army.
The Laura Street Trio â€" the Marble Bank Building, the Florida Life Building and the Bisbee Building â€" plus the old Barnett Bank Building could be likened to those parched bones.
Purchased in April by a development company headed by Stephen Atkins and backed by Jaguars owner, Shahid Khan, the buildings stand silent and tomb-like at the corner of Laura and Forsyth Streets on a block forgotten by commuters racing past.
The acquisition may represent growth for Jacksonville’s downtown, and Atkins might be a prophet foretelling the City’s future.
Downtown momentum
Wiat Bowers is an urban planner with a local consulting firm who purchased a home in Jacksonville’s urban core in 2006. Downtown was on the cusp of exploding in a good way, he said.“Then, the recession hit, and that stymied everything.â€
http://residentnews.net/2013/06/04/downtowns-laura-street-trio-barnett-bank-building-face-uncertain-future/
Thanks for putting up the link Ennis. You are the "magic man"! :)
not sure there is much info. about the latest on the Trio and Barnett projects in this article....the writer tried to contact Steve Atkins but was not successful
A part of me was just a lil agitated to hear about the Khan/Shipyards 'thing' when nothing so far as come of the Khan/Trio 'thing'. I guess I have developed the typical Jacksonville "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude. I'd just like to see the Trio with a concrete plan before moving on to something as huge as the Shipyards.
Quote from: comncense on June 18, 2013, 09:54:47 PM
A part of me was just a lil agitated to hear about the Khan/Shipyards 'thing' when nothing so far as come of the Khan/Trio 'thing'. I guess I have developed the typical Jacksonville "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude. I'd just like to see the Trio with a concrete plan before moving on to something as huge as the Shipyards.
Well Khan has little do with anything. He's just providing the possible financing. He's not a developer so he has no control of making the move forward. He has nothing to do with the concreate plans for the trio. He's just bankrolling. However, the Shipyards is something he's personally has idea's for. So IMO the two projects have little in common aside from the fact his investment firm is interested in financing.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 18, 2013, 09:02:16 PM
not sure there is much info. about the latest on the Trio and Barnett projects in this article....the writer tried to contact Steve Atkins but was not successful
I think it was the "phone" being disconnected as to the "unsuccessful" attempt which seems odd considering all of the attention drawn to the project to be followed by no announcement at One Spark and then a phone for contact with the main driver of the project disconnected. So is no news good news or something else?
Does anyone have any idea what happened with this project? Any news?
Quote from: icarus on July 15, 2013, 10:33:10 AM
Does anyone have any idea what happened with this project? Any news?
They don't want to take attention away from One Spark 2014.
Announcement coming shortly thereafter...
Quote from: KenFSU on July 15, 2013, 11:33:24 AM
Quote from: icarus on July 15, 2013, 10:33:10 AM
Does anyone have any idea what happened with this project? Any news?
They don't want to take attention away from One Spark 2014.
Announcement coming shortly thereafter...
;D
Maybe they meant the next one spark
makes sense its called the Trio ... our own personal Bermuda triangle of development ... hopefully they announce something soon.
http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2013-08-17/story/hotel-restaurants-bank-planned-historic-laura-street-trio?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Really hope they could get this done.
When I read that Langton may pull out of developments downtown if the City pulled their downtown investments, it meant to me that the City needs stronger leaders with better connections to Community Leaders. I don't see any forward progress in downtown growth under Brown, he has no plan, just an idea here, there and cannot get anyone to follow a master plan. Of course he will take credit for OneSpark, but OneSpark is bigger than any one person. Very disappointed with the lack of progress downtown, other than to take away the chess tables in Hemming Plaza. Ugh!
This is another project that will need a portion of that $9 million council wants to take away. None of them work without incentives to fill in the financing gaps. Our DT hasn't reached that level of vibrancy yet.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 18, 2013, 12:42:16 AM
This is another project that will need a portion of that $9 million council wants to take away. None of them work without incentives to fill in the financing gaps. Our DT hasn't reached that level of vibrancy yet.
"... that level of vibrancy..". You've broached the idea of the "threshold". How viable is that idea?
We've been stuck in a pre-threshold environment for decades....its called stagnation. Achieving the threshold will force conditions more favorable for businesses and residents desiring entry into the core. In fact, we can probably assume that a post-threshold environment will mean that many will begin to "compete" for entry into the core.... simply because there will be an energy level in the core upon which they can depend.... as if riding upon it.
The problem is that there has been no vision, no strong leadership, no educating the council members or their constituents, and therefore no sacrifice, hard work, or action to force progress to the much needed threshold which, if achieved, will remove most of the risk for businesses and residents desiring entry into the core.
