Interesting article. The Laura Street Trio project could be in jeopardy if COJ doesn't commit to providing a certain amount of money within the next month. This is the tough part of downtown revitalization. Having to find a way to put your money where your mouth is. I wonder if this pending decision could make or break the redevelopment of the Northbank core?
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/3559226156_5LBK9hT-900x2000.jpg)
Proposed Laura Street Trio site planhttp://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-sep-barnett-and-laura-street-trio-site-plan-september-2014#.VIiHGjHF_Cs
QuoteSteve Atkins, SouthEast Group principal and managing director, for years has proposed residential, office space, restaurants, a sports bar and even a boutique hotel for the sites.
He told the World Affairs Council in September the $70 million project would require at least $8 million from the city to become reality.
"We'll try to get there, but the DIA doesn't have that capital," Wallace said at the time.
That opinion hasn't changed.
"It's really difficult to try to make the numbers work," Wallace said Monday. "It's a question of how much equity and how much debt on the private-sector side can the project generate. ... I don't want (the city) to be more than 20-something percent of the transaction."
Wallace said the city has a deadline for its potential role in the project.
"First quarter of 2015, I'm hoping to get to a 'go' or 'no go' on this project. We've spent 90 days working on that project. I'm going to make a recommendation one way or another," he said.
Another site could be suitable for housing FSCJ students. Someone just needs to talk to FSCJ to get them on board. I believe there was an RFP done for this site a few months back and the winning group had proposed multifamily infill. I wonder if that project died?
QuoteIn 2003, the city entered into an agreement with an Orlando-based developer to construct a restaurant in LaVilla near the Ritz Theatre and Museum.
The restaurant never was completed and, after putting nearly
$2 million into the project, the city in 2008 released the developer from having to repay a construction loan and took over the property.
It has been vacant since.
Wallace said any future development of the restaurant property will be feasible only if it is part of a larger project. One possibility could be development of student housing in partnership with Florida State College at Jacksonville, but the city has not contacted the college even on a preliminary basis, Wallace said.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=544476
Here we find ourselves back here again. A cheap city will always be a cheap city. I guess we will have to hold our breath and see, but given the way things work around here... ::)
I'm gonna take a nap. Wake me up when "downtown is on fire."
Whoa wait a minute - are you telling me that a project involving historic buildings in downtown Jacksonville could be in jeopardy?! I refuse to believe it!!
Honestly I wish they would stop announcing their intentions with these properties and wait until more of the funds are secured. Otherwise you lead to jaded people (like me) rolling their eyes every time a new project involving downtown property is mentioned in the press.
This city can't even maintain parks and medians. How much money do they have available to dump into these downtown development schemes?
i've said it before on this site, and i'll say it again. i won't believe anything will happen with the trio until I actually see a finished project happen. I have heard talk of the trio getting project after project for three decades now and it always ends as just being talk. I am sure it has been going on for more than the thirty years i know and i'm sure...
Man, we really need to find a way to jump on these opportunities when they present themselves. Especially when the economy is on an upward swing. I wonder how big the discrepancy between what Atkins is asking and what DIA can afford is? If it's only a couple of million dollars, I wonder if crowdsourcing could possibly be a viable option to help close the gap. Local corporations donate $______ and get use of the ballroom, restaurant, bar, etc. for a corporate event. Backers donate $ __________ and receive a stay in the boutique hotel once finished or a plaque in the buildings recognizing their contribution. As a city, Jacksonville rallied together to buy $75 million worth of imaginary NFL club tickets in less than ten days, long before the Jaguars even technically existed. Surely there must be a way (that isn't perceived as simply lining Atkins' pockets) for the city to pull together enough loose change to preserve and restore these critical, endangered buildings.
Definitely nervous about Stache too in light of what's happened with KYN and the Edgewood Bakery.
If coj can't find $8mm, which is far below the 20% that Wallace alludes to, for such a no-brainer, transformative project like the Trio, then that is VERY telling. The only projects that will happen are the $1-4mm deals like Bostwick, and those might even start to dry up, if it is obvious the bigger projects won't happen.
I wonder if the new (upcoming) city council would be more responsive to the project . . .
Quote from: Bill Hoff on December 10, 2014, 08:09:49 PM
I wonder if the new (upcoming) city council would be more responsive to the project . . .
Depends - we need to get to know the candidates, and make sure those with an eye to the future - and not stuck in the past - win.
Quote from: Bill Hoff on December 10, 2014, 08:09:49 PM
I wonder if the new (upcoming) city council would be more responsive to the project . . .
Are we sure a deal with the structures can wait around that long? After all, time is money and if you're the private sector, there are a lot of other places across the globe to invest instead of sticking to Jax.
In a couple of years (if not sooner), we'll be heading towards another down cycle. The housing sector won't be to blame, and there won't be problems of foreclosures due to crashes in value, per se, but there will be an employment slump, and Jax will be hit hard.
Unemployment won't help tax rolls and people will be looking for lower taxes.
If this is the amount of economic development that happens in Jax during the best of times (look at November's jobs report), then it will be a tough 2-3 year slump for the city.
This is all very tough to hear. It's hard (or not too hard) to be this cynical, but most of America is literally BOOMTOWN right now. Cranes dot the cityscapes of most major cities at this point. That includes many of Jacksonville's peers.
We're rapidly closing in on two years since Atkins revealed plans for the Trio.
Has anyone heard anything new as of late?
I was talking to someone today and she had some inside knowledge and said the project is scrapped. I don't know what it is worth, but it does not look like the city is moving a finger for this. I am just curious why?
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on April 02, 2015, 07:20:34 PM
I was talking to someone today and she had some inside knowledge and said the project is scrapped. I don't know what it is worth, but it does not look like the city is moving a finger for this. I am just curious why?
Sorry if this sounds too harsh, but you came here to write, "I was talking to someone today and she had inside knowledge and said the project is scrapped" ? Are you adding to the conversation, or talking about someone who knows something about what is going on but has no idea what or who? Should I invest in this information? I'm just curious as to what you are saying? I haven't been
"keeping up" with the project, but feel maybe more inforamtion should be provided, instead of pure speculation which can turn to gossip.
Good to hear..... What do you know?
The fact this project is not underway is one of the blackest eyes our city has.
Perhaps they are waiting for Lori Boyer to finish looking under all the budget rocks to see how much money we really have.
Then again look inside the Barnett Bank cornerstone. Didnt old man Barnett put 100 gold coins in the time capsule? ;)
I thought Brown was holding up as a pawn. Surely he will do everything in his power to push it through before the runoff. Momentum and timing is key.
It would be nice to see CSX take a role in helping to finance this project. A long term low interest bond to get the ball rolling. If downtown Jax ever does get going CSX will benefit mightily.
If it is lost as a result of the pension, then I'll say what I've said many times on this forum: the whole city must suffer, but the police and others collect obscene pensions will make no sacrifice.
What is going to be embarrassing is the 200k visitors next week for OneSpark, that saw the announcement for the Barnett building last year and there's been no progress.
I would vote for Brown if he would just get this done alone. Right now I am completely undecided. I feel like this city remains in neutral while everyone else is moving.
Quote from: For_F-L-O-R-I-D-A on April 03, 2015, 12:33:23 AM
I would vote for Brown if he would just get this done alone. Right now I am completely undecided. I feel like this city remains in neutral while everyone else is moving.
not to turn this into a political thread, but has Curry intimated in any way that he could/would get it done?
That would be a real shame if this project didn't come to fruition. I was really excited when I saw the plans of mixing new and old together into something that would start adding to the downtown landscape.
I am an avid reader of MJ, although I rarely comment on the stories, and I just don't understand why Jax can't get things going. I have read about multiple projects and ideas that people have that would be great for Jax, but then it fizzles out as if Jacksonville is destined to stay mediocre at best.
What needs to happen to start the ball rolling? Talk is cheap...let's see some action.
As many wise users have said on here many, many times before... don't believe any of the projects slated for downtown will actually happen until they are 100% complete and open. Otherwise, you'll just constantly set yourself up for disappointment from failed projects and indefinite delays.
Quote from: MusicMan on April 02, 2015, 11:10:29 PM
It would be nice to see CSX take a role in helping to finance this project. A long term low interest bond to get the ball rolling. If downtown Jax ever does get going CSX will benefit mightily.
How so? Downtown takes off, their property value rises, and they get to pay higher taxes? I don't see how a bustling downtown helps an international transportation company. Hell, maybe they'll relocate.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 03, 2015, 10:42:43 AM
Quote from: For_F-L-O-R-I-D-A on April 03, 2015, 12:33:23 AM
I would vote for Brown if he would just get this done alone. Right now I am completely undecided. I feel like this city remains in neutral while everyone else is moving.
not to turn this into a political thread, but has Curry intimated in any way that he could/would get it done?
Curry hasn't intimated anything about this or any project, issue, or philosophy that concerns the City of Jacksonville, FL.
Jax property taxes are a drop in the bucket for a company like CSX. Somehow companies manage to survive with much larger offices in New York and San Francisco!
Totally get your point though. Not sure that CSX "needs" to be downtown. Their "campus"/buildings there are hideous anyway. In an active market with redevelopment potential and demand by new users, I'd say get them the hell out, demolish their shit, and start fresh with something decent. But that will NEVER happen.
In fact, since they own at least one of those buildings, the whole thing has probably been retrofitted for CSX's exclusive use. If they were to leave, not only would a *huge* chunk of the already small downtown population of workers (and restaurant/shop customers) leave, it would be difficult to backfill their space. That building just doesn't look efficient or nice at all.
^^^can you remind me what financing we are talking about?
In my world, stuff happens when financing is in place. Sometimes stuff happens when financing isn't in place. We went spec on an office tower in Denver without financing in place, and then we secured financing, but it was structured such that proceeds wouldn't be available until certain hurdles were met along the way. Why isn't anything happening here? What kind of financing is it, and for what?
Is Stashe/Khan providing what is essentially a subscription line to help the project get started without traditional c-loan in place? If that's the case, it's hard to call that "financing" if it's only a limited option to start the project and nothing more (and there are probably hurdles in place for that...and it's probably not the cheapest money).
Based on my experience, and obviously I'm not sitting in the Edgewood Bakery with all of the partners hashing things out like you are, but if this thing could get done today and someone was motivated enough to do it and that person or another involved person had the money, this thing would be underway.
Someone, or some people, are not pulling the trigger, for years now. For a project this small (and it is small...maybe not for Jax, which is probably part of it, but in terms of dollars and cents it is small), this project is really dragging.
I don't think anyone is saying that they know for sure this isn't happening sometime in the next 100 years, but really, when IS this going to get going?
Wasn't Marriott lined up as an operator/flag for the hotel component? Isn't the parking component easy enough to get done? Even in Jax? Certainly we're not waiting on a restaurant here? An un-leased restaurant space of this magnitude has the same risk profile of a leased restaurant space of this magnitude. This deal cannot possibly hinge on the restaurant - that in and of itself is almost like a separate investment, especially when compared in size to the rest of the project (it's a heft component).
Can't they move forward with the hotel piece? Or is that contingent on signing up an operator that Marriott agrees with? Thought it was only going to be a Courtyard or some similar limited service concept?
Rambling, but come on, Stephen, remind us all what's going on here.
Thanks,
yours truly
QuoteHe had all the liquidity in the world
Cameron Kuhn had very little liquidity. Once his twice-convicted money laundering buddy (currently encarcerated) cut him off, all of his middle market lenders filed foreclosures against his real estate holdings and he then got into the food truck game. After selling his little food cart, he then tried to unscrupulously backdoor his way back into an ownership interest of his once-most-prized possession, The Plaza in Orlando (during a time when the various condo associations within the complex were facing their own foreclosure suits). Luckily, the legal community was able to pry Kuhn's hands off of the complex (for a second time).
Let's set the record straight on Kuhn, he's already been extended far too much 'credit'.
Quote from: simms3 on April 03, 2015, 12:42:16 PM
Jax property taxes are a drop in the bucket for a company like CSX. Somehow companies manage to survive with much larger offices in New York and San Francisco!
CSX doesn't pay property taxes to COJ anyway.
Assessed Value: $23,177,200.00
Railroad Oper Property (926)- $23,061,314.00
Taxable Value: $115,886.00
http://apps.coj.net/pao_propertySearch/Basic/Detail.aspx?RE=0889580010
Quote from: stephendare on April 03, 2015, 01:35:11 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 03, 2015, 01:07:42 PM
^^^can you remind me what financing we are talking about?
In my world, stuff happens when financing is in place. Sometimes stuff happens when financing isn't in place. We went spec on an office tower in Denver without financing in place, and then we secured financing, but it was structured such that proceeds wouldn't be available until certain hurdles were met along the way. Why isn't anything happening here? What kind of financing is it, and for what?
Is Stashe/Khan providing what is essentially a subscription line to help the project get started without traditional c-loan in place? If that's the case, it's hard to call that "financing" if it's only a limited option to start the project and nothing more (and there are probably hurdles in place for that...and it's probably not the cheapest money).
Based on my experience, and obviously I'm not sitting in the Edgewood Bakery with all of the partners hashing things out like you are, but if this thing could get done today and someone was motivated enough to do it and that person or another involved person had the money, this thing would be underway.
Someone, or some people, are not pulling the trigger, for years now. For a project this small (and it is small...maybe not for Jax, which is probably part of it, but in terms of dollars and cents it is small), this project is really dragging.
I don't think anyone is saying that they know for sure this isn't happening sometime in the next 100 years, but really, when IS this going to get going?
Wasn't Marriott lined up as an operator/flag for the hotel component? Isn't the parking component easy enough to get done? Even in Jax? Certainly we're not waiting on a restaurant here? An un-leased restaurant space of this magnitude has the same risk profile of a leased restaurant space of this magnitude. This deal cannot possibly hinge on the restaurant - that in and of itself is almost like a separate investment, especially when compared in size to the rest of the project (it's a heft component).
Can't they move forward with the hotel piece? Or is that contingent on signing up an operator that Marriott agrees with? Thought it was only going to be a Courtyard or some similar limited service concept?
Rambling, but come on, Stephen, remind us all what's going on here.
Thanks,
yours truly
In jville financing is not a guarantee of success, as Cameron Kuhn can tell you.
He had all the liquidity in the world at the top of the real estate boom and was still unable to move the project forward because the JEA took more than a year to 'negotiate' whether or not they were going to run chilled water to the building to make air conditioning possible.
I think you're confusing financing with potential access to financing. Actual financing starts with a term sheet and deal terms. Sources can be public or private, senior first secured or junior/subordinated with multiple participators. Unless you're speaking of some sort of revolver, subscription line, LoC, etc etc. Those wouldn't apply to this project.
Maybe someone is holding these assets as-is on their balance sheet (who holds title?). But that's not "financing". And a lender isn't going to underwrite and "finance" a deal that may not happen. Basically, a lender will finance a deal whereby the only thing getting in the way of the edal happening would be the lender's decision to finance it (in simplified terms...lenders don't do underwriting exercises for no reason, especially for deals of this small size and extreme risk profile).
Quote from: Lunican on April 03, 2015, 02:51:42 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 03, 2015, 12:42:16 PM
Jax property taxes are a drop in the bucket for a company like CSX. Somehow companies manage to survive with much larger offices in New York and San Francisco!
CSX doesn't pay property taxes to COJ anyway.
Assessed Value: $23,177,200.00
Railroad Oper Property (926)- $23,061,314.00
Taxable Value: $115,886.00
http://apps.coj.net/pao_propertySearch/Basic/Detail.aspx?RE=0889580010
Is that because they are a "public utility"? Basically, this says they'll stay downtown at least for a long while. Own the building outright, no taxes (there wouldn't be taxes it would appear even if they moved, but there would be moving costs, potential construction costs to build something).
^ Railroads pay property taxes to the states they operate in. They will be right where they are until another round of railroad mergers is started. After that they will likely leave Jax and be consolidated in Omaha or Fort Worth. Five years or fifty is the question.
Just my comment. If there will be any catalyst for downtown it will the the 220 Riverside project. If 4 or 5 hundred renters move into that area I think it will be the spark downtown developers need.
I doubt it. In the grand scheme of things, apartment complexes like 220 Riversides come a dime a dozen on strips like Baymeadows, Gate Parkway and Kernan Blvd. DT would have all the momentum in the world if we, as a city, facilitated that growth and interest. Instead, several of the things that do happen, happen "in spite of". Clean up the streets, parks, schools, allow tactical urbanism to sprout, get out of the way of the private sector and let the market take control. It really is that easy.
^^^I agree with everything you said.
To add, jobs drive growth. Jobs are all going to the SS. Literally all of them. Downtown needs to figure out what these companies want (besides "to be where their employees live" because that's a chicken v egg argument). Part of that is that downtown needs to figure out why people want to live on the SS.
If it's for open space and trees, then as open as downtown is compared to most, it needs to do a better job with its parks, make them family friendly, and make sure they are the BEST maintained parks in the city (as if a fancy HOA managed them).
Nobody moves to Jax for an urban living option. That includes young professionals, too. Almost everyone I know in Jax in their 20s is already owning a house and having kids. Versus in a New York or San Francisco where it remains to be seen if these people are getting married ever, at all, or having kids ever, at all (even dating seems to be a big step and most people opt for open or polyamorous relationships). A place like Atlanta is somewhere in the middle.
So it's a huge demographics shift, different ideals, and an uphill battle to make downtown the place.
For apparency and a comparison - look at all the residential towers in Miami or Atlanta. And those downtowns are still pretty dead. It takes A LOT - more than just new apartments, especially more than just a few hundred new apartments.
Nashville and Charlotte each have a longggggggg way to go, still, and yet each is 2+ decades ahead of Jax, if Jax starts developing now.
Someone just needs to pull the trigger on something. How much riskier can it get in Jax - whether or not you start now or next year? City financing a piece of a project can help take *a smidge* of risk off the table. If you're going to have the balls to throw money down and start up something when the city gives you a couple million or "next year" when the market will improve, then in Jax you should really just have the balls to do it today, or you simply don't have the balls to do the project period. And nobody would blame you for that. But as the saying goes, talk is cheap.
Quote from PJS:
How so? Downtown takes off, their property value rises, and they get to pay higher taxes? I don't see how a bustling downtown helps an international transportation company. Hell, maybe they'll relocate.
Maybe it works the same way it is currently working for all the people who bought near or around the old boarded up hospital that is now Publix and Five Points in Riverside 17 years ago (1998). That area was mediocre at best, then Publix came in, Starbucks joined the crowd, and that crappy bungalow you paid $30,000 for , is now worth $230,000. Now, you don't have to sell, and yes your taxes have gone up (not too much if you homestead the place) and you live in one of the hottest and most desirable neighborhoods in Jacksonville. You can walk to all kind of great restaurants, do all the things your friends in cool cities do. See, the guys who run CSX would be better off if dowtown Jacksonville became one of the most attractive places for people and business in North America. They could attract even more talented people to work there and offer all the cool things great cities offer. That's how it works. Then CSX swallows up the other companies, not the other way around.
What I'm proposing is that CSX (who is amazingly profitable) puts forth a (relatively) small sum ($8 million??) as seed money to get the project off the ground.
Ever heard of Gate Hospitatlity? It's the luxury and comfort wing of Gate Petroleum. Has nothing to do with running gas stations but gives the company a neat little gold piece it can flash at potential executives and their families, plus increases the allure and quality of life in Jacksonville, maybe even for their employees. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with gas.
When I relocated to Jax in 2003, I came for a job but wanted to live in an urban setting. However, urban "to me" meant reliable mass transit, great parks, vibrant pedestrian scale street life and a variety of urban housing types (I wanted a rowhouse or at least a townhouse). I basically had two days to find a place and I ended up in the Southside for three primary reasons.
1. More housing types available on short term notice
2. Closer to my Ponte Vedra based office.
3. More retail and services available in closer proximity (I would have had a reverse commute on my hand if I selected DT)
4. I passed on the urban core because it wasn't the type of vibrant walkable environment that I would be willing to pay extra... for less space.
I literally felt that what I wanted, wasn't available, so I'd pocket the extra housing cash instead.
Tsk, tsk, tsk; what is happening to my Jacksonville. I thought we had got rid of the old "good ole boys" cronies who impeded and/or destroyed Jacksonville's potential and possibilities for the future...and then I hear (gossip?) this. Miami is looking like New York City, Tampa is beginning to stir once again, Orlando is also stirring, and Jacksonville seems to not be moving at all downtown for the exception of little rinky dink projects like bars, restaurants, street improvements, etc. I was really thinking about moving back to Jax because though it seems there's no significant projects on the line, it's still much better than when I was living there in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. I am now 58 years old, when I left Jax 21 years ago, there was nothing, I repeat NOTHING going on; yes, things are better than then...but when are we (Jax) going to reach the par of "world class" like Miami, Atlanta, Houston, Philadelphia, and even New York City; Jax's population, due to consolidation is illusory; and I guess the state of our downtown, and the way we handle things, are indicative of the small city mentality that we had before consolidation; heck, we sure are living up to it aren't we? Love Jax, always will, but I wish we'd just strip the consolidation thing, shrink back to our old city limits with maybe some annexed areas (new), and be the small city ranked 80th or so that we really are. And yes, things like this upset me and makes me mad; I just love Jax and it infuriates me when I see things like this.
Quote from: coredumped on April 03, 2015, 12:06:21 AM
If it is lost as a result of the pension, then I'll say what I've said many times on this forum: the whole city must suffer, but the police and others collect obscene pensions will make no sacrifice.
What is going to be embarrassing is the 200k visitors next week for OneSpark, that saw the announcement for the Barnett building last year and there's been no progress.
How does CSX play into this and what can they do? Am I missing something?
QuoteHow does CSX play into this and what can they do? Am I missing something?
It's a Hail Mary, since its holy week.
Why doesn't our Port Authority issue bonds to move some project ahead. The Cleveland Port Authority has been instrumental in helping with both private and public financing of projects in downtown Cleveland as noted:
PORT OF CLEVELAND APPROVES FINANCING FOR MAJOR DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Thursday, November 21, 2013
CLEVELAND, OH- The Port of Cleveland's Board of Directors voted today to help support more than $400 million in downtown Cleveland redevelopment projects.
At its monthly board meeting, The Port approved:
Issuing up to $97 million in lease revenue and tax increment financing bonds for Phase II of the Flats East Bank project. Total project costs are estimated at $149 million.
Issuing up to $57 million in lease revenue and tax increment financing bonds for the development of "The 9", a mixed-use development adjacent to the new County Headquarters. Total project costs are estimated at $171 million.
Granting a leasehold interest in the Optima-Sage hotel project to continue the development of the $73 million redevelopment of the former Crowne Plaza hotel".
William Friedman, president and CEO of the Port of Cleveland, said it is part of the Port's mission to finance development through the sale of project revenue bonds to private investors. The Port of Cleveland is the only local government agency whose sole mission is to spur job creation and economic vitality in Cuyahoga County. "These three projects that our Board approved today are vitally important to the redevelopment of downtown Cleveland. They will bring construction jobs, permanent jobs, tax revenues, and will change the feel of our downtown," he said. "We're proud to play a role in attracting private investment capital to these projects and our community." Full Press Release 2013.11.21 Financing
Different responsibilities. If our port had the cash, it would be dredging the river instead of seeking cash from other sources.
Quote from: stephendare on April 03, 2015, 09:31:07 PM
As we have been saying on this site for ten years now, if the goddam 'redevelopment professionals' would just get out of the way, the Downtown would have already recovered, expanded and be in a healthy place.
Get out of the way, facilitate financing, give up some perception of controlling things, stop being dicks about it and let the market take over.
Amen. My sense is there's a perception that anything new happening has to be big because we don't have the pieces in place for someone to take a chance on something small downtown. The chances for those small projects are few and far between, so we rely on big projects like this or the Shipyards to get us out of a rut when a dozen or so small projects would be healthier for downtown than one big project.
(But if all we can get right now are 1 or 2 big projects, I'll take them if they get things moving...)
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on December 10, 2014, 02:06:39 PM
Here we find ourselves back here again. A cheap city will always be a cheap city. I guess we will have to hold our breath and see, but given the way things work around here... ::)
Spending money that you don't have is not being smart,its being stupid. Jacksonville has a lot of debt that must be dealt with and many more financial problems on the horizon until the pension fund for the police/fire fighters is dealt with.
Quote from: Bill Hoff on December 10, 2014, 08:09:49 PM
I wonder if the new (upcoming) city council would be more responsive to the project . . .
they won't be until the 800lb gorilla( being the 1.4 billion dollar deficet in the police/fireman pension fund) gets resolved. A lot of major downtown work is going to be on hold until this gets dealt with. The union leaders want their money for their retirement
Quote from: thelakelander on April 04, 2015, 10:52:07 AM
Different responsibilities. If our port had the cash, it would be dredging the river instead of seeking cash from other sources.
it wouldn't be able to dredge the river because the Saint Johns River Keeper and the Sierra Club have sued to block it on grounds that it is bad for the environment.
^Sierra Club and River Keeper aside, there's still no funds available to pay the piper.
Quote from: stephendare on April 03, 2015, 09:31:07 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on April 03, 2015, 09:00:36 PM
Tsk, tsk, tsk; what is happening to my Jacksonville. I thought we had got rid of the old "good ole boys" cronies who impeded and/or destroyed Jacksonville's potential and possibilities for the future...and then I hear (gossip?) this. Miami is looking like New York City, Tampa is beginning to stir once again, Orlando is also stirring, and Jacksonville seems to not be moving at all downtown for the exception of little rinky dink projects like bars, restaurants, street improvements, etc. I was really thinking about moving back to Jax because though it seems there's no significant projects on the line, it's still much better than when I was living there in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. I am now 58 years old, when I left Jax 21 years ago, there was nothing, I repeat NOTHING going on; yes, things are better than then...but when are we (Jax) going to reach the par of "world class" like Miami, Atlanta, Houston, Philadelphia, and even New York City; Jax's population, due to consolidation is illusory; and I guess the state of our downtown, and the way we handle things, are indicative of the small city mentality that we had before consolidation; heck, we sure are living up to it aren't we? Love Jax, always will, but I wish we'd just strip the consolidation thing, shrink back to our old city limits with maybe some annexed areas (new), and be the small city ranked 80th or so that we really are. And yes, things like this upset me and makes me mad; I just love Jax and it infuriates me when I see things like this.
Meh. there is a way forward, and we are reaching toward it.
The Barnett Trio Project is still moving forward, theres just back stage stuff to get handled. Thats all.
No amount of speculation or explanation about how things are done in other projects in other cities will change that. Every deal is its own animal and works out its own path.
The owners feel confident about the project, and that confidence, based on the conversations that Ive had, doesn't seem to be bravado.
There are projects in San Francisco and New York that take upwards of 15 years to get put together, regardless of all this smack talk about financiers deciding to build on the spot, the minute they have the cash. They make movies and long running musical hits about it in fact (see "Rent"). If Toney Sleiman decides to build on suburban land that he already owns for something that is already zoned for that project, he works with the same lightning speed.
But Jville in its infinite wisdom, created layers and layers of process and control on any possible redevelopment downtown that makes any project take years.
As we have been saying on this site for ten years now, if the goddam 'redevelopment professionals' would just get out of the way, the Downtown would have already recovered, expanded and be in a healthy place.
Get out of the way, facilitate financing, give up some perception of controlling things, stop being dicks about it and let the market take over.
Thanks Stephen; I feel a tad better now but not by much. I agree whole heartedly with you and I too wish they'd (redev pro's) would just get out of the way. Thanks Stephen for a "sigh" of relief (somewhat). I Hope it all works out. Sad thing is, I grew up in Jax in the 60's; and I remember a hustling, bustling, New York type of fanfare and atmosphere downtown. A lot of you in this forum were hardly born back then and mostly know, or remember a dead, unalive downtown. I know we may never regain that overall in our downtown (vibrancy and shear life), but we can make noise and create a lot of interest relative to quality of life and residential living that will make DT Jax vibrant and alive again...and the Laura Trio can certainly help (and other developments on the proposal or drawing boards). Thanks again Stephen.
Everyone is saying that the city needs to get out of the way, but it seems that incentives are required or at least always requested in any deal, even the small ones. Therefore, the city is going to be 'in the way'. I agree that the process for incentives could be streamlined and better defined, but if someone wanted to do a project without incentives, are they really that hindered by the city? Isn't it more that the incentives are required to make the deals work, and the city simply doesn't have the money, but is too timid to actually state as much?
^More or less. There are many areas the city can streamline or simply get out of the way (signage ordinance, sidewalk tables, DDRB review, permitting). But this is a case where the project wants city incentives to move forward. However, the city doesn't have the money available because of its debt, ridiculous budget issues, and its tendency to lose track of tens of millions of dollars at a clip. Not to say the city *couldn't* have the money, but they'd need someone who was going to make real decisions in charge.
^^^Or anywhere.
Not to add to anymore speculation so I will say this is merely conjecture right now... BUT I overheard at One Spark the wheels on this project will begin turning this week in some capacity. What that is, what that means, I do not know. Permitting maybe? Anyone else have some more insight on this? Don't mean to stir the pot with misinformation if it is, just curious.
Quote from: camarocane on April 14, 2015, 06:35:49 PM
Not to add to anymore speculation so I will say this is merely conjecture right now... BUT I overheard at One Spark the wheels on this project will begin turning this week in some capacity. What that is, what that means, I do not know. Permitting maybe? Anyone else have some more insight on this? Don't mean to stir the pot with misinformation if it is, just curious.
Sure it wasn't a homeless person trolling you?
I also heard from a shop owner on Bay that she heard the Laura Street Trio will be "moving forward soon."
Probably conveniently before the mayor election
Quote from: edjax on April 14, 2015, 09:17:17 PM
Sure it wasn't a homeless person trolling you?
If it makes you feel better, yes. I'm sure it wasn't a hobo that mentioned it. ::)
I doubt anything moves forward without a COJ commitment on funding. So far, that hasn't materialized.....at least publicly.
Quote from: camarocane on April 15, 2015, 07:03:18 AM
Quote from: edjax on April 14, 2015, 09:17:17 PM
Sure it wasn't a homeless person trolling you?
If it makes you feel better, yes. I'm sure it wasn't a hobo that mentioned it. ::)
Wow, soooo sensitive.
Quote from: camarocane on April 15, 2015, 07:03:18 AM
Quote from: edjax on April 14, 2015, 09:17:17 PM
Sure it wasn't a homeless person trolling you?
If it makes you feel better, yes. I'm sure it wasn't a hobo that mentioned it. ::)
Wow, soooo sensitive.
$50 million total has been freed up for CIP via the City Council's scrubbing of the books:
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=545338
REALLY hope that some of the funds are appropriated to filling whatever subsidy gap might still be holding this project up.