Most investors have taken the easy, short term, path to profits, which has meant.."the suburbs", not realizing that the achievement of high core vibrancy and infill will greatly benefit the entire northeast Florida area.
As politicking and profiteering increases, true leadership decreases..... and the bullshit show goes on.
A great story of how the catalyst for the turnaround of downtown Cleveland almost single-handedly thanks to one family: How One Family Made Cleveland (Yes, Cleveland) Cool (http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-economy/solutions-bank/how-one-family-made-cleveland-yes-cleveland-cool-20130801)
QuoteDevelopers were reluctant to invest in urban residential and mixed-use projects in an unproven market. An urban development in a distressed area is a significantly more complicated, expensive, and time-consuming endeavor than planting a subdivision in open space. "It took us eight years just to buy all the property, and we got no returns for that period of time," Maron says. It helped that MRN wasn't beholden to preconceptions about how to make money in real estate. Its leadership consisted of Maron, a trained violinist; his dad, a contractor; and his brother, an accountant.
Urban projects also require a lot of cooperation with city hall, to make sure they are integrated with existing infrastructure and comply with city laws. The 16 buildings on East Fourth had 250 owners crowded onto their land-leases. MRN managed to acquire 80 percent of the property, but to free up abandoned or extremely neglected buildings, the city had to exercise eminent domain. Realizing Maron's vision required working with the city to waive parking-ratio requirements and to make sure fire trucks could still access a street closed to vehicular traffic.
Financing the project was even more complicated. "What we call 'baklava financing' has been the way we've approached urban projects," Maron says, referring to the Mediterranean layered pastry. Federal and state historic tax credits provided a layer of funding for every apartment building, restaurant, or entertainment venue. Cleveland Development Advisers, a subsidiary of the regional chamber of commerce, provided loans and New Markets tax credits.
MRN was forced to get creative. Restaurateurs were wary of taking a chance on a largely abandoned area, so MRN opened its own Mexican restaurant, Irish pub, and bowling alley. "We're in the hotel business, and the restaurant business—things that, at the time, we were forced to do because it was the only way for us to prove that there was a market for this kind of product," Maron says.
But each project got easier to finance. The 224 apartments filled up almost as fast as MRN could build them. Crowds gathered at East Fourth's entertainment venues, attracting new businesses and new investment. Today, tenants include Chef Jonathon Sawyer, whose Greenhouse Tavern was named one of the 10 best new restaurants in America by Bon Appetit. Rents on East Fourth have gone up 60 percent in the last decade, Maron says, and restaurant retail sales are double what MRN first expected. "As the market continues to grow, there's less and less need for the baklava financing," Maron says.
CoJ either needs to pick a winner or get out of the way.
Really glad to see something coming, but the delay clearly had to do with changing the plans. What happened to the student housing component, which was sort intriguing of all! And the possibility of a pharmacy would have been great. Obviously all the residential has been wiped out as well.
Still, that can come in the future, as long as we have adaptive reuse and additional infill I'm stoked.
QuoteMost investors have taken the easy, short term, path to profits, which has meant.."the suburbs", not realizing that the achievement of high core vibrancy and infill will greatly benefit the entire northeast Florida area.
I think the point you made there, which I completely agree with, is that at this point in time Downtown needs "benefactor" investors - patient money that is more purpose driven than return driven. Does Jacksonville have enough deep-pocketed local investors with a passion for Downtown? I believe that "benefactor" projects would go much further to advancing Downtown in the early stages of revitalization than any government incentivized project could, although that element is essential too. The Trio project is dependent on New Markets Tax Credits to help make the numbers pencil. But we can't count on the availability of incentives/tax credits lasting forever. And frankly, Downtown will not be "revitalized" from a real estate investment standpoint until they are no longer needed to make projects economically viable.
Quote from: JFman00 on August 18, 2013, 03:17:58 AM
A great story of how the catalyst for the turnaround of downtown Cleveland almost single-handedly thanks to one family: How One Family Made Cleveland (Yes, Cleveland) Cool (http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-economy/solutions-bank/how-one-family-made-cleveland-yes-cleveland-cool-20130801)
I met Ari Maron at the Vanguard Conference. A few of the events were hosted at their 4th Street and Uptown developments. Cleveland helped facilitate what they were trying to do. Historically, we've been more of a stumbling block for private development.
Take note of this paragraph:
QuoteCleveland's urban revival has required leadership at every level. Business owners voluntarily raised their taxes to fund special improvement districts. Cleveland State University built space for nearly 1,200 additional dorm beds downtown. A Transportation Department grant helped fund a bus rapid-transit line between the business district and the university, hospital, and arts district. City hall modified building codes to encourage historic preservation and created new walkable neighborhood zoning.