Any progress or details at all with the Trio or Barnett?! It might be annoying having people ask every month with the same answer but this is an important project which never seems to have any new info.
I would say the evidence, or lack thereof, is proof this project is in trouble. It does not appear that one thing has been done since all of the fancy announcements well over a year ago. The Marble Bank supposedly signed a lease to Scotty Schwartz to put a grand southern restaurant in there. Has there been anything done at all? What did our newly elected Mayor say regarding these structures? Anything at all? Please post if you have it:)
QuoteThe Marble Bank supposedly signed a lease to Scotty Schwartz to put a grand southern restaurant in there. Has there been anything done at all?
In speaking with Scotty, my neighbor, he is excited about the possibilities, but he said it would be a good couple of years before he was open. I believe his lease is contingent on the trio opening.....so chicken and egg again....
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 02, 2015, 08:19:52 AM
QuoteThe Marble Bank supposedly signed a lease to Scotty Schwartz to put a grand southern restaurant in there. Has there been anything done at all?
In speaking with Scotty, my neighbor, he is excited about the possibilities, but he said it would be a good couple of years before he was open. I believe his lease is contingent on the trio opening.....so chicken and egg again....
That's so disheartening. I really hope the new council moves forward with the city's part of some deal because unfortunately developers are so risk adverse that they "need" government incentive. It would be a huge missed opportunity if these buildings remain vacant.
^^^Developing LST is not even about risk aversion. It's $$$ suicide without public subsidy. In my opinion, and apparently those of others as well, a developer should get paid to do the developing, and should get paid A LOT to put some money at risk. I.e. the city needs to step up big time if it wants to see a trio of decrepit, horribly designed buildings for most of today's needs in a totally dead southern downtown with no prospects be developed. I mean that IS what we're talking about here.
If I were loaded, I'd put up a million dollars and hope to be paid 10-15, at least. Give the city back its money + 10-15% or something like that. These kinds of deals actually get structured every day on the private side. Not sure what is taking so long to get this done on the public side down there.
"Privatize the profit, Socialize the risk."
^^^The only other way is to hold a gun to someone's head and tell them to spend time and money on doing the project, without any public help (and who in Jax has the money?). Also, the city would still profit, if the project turned a profit. Meaning, the city's (and taxpayer's) money isn't free, and is senior to the developer's. But the city wouldn't be doing the work, and relatively speaking would be taking less risk (especially considering position in the capital stack). City also benefits from an infinite investment horizon that isn't limited in scope to just the single project, but rather the city benefits in its entire infinite future from residual tangible and intangible gains it would receive from a rehabbed and improved LST (whereas the developer is trying to eek a profit out of just this one asset in the short amount of time he has to complete the project, put tenants in, and sell it).
All in all, that's a stupid way of looking at it. The city needs a lowly individual human being to put up time and money to get the project done. That individual human being needs the city's money, as well. That individual will be doing all the work, and will be putting up a larger share of his own net worth up to complete the project, with financial gains limited to just this project alone, so in effect, that individual has a lot more to lose and is taking a bigger risk, and doing all the work. That individual needs a huge payout from any profits, of course after the city receives its.
This is no different than a traditional lender financing a project with an LP and a GP (your basic capital stack). Lender gets paid off with interest and fees first before anyone. Then the LP (primary equity) gets paid its money back with a certain promised return (think of it as interest). Then after the LP receives what it was promised (and what it negotiated for itself at the consummation of the deal just as a lender negotiated for itself an interest rate and other facets), the GP might make an outsized proportion of what's left relative to what it invested initially (called earning a promote).
Anyone who thinks negotiating such deals is "unfair" can come visit me in San Francisco where the city has actually F'd with the capitalist system to the point where we are now in a housing emergency because extreme liberalism thought developer profits were unfair (and thus nothing got built).
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/06/giants-kim-mission-rock-affordable-housing-giants.html
And to be fair, "public subsidy" is the wrong word. It would seem that traditional financing is not available for such a risky project. Therefore, the City should step in as a public financier. To the point where the City has public funds
already set aside, as part of a budget, for such projects, the City should determine if some should go to this project, and if so, how much.
If you want to call that
Quote"Privatize the profit, Socialize the risk."
, by all means, just know that there is no other way to get this project done.
Simms, in your opinion, would it be worth more if the city simply knocked down the existing structures and offered up the chance to build from scratch?
Well I am not Simms but I hope you will allow me to answer- no. We have plenty of vacant lots that are littering LaVilla and other parts of downtown that could be "rebuilt". Keeping these buildings is a big part of what we all hope to accomplish. Chalk it up to nostalgia or whatever, but Damn...haven't we torn enough buildings down?
Part of why I think Simms idea makes sense is because these buildings are of public importance as historic buildings in need of preservation and new life. LST is part of the culture and history of this city.
Quote from: MusicMan on June 02, 2015, 07:38:21 PM
Simms, in your opinion, would it be worth more if the city simply knocked down the existing structures and offered up the chance to build from scratch?
No. The lot would sit empty. I'd personally rather see a deteriorating building (unless it genuinely becomes a public safety hazard - and LST *appears* close) than an empty overgrown lot or a fresh black top for more cars. Especially an empty or overgrown surface lot on what is supposed to be the most central, happening intersection in all of downtown (Laura and Adams).
The City doesn't need to offer anyone up a chance to build something new and grand from the ground up. The City had an opportunity to reserve one of the most prime pieces of land in the city for something at least decent, and we got a Haskell Co tilt wall garage instead (looking at Parador). We have other prime pieces of land, both waterfront and otherwise, small and large, cleaned and needing cleaning, with and without parking, city-owned or privately owned, that all sit empty.
IF something doesn't happen with LST soon, though, I don't know how structurally sound it will be to retrofit. It's been looking like a Detroit building for many many years now, and those are all at the end of their useful life, at best.
Quote from: simms3 on June 02, 2015, 09:10:52 PM
Quote from: MusicMan on June 02, 2015, 07:38:21 PM
Simms, in your opinion, would it be worth more if the city simply knocked down the existing structures and offered up the chance to build from scratch?
No. The lot would sit empty. I'd personally rather see a deteriorating building (unless it genuinely becomes a public safety hazard - and LST *appears* close) than an empty overgrown lot or a fresh black top for more cars. Especially an empty or overgrown surface lot on what is supposed to be the most central, happening intersection in all of downtown (Laura and Adams).
The City doesn't need to offer anyone up a chance to build something new and grand from the ground up. The City had an opportunity to reserve one of the most prime pieces of land in the city for something at least decent, and we got a Haskell Co tilt wall garage instead (looking at Parador). We have other prime pieces of land, both waterfront and otherwise, small and large, cleaned and needing cleaning, with and without parking, city-owned or privately owned, that all sit empty.
IF something doesn't happen with LST soon, though, I don't know how structurally sound it will be to retrofit. It's been looking like a Detroit building for many many years now, and those are all at the end of their useful life, at best.
Didn't they say that years ago....hence the destruction of the sconces?
^did you mean cornices?
Quote from: JaxNative68 on June 03, 2015, 11:42:57 AM
^did you mean cornices?
Yup, my bad. I blame the rum I was drinking at the time. :o
http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2015/07/07/beaux-arts-bank-turned-hotel-the-langord-to-open-in-sept.php
Just in case you want to see what a restored historic bank looks like......The Langford, downtown Miami opening this September 2015.........
What was the cost?
Quote from: tpot on July 08, 2015, 06:15:06 PM
http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2015/07/07/beaux-arts-bank-turned-hotel-the-langord-to-open-in-sept.php
Just in case you want to see what a restored historic bank looks like......The Langford, downtown Miami opening this September 2015.........
If you want to really be depressed, looks at Miami's development pipeline and compare it to Jacksonville's:
http://miamidda.com/map/index.html
Quote from: KenFSU on July 08, 2015, 11:02:57 PM
Quote from: tpot on July 08, 2015, 06:15:06 PM
http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2015/07/07/beaux-arts-bank-turned-hotel-the-langord-to-open-in-sept.php
Just in case you want to see what a restored historic bank looks like......The Langford, downtown Miami opening this September 2015.........
If you want to really be depressed, looks at Miami's development pipeline and compare it to Jacksonville's:
http://miamidda.com/map/index.html
Just imagine how busy the person who writes those 'Construction Update' stories for Metrojacksonville.com would be if that kind of activity was happening here in Jacksonville. Luckily for him/her, not much is happening here and the projects that are moving forward are progressing at a snail's pace. I would venture to guess the Urban Construction update from June 2015 is not much different from the one on June 2014.
Quote from: KenFSU on July 08, 2015, 11:02:57 PM
Quote from: tpot on July 08, 2015, 06:15:06 PM
http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2015/07/07/beaux-arts-bank-turned-hotel-the-langord-to-open-in-sept.php
Just in case you want to see what a restored historic bank looks like......The Langford, downtown Miami opening this September 2015.........
If you want to really be depressed, looks at Miami's development pipeline and compare it to Jacksonville's:
http://miamidda.com/map/index.html
Just the fact that miami's downtown development authority has an active website and maintains a pipeline puts it lightyears ahead of Jax.
QuoteNo. The lot would sit empty. I'd personally rather see a deteriorating building (unless it genuinely becomes a public safety hazard - and LST *appears* close) than an empty overgrown lot or a fresh black top for more cars.
Yet the shipyards is used for concerts and parking, literally, an empty lot, and the Berkman is used as an eyesore of what not to do as a builder. The lot next to LST has say empty for years too, as have many of the downtown lots. The only thing that seems to save old structures downtown is a fire.
That Miami website is awesome. As I said in another thread, the Miami DDA and Orlando DDB are light years ahead of the DIA in marketing and development recruitment.
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 09, 2015, 09:36:08 AM
QuoteNo. The lot would sit empty. I'd personally rather see a deteriorating building (unless it genuinely becomes a public safety hazard - and LST *appears* close) than an empty overgrown lot or a fresh black top for more cars.
Yet the shipyards is used for concerts and parking, literally, an empty lot, and the Berkman is used as an eyesore of what not to do as a builder. The lot next to LST has say empty for years too, as have many of the downtown lots. The only thing that seems to save old structures downtown is a fire.
The Seminole Club, Suddath, Covington, Dyal Upchurch buildings, etc. all look great. Soon the old Federal Reserve and Bostwick Buildings will look great too! Some of those sat pretty abandoned and distressed for years.
Miami put together a great video promoting downtown......JAX needs to grow with the rest of Florida.......so much potential and great natural assets....Just imagine what JAX would be like if all the money spent on studies were spent on real projects......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF4Lno1KU94
^^^Nice video. Atlanta's 2 "downtown" areas produce good promotional vids, too. I'm sure Uptown Charlotte does, as well as Nashville and Austin and Denver.
I still get miffed when I see "DT Miami is 2nd largest financial hub after NYC". I mean...come on. But props to those making impactful improvements to DT Miami!
Miami is the hub of banking for South America, tons of international banks have offices in Brickell, Miami's Financial District...
^^^About 13 million sf of office space in Downtown Miami/Brickell, in total (excluding medical/government)...Miami DDA pegs the number at just under 18 million sf and that wouldn't change any of the below. A lot of that has to be taken up by large law firms, such as Greenberg Traurig, which is based there, as well as accounting firms, insurance, companies, architects, engineers, etc. Leaving a portion of that to be occupied by banks and financial services firms.
There is more office space occupied by banks and financial services firms in the CBDs of Chicago, SF, and Boston than there is total office space in or around downtown Miami. A "bank" in DT Miami might occupy 5K sf and be staffed by 3-10 people, and they might literally provide only traditional banking services or serve as a language intermediary between a Latin client and a larger hub office in another American city or London. There is no investment banking presence, no private equity or large hedge funds, no sales/trading/clearing desks, etc etc. But there are probably 200 of these tiny little offices...I guess that makes DT Miami the "2nd largest financial hub after New York".
The whole city of Miami is essentially a savings bank...I mean real estate developed, bought, and sold by Latins is what drives the entire economy down there. Lol...but that doesn't make Miami a larger banking or financial center than Boston, SF, or Chicago. Or even Charlotte. Or frankly even LA or Houston.
Not to knock Miami down to size, but if there's one city that's full of so many blatantly overstated or false claims, it's that one, and I think it can get away with them because it might as well be a different country and the rest of the US isn't really all that focused on business dealings there.
Are we assuming that this project is dead?
Just curious.
^nothing in the budget for it. And nothing in the budget for Shipyards either. Or the Landing. I'm guessing that sometime this fall the Khan thing will become unlocked one way or the other. Maybe it's deja vue all over again.
I wonder what the status of this is:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=545701
Quote from: KenFSU on September 22, 2015, 12:13:16 PM
I wonder what the status of this is:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=545701
"crickets..."
Quote from: KenFSU on July 08, 2015, 11:02:57 PM
Quote from: tpot on July 08, 2015, 06:15:06 PM
http://miami.curbed.com/archives/2015/07/07/beaux-arts-bank-turned-hotel-the-langord-to-open-in-sept.php
Just in case you want to see what a restored historic bank looks like......The Langford, downtown Miami opening this September 2015.........
If you want to really be depressed, looks at Miami's development pipeline and compare it to Jacksonville's:
http://miamidda.com/map/index.html
Very depressing; that should have been Jacksonville; at least half of what Miami has. Can't believe the difference. Jax used to be the city that set the standard for all of florida and its cities; now we're 3rd or 4th though because of consolidation, we are the largest city in population.
I would trade consolidation in a heartbeat if I knew we would annex the surrounding areas around the old city boundaries and more business, developments, etc. suddenly moved into downtown and the urban core and the city as a whole.
At this point, anything with the words "Laura Street Trio" attached to it goes into the "meaningless press release" pile. I wish they would just not even mention it anymore until someone has actually started construction.
Quote from: Bativac on September 23, 2015, 11:04:35 AM
At this point, anything with the words "Laura Street Trio" attached to it goes into the "meaningless press release" pile. I wish they would just not even mention it anymore until someone has actually started construction.
That pile is overflowing with Shipyards items... you need to start another one.
Quote from: Sentient on September 23, 2015, 11:22:26 AM
Quote from: Bativac on September 23, 2015, 11:04:35 AM
At this point, anything with the words "Laura Street Trio" attached to it goes into the "meaningless press release" pile. I wish they would just not even mention it anymore until someone has actually started construction.
That pile is overflowing with Shipyards items... you need to start another one.
You could throw it in the East San Marco pile.
Was thinking of moving back to Jax; but what for? Crickets chirping at night? A dead downtown and/or city as a whole that shuts down after 5? No entertainment, venues, or attractions that would keep me awake 24/7? I think I'll stay down here in the Sarasota area until I figure out where I want to go until I am lowered 6 feet under or burned to ashes in an incinerator. Until then, I still love my Jacksonville.
Quote from: heights unknown on September 25, 2015, 01:28:28 PM
Was thinking of moving back to Jax; but what for? Crickets chirping at night? A dead downtown and/or city as a whole that shuts down after 5? No entertainment, venues, or attractions that would keep me awake 24/7? I think I'll stay down here in the Sarasota area until I figure out where I want to go until I am lowered 6 feet under or burned to ashes in an incinerator. Until then, I still love my Jacksonville.
Wait, you're making fun of Jacksonville and being sleepy, but you live in Sarasota? Sarasota is where retirees go to die!
I understand your frustration with Jax, it has a lot of potential, but it also has a lot going for it. What is it you're looking for that you CAN'T find in Jax?