There's little political opposition, in large part because gentrification isn't an issue. "No one's being displaced," Hill says. Downtown, in University Circle, and along the lakefront, new developments are replacing vacant office space, empty warehouses, and parking lots.
This makes a world of difference between the haves and the have nots.
Quote from: ronchamblin on August 18, 2013, 02:33:56 AM
Most investors have taken the easy, short term, path to profits, which has meant.."the suburbs", not realizing that the achievement of high core vibrancy and infill will greatly benefit the entire northeast Florida area.
I don't blame them. In general, investors are investing to make money instead of losing it trying to achieve risky feel good stories. Most aren't headed to the burbs. It's not like our burbs are booming these days either. Instead, they take their money out of town and invest in other areas across the globe that are safer bets. We can turn things around but it's not going to happen until we can be trusted to take leadership in investing in downtown and truly facilitating development instead of pulling the rug from under it or throwing grenades in its way.
Quote from: kbhanson3 on August 18, 2013, 07:57:05 AM
QuoteMost investors have taken the easy, short term, path to profits, which has meant.."the suburbs", not realizing that the achievement of high core vibrancy and infill will greatly benefit the entire northeast Florida area.
I think the point you made there, which I completely agree with, is that at this point in time Downtown needs "benefactor" investors - patient money that is more purpose driven than return driven. Does Jacksonville have enough deep-pocketed local investors with a passion for Downtown? I believe that "benefactor" projects would go much further to advancing Downtown in the early stages of revitalization than any government incentivized project could, although that element is essential too. The Trio project is dependent on New Markets Tax Credits to help make the numbers pencil. But we can't count on the availability of incentives/tax credits lasting forever. And frankly, Downtown will not be "revitalized" from a real estate investment standpoint until they are no longer needed to make projects economically viable.
Good terms that I must remember... "benefactor" investors .... "purpose driven" than return driven.
"Downtown will not be "revitalized" from a real estate investment standpoint until they (incentives/tax credits) are no longer needed to make projects economically viable."
Right on! There will be no need for lasting incentives and tax credits simply because a post-threshold condition will finally exist, wherein there will exist a momentum, a buzz, an excitement that downtown "finally" is producing its own energy... as if a fire, to which one has been giving labor to ignite, has finally burst into flames.... thus allowing the heat energy to do, without further assistance, the work only a fire can do.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 18, 2013, 08:33:33 AM
Quote from: ronchamblin on August 18, 2013, 02:33:56 AM
Most investors have taken the easy, short term, path to profits, which has meant.."the suburbs", not realizing that the achievement of high core vibrancy and infill will greatly benefit the entire northeast Florida area.
I don't blame them. In general, investors are investing to make money instead of losing it trying to achieve risky feel good stories. Most aren't headed to the burbs. It's not like our burbs are booming these days either. Instead, they take their money out of town and invest in other areas across the globe that are safer bets. We can turn things around but it's not going to happen until we can be trusted to take leadership in investing in downtown and truly facilitating development instead of pulling the rug from under it or throwing grenades in its way.
Absolutely. Leadership is a "key" requirement. The mayor, the city council, and others in positions of influence can, if they can see past politics and attempt to educate their constituents as the huge gain for "their" neighborhoods once full vibrancy in the core is achieved.... there can be great moves toward the goals, as the usual roadblocks and wasted energy can be eliminated.
Nothing will happen until strong leadership, with vision, exists. And that's why the next elections are so important. The problem with elections however is that it's difficult to separate those who say anything to get elected from those who actually speak what we might call the truth..... a rare thing in America. It's called the forked tongue disease, which can be cured with a combination of vitamins containing integrity, honesty, sacrifice, and vision.
www.jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2013-08-17/story/hotel-restaurants-bank-planned-historic-laura-street-trio
It'd be a great thing for downtown if it happens. I hate to use the cliche of "the thing that pushes it ..." but it could be a great stimulus for more activity.
Any completed projects in the trio and the Barnett building will certainly be a boon for the area.
My work on the 225 Laura Building is not yet started because GUS & Company will not be out of the building for several more weeks, and because I've been tied up on other projects. GUS is moving to a spot on the south side of Adams street, I think west of Julia..... closer to the courthouse.
BTW, the six apartments planned for the two upper floors of the 225 Laura building (GUS's) are already spoken for... already rented when completed. Seems that everybody wants to have a view over the park, and near a restaurant, which will be located just below in the current GUS & Company location.
In any case, let's hope the renovation work on the trio will begin before I complete the renovation of the 225 building, which should be finished in 2015.
It would be nice to have more of the "little" buildings in the area, buildings such as the 225 Laura, so that more of the average Joe's without megabucks could "do" more renovation projects. There is not much left on Laura.... buildings small enough for a worker-bee type of person to renovate.
Of course, there is the building occupied by Magnificat, and the adjacent one around the corner, behind Magnificat, both having the same owners..... who, I believe, live out of town. But then, these two buildings are being, for the most part, occupied, and are not in desperate need of renovation. I think the two buildings were left by Blanch Pavles (sp), to two of her sons. Being a long time customer and friend, she once said that she would consider selling one or both to me, but she passed away about three years ago. I think too, that her sons own one of the buildings on the north side of Adams, between Laura and Hogan.
Must be nice to be "left" real estate.... basically for free. But, as some might say, its better to work for what you have, so that it's more appreciated.
Marriott approves hotel franchise for the Trio.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/09/13/marriott-approves-hotel-franchise-for.html
Quote from: I-10east on September 13, 2013, 02:22:59 PM
Marriott approves hotel franchise for the Trio.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/09/13/marriott-approves-hotel-franchise-for.html
Fantastic news.
Now we sit back and watch our city leaders screw it up.
Here's the press release:
Marriott International Approves Laura Trio Hotel
Jacksonville, Fla – Following the release of the proposed redevelopment plans for the Laura Street Trio in downtown Jacksonville by SouthEast Group on August 19th, Marriott International, Inc., today announced its formal approval of the developer's franchise for the 131-key hotel to be operated under the company's Courtyard by Marriott flag. In a letter addressed to SouthEast Group principal and managing director Steve Atkins, Marriott conveyed its Development Committee's approval and scheduled execution of operational and trademark licensing.
Upon completion of the redevelopment, the new hotel will establish singular brand representation of the Marriott
hospitality system in downtown Jacksonville. The new hotel will be one of the exclusive adaptive reuse, historically-themed products featured by Marriott in select markets around the country. Similarly styled hotels have become downtown hotspots in Boston, Philadelphia, San Diego, Seattle, Tulsa, Cincinnati, Washington D.C., Denver and Miami.
While distinct from the typical Courtyard model, this select service product also takes advantage of the Marriott Rewards Program. The exclusive offering by Marriott has nearly 40 million members worldwide and is the largest program of its kind in the hospitality industry, allowing users to earn and redeem points at any of 14 distinctive brands and over 3,700 hotels in 70 countries and territories. The Rewards network is particularly popular with today's business traveler, making Marriott the leader in that market category. In addition, Courtyard by Marriott is now the official hotel of the NFL, providing additional opportunities to link downtown's Sports District to the city's core with pre-game and post-game events, as well as off-season programming throughout the year.
"This can be a game-changer for downtown Jacksonville" said developer Steve Atkins. "The relationship with Marriott is the key to making this redevelopment successful. The Trio can be transformative for the Central Business District. Having the biggest name in the hospitality industry located in the epicenter of Jacksonville is a major piece of the puzzle, now it's time for the City to embrace the opportunity and be bold in its support of the project," Atkins added. "Great cities invest in themselves by creating dynamic urban environments that foster activity. Here is a chance for Jacksonville to become a greater city."
With an overall project scope of around $40MM, the developers are seeking participation with the city through publicprivate-partnership. Groundbreaking is scheduled for early 2014, with a grand opening in late 2016.
SouthEast is a commercial real estate development firm based in Jacksonville, Florida, providing a full complement of
development services, capital management and general contracting performance across the southeastern region of the United States. The company specializes in integrated design-build services, new construction, preservation and
development consultation programming, with a focus on sustainable construction and redevelopment.
SouthEast is licensed for operations as a Certified General Contractor in the states of Florida, Georgia, Alabama,
Mississippi, North and South Carolina and has been qualified for operations in Tennessee and Kentucky. Specializing in design-build construction methodology, company principals have more than 80 years of industry experience and a resume of more than $500 million dollars in total development volume throughout the region.
Atkins says restaurants announcements coming soon:
http://jacksonville.com/business/2013-09-13/story/laura-street-trio-gets-ok-marriott
And as article in JBJ now running states a year later and nothing. Wow. Nothing can get done in this city. I guess we are still looking for our sugar daddy here.
The JBJ article:
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/03/26/a-year-after-khan-backs-deal-for-laura-street-trio.html?page=all
It's sad, I know it wouldn't have been done by this years one spark, but so many people come in to town for one spark it would be nice if they could see some activity on these buildings. This is a huge black eye on our city. Probably tied with the shipyards.
^^ yea very sad. It amazes me that a broke ass city like Cleveland continues to make great strides in their downtown while Jax sits idly by.
I believe there will be solid movement on the Barnett building in the very near future.
Quote from: tufsu1 on March 26, 2014, 08:01:13 PM
I believe there will be solid movement on the Barnett building in the very near future.