If you're looking for entertainment and venues, there's many cool bars downtown. The elbow has a great selection of things to do all within 5 blocks of each other:
(https://veuwer.com/i/36v0.png)
Not to mention the rest of downtown, riverside/king street etc. Oh and the beaches, great fishing, town center, Cummer, MOCA, Florida Theatre, Cork district, Fort Caroline and the many other great parks, and this HUGE LIST of events in Jacksonville:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attractions_and_events_in_Jacksonville,_Florida
And let's not go in to the many awesome sports teams we have....
But please, enjoy Sarasota.
As someone once said "If you're bored in Jacksonville, it's your own fault!"
Quote from: coredumped on September 25, 2015, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on September 25, 2015, 01:28:28 PM
Was thinking of moving back to Jax; but what for? Crickets chirping at night? A dead downtown and/or city as a whole that shuts down after 5? No entertainment, venues, or attractions that would keep me awake 24/7? I think I'll stay down here in the Sarasota area until I figure out where I want to go until I am lowered 6 feet under or burned to ashes in an incinerator. Until then, I still love my Jacksonville.
Wait, you're making fun of Jacksonville and being sleepy, but you live in Sarasota? Sarasota is where retirees go to die!
I understand your frustration with Jax, it has a lot of potential, but it also has a lot going for it. What is it you're looking for that you CAN'T find in Jax?
If you're looking for entertainment and venues, there's many cool bars downtown. The elbow has a great selection of things to do all within 5 blocks of each other:
(https://veuwer.com/i/36v0.png)
Not to mention the rest of downtown, riverside/king street etc. Oh and the beaches, great fishing, town center, Cummer, MOCA, Florida Theatre, Cork district, Fort Caroline and the many other great parks, and this HUGE LIST of events in Jacksonville:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attractions_and_events_in_Jacksonville,_Florida
And let's not go in to the many awesome sports teams we have....
But please, enjoy Sarasota.
As someone once said "If you're bored in Jacksonville, it's your own fault!"
"CORE DUMP," (change that name), I..LOVE...JAX. And I am still thinking of moving back; but when I see the leaders and senior officials dropping the ball all the time, it really turns me off. I WAS NOT MAKING FUN OF JAX...again, I LOVE JAX...AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT. I am still leaning towards moving back after everything is ironed out here, but again, I have to be moving to something that's going to keep me awake; Jax is in much better shape than when I left back in '95 that's for sure. Believe it or not, for a city of 60k, Sarasota has got it going on downtown, lively downtown day and night, dense, lively, cultural, etc.; and you're right, seniorville it is (and I am nearing that mark), but I LOVE MY JAX, and I root for Jax 24/7 in everyway...I was born in Jacksonville and lived in LaVilla in the 60's, and spent over 60 percent of my life in Jax as an adult while in the Navy. No, not making fun of Jax, but it just pisses me off that the leaders and officials just can't seem to get things going or manage the city and help it to prosper and be a success, and a serious competitor, with our peer major florida cities.
Quote from: heights unknown on September 25, 2015, 07:07:39 PM
Quote from: coredumped on September 25, 2015, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on September 25, 2015, 01:28:28 PM
Was thinking of moving back to Jax; but what for? Crickets chirping at night? A dead downtown and/or city as a whole that shuts down after 5? No entertainment, venues, or attractions that would keep me awake 24/7? I think I'll stay down here in the Sarasota area until I figure out where I want to go until I am lowered 6 feet under or burned to ashes in an incinerator. Until then, I still love my Jacksonville.
Wait, you're making fun of Jacksonville and being sleepy, but you live in Sarasota? Sarasota is where retirees go to die!
I understand your frustration with Jax, it has a lot of potential, but it also has a lot going for it. What is it you're looking for that you CAN'T find in Jax?
If you're looking for entertainment and venues, there's many cool bars downtown. The elbow has a great selection of things to do all within 5 blocks of each other:
(https://veuwer.com/i/36v0.png)
Not to mention the rest of downtown, riverside/king street etc. Oh and the beaches, great fishing, town center, Cummer, MOCA, Florida Theatre, Cork district, Fort Caroline and the many other great parks, and this HUGE LIST of events in Jacksonville:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attractions_and_events_in_Jacksonville,_Florida
And let's not go in to the many awesome sports teams we have....
But please, enjoy Sarasota.
As someone once said "If you're bored in Jacksonville, it's your own fault!"
"CORE DUMP," (change that name), I..LOVE...JAX. And I am still thinking of moving back; but when I see the leaders and senior officials dropping the ball all the time, it really turns me off. I WAS NOT MAKING FUN OF JAX...again, I LOVE JAX...AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT. I am still leaning towards moving back after everything is ironed out here, but again, I have to be moving to something that's going to keep me awake; Jax is in much better shape than when I left back in '95 that's for sure. Believe it or not, for a city of 60k, Sarasota has got it going on downtown, lively downtown day and night, dense, lively, cultural, etc.; and you're right, seniorville it is (and I am nearing that mark), but I LOVE MY JAX, and I root for Jax 24/7 in everyway...I was born in Jacksonville and lived in LaVilla in the 60's, and spent over 60 percent of my life in Jax as an adult while in the Navy. No, not making fun of Jax, but it just pisses me off that the leaders and officials just can't seem to get things going or manage the city and help it to prosper and be a success, and a serious competitor, with our peer major florida cities.
Well, the best thing you can do for Jax, is move back here and contribute to the core area's economy.
Looks like some potential new life for the Trio and Barnett!
QuoteJust over a year ago, developer Steve Atkins said he was ready.
He said he had commitments for $70 million to revitalize the historic Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank building. He just needed $7.7 million from the city to get started.
No work ever began.
Now, Atkins said he's again ready move forward.
He sent Downtown Investment Authority CEO Aundra Wallace a letter last week with term sheets for the private financing, which includes the purchase of Federal Historic Tax Credits.
Atkins' SouthEast Group is partnering with the Las Vegas-based Molasky Group of Cos. for what Atkins said is close to a $78 million project.
But, Atkins said, he needs $8 million from the city.
That public money, plus more than $9 million in tax credits leaves the project needing $60 million. Of that, private equity would be $20 million from SouthEast and Molasky, with the remaining $40 million coming through a loan from a financial institution, Atkins said.
Attachments to the Wallace letter included a summary of terms and conditions for proposed financing from US Bank N.A. for the Barnett Bank building and the historic tax credits.
The bank describes it not as a commitment, but instead a description under which it would consider providing financing. Atkins said the companies have gone through the underwriting process and says it shows the private side of the deal is in place.
Kirk Wendland, the city's Office of Economic Development director, didn't specifically address the terms for the Laura Street/Barnett deal, but said such letters don't represent commitments. However, they do help the city and private side continue talks about partnering on deals.
Atkins said Molasky is a "great financial partner" that's done high-profile projects and brings significant cash equity. He said he started talking with them several months ago and "hit it off immediately."
The company has more than 65 years in real estate development in government, retail, residential and commercial projects. Examples of its commercial work include two Bank of America plazas and Sunrise Hospital in Las Vegas, along with a Blue Cross Blue Shield of Georgia facility.
Atkins declined to go into specific of the business relationship with the company. Requests for interviews with Molasky officials last week were not granted.
A breakdown of the Barnett Bank deal calls for a project of more than $32 million — $16.6 coming from loaned funds and $16 million through private equity. For the latter, $4 million is pegged as coming from a city grant and $5.1 million through tax credits.
As for the Laura Street Trio, it's laid out as a $44.6 million project with $22.3 million coming from both a loan and private equity. The equity includes $4 million of city money and $4.4 million in tax credits.
Plans and tenants previously announced for both buildings remain, Atkins said.
The Barnett Bank building would have a financial institution on the first two floors along with a coffee shop. Above that would be some commercial space and 110 market-rate residential units ranging from 600 to 800 square feet.
Atkins said the Marriott and "The Bullbriar" restaurant headed by Scott Schwartz, chef and owner of the 29 South Restaurant, would be in the Laura Street Trio. Additionally, a bodega-style market called Cucina Urban would be included.
Atkins said he met with Mayor Lenny Curry's administration in mid-September to talk about the project and what was needed. He declined to say who, but said he came away encouraged by the administration's enthusiasm.
Atkins said he hasn't made an official request to the city for the $8 million yet, but said the "ball is in the city's court" on the project.
Atkins' letter to Wallace indicated he wanted the project to be presented to the DIA for review and approval "at the earliest possible opportunity."
However, Wallace said it won't be on the authority's Nov. 18 agenda.
Wallace was in Oklahoma City last week as part of the JAX Chamber trip and said he forwarded the information to staff.
"I really have got to look at it myself and review what my team tells me," he said.
Wallace said he'd look at who was guaranteeing the debt, who was in control of the project and which groups were putting up equity when it came to any ask about public money.
Through this all, though, remains a legal issue.
Atkins' group purchased the Downtown buildings in 2013 with more than $3 million in assistance from Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan through his Stache Investments. After more than a year with no work on the project, Stache Investments began foreclosure proceedings.
Stache Investments says it hasn't been paid anything on its loan. Barnett Towers LLC, Atkins' entity created that owns the building, claims it wasn't a typical loan and it wasn't supposed to be paid back.
The disagreement continues and, unless it's settled out of court, won't be decided until spring.
Atkins' letter to Wallace says $3.1 million has been set aside in a private trust at Rogers Towers to satisfy the mortgage held by Stache Investments. The release of those funds would be made immediately upon the city approving the public investments for the project.
Atkins' wouldn't comment on the litigation or why paying the mortgage was tied to city approving incentives.
Khan spokesman Jim Woodcock in a statement last week said he had no comment and that it was a matter before the courts.
Atkins said to expect announcements this week about the financing and other details about the project.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546467 (http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546467)
I'll hand it to Atkins, he's very good at keeping this project in the news after years of no movement.
What am I missing here? The DT area could do with a boutique semi-full service Courtyard hotel to complement the full service hotels. I see these type of DT hotels being built/remodeled in other cities. Marriott does not approve "branding" of these type projects without thinking it will be a success. The restaurant will compliment the hotel and provide another DT option. Why is this so hard to move forward? Those with better DT insight please inform me.
I also believe its a no-brainer it just takes time to convince private firms that it's worth the huge investment. My guess is that with recent trends in Hemming Park, Laura St. being named one of the best streets in America by APA and just the overall positive trends DT or Jax generally private enterprise is finally starting to see the money.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 09, 2015, 12:50:04 PM
I'll hand it to Atkins, he's very good at keeping this project in the news after years of no movement.
Yes.
Always hopeful for these two projects, but:
Bank of America tower sold last year for $88M
These two projects combined will cost at least $77M by estimates above
The article does a bad job at discussing sources and uses here. It lumps in public sources with private equity, improperly. Not sure exactly what kinds of tax credits are being used here, but that $77M may effectively be reduced by all or part of the public sources depending on their structure.
Even so, 110 market rate units and a smaller Courtyard hotel with 131 keys above some commercial space, a restaurant, and a bodega for nearly the same price to buy Jacksonville's tallest, arguably most prestigious office tower is an imbalance that can only get worked out with a lot of public subsidies.
I would be for such subsidies WAYYYYYY before spending another dime on the NFL team/stadium, as I seem to be reading in the headlines now. But $77M is a very large sum of money for any project in Jax. I believe 220 Riverside came in at < $40M for nearly 300 units, a garage, and a couple restaurants, and I believe that likely includes the land. 220 Riverside will get significantly higher rents than the 110 smaller units proposed for the Barnett Bank building. As for the Courtyard by Marriott, 131 keys is terrifically small (Marriott's not on the hook for any of the development, but speaking for penciling out the development and eventually selling it...). The kind of spend needed to rehab those buildings to a quality that Courtyard requires, above and beyond just being able to receive a certificate of occupancy from the city is ridiculous, to say the least. And then what rates will they get? The lowest in the country...Jax has basically the cheapest hotel rooms in the country and a market that has historically been overbuilt with terrible occupancy (hence all the woes with hotels downtown and everywhere all over the city).
I'm hopeful for a shit ton of cheap or free money to get this done (i.e. City please step up).
And Aundra Wallace and Jax chamber, how many trips are you going to take to Oklahoma City? What are you trying to learn from that place?!?! Whatever you've seen there yet to date, it's not like there's any evidence of it here, and why not just go to Portland OR or some other city?
Everyone who's been following this knows the city will have to subsidize a portion of it. They need to subsidize that before subsidizing more at the stadium in my opinion. The stadium stuff can wait if they can't do it at the same time. One of the "Greatest Streets in America" isn't so great when you see the vacant shells of the Trio and Barnett. It's kind of a joke. We are talking about $12 million for the city to chip in to save its two most iconic historic buildings on its most iconic street? That compared to $45 million for an amphitheater and practice field? If Shad Khan really wanted that done now he would probably be willing to throw down more than half. He has billions.
No reason to compare the stadium stuff with the Trio. The money being identified for the stadium stuff can't be used to fund the Trio. You'll need another pot of cash.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 09, 2015, 02:49:58 PM
No reason to compare the stadium stuff with the Trio. The money being identified for the stadium stuff can't be used to fund the Trio. You'll need another pot of cash.
Yep. Another thing is that obviously Khan's good for his share of the stadium projects. The Laura Street Trio needs to be airtight before the city commits to putting money toward that. It's an important project but the right folks need to be at the helm.
I think the city just may be a bit leary dealing with Mr. Atkins.
Quote from: edjax on November 09, 2015, 03:16:44 PM
I think the city just may be a bit leary dealing with Mr. Atkins.
I have wondered this as well. Does he have a history? I can't seem to find much other than a few project he was previously involved with. Seems like a project more structured for a larger development outfit with more cash but I wish him the best of luck.
Since the stadium stuff and laura st are two different pots, and Khan already has some involvement with Barnett, maybe the city could negotiate with him in ways that would get his investment involvement in both if they help him with the stadium plans? Not sure completely how all that public/private investment typically works but just a brainstorming thought.
Quote from: CCMjax on November 09, 2015, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 09, 2015, 03:16:44 PM
I think the city just may be a bit leary dealing with Mr. Atkins.
I have wondered this as well. Does he have a history? I can't seem to find much other than a few project he was previously involved with. Seems like a project more structured for a larger development outfit with more cash but I wish him the best of luck.
Since the stadium stuff and laura st are two different pots, and Khan already has some involvement with Barnett, maybe the city could negotiate with him in ways that would get his investment involvement in both if they help him with the stadium plans? Not sure completely how all that public/private investment typically works but just a brainstorming thought.
I don't know him or his previous development history, but from reading his website, it looks like his core business is acquiring Tax Credits.
Quote from: Apache on November 09, 2015, 06:35:52 PM
I don't know him or his previous development history, but from reading his website, it looks like his core business is acquiring Tax Credits.
You actually found a website for Southeast Group? I've searched high and low and have not been able to find an actual website for the company. Would you mind sharing the link?
Quote from: marty904 on November 09, 2015, 08:51:36 PM
Quote from: Apache on November 09, 2015, 06:35:52 PM
I don't know him or his previous development history, but from reading his website, it looks like his core business is acquiring Tax Credits.
You actually found a website for Southeast Group? I've searched high and low and have not been able to find an actual website for the company. Would you mind sharing the link?
Oh no, not for Southeast Group. Pretty sure that entity was just created in '13 specifically for this project.
I was referring to the Urban Trust Capital site.
http://www.urbantrustcapital.com/
Quote from: thelakelander on November 09, 2015, 02:49:58 PM
No reason to compare the stadium stuff with the Trio. The money being identified for the stadium stuff can't be used to fund the Trio. You'll need another pot of cash.