Speculation or do you know something we don't? :)
^ perhaps I do
Quote from: tufsu1 on March 26, 2014, 10:32:18 PM
^ perhaps I do
OH! Are you able to share anything with us? We need something after being reminded about the trio again.
^ well for one thing the building will be open during One Spark...and some creators will be located there
QuoteGroundbreaking is scheduled for early 2014
Is this early enough or should we wait for August?
Anybody seen this yet?
http://www.thebarnettjax.com/ (http://www.thebarnettjax.com/)
Quote from: Ajax on March 28, 2014, 08:22:15 AM
Anybody seen this yet?
http://www.thebarnettjax.com/ (http://www.thebarnettjax.com/)
Nice teaser!
It's going to be an "innovation center?"
QuoteInnovation center in Downtown's Barnett Bank tower showing signs of life
A website and Facebook, Twitter and Instagram accounts for The Barnett went live this week, showcasing photos of the ground-floor of the Barnett Bank Tower with the tagline "a historic 160,000 square-foot-space in the heart of Jacksonville's growing startup community."
The website includes a logo of Southeast Group, which owns the Barnett and the Laura Street Trio. SouthEast Managing Partner Steve Atkins did not return a phone call seeking comment Friday afternoon.
Full article:
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/03/28/innovation-center-in-downtowns-barnett-bank-tower.html
and now you know of what I hinted at a few weeks back
All 160,000 sf?
The Marble Bank building will be the location of the Cultural Council awards this May, and an upscale restaurant headquartered in Atlanta is being brought in to cater the event. This restaurant will be the final occupant of the Marble Bank post-completion. Early rumors from within hint that it will be a high-end steakhouse.
Quote from: joshuataylor on April 02, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
The Marble Bank building will be the location of the Cultural Council awards this May, and an upscale restaurant headquartered in Atlanta is being brought in to cater the event. This restaurant will be the final occupant of the Marble Bank post-completion. Early rumors from within hint that it will be a high-end steakhouse.
THIS May? As in 1 month from now? MJ has put up pictures of the interior and it needs a LOT of work - has work already begun on it? If not, I'd say May is way too soon for it to be open, let alone serving steaks.
^ yes and no....the awards dinner will be held there in May....any permanent establishment is months/years off
Quote from: thelakelander on April 02, 2014, 04:26:36 PM
All 160,000 sf?
no...I think the plan is to renovate and occupy floors gradually
Hmm, so no school of higher learning?
Quote from: coredumped on April 02, 2014, 05:18:23 PM
Quote from: joshuataylor on April 02, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
The Marble Bank building will be the location of the Cultural Council awards this May, and an upscale restaurant headquartered in Atlanta is being brought in to cater the event. This restaurant will be the final occupant of the Marble Bank post-completion. Early rumors from within hint that it will be a high-end steakhouse.
THIS May? As in 1 month from now? MJ has put up pictures of the interior and it needs a LOT of work - has work already begun on it? If not, I'd say May is way too soon for it to be open, let alone serving steaks.
Yes, the entire building has been cleaned and weatherproofed inside, and a subfloor has been built up in the main room to host the ceremony. But the actual renovation will be some months away. Still, it will be nice to finally know one of the restaurant concepts that will finally occupy the space alongside the Marriott (and just for rumor's sake... Capital Grille is an Atlanta-based chain, with the advantage of an existing Town Center location from which to cater...)
Wait....so is the Laura Street Trio project dead or alive??? I'm confused..
Quote from: Rynjny on April 02, 2014, 06:27:14 PM
Wait....so is the Laura Street Trio project dead or alive??? I'm confused..
It never died. It's just going to take a while.......and city money.......to pull it off.
This place is gonna get a lot of attention during One Spark. ;)
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on April 02, 2014, 07:04:48 PM
This place is gonna get a lot of attention during One Spark. ;)
most likely
Quote"We're creating a hub for the millennial startup group," said Steve Atkins, whose SouthEast Holdings a year ago paid $3 million for the tower and the buildings known as the Laura Street Trio.
He already has commitments, including Elton Rivas, who said he's bringing his own trio of enterprises to the building. Rivas is the co-founder of One Spark, the creative festival that kicks off downtown on Wednesday. But he's also the co-founder of CoWork Jax and KYN, both geared to help new businesses get started and out on their own.
Rivas said the offices for all three are moving to Barnett, taking up about four floors to create what he called "the epicenter of an entrepreneurial eco-system."
http://members.jacksonville.com/business/2014-04-04/story/innovation-center-will-revive-historic-barnett-building-downtown
Wow!!! Freaking awesome news!! Get the younger people from this and from the old library transformation this will bring much needed life into dt.
And even better the financing is in place and no city money will be requested. As Toney stands with hands open wide.
Nice.
This has to be the best news I've heard regarding DT getting a big boost for building "occupancy". Occupying buildings in the DT core is critical, and you can't get much closer to the center of the city.
Steve Atkins is my hero for at least a year. He's been determined to do the trio. His persistence and hard work is paying off.
Let's hope nothing happens to obstruct what appears to be a going project.
great news for downtown. it will be cool to see the Barnett Building all lit up and active.
For sure, great news!!
Steve Atkins is filling buildings ..... occupying buildings........."with people"..... and thereby adding momentum to true revitalization.
Food Trucks, if allowed to establish themselves in "excessive" quantity and in "too close" proximity to established restaurants in the DT core, will tend to "empty" buildings. .... and thereby decrease the momentum to revitalization.
Ugh, please not again.
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 04, 2014, 08:40:23 PM
Steve Atkins is filling buildings ..... occupying buildings........."with people"..... and thereby adding momentum to true revitalization.
Food Trucks, if allowed to establish themselves in "excessive" quantity and in "too close" proximity to established restaurants in the DT core, will tend to "empty" buildings. .... and thereby decrease the momentum to revitalization.
Stop now. Just focus on getting your salon opened up to take advantage of this momentum.
This is wonderful to hear! And not just the reuse of important and irreplaceable landmarks, but the emphasis on creating an environment for the up-and-coming generation(s). They are the future of downtown, and you just don't hear that often enough in talk of its revitalization.
Great news indeed!
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 04, 2014, 08:40:23 PM
Food Trucks, if allowed to establish themselves in "excessive" quantity and in "too close" proximity to established restaurants in the DT core, will tend to "empty" buildings. .... and thereby decrease the momentum to revitalization.
Is this sarcasm? I really can't tell....
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 04, 2014, 08:40:23 PM
Steve Atkins is filling buildings ..... occupying buildings........."with people"..... and thereby adding momentum to true revitalization.
Food Trucks, if allowed to establish themselves in "excessive" quantity and in "too close" proximity to established restaurants in the DT core, will tend to "empty" buildings. .... and thereby decrease the momentum to revitalization.
I used to love popping in to your shop, but you have turned me off so wholly (with the food truck war) that I can't enjoy patronizing any longer. I'm not the only one you've lost. Many people in my circle of influence have separately caught on to your insecurities with the "new" and feel the same way. I wish you many more years of success, but I highly recommend you drop the vocal activism before you get lumped in with a crowd that I really didn't think you were part of.
Do your thing, man. Get creative and stop bitching about the trucks.
Kyn, Cowork Jax and One Spark were all located in downtown within a couple blocks of this building anyway, but it's still great to bring them together with other tech and startup ventures. Did The Factory incubator/accelerator ever finalize their relocation to downtown Jax?
I think the UNF component is fantastic. Summer 2015 can't come soon enough!
Quote from: InnerCityPressure on April 05, 2014, 12:51:07 AM
Quote from: ronchamblin on April 04, 2014, 08:40:23 PM
Steve Atkins is filling buildings ..... occupying buildings........."with people"..... and thereby adding momentum to true revitalization.
Food Trucks, if allowed to establish themselves in "excessive" quantity and in "too close" proximity to established restaurants in the DT core, will tend to "empty" buildings. .... and thereby decrease the momentum to revitalization.
I used to love popping in to your shop, but you have turned me off so wholly (with the food truck war) that I can't enjoy patronizing any longer. I'm not the only one you've lost. Many people in my circle of influence have separately caught on to your insecurities with the "new" and feel the same way. I wish you many more years of success, but I highly recommend you drop the vocal activism before you get lumped in with a crowd that I really didn't think you were part of.
Do your thing, man. Get creative and stop bitching about the trucks.
It appears you've not understood the principle ideas I've offered about food trucks ... about their relation to the importance of increasing building occupancy in the core. My desire has been to convey that I "do want food trucks in the core", but that we should be cautious about how much freedom is allowed to food trucks, because too much freedom.... too many food trucks .... too close to .....and too often ...... around the established restaurants ..... "could" work against building occupancy in the DT core, and therefore work against revitalization.
Again .... "I do want food trucks in the DT core".
And again .... and this apparently is somewhat difficult for you to understand ... I appreciate the value of having food trucks in the DT core ... and I support having them. I "want" food trucks, as they add variety to the DT environment. I hope this is set upon your mind.
However, I offer a voice of caution. Anything we do regarding decisions about food trucks, should ultimately apply pressure to cause an increase in the occupancy of the buildings in the DT core, and not cause the emptying of them. No matter what anyone thinks about what I've said, my concern is that we do not impair the progress toward long-term revitalization.
Just as you have the freedom to continue implying the erroneous position that I oppose having food trucks in the core. I have the freedom to offer "caution" about the quantity, density, and proximity of these food trucks.