Why do people on this board
keep doing this? It's as if facts are irrelevant on this question.
Urban Trust Capital is a consultant on the project - they do specialize in helping developers make use of historic tax credits. The way the IRS has written the rules makes it surprisingly difficult, particularly for large projects like this one...
The opportunity to get 20% of your rehab cost back is obviously very attractive, and often makes the difference between a viable project and no project.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 09, 2015, 09:37:59 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 09, 2015, 02:49:58 PM
No reason to compare the stadium stuff with the Trio. The money being identified for the stadium stuff can't be used to fund the Trio. You'll need another pot of cash.
Why do people on this board keep doing this? It's as if facts are irrelevant on this question.
Same bucket or different bucket, doesn't matter. It's noticeable to all on this board how much money we do spend on certain things and how much money we don't spend on others. Also noticeable that we do in fact spend a lot of money on a few things while also freaking out about the lack of money, budget issues, and a pending pension doomsday scenario.
Really can't ignore hypocrisy or these little facts. Fact is somehow seemingly unlimited money is made available to the Jaguars (an organization already more capitalized than any other entity in the city - the last thing that absolutely needs more taxpayer money is in fact the Jaguars but alas it receives more taxpayer money than almost anything) but no money is made available to projects such as the Trio (would need chump change compared to the Jags, absolutely needs the money to work, and could in fact result in a more noticeable/positive change for the city than people realize). Perhaps there is a middle ground that provides more level support for both.
I think I personally would be turned off less seeing more headlines about more $$$ going to the Jags if just one other thing in the city I'd like to see funded got funded. The salt in my wound is the constant dog and pony show about how the city has no money (the city must have a whole publicly funded by taxpayer money endowment set up for the Jags then). As someone already mentioned, Laura was recently named one of the 10 best streets in America. (??????????)
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 12:52:25 PM
New information coming tomorrow afternoon. We have a breakfast meeting with the developer.
CAN'T WAIT.
I don't think the Trio is a matter of money. It's a matter of whether we can be sure the investment will pay off. This means that we have to be sure the proponents really can and will pull it off. We don't want to be in the position of putting $8 million into the project only to have it fail. It's an important project, but we've heard a lot of announcements for the last 4 years and still no movement.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2015, 02:05:03 PM
I don't think the Trio is a matter of money. It's a matter of whether we can be sure the investment will pay off. This means that we have to be sure the proponents really can and will pull it off. We don't want to be in the position of putting $8 million into the project only to have it fail. It's an important project, but we've heard a lot of announcements for the last 4 years and still no movement.
I hear you. And honestly, I'm skeptical, and this is also my own line of work, but I do believe that if priorities were on fixing downtown, there would be some acknowledgment that some money in the beginning is going to go down the drain. DT Jax absolutely relies on public subsidy, and that notion. It's so far gone no amount of private sector interest alone is going to bring it back.
But aren't the Jags kind of a sunk cost, and particularly unnecessary as they are so well capitalized as it is? It's really a double standard.
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2015, 02:08:49 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2015, 02:05:03 PM
I don't think the Trio is a matter of money. It's a matter of whether we can be sure the investment will pay off. This means that we have to be sure the proponents really can and will pull it off. We don't want to be in the position of putting $8 million into the project only to have it fail. It's an important project, but we've heard a lot of announcements for the last 4 years and still no movement.
I hear you. And honestly, I'm skeptical, and this is also my own line of work, but I do believe that if priorities were on fixing downtown, there would be some acknowledgment that some money in the beginning is going to go down the drain. DT Jax absolutely relies on public subsidy, and that notion. It's so far gone no amount of private sector interest alone is going to bring it back.
But aren't the Jags kind of a sunk cost, and particularly unnecessary as they are so well capitalized as it is? It's really a double standard.
One big difference is that Khan's obviously good for his part of the stadium district deal. If it gets approved we can expect it to happen. It sucks but I'm not sure that can be said about the Trio's owners.
^unless Khan becomes the Trio's owner. 8)
I just looked at the Barnett's website, it has a proposed layout consisting of:
Floor 3: Classrooms
Floor 4: Office
Floors 5-6: Co-work Jax
Floor 7: Kyn
Floor 8: One Spark
Floors 9-16: Apartments
Floor 17: Office Space
Floor 18: Conference and collaboration space
I hope this is out of date, but if not, it sounds very suspect to me. Kyn and One Spark have pretty spotted track records and I doubt they would inspire confidence with financiers.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 10, 2015, 03:12:12 PM
I just looked at the Barnett's website, it has a proposed layout consisting of:
Floor 3: Classrooms
Floor 4: Office
Floors 5-6: Co-work Jax
Floor 7: Kyn
Floor 8: One Spark
Floors 9-16: Apartments
Floor 17: Office Space
Floor 18: Conference and collaboration space
I hope this is out of date, but if not, it sounds very suspect to me. Kyn and One Spark have pretty spotted track records and I doubt they would inspire confidence with financiers.
Pretty sure that was based upon his last and best great announcement. I am not sure if that was the one 6 months ago, 1 year, 18 months, 2 years or 4 years ago. ............ Does Kyn even exist any more?
Quote from: edjax on November 10, 2015, 03:23:33 PM
Pretty sure that was based upon his last and best great announcement. I am not sure if that was the one 6 months ago, 1 year, 18 months, 2 years or 4 years ago. ............ Does Kyn even exist any more?
I didn't think so, but I wasn't sure if this was going to be the dramatic resurgence of the hipster business incubator we all love.
Well the simple fact that they have apparently already designated the office space to go to local non-profits with recent shaky histories and backing is a major faux pas. It implies they already have a rent in mind that these lessees will pay, rather than designating some space as commercial space and marketing the space through traditional means to get the best tenants/terms/credit available. I would expect a launch to already include a broker from a legitimate office in Jax, and to include a link to a flyer, if there were anything serious about the proposal. Clearly you have a 1-2 man shop with an idea and limited web development skills, and that's about it.
So yea, right off the bat the whole business plan is amateur hour at best. Also, sandwiching residential in between floors of commercial? Amateur hour at best there, too. Creating stacks in a building that small, with a mix of uses, will be quite a challenge. Clearly they have not spoken to anyone who has done this before, or any architects or engineers. But they do have a web design guy who can create a very very basic website using a cheap domain host (the website doesn't even work for me).
Yea, nothing about any of these plans is confidence boosting. But I wish the city would signal that they would be serious about being a partner in these rehabs to attract someone who is a little more serious/experienced. Right now, the best we can get are some local guys with some basic experience in small projects and a lot of hope that somehow something will happen for them (I mean truth be told, I know college students who can actually get something done here...I know people who have < 22 years of age done stuff of this magnitude). There's no leadership from the city that screams: anyone with experience and deeper pockets, please come help us and we will help you!
To find out more....
http://barnett-trio.com/
http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million (http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million)
Atkins said some tenants for the buildings remain the same: A 131-room Courtyard by Marriott hotel in the Bisbee and Florida Life buildings topped with a rooftop bar and the Bullbriar restaurant in the Marble Bank Building.
While the plans for the Barnett National Building once included the offices of One Spark, CoWork Jax and KYN, Atkins said a major financial institution will take the first two floors. But that company wants to make the announcement itself, he said.
CenterState Bank has agreed to put a branch on the first floor, but is not the major tenant. Vagabond Coffee has committed to a coffee shop in the lobby.
Floors three-seven would be commercial space, and 110 apartments would take the top 11 floors.
Make a deal with Khan and do the stadium projects at the same time as the Trio!!!!! As I said before, and Simms reiterated, the Trio is peanuts compared to the city's investments at the stadium, both already done and yet to be done. Find a way to roll them into one. Somehow get Khan involved with both the stadium and the Trio. The Barnett can wait, since what occupies it eventually seems in flux and since it currently kind of looks occupied so it's not such an embarrassment. The appearance of the Trio on the other hand just screams out "this city can't get its act together!" And the uses and tenants seem more realistic and reliable.
The Trio is not going to a gigantic financial success, it will most likely lose money, but it is a necessary project for the betterment of the city and one that the city needs to help out on. Consider it required maintenance just like a road.
God, I'm rooting for this, but this line...:
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 04:51:07 PM
http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million
SouthEast and Molasky will invest $20 million in equity into the project, Atkins said. Another $9 million would come from tax credits. U.S. Bank has provided term sheets for $40 million that it would lend the project.
That leaves $8 million coming from the city.
That means the $8 million from the city would be in addition to tax credits, meaning $17 million total.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2015, 04:57:17 PM
God, I'm rooting for this, but this line...:
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 04:51:07 PM
http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million
SouthEast and Molasky will invest $20 million in equity into the project, Atkins said. Another $9 million would come from tax credits. U.S. Bank has provided term sheets for $40 million that it would lend the project.
That leaves $8 million coming from the city.
That means the $8 million from the city would be in addition to tax credits, meaning $17 million total.
Good let's do it. US Bank underwrote this deal, so the city should sign off just based on the competency that is now providing additional backing.
Quote from: CCMjax on November 10, 2015, 04:54:42 PM
Make a deal with Khan and do the stadium projects at the same time as the Trio!!!!! As I said before, and Simms reiterated, the Trio is peanuts compared to the city's investments at the stadium, both already done and yet to be done. Find a way to roll them into one. Somehow get Khan involved with both the stadium and the Trio. The Barnett can wait, since what occupies it eventually seems in flux and since it currently kind of looks occupied so it's not such an embarrassment. The appearance of the Trio on the other hand just screams out "this city can't get its act together!" And the uses and tenants seem more realistic and reliable.
The Trio is not going to a gigantic financial success, it will most likely lose money, but it is a necessary project for the betterment of the city and one that the city needs to help out on. Consider it required maintenance just like a road.
Credits/city loans can be assumed and paid off with interest, not losing the city any money and allowing developers/new buyers to still make the returns they need to pencil out the project. I think it's safe to say it sounds like we're in a good place for all parties here at this point.
Quote from: jaxlore on November 10, 2015, 04:50:34 PM
http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million (http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million)
Atkins said some tenants for the buildings remain the same: A 131-room Courtyard by Marriott hotel in the Bisbee and Florida Life buildings topped with a rooftop bar and the Bullbriar restaurant in the Marble Bank Building.
While the plans for the Barnett National Building once included the offices of One Spark, CoWork Jax and KYN, Atkins said a major financial institution will take the first two floors. But that company wants to make the announcement itself, he said.
CenterState Bank has agreed to put a branch on the first floor, but is not the major tenant. Vagabond Coffee has committed to a coffee shop in the lobby.
Floors three-seven would be commercial space, and 110 apartments would take the top 11 floors.
Well this solves all the amateur hour stuff brought up less than an hour ago. No more sandwiching uses. Sounds like a credit tenant in the office space is already signed on. The news coming out today is the best I've ever heard for either project. Congrats team working on this.
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 04:51:07 PM
"We couldn't get anything done with the last administration," Atkins said. "But we're looking at this as a new day."
Interesting. I wonder why they could not get anything done with the last administration?
I like this .. from CCMjax.
"The Trio is not going to a gigantic financial success, it will most likely lose money, but it is a necessary project for the betterment of the city and one that the city needs to help out on. Consider it required maintenance just like a road."
Roads aren't privately owned.
Also, how does 20 million in equity actual become $? Sounds like financial jargon and that the group is actually 37 million short of actual $.
What projects has Atkins successfully completed? Were any of them under projected budget? I believe that confidence is an issue and rightfully so.
A healthy downtown is effectively no different from a well maintained public utility. It is a huge driver for a healthy economy. At some point when downtown was abandoned and let to rot by public leaders and a bad attitude du jour by private citizens, it became a largely public responsibility to clean it up. This cost and workout is by no means unique to Jacksonville. Every city has had to do this. Jacksonville is just kicking and screaming along the way and delaying what is becoming a larger public expense by the day.
A huge part of this healthy downtown is healthy buildings that can house uses. A few relatively small investments here and there and the investment cycle will become more autonomous and the city can go back to its business of funding nothing, or funding whatever. This has proven out in nearly every downtown in America by now.
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2015, 09:47:51 PM
A healthy downtown is effectively no different from a well maintained public utility. It is a huge driver for a healthy economy. At some point when downtown was abandoned and let to rot by public leaders and a bad attitude du jour by private citizens, it became a largely public responsibility to clean it up. This cost and workout is by no means unique to Jacksonville. Every city has had to do this. Jacksonville is just kicking and screaming along the way and delaying what is becoming a larger public expense by the day.
A huge part of this healthy downtown is healthy buildings that can house uses. A few relatively small investments here and there and the investment cycle will become more autonomous and the city can go back to its business of funding nothing, or funding whatever. This has proven out in nearly every downtown in America by now.
So true and very well stated.
So we should issue bonds like a utility? Don't think it's nearly as safe a bet for an investor.
We spent too much on the courthouse. Most cities don't have the same cost of bridge repair and JTA expense for 950+ sq miles. And, there's the whole police pension thing. Now the stadium is becoming a big yearly expense too.
Jacksonville has some serious and unique challenges to address. Any solutions for making downtown "healthy" or even examples of how all those other cities did it?
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 10, 2015, 10:29:49 PM
Any solutions for making downtown "healthy" or even examples of how all those other cities did it?
This website is littered with both solutions and examples.
I was more interested in the solutions specifically referenced by the poster calling downtown effectively a utility. Most of the other "solutions" on this site don't seem realistic and too public transportation centric to be relevant to Jacksonville.
Seeking financing solutions - like crowdrise.com - to actually get this project moving and simply asking question about legitimacy of current project lead isn't "bashing" but just addressing current sticking points so that we can move forward.
I now realize that the person with comment deleting capabilities has a personal relationship with Mr. Atkins and that may be why there isn't any answers to the questions about his past development success and if he was under budget on previous jobs. That's not "bashing".
If the city is able to provide its portion, how soon will work be able to begin? Is the Cucina Urban piece going in the previously proposed new construction on the grass lot north of the trio? How tall will that building be? In what other ways does the scope and scale deviate from the previous proposal?
What's the plans for the surface parking lot on Forsyth Street, between Laura and Main Streets?
Is there any additional information on the residential units. Number of units? Price range? etc.
I don't think asking questions is the same as bashing. Even if the answers are negative. It seems you would rather "bash" or delete me instead of being productive. Gadfly.
My post history speaks for itself and is mostly full of questions. I use this site like several others to investigate events but do not have the ability to edit or delete posts to suit my position. If I did have that editorial power, then the discussions would be directed differently. This site literally shapes public opinion and perceptions and when I ask a question I am either attacked or deleted. Why not let truth shape public opinion instead of the highest bidder?
The Tappouni stuff with getting hired by Ability Housing while campaigning was sketchy. Atkins I asked questions about history to be met with a "guard dog" tactic so that's bashing? And I don't want to waste anymore effort on Elton. He's trying to keep a low profile and that's fine. It's when he was proactively bending the truth that I had an issue. Most of those posts ended up being right.
Obviosly this site can shape public opinion and I just wish that it subscribed to a Journalistic Ethics and Standards instead of "selling" to the highest bidder. It is the one with the power/role of editor that can and should change.
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 11, 2015, 05:04:52 AM
I was more interested in the solutions specifically referenced by the poster calling downtown effectively a utility. Most of the other "solutions" on this site don't seem realistic and too public transportation centric to be relevant to Jacksonville.
Although true vibrancy will never happen without human scaled connectivity, there have been quite a few that would improve downtown's conditions that aren't public transportation centric. Here's a couple of links if your interested:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-nov-creating-downtown-vibrancy-by-exposing-secret-retail
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2006-dec-urban-connectivity-state-union
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-mar-food-trucks-and-their-impact-on-downtown-revitalization
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 08:01:15 AM
Since we are on the subject what experience does Shahid khan have at large real estate development? Any successful projects to speak of?
What type of large scale real estate development? He's definitely been successful at building Flex-N-Gate globally since the early 1980s. He now has developed 54 manufacturing facilities in various continents.
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 09:28:44 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 08:54:16 AM
What's the plans for the surface parking lot on Forsyth Street, between Laura and Main Streets?
With Steve now.
The plan is to build a parking structure. One that would be large enough to accommodate the greater market downtown, not just the development. Plans have been submitted to the city that are basically identical to the ones we printed last.
So a parking structure with ground level retail and dining space?
Man this is exciting stuff. I hope they start turning dirt soon. I can't take another year of waiting.
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 09:44:28 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 09:40:19 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 09:28:44 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 08:54:16 AM
What's the plans for the surface parking lot on Forsyth Street, between Laura and Main Streets?
With Steve now.
The plan is to build a parking structure. One that would be large enough to accommodate the greater market downtown, not just the development. Plans have been submitted to the city that are basically identical to the ones we printed last.
So a parking structure with ground level retail and dining space?
Yes that is the proposal now. It has a ground level retail built right into the plan. There has already been interest in this space.
I ask because replacing that block long surface parking lot on Forsyth, with something that generates pedestrian activity and foot traffic, is just as big as restoring the vacant buildings across the street. This is a component of this redevelopment project that has been overlooked by most, IMO.
^ I agree with Lake, but if that becomes a huge garage, it will be adjacent to or across the street from 3 other garages. Who uses these and why isn't there more coordination between them?
Ok so how do we show city hall that this is something we care about deeply and we are not 850,000 totally apathetic and clueless citizens and we want this project done? Show up in front of City Hall with our "Historic Buildings' Lives Matter" T-shirts and signs? Just kidding . . . . . . . . actually not really, I kind of like that. Who at city hall needs the Peterbrooke basket of chocolates dropped off at their desk in order to push this through and who's on that???? Stephen?
So this is still the plan?
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/3559226156_5LBK9hT-900x2000.jpg)
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 09:44:28 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 09:40:19 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 09:28:44 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 08:54:16 AM
What's the plans for the surface parking lot on Forsyth Street, between Laura and Main Streets?
With Steve now.
The plan is to build a parking structure. One that would be large enough to accommodate the greater market downtown, not just the development. Plans have been submitted to the city that are basically identical to the ones we printed last.
So a parking structure with ground level retail and dining space?
Yes that is the proposal now. It has a ground level retail built right into the plan. There has already been interest in this space.
I ask because replacing that block long surface parking lot on Forsyth, with something that generates pedestrian activity and foot traffic, is just as big as restoring the vacant buildings across the street. This is a component of this redevelopment project that has been overlooked by most, IMO.
Agreed - one of the most exciting things from the plans last year was the proposal to turn the Regions surface lot across the street (at Forsyth and Laura) into a park and turn the surface lot down the street (at Forsyth and Main) into a garage with first floor retail space.
I don't know. I'm sure he's got money invested into more than Flex-N-Gate. As far as Flex-N-Gate goes, I also don't know what the context of each location is and what the development of each location included. In other words, I don't think we can claim that he does or does not have any successful projects without really getting into his background.
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 10:42:42 AM
Under Brown, the question seemed to by 'why should' we do this?. Under Curry so far, the question has been 'How can" we do this?
Curry continues to impress. I'll admit I was skeptical about him at first, but he's do a lot of things right!
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 11:02:08 AM
I don't know. I'm sure he's got money invested into more than Flex-N-Gate. As far as Flex-N-Gate goes, I also don't know what the context of each location is and what the development of each location included. In other words, I don't think we can claim that he does or does not have any successful projects without really getting into his background.
Mark Lamping was directly involved with the mixed use projects at the Meadowlands (mixed bag) as well as the new retail/entertainment complex that opened this year in St. Louis adjacent to Busch Stadium and affiliated with the Cardinals
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 11:10:20 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2015, 11:02:08 AM
I don't know. I'm sure he's got money invested into more than Flex-N-Gate. As far as Flex-N-Gate goes, I also don't know what the context of each location is and what the development of each location included. In other words, I don't think we can claim that he does or does not have any successful projects without really getting into his background.
It doesn't appear that the question has been asked locally, in any case.
Based on tufsu1's post, here's Ballpark Village in downtown St. Louis:
(http://www.stlballparkvillage.com/images/photo_gallery/Busch%20II%20Master%204_620.jpg)
(http://siteselection.com/onlineInsider/images/Ballpark-Village.jpg)
(http://www.stlballparkvillage.com/images/new-information.jpg)
(http://www.stlballparkvillage.com/images/ballpark_map.jpg)
QuoteBallpark Village will be the first master planned and fully integrated sports anchored development in the United States. To be built in multiple phases, Ballpark Village will have Entertainment, Retail, Restaurants, Residential, Parking, and Hotel elements. Once completed, Ballpark Village will be well over $750 Million in total development.
http://www.stlballparkvillage.com/
American Dream Meadowlands:
(http://forum.nyskiblog.com/file/n3495439/dubai1.jpg)
(http://donsnotes.com/nyc-nj/images/american-dream-meadowlands.png)
There's no mixed-use commercial/residential development included in the latest Khan proposal....just sporting and event oriented. However, it now does appear that his team does have some mixed-use development experience. Nevertheless, it's a discussion for another thread. We should keep this one focused on the Trio.
Having a partner with some money and experience can only be good for the project. Maybe it will actually happen. Of course, it does seem to depend on the city kicking in a lot of money.
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations.
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
so its fair to say that atkins has as much experience as khan does, if not more.
Without proper research, probably not. Luckily, it should not matter in getting the Trio off the ground.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 11, 2015, 04:55:22 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations.
The city will simply benefit from having a dead, high profile spot in the heart of the Northbank activated once again. Hopefully, everything works out this time.
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
so its fair to say that atkins has as much experience as khan does, if not more.
This is more absurd than fair.
I know Danis was the original GC on the job and KBJ the architect. Has this changed and are they simply picking up where they left off if this goes forward? When Danis was finishing up the Jesse Dupont Center down the street they were about a month or two from hopping their crews over to the Trio or Barnett. They were just waiting for the green light, it's a shame it didn't come together then.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 08:51:27 AM
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 11, 2015, 08:47:29 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
so its fair to say that atkins has as much experience as khan does, if not more.
This is more absurd than fair.
especially if you completely disregard the facts, amiright?
No, you are wrong. As indicated earlier, Khan's team-Lamping- has vastly more experience and resources building sports and entertainment venues than Atkins does building urban mixed use historic renovations.
But I dont see why its an "either-or" argument as most people would like to see both projects get built.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 09:22:36 AM
Quote from: SunKing on November 12, 2015, 09:18:45 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 08:51:27 AM
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 11, 2015, 08:47:29 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
so its fair to say that atkins has as much experience as khan does, if not more.
This is more absurd than fair.
especially if you completely disregard the facts, amiright?
No, you are wrong. As indicated earlier, Khan's team-Lamping- has vastly more experience and resources building sports and entertainment venues than Atkins does building urban mixed use historic renovations.
But I dont see why its an "either-or" argument as most people would like to see both projects get built.
1. Khan isn't Lamping.
2. The project is mixed commercial/residential
3. There is no sports element to the project.
4. The post is in response to a tendentiously bashing poster questioning whether or not Steve even had the experience to do this project.
So I don't see an either or argument about the Everbank Field and the Laura Street Trio either Sun King, but thanks for jumping in head first anyways. Perhaps actually reading the thread next time will keep you from making so many wrong statements in a single paragraph. And will hurt your head less on landing.
I was only responding to your comparison of Atkins vs Khan's capabilities as developers. I am quite familiar with Khan's background, his team and his resources. As I may not be familiar with Mr. Atkins background, his team and his resources.
Rather than hurtfully slamming anyone that disagrees with your comments, why not share with everyone Mr. Atkins resume of projects?
Please enlighten us all.
Damn, Stephen -- thicker skin, man. You can have weirdest take on things sometimes. Khan isn't Lamping -- that's a substantive & appropriate response? When the man is Khan's employee ? ? ?
Not sure I won't to get into this tennis match, but my thought is Khan has enough money to hire the correct development and financial advisors to assist his decisions and plans. He personally does not need mixed use experience. Few people in JAX have his financial resources. This is not saying Atkins is not qualified, just they have different approaches.
This is Simms earlier point I believe. Although I hate to agree with Simms I see his point. You can spend $77 million on 131 hotel keys, 100+ apts. and a couple restaurants and some retail. OR you can have 220 Riverside, Brooklyn Apts., and Brooklyn Station for less. The returns have to be fully understood. That said it is a much needed DT project.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 10:41:47 AM
Quote from: SunKing on November 12, 2015, 10:04:06 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 09:22:36 AM
Quote from: SunKing on November 12, 2015, 09:18:45 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 08:51:27 AM
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 11, 2015, 08:47:29 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 11, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
so its fair to say that atkins has as much experience as khan does, if not more.
This is more absurd than fair.
especially if you completely disregard the facts, amiright?
No, you are wrong. As indicated earlier, Khan's team-Lamping- has vastly more experience and resources building sports and entertainment venues than Atkins does building urban mixed use historic renovations.
But I dont see why its an "either-or" argument as most people would like to see both projects get built.
1. Khan isn't Lamping.
2. The project is mixed commercial/residential
3. There is no sports element to the project.
4. The post is in response to a tendentiously bashing poster questioning whether or not Steve even had the experience to do this project.
So I don't see an either or argument about the Everbank Field and the Laura Street Trio either Sun King, but thanks for jumping in head first anyways. Perhaps actually reading the thread next time will keep you from making so many wrong statements in a single paragraph. And will hurt your head less on landing.
I was only responding to your comparison of Atkins vs Khan's capabilities as developers. I am quite familiar with Khan's background, his team and his resources. As I may not be familiar with Mr. Atkins background, his team and his resources.
Rather than hurtfully slamming anyone that disagrees with your comments, why not share with everyone Mr. Atkins resume of projects?
Please enlighten us all.
Well thats the downside of not knowing what the context you are speaking into is, sunking. Perhaps less definitive statements like 'you are wrong' lead to more civil approaches from the person to whom you are addressing them.
But please, share with us Khan's experience in mixed commercial/residential use.
We are all very familiar with Khan's sports and entertainment background and the discussion is not about him so drop it. I am asking you to shed some light on Atkin's mixed commercial/residential use development background. When I look up Southeast Group, I can find that it was only formed in 2013.
Seriously, what projects has the guy personally been involved in?
I hope both Khan and Atkins make millions off their investments in the core. Sleiman too. Their success means that DT Jax should benefit as well and result in spin-off economic activity. Anyway, here's a link (click and scroll down) showing EB5 Group's development projects:
http://www.eb5groupllc.com/
Las Vegas developer partnering with Steve Atkins sees the vision for Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank building
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546489
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 11:40:58 AM
I hope both Khan and Atkins make millions off their investments in the core. Sleiman too. Their success means that DT Jax should benefit as well and result in spin-off economic activity. Anyway, here's a link (click and scroll down) showing EB5 Group's development projects:
http://www.eb5groupllc.com/
Las Vegas developer partnering with Steve Atkins sees the vision for Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank building
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546489
Oh I agree with that, lets make it all happen. The question now is whose project is this really? My goodness, Atkins new partners look shady.
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/jun/29/cover-fbi/#
they're called EB5 Group? lol thats hilarious
That's your answer? Seriously?
What is Mr. Atkins background prior to this proposed project? My question is open to anyone since stephendare appears to be speaking from another dimension.
Another dimension -- good one!
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 12:34:42 PM
As shady as dumping hexavalent chromium into peoples water supply?
In my best Ronald Reagan imitation possible, including an over-the-top African American eye roll:
There you go again!We get it, Stephen: the UAW targeted the man, so *you* target the man. Surprise, surprise -- looking at a 2012 article, none of the outfits Flex-n-Gate incorporated are unionized but nine of the outfits they acquired *are* unionized. And the unions want more.
So . . . you're not a nativist after all (maybe) when it comes to Shad Khan; but you're allowing yourself to be a water boy ? ? ?
Let it go, man. Quit carrying that water.
Khan isn't proposing a residential/commercial development. He is proposing a sports and entertainment venue that could include residential or commercial. I would assume that means that he will build the former and let others build the latter. So yes his experience in the former is well documented by virtue of his two sports franchises and related investments. In terms of overall project management, two complicated projects come to mind-the man built one of the world's largest private yachts as well as the largest tvs in the world. So yeah, when this man says that he can deliver on a project, I have a history of success to look back on.
So again who is Atkins and aside from really wanting to see the Laura Street project a success, what experience does the man have?
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 01:35:54 PM
Here is the Molasky Group's website.
http://www.molaskyco.com
Wonder how Lampings references look next to the projects of the Molaskys?
Dont go there....its just too easy.
Quote from: jaxjags on November 12, 2015, 11:07:22 AM
This is Simms earlier point I believe. Although I hate to agree with Simms I see his point. You can spend $77 million on 131 hotel keys, 100+ apts. and a couple restaurants and some retail. OR you can have 220 Riverside, Brooklyn Apts., and Brooklyn Station for less. The returns have to be fully understood. That said it is a much needed DT project.
Factoid: The developer brought into the Berkman 2 project asked for only $5 million. That was over a year ago. For 5 measly million bucks we'd be that much closer to a whole new batch of downtown residents.
You conveniently forgot this little tidbit.
On Thursday, March 13, 2008, he resigned as president of the Cardinals to become Chief Executive Officer of the New Meadowlands Stadium Company, where he oversaw the opening of The "Meadowlands," the new New York Giants and New York Jets football stadium.
I would be glad to discuss Lamping and the Molasky's on another thread after you tell me what projects Atkins has overseen. Remember-you promised.
Try not to get emotional. Its a simple question.
so its like Calvinball where you make up the rules as you along?
does anybody know Atkins background?
Sorry I meant any grown ups or humanoids from this planet, the topic is Atkins.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:08:58 PM
Quote from: SunKing on November 12, 2015, 02:08:09 PM
I would be glad to discuss Lamping and the Molasky's on another thread after you tell me what projects Atkins has overseen. Remember-you promised.
I did, on the condition that you told us which residential/commercial mixed use projects atkins had done
It seems like you are both trying to figure out the same thing?
This long, inane argument has really got me wondering who this Steve Atkins fella is now. Southeast Group was obviously put together for the sole purpose of this Barnett/Trio project. What did he do before that? He ran Atkins Group, Inc. for 15 years. What did they do? An internet search doesn't reveal much about this gentleman's experience or qualifications. However, some on this board obviously know him and therefore know a little about his training and experience, whether it is in this type of project or not. I wonder if they would share?
(http://i.imgur.com/8wFAW0v.jpg)
16 pages is a lot to read, forgive me, but is Khan back involved with this project? It's between him and Atkins to develop it?
Quote from: Apache on November 12, 2015, 02:26:17 PM
16 pages is a lot to read, forgive me, but is Khan back involved with this project? It's between him and Atkins to develop it?
Look what you did now stephendare. whole new can of worms.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:25:35 PM
Actually those are assumptions, PeeJay. His background is actually more diverse and longer than all that.