Regarding your decision to avoid my establishment as a consequence of my opinions, I invite your absence, as I wish to avoid engaging not only bigotry, but also those who seem incapable of understanding scenarios or problems having more than one or two components.
I like candy too, but I also like having healthy teeth for the long run. The food truck issue provides good candy for the short run, but we must be cautions that we do not impair efforts to achieve the long term objective of "occupying buildings", as doing so is crucial to revitalizing the core.
For the third or fourth time .... "I want food trucks in the DT core".
But we must display the wisdom to use caution ..... and ensure that excesses regarding food trucks do no damage to the long-term health of the core. That's all.
BTW. I do not have insecurities with the new, but I do have the wisdom to avoid being overwhelmed by the new. And if you are suggesting that my position is associated with a fear of competition, I might offer the fact that for almost forty years, after having started my book business with no money, and no experience, I've destroyed my competition. How can this be? Is it because I lack certain skills or attributes? Is it because I lack business acumen or wisdom?
My concern is not the competition from food trucks regarding my operation. My concern is for other operations that currently "occupy buildings" in the DT core; and this, as a consequence of my concern about building occupancy, and thus for progress toward real vibrancy. Caution regarding food trucks is all I ask. ;)
So the Marriott Boutique hotel is out? Still super exciting.
^Where'd you get that? Kind of sounds like the building that's easier to get moving on, may be moving forward a little sooner than the one involving the Trio buildings across the street. Other than the apartments, it looks as if they are filling the Barnett with uses that don't necessarily require the immediate construction of a parking garage. Good move.
You know I was thinking it was in the Barnett building and I was looking at the uses and didn't see it listed. But I see the bottom of the article it clearly states the courtyard is in the Bisbee building so great.
So to clarify, is Marriott still on the docket?
There has been nothing suggested to say Marriott isn't still on board for the Trio. All the most recent news addresses is the building across the street, which has always been a separate project.
I know this will not happen, but an Apple store in the Barnett Building would be amazing.
I've been attending functions at CoWork Jax for a couple of years and cannot wait to see their facilities in the Barnett. The old bank building was gorgeous and so very impressive to me as a kid, with its huge lobby and giant windows to the street. So nostalgic and so super cool. My congratulations to all involved!
New Rule:
Nothing of significance happens regarding the survivability of business startups in the DT core until the population of the DT core (& its peripherals) increases as a consequence of increased residents, businesses, office workers, or sustained visitors.
New Rule:
Each kind or type of business is unique in demanding a minimum customer "foot traffic" population in its environment -- for example, in the DT core -- below which it cannot survive and prosper.
New Rule:
It must be the objective of all concerned with achieving vibrancy in the DT core, to, by whatever means -- incentives, encouragement, invitations, marketing, implementations -- gain .... force .... an increase in the population in the DT core -- residents, office workers, businesses, and sustained visitors.
Until the population increases, nothing else matters, and all the hoping and rhetoric amounts to little.
^No new rules needed. Let's not push to handicap the market even more than it already is.
Anyway, here's some updated info on the development of the Trio:
QuoteDeveloper: Laura Street Trio 'tracking directly behind' Barnett plans
The redeveloped Trio, at the corner of North Laura and West Forsyth streets, is to include two restaurants, one in the Marble Bank Building and one on the ground floor of the Bisbee Building, which will also include a Courtyard by Marriott hotel. There are also plans for a new building with a rooftop bar and a parking garage. The most recent figure for redevelopment is $40 million.
full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/morning-edition/2014/04/developer-laura-street-trio-tracking-directly.html
^Atkins has certainly been proactive in keeping word on the project in the news.
All I can say is - wow! All the buildings together represent a good, healthy mix of retail, entertainment, living quarters and business space. It's a dream come true for DT.
If it all comes together.
I saw in article on JBJ that he states he already has commitments for the first two floors of retail in The Barnett.
Shad Khan candidly answered various questions to moderator Jim Stallings during a lunch audience at the Jacksonville World Affairs Council. To answer a question about Jax not pushing it's potential, Khan said: "I think there has been a vacuum here, I can't explain it. A homeless guy in Detroit has more mojo than a millionaire in Jacksonville". The interview is covered by JBJ.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/04/22/shad-khan-unplugged-homeless-in-detroit-have-more.html
And in an article n Daily Record he said enough of the talk about downtown. There has been enough of it and time to start doing. He also confirmed he has been in discussins with an architect on the development of the Shipyards.
Quote from: edjax on April 22, 2014, 03:46:23 PM
And in an article n Daily Record he said enough of the talk about downtown. There has been enough of it and time to start doing. He also confirmed he has been in discussins with an architect on the development of the Shipyards.