So what is his background? I want for him to succeed, and I don't claim that Khan has any experience with this sort of development, so I don't have an argument with you, I just want to know about Atkins, and it seems that you know.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:25:35 PM
Quote from: PeeJayEss on November 12, 2015, 02:24:03 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:08:58 PM
Quote from: SunKing on November 12, 2015, 02:08:09 PM
I would be glad to discuss Lamping and the Molasky's on another thread after you tell me what projects Atkins has overseen. Remember-you promised.
I did, on the condition that you told us which residential/commercial mixed use projects atkins had done
It seems like you are both trying to figure out the same thing?
This long, inane argument has really got me wondering who this Steve Atkins fella is now. Southeast Group was obviously put together for the sole purpose of this Barnett/Trio project. What did he do before that? He ran Atkins Group, Inc. for 15 years. What did they do? An internet search doesn't reveal much about this gentleman's experience or qualifications. However, some on this board obviously know him and therefore know a little about his training and experience, whether it is in this type of project or not. I wonder if they would share?
Actually those are assumptions, PeeJay. His background is actually more diverse and longer than all that.
Diversity is fine but should we just assume that he has no experience?
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:30:12 PM
sure. let me scan the resume and load it up. It will take me a few hours as I'm doing a project out here in Ponte Vedra.
Thanks!
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 02:28:58 PM
Quote from: Apache on November 12, 2015, 02:26:17 PM
16 pages is a lot to read, forgive me, but is Khan back involved with this project? It's between him and Atkins to develop it?
No, its a partnership with Molasky and Southeast and their (mostly) corporate tenants. Whyisjohngalt typically disparaged Atkins with the Khan comparison. I made the simple answer, and then Sun King jumped into the conversation with a long screed that literally had nothing to do with the side conversation. To make himself seem less nebulous and foolish, we've been entertaining this dumb conversation for the better part of the day now.
Name calling is allowed now?
No need for resumes, yes or no does Atkins have the experience for this type of project?
You can call me all the names you want stephendare but you do this fellow Atkins and the project's potential a disservice.
I hope to see the project move forward but I am seriously skeptical at this point.
He has a background in commercial real estate and I believe in addition he developed a successful medical complex here in town. I will make some inquiries to confirm this. Regardless of his experience in mixed use development, he has formed one hell of a team that has more than enough experience to get the job done and do it well. He has been vetted by 2 massive international companies that also feel he and his team can get it done. Hope this helps.
"The most progressive cities around the world focus on preserving, restoring and utilizing their historic properties. One of the ways they do this is by embracing Public-Private-Partnerships. For this project, the Private Sector will invest and finance 90% of the total cost of the project, with a proposed public investment from the City of Jacksonville for the balance, or 10% of the total costs." - barnet-trio.com
Atkins has the funding in place, a passion for Jacksonville, a firm plan of action for the trio, tenants that will bring revenue to the city, etc., etc. What is taking the city so long to approve this project and inject 10% of the cost into it? This project has been in front of them for YEARS. Could it be that they can't see the forest for the trees -- the tree being Shad Khan?
The city is peeing in its pants to cowtow to Khan. Where is Khan's passion for Jacksonville - in a severely suffering football team that he could up and move to another location? We've already seen how he destroyed a 65 year-old Jacksonville business, the Edgewood Bakery. Could One Spark have fizzled out because Khan cut ties with KYN? KYN had the ideas, Khan had the money.
Does anyone see a coincidence in the 2014 ousting of Stache Investments' Former Chief Investment Officer Jim Zsebok?
"Stache Investments Co. will continue to operate in Jacksonville and no projects currently under way or being considered by Stache will be affected."; Zsebok, who could not be reached for comment, has been a major part in the city's nascent innovation scene, with Stache Investments playing a key role in projects as diverse as the One Spark festival and the planned renovation of the former Barnett Bank building Downtown. - Jacksonville Business Journal
Can someone name one or more businesses that Khan has supported?
Now the city has on its November 18 agenda to approve the much more recent proposal by Khan of once again making changes to the stadium and surrounding areas. For what? Because we have fervent Jacksonville Jaguars fans?! I think not. Even if it's to attract the opposing teams fans, where are they going to stay? In the Hampton Inn across the river? Does the city have money in its historic preservation fund or somewhere else to pay for it? No, we have to pay for it -- and much, much more than 10% of it. How many months (if not weekends) does the stadium bring in revenue for the city? Wouldn't a mixed-use development such as the Trio with restaurants, a hotel, apartments, retailers, a bank and other businesses bring in monthly revenue to the city?
These are the issues and questions I have when the city is involved in any ventures that Jacksonville entrepreneurs try to pursue. I also question why the media is not asking any of these questions. With a very small amount of research, anyone can find this info. Is investigative journalism dead? Could it be that the media, too, can only see the bright, shiny, huge yacht parked in front of the CSX building and all the superficial trappings that follow extreme wealth?
As Jacksonville citizens, we should demand that the Trio project take priority and a decision be made on the public-private partnership. Downtown development is nil with the exception of the Jesse Ball Dupont Center which houses non-profits at lower market value and a spate of restaurants. The Trio stands to brings in bookoos of tax revenue. Right now, the powers that be in Jacksonville happen to be blinded by the grandiosity and wealth of one individual who makes unreliable promises.
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 04:13:15 PM
"The most progressive cities around the world focus on preserving, restoring and utilizing their historic properties. One of the ways they do this is by embracing Public-Private-Partnerships. For this project, the Private Sector will invest and finance 90% of the total cost of the project, with a proposed public investment from the City of Jacksonville for the balance, or 10% of the total costs." - barnet-trio.com
Atkins has the funding in place, a passion for Jacksonville, a firm plan of action for the trio, tenants that will bring revenue to the city, etc., etc. What is taking the city so long to approve this project and inject 10% of the cost into it? This project has been in front of them for YEARS. Could it be that they can't see the forest for the trees -- the tree being Shad Khan?
The city is peeing in its pants to cowtow to Khan. Where is Khan's passion for Jacksonville - in a severely suffering football team that he could up and move to another location? We've already seen how he destroyed a 65 year-old Jacksonville business, the Edgewood Bakery. Could One Spark have fizzled out because Khan cut ties with KYN? KYN had the ideas, Khan had the money.
Does anyone see a coincidence in the 2014 ousting of Stache Investments' Former Chief Investment Officer Jim Zsebok?
"Stache Investments Co. will continue to operate in Jacksonville and no projects currently under way or being considered by Stache will be affected."; Zsebok, who could not be reached for comment, has been a major part in the city's nascent innovation scene, with Stache Investments playing a key role in projects as diverse as the One Spark festival and the planned renovation of the former Barnett Bank building Downtown. - Jacksonville Business Journal
Can someone name one or more businesses that Khan has supported?
Now the city has on its November 18 agenda to approve the much more recent proposal by Khan of once again making changes to the stadium and surrounding areas. For what? Because we have fervent Jacksonville Jaguars fans?! I think not. Even if it's to attract the opposing teams fans, where are they going to stay? In the Hampton Inn across the river? Does the city have money in its historic preservation fund or somewhere else to pay for it? No, we have to pay for it -- and much, much more than 10% of it. How many months (if not weekends) does the stadium bring in revenue for the city? Wouldn't a mixed-use development such as the Trio with restaurants, a hotel, apartments, retailers, a bank and other businesses bring in monthly revenue to the city?
These are the issues and questions I have when the city is involved in any ventures that Jacksonville entrepreneurs try to pursue. I also question why the media is not asking any of these questions. With a very small amount of research, anyone can find this info. Is investigative journalism dead? Could it be that the media, too, can only see the bright, shiny, huge yacht parked in front of the CSX building and all the superficial trappings that follow extreme wealth?
As Jacksonville citizens, we should demand that the Trio project take priority and a decision be made on the public-private partnership. Downtown development is nil with the exception of the Jesse Ball Dupont Center which houses non-profits at lower market value and a spate of restaurants. The Trio stands to brings in bookoos of tax revenue. Right now, the powers that be in Jacksonville happen to be blinded by the grandiosity and wealth of one individual who makes unreliable promises.
Dumbest post I have ever read..
The bias is strong today..
Sounds like a scorned ex-baker...
Sorry, I'm not the baker. I just get really frustrated every time I hear about downtown development and all the promising projects that are not and have not happened. And such a fuss is made over anything Khan wants to do whether its best for the city or not. I think he's shady.
Maybe because Khan puts millions of his own dollars into the projects? that may be a reason the City bends over backwards to work with him, just saying. I do get your frustration with the hope of other projects moving forward and seeing them never get off the ground.
The thing Shad Khan does to some people in this town is downright bizarre. Are these infrequent posters even real, or are they sock puppets?
The city does things to its own detriment. Why not give the go ahead for the Trio which includes a hotel in the stadium's backyard which will infuse the hotel & bed tax fund to help pay for the stadium upgrades? This is what I mean by seeing only the bright, shiny things. I may be wrong but I don't think a new contract has been set for the Florida-Georgia game which brings in $300-400 million for the city -- all because the number of seats will be reduced.
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:05:25 PM
The city does things to its own detriment. Why not give the go ahead for the Trio which includes a hotel in the stadium's backyard which will infuse the hotel & bed tax fund to help pay for the stadium upgrades? This is what I mean by seeing only the bright, shiny things. I may be wrong but I don't think a new contract has been set for the Florida-Georgia game which brings in $300-400 million for the city -- all because the number of seats will be reduced.
How do you know they won't? Maybe he finally has some legitimate people teamed up with him his time.
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 04:36:44 PM
Sorry, I'm not the baker. I just get really frustrated every time I hear about downtown development and all the promising projects that are not and have not happened. And such a fuss is made over anything Khan wants to do whether its best for the city or not. I think he's shady.
Just have to laugh.
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
Good luck with that. Doesn't help when people who really know they are keep on pushing some agenda.
Quote from: edjax on November 12, 2015, 05:09:34 PM
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:05:25 PM
The city does things to its own detriment. Why not give the go ahead for the Trio which includes a hotel in the stadium's backyard which will infuse the hotel & bed tax fund to help pay for the stadium upgrades? This is what I mean by seeing only the bright, shiny things. I may be wrong but I don't think a new contract has been set for the Florida-Georgia game which brings in $300-400 million for the city -- all because the number of seats will be reduced.
How do you know they won't? Maybe he finally has some legitimate people teamed up with him his time.
I hope they will. What I meant though was why hasn't the city made the Trio a priority which has been in front of them for a long time and will provide close-to-immediate tax revenue (he's had the same tenants lined up this whole time) but instead they jump on the Khan wagon that could potentially jeopardize the $300-400 million sure thing they've got coming in?
I am a real poster and a future tenant (the Bullbriar) of the Laura Street Trio (full disclosure).
This has been a long process and for years people have been talking about this project and its potential success and failure. I believe this is the closest we have come to seeing this project come to fruition. Yes it will cost us money but that money will come back to the city and us multiple times over.
On the questions earlier about Steve Atkins and his ability to get it done:
Steve Atkins and the SouthEast Group is only as strong as the team he surrounds himself with.
Who is this "dream team"?
They have partnered with Danis Construction on the renovation and adaptive-reuse of the Laura Trio and the Barnett because they have the experience to meticulously preserve historic structures which in the past include these local projects (just to name a few):
1. Jake M. Godbold City Hall Annex
2. Farah and Farah Law Offices
3. Jesse Ball DuPont Center
Between Danis, the lead architects and engineers, they have six local firms that are skilled in historic preservation.
The Molasky Group of Companies, a 65-year old, $2 billion company that not only finances projects, but develops projects for the US Government and Blue Cross Blue Shield, among others.
US Bank who is providing all the senior debt (well in excess of what they are asking the City to approve).
It is important to note that Steve has been vetted by his tenants and partners and we all believe in him, his abilities and the abilities of his assembled team. Also as I mentioned earlier two of the worlds largest and most prominent international brands are tenants and have vetted Steve. Marriott is one and the other wants to make their own announcement. Both are worldwide powerhouses who did their due diligence, signed leases and are ready to invest and be a part of this project.
Let's get behind the revitalization of the epicenter of our city. Make the city something people will want to spend time in. Come for business but stay because Jacksonville is a great place to visit and live. Since bed taxes help to pay for a fraction the stadium perks give people a reason to stay longer. Create a destination not just a stopover.
I have no issue with the city of Jacksonville having the nicest stadium in the country as long as the epicenter of our city doesn't look like war torn Beirut.
If you feel the same please sign this petition going to city hall:
https://www.change.org/p/encourage-jacksonville-city-officials-to-approve-the-additional-10-needed-to-fund-the-barnett-trio-project?tk=AIKgb2eiuO2NZ0NK7U3hen9uxSr9VQ4gQn_3R7akRz4&utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:19:50 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 12, 2015, 05:09:34 PM
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:05:25 PM
The city does things to its own detriment. Why not give the go ahead for the Trio which includes a hotel in the stadium's backyard which will infuse the hotel & bed tax fund to help pay for the stadium upgrades? This is what I mean by seeing only the bright, shiny things. I may be wrong but I don't think a new contract has been set for the Florida-Georgia game which brings in $300-400 million for the city -- all because the number of seats will be reduced.
How do you know they won't? Maybe he finally has some legitimate people teamed up with him his time.
I hope they will. What I meant though was why hasn't the city made the Trio a priority which has been in front of them for a long time and will provide close-to-immediate tax revenue (he's had the same tenants lined up this whole time) but instead they jump on the Khan wagon that could potentially jeopardize the $300-400 million sure thing they've got coming in?
How do you know that they had legitimate financing lined up before? Did you thoroughly vet the documents? Hopefully they do now and it will somehow get approved. And perhaps more willing to work with Khan as well as we kind of know he is worth billions so has the money and he is is providing his money into an asset owned by the city.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
I didn't mean to imply that it would fund the $45 million amphitheater. It will help to fund the hotel & bed tax fund. Doesn't it make sense to have more money coming in on a line item than going out? Less debt.
We can treat them as two separate and different projects but the Trio benefits the stadium in that regard. I don't foresee how the stadium benefits the Trio.
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:19:50 PM
I hope they will. What I meant though was why hasn't the city made the Trio a priority which has been in front of them for a long time and will provide close-to-immediate tax revenue (he's had the same tenants lined up this whole time) but instead they jump on the Khan wagon that could potentially jeopardize the $300-400 million sure thing they've got coming in?
What's the $300-$400 million sure thing being jeopardized by the stadium proposal?
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:30:29 PMWe can treat them as two separate and different projects but the Trio benefits the stadium in that regard. I don't foresee how the stadium benefits the Trio.
More downtown events result in more visitors staying in downtown hotels like the Trio's proposed Courtyard by Marriott.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 05:21:38 PM
I have no issue with the city of Jacksonville having the nicest stadium in the country as long as the epicenter of our city doesn't look like war torn Beirut.
Great sentence and sentiment. Good luck, Scott! Glad to have you a part of this city and, hopefully, the Laura Trio revitalization!
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:30:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
I didn't mean to imply that it would fund the $45 million amphitheater. It will help to fund the hotel & bed tax fund. Doesn't it make sense to have more money coming in on a line item than going out? Less debt.
We can treat them as two separate and different projects but the Trio benefits the stadium in that regard. I don't foresee how the stadium benefits the Trio.
??? Ah. Perhaps people coming to events at the stadium and amphitheater will want to stay at the hotel included in the Trio plan??
Quote from: edjax on November 12, 2015, 05:33:50 PM
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:30:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
I didn't mean to imply that it would fund the $45 million amphitheater. It will help to fund the hotel & bed tax fund. Doesn't it make sense to have more money coming in on a line item than going out? Less debt.