This is good news considering his comments about no more talk and more action. I would be interested to see what he comes up with for the Shipyards and what kind of deal he is looking to broker in order to develop the parcel. I must say that I was tickled by his commentary about the lack of millionaire mojo. :) At least he sees the outcropping of business as usual in Jacksonville when it comes to so called movers and shakers.
Quote from: edjax on April 22, 2014, 03:46:23 PM
And in an article n Daily Record he said enough of the talk about downtown. There has been enough of it and time to start doing. He also confirmed he has been in discussins with an architect on the development of the Shipyards.
Here's that article.
www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542769
Quote from: I-10east on April 22, 2014, 04:06:10 PM
Quote from: edjax on April 22, 2014, 03:46:23 PM
And in an article n Daily Record he said enough of the talk about downtown. There has been enough of it and time to start doing. He also confirmed he has been in discussins with an architect on the development of the Shipyards.
Here's that article.
www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542769
From the article Khan said: "We'll step in and do it,"
Khan did not offer specifics Tuesday.
I am willing to take him at his word. Action is long overdo. Bring it! :)
Quote from: I-10east on April 22, 2014, 03:37:14 PM
Shad Khan candidly answered various questions to moderator Jim Stallings during a lunch audience at the Jacksonville World Affairs Council. To answer a question about Jax not pushing it's potential, Khan said: "I think there has been a vacuum here, I can't explain it. A homeless guy in Detroit has more mojo than a millionaire in Jacksonville". The interview is covered by JBJ.
www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/04/22/shad-khan-unplugged-homeless-in-detroit-have-more.html
Props for this post (I do give credit where it is due!), because that was an awesome interview.
Love that Khan pulls no punches.
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 04:10:00 PM
Props for this post (I do give credit where it is due!), because that was an awesome interview.
Thanks Simms.
Quote from: pierre on April 22, 2014, 04:18:22 PM
Love that Khan pulls no punches.
Thats why I love him. He doesnt talk much, but when he does he tells the blunt truth with a straight face.
He is talking dead truth. All the studies the city paid for.... for the same advice!
Great interview. I love Khan's comments. It helps to have someone from outside the area who is also heavily invested here, actually state that we're good at talking with no action. All of the things being discussed in this town that would enhance our quality of life don't take long to implement. It's time to stop talking and studying and start implementing.
Action? Instead of talk? What entities or components are required for one to "act" regarding a project in the core? I presume we are talking about a significant project that would increase population, business, and vibrancy in the core.
I presume we are acknowledging that there have been far too few significant projects in the core over recent decades -- that we've been somewhat stagnant as far as core development is concerned.
Given a certain situation ... scenario ... or environment, such as in our current low-foot-traffic core, one might attempt to imagine a viable project that could survive within it. Once one has imagined a project -- a project having a high probability of success, then one might determine how to force the project to completion.
Before action is to be, one must not only perceive the beginning and the end, but one must also perceive the path to the end, perceiving as much as possible all the obstacles on the path. And then one must determine if all the assets are available to ensure destruction of all the obstacles.
Only by perceiving a viable goal or project, can one proceed to action. Only by possessing the will and determination can one proceed to action. Only by achieving confidence as to the probability of success, can one proceed to action. Only by having sufficient assets, can once proceed to action.
Viable Project? The very fact that within the core is very low foot-traffic, makes finding a "viable project" difficult. Every 1,000 people added to the downtown mix, via residents, workers, or visitors, will increase the number of types of businesses that can survive and prosper in the core. A major cause of a lack of downtown core "investment action" over decades, is its lack of foot traffic. Once a certain threshold of population has been achieved, we will observe a rush to engage the core because entrepreneurs will perceive a high probability of achieving success. And people will move into the core as residents because the core will supply the necessities for living. Opportunity, and the increased probability of survival and profits, drives investment and "action" from potential entrepreneurs.
So.... what is preventing "action"? Fear? Fear of failure ... of losing one's assets? Where are the brave souls who are willing to force success? Is everyone lacking in borrowing power? Is the economy simply too poor, and the core foot traffic too low to allow confidence that "any" viable project can survive in the core?
I suspect that a primary obstacle to having more "action" is simply that, under the current condition of low foot traffic, there are almost "no viable projects" or businesses that could survive in the core. If there were viable projects, then we would see businesses and investors providing the "action" we talk about. Investors and business people must perceive a high probability of success and profits "before they force action".
In order to emerge to a condition of progress toward infill and vibrancy, to escape the current stagnation, there must be some bold and moneyed individuals who are willing to invest in the core to "force" increases in core population. By "forcing" I mean to say "taking more risk" than is the norm. Khan apparently has the funds, but to what degree is he willing to affect the situation positively?