We can treat them as two separate and different projects but the Trio benefits the stadium in that regard. I don't foresee how the stadium benefits the Trio.
??? Ah. Perhaps people coming to events at the stadium and amphitheater will want to stay at the hotel included in the Trio plan??
EdJax is absolutely correct. It is a symbiotic relationship.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 05:21:38 PM
I have no issue with the city of Jacksonville having the nicest stadium in the country as long as the epicenter of our city doesn't look like war torn Beirut.
If you feel the same please sign this petition going to city hall:
https://www.change.org/p/encourage-jacksonville-city-officials-to-approve-the-additional-10-needed-to-fund-the-barnett-trio-project?tk=AIKgb2eiuO2NZ0NK7U3hen9uxSr9VQ4gQn_3R7akRz4&utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature
Welcome to the forum and I look forward to dining at the Bullbriar! Regardless of what happens or doesn't happen with the stadium, under no circumstances should we not invest in improving the core of the Northbank. I agree that the Trio site is essentially ground zero when it comes to activating the Northbank.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 05:39:27 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 12, 2015, 05:33:50 PM
Quote from: Native Girl on November 12, 2015, 05:30:29 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
I didn't mean to imply that it would fund the $45 million amphitheater. It will help to fund the hotel & bed tax fund. Doesn't it make sense to have more money coming in on a line item than going out? Less debt.
We can treat them as two separate and different projects but the Trio benefits the stadium in that regard. I don't foresee how the stadium benefits the Trio.
??? Ah. Perhaps people coming to events at the stadium and amphitheater will want to stay at the hotel included in the Trio plan??
EdJax is absolutely correct. It is a symbiotic relationship.
And I guess I should add eat at your fabulous new restaurant!
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
If possible they should do them at the same time since both investors are ready to break ground now essentially. If not possible, don't you think it would be smarter to cough up the smaller amount, chump change for a city of a million people, that is $8 million to break ground on a project that is essential to the city of Jacksonville and has been desperately waiting for decades while they could at the same time contributing to the bigger pot that involves the stadium? Seems reasonable to me, "Hey Mr. Khan, we love your idea and we will work with you, but we need to knock this other essential project out too that requires us to contribute much less." Khan has billions and he could get started now with his own money if he wanted though he likely won't unless someone else (city) pays for half of it because he will play hardball business man. This is how he made billions, coming out way on top of business deals like this. Whether or not he wants to play extreme hardball is up to him. I think the city should work with him and contribute but I think there can be negotiations rather than "yes sir, here's $45 million!"
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 05:21:38 PM
I have no issue with the city of Jacksonville having the nicest stadium in the country as long as the epicenter of our city doesn't look like war torn Beirut.
If you feel the same please sign this petition going to city hall:
https://www.change.org/p/encourage-jacksonville-city-officials-to-approve-the-additional-10-needed-to-fund-the-barnett-trio-project?tk=AIKgb2eiuO2NZ0NK7U3hen9uxSr9VQ4gQn_3R7akRz4&utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature
Welcome to the forum and I look forward to dining at the Bullbriar! Regardless of what happens or doesn't happen with the stadium, under no circumstances should we not invest in improving the core of the Northbank. I agree that the Trio site is essentially ground zero when it comes to activating the Northbank.
Thank you! I look forward to feeding all of you. Let's get it done!
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 05:21:38 PM
I am a real poster and a future tenant (the Bullbriar) of the Laura Street Trio (full disclosure).
This has been a long process and for years people have been talking about this project and its potential success and failure. I believe this is the closest we have come to seeing this project come to fruition. Yes it will cost us money but that money will come back to the city and us multiple times over.
On the questions earlier about Steve Atkins and his ability to get it done:
Steve Atkins and the SouthEast Group is only as strong as the team he surrounds himself with.
Who is this "dream team"?
They have partnered with Danis Construction on the renovation and adaptive-reuse of the Laura Trio and the Barnett because they have the experience to meticulously preserve historic structures which in the past include these local projects (just to name a few):
1. Jake M. Godbold City Hall Annex
2. Farah and Farah Law Offices
3. Jesse Ball DuPont Center
Between Danis, the lead architects and engineers, they have six local firms that are skilled in historic preservation.
The Molasky Group of Companies, a 65-year old, $2 billion company that not only finances projects, but develops projects for the US Government and Blue Cross Blue Shield, among others.
US Bank who is providing all the senior debt (well in excess of what they are asking the City to approve).
It is important to note that Steve has been vetted by his tenants and partners and we all believe in him, his abilities and the abilities of his assembled team. Also as I mentioned earlier two of the worlds largest and most prominent international brands are tenants and have vetted Steve. Marriott is one and the other wants to make their own announcement. Both are worldwide powerhouses who did their due diligence, signed leases and are ready to invest and be a part of this project.
Let's get behind the revitalization of the epicenter of our city. Make the city something people will want to spend time in. Come for business but stay because Jacksonville is a great place to visit and live. Since bed taxes help to pay for a fraction the stadium perks give people a reason to stay longer. Create a destination not just a stopover.
I have no issue with the city of Jacksonville having the nicest stadium in the country as long as the epicenter of our city doesn't look like war torn Beirut.
If you feel the same please sign this petition going to city hall:
https://www.change.org/p/encourage-jacksonville-city-officials-to-approve-the-additional-10-needed-to-fund-the-barnett-trio-project?tk=AIKgb2eiuO2NZ0NK7U3hen9uxSr9VQ4gQn_3R7akRz4&utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature
thank you Scotty. I really hope it is a success for everyone's sake. Appreciate you hanging in there.
petition signed. I hope something good happens when you get to 500
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on November 12, 2015, 05:49:13 PM
petition signed. I hope something good happens when you get to 500
Thank You!!!
I signed it too.
Quote from: CCMjax on November 12, 2015, 05:44:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
If possible they should do them at the same time since both investors are ready to break ground now essentially. If not possible, don't you think it would be smarter to cough up the smaller amount, chump change for a city of a million people, that is $8 million to break ground on a project that is essential to the city of Jacksonville and has been desperately waiting for decades while they could at the same time contributing to the bigger pot that involves the stadium? Seems reasonable to me, "Hey Mr. Khan, we love your idea and we will work with you, but we need to knock this other essential project out too that requires us to contribute much less." Khan has billions and he could get started now with his own money if he wanted though he likely won't unless someone else (city) pays for half of it because he will play hardball business man. This is how he made billions, coming out way on top of business deals like this. Whether or not he wants to play extreme hardball is up to him. I think the city should work with him and contribute but I think there can be negotiations rather than "yes sir, here's $45 million!"
To be honest, I think most of the discussion in this thread is kind of silly. IMO, it's pretty myopic to debate the validity of completely different projects (with totally different funding sources) against one another, as an either or proposition. In just about every other city of equal size across this country, multiple projects are being funded and constructed simultaneously. If Jax is to turn the corner, we're going to have to advance beyond this level of conversation and implementation. Not only should the Trio and Everbank improvements move forward, so should others like Healthy Town, 200 Riverside, the Landing, Broadstone Riverhouse, etc. Getting the Trio off the ground has nothing to do with the stadium or Khan's personal bank account. It pretty much boils down to if city leaders believe it's truly important to the community to invest public money into the restoration of these historic buildings and in infill development immediately surrounding them. If so, the $8 million will be found. With that said, building support to save the Trio should focus on the merits of the Trio development itself and the impact it will have in the historic heart of the city. Not a fruitless comparison to a random DT development project at Everbank Field. With that said, I've also signed the petition.
I agree. Thank you for your support.
Two international companies vetted the project. Marriott is one. Duetsche Bank the second?
The onky link between Khan and the Atkins guy is that Khan began foreclosure proceedings on part of The Trio property that Atkins hadnt made any payments on.
What's the standing on that case you might be wondering? I am currently too busy trying to research qualifications for Atkins (which were supposed to be posted here) then I'll look up the case.
The Trio should be finished. The Barnett was completed in summer of 2015, as promised, and finishing the other buildings will be a huge asset to the Northbank. Are there any development teams that can do this project without city $ so it can continue?
Wait what? The Barnett has been completed? I've only been gone for 6 months, but last I saw / heard it wasn't even close to being started.
No. The Barnett isn't complete. Construction hasn't even began.
Maybe I missed it, but is this 10% being asked for in tax incentives? Cold hard cash up front? Is the developer just asking for the city to give them 10% outright, what does the city get out of it? 10% ownership?
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Nice Lead Letter today
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2015-11-12/story/lead-letter-laura-street-building-projects-deserves-citys
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:28:05 PM
Nice Lead Letter today
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2015-11-12/story/lead-letter-laura-street-building-projects-deserves-citys
Great article. It is awesome to finally see the media hopping on board and demanding that this get done. He said it well, they really aren't asking much out of the city for a project like this.
Keep on pressing! Schwartz, thanks for the link to the petition. I signed it and sent it to my whole office and about 50 others, ha ha! I urge all the others on this board to pass it on. I think a lot of people disconnected from downtown don't even know about this project and how much it impacts our city, so pass it on and get the word out to as many people as possible. I will do the same.
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 07:24:45 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2015, 05:14:57 PM
I doubt the Trio will have any impact on the bed tax being able to fund the $45 million amphitheater. These are really two projects, over a mile apart, that don't have anything to do with one another. We should view and treat them that way.
Literally no one besides sun king is comparing the two projects. I suppose that we could bring in the effort to build something in Dubai or New York as well.
I imagine I could post some outrage laden thing about who thinks that any of these projects are comparable to an artificial island in the middle east.
QuoteI mean come on! Are either of these guys even qualified to build an island?
Cant we be reasonable and separate the Artificial Land Masses from the simple task of historic renovation downtown Jacksonville?
lol.
A couple of posters with an agenda to lessen the developer posted and the rest of us have played along stupidly.
Joke is on all of us.
joke is on you Stephendare as you are the only one making comparisons between the projects. I support the project and only asked what Atkins qualifications were, not his partners.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:24:54 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Yes I read and understand all of that. So long story short is that the developer is asking for 10% frwe and clear, with no guaranteed return. That's fine and all I was just looking for some clarification.
So what has Atkins done before? I've sorted through 20 pages of this back and forth. It's pretty silly to keep bringing Khan into this, especially for those trying to defend Atkins; "self-made billionaire and most famous guy in the city" would make anyone pale in comparison.
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2015, 12:36:31 AM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 12, 2015, 09:56:23 PM
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:24:54 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Yes I read and understand all of that. So long story short is that the developer is asking for 10% frwe and clear, with no guaranteed return. That's fine and all I was just looking for some clarification.
you mean other than the suddenly activated taxes on the properties and the businesses in five buildings,----four of which are multi story---- right?
No, I mean there is the possibility that the city forks over a bunch of free money and the project never gets completed --- amiright?
Good to know. I am all for the project but as a taxpayer I'd like to know there is some sort of reassurance that public money isn't going to go up in smoke.
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2015, 09:30:33 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 13, 2015, 09:06:13 AM
So what has Atkins done before? I've sorted through 20 pages of this back and forth. It's pretty silly to keep bringing Khan into this, especially for those trying to defend Atkins; "self-made billionaire and most famous guy in the city" would make anyone pale in comparison.
I also think its silly to bring in Khan as well, actually. Especially since he is no longer involved with the deal (apparently to the dismay of a few people who think he should own all of downtown) But there you have it.
If any comparison is being made, its over the credulity involved with handing a billionaire hundreds of millions of tax dollars vs the incredulity on the part of a couple of posters who can't imagine why Steve was able to arrange financing with one of the country's most substantial real estate development companies and several of its largest and most recognizeable corporations.
In fact, if you scroll back, there was even an attempt to smear the reputation of the companies involved----simply because two of our posters would not like to see Atkins succeed.
The process should be uniform in my opinion. Everyone should be subject to the same scrutiny and questions when asking for tax dollars. But this conversation hasn't really been about the money or the bona fides (any thinking person would look at the financial team and realize that the process has been vetted by some of the best in the industry) its just about this southern local madness of casting aspersions on the crab that seems to be crawling out of the box.
I think the Khan vs Atkins debate - the one that's talking about them personally - is a distraction. I think what people may actually be arguing over is the simple financial health of this project. There isn't a lot known about Atkins, and it doesn't look like he has billions - or maybe even millions - of his own money he could dip into if there are cost overruns. We've seen too many examples of proposals falling apart due to financial issues
after the city has forked over money.
That being said, if we start setting up barriers for smaller local developers that want to try and develop larger projects downtown, the whole redevelopment of downtown is going to remain a very slow process. One of my big pet peeves is that we have to rely on these big projects because so many buildings have been demolished over the decades that would have otherwise allowed people like Atkins and others to get their feet wet with smaller projects. These incentives wouldn't be needed if we had been smarter in the past. So forking over a little something to Atkins is just going to be the tax we pay for being foolish and shortsighted in the past.
Quote from: hiddentrack on November 13, 2015, 09:57:21 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2015, 09:30:33 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 13, 2015, 09:06:13 AM
So what has Atkins done before? I've sorted through 20 pages of this back and forth. It's pretty silly to keep bringing Khan into this, especially for those trying to defend Atkins; "self-made billionaire and most famous guy in the city" would make anyone pale in comparison.
I also think its silly to bring in Khan as well, actually. Especially since he is no longer involved with the deal (apparently to the dismay of a few people who think he should own all of downtown) But there you have it.
If any comparison is being made, its over the credulity involved with handing a billionaire hundreds of millions of tax dollars vs the incredulity on the part of a couple of posters who can't imagine why Steve was able to arrange financing with one of the country's most substantial real estate development companies and several of its largest and most recognizeable corporations.
In fact, if you scroll back, there was even an attempt to smear the reputation of the companies involved----simply because two of our posters would not like to see Atkins succeed.
The process should be uniform in my opinion. Everyone should be subject to the same scrutiny and questions when asking for tax dollars. But this conversation hasn't really been about the money or the bona fides (any thinking person would look at the financial team and realize that the process has been vetted by some of the best in the industry) its just about this southern local madness of casting aspersions on the crab that seems to be crawling out of the box.
I think the Khan vs Atkins debate - the one that's talking about them personally - is a distraction. I think what people may actually be arguing over is the simple financial health of this project. There isn't a lot known about Atkins, and it doesn't look like he has billions - or maybe even millions - of his own money he could dip into if there are cost overruns. We've seen too many examples of proposals falling apart due to financial issues after the city has forked over money.
That being said, if we start setting up barriers for smaller local developers that want to try and develop larger projects downtown, the whole redevelopment of downtown is going to remain a very slow process. One of my big pet peeves is that we have to rely on these big projects because so many buildings have been demolished over the decades that would have otherwise allowed people like Atkins and others to get their feet wet with smaller projects. These incentives wouldn't be needed if we had been smarter in the past. So forking over a little something to Atkins is just going to be the tax we pay for being foolish and shortsighted in the past.
Word.
Which is why it would be helpful to know a little something about the guy.
The part that still puzzles me is the amount of upfront cash that is expected on these types of projects.
I'm not against using tax money for projects that will have an opportunity to have a positive impact on the city overall. I'm against the upfront payouts. This type of tax spending should be looked at along the lines of an investment as opposed to a cost since there is a good potential to recoup the money later down the line.
Have the deals written in such a way that the city is guaranteeing 'x' amount of $$$ after certain benchmarks, as Stephen alluded to earlier, are hit, just as you're allowed to submit for a draw on the private side of the industry.
Is there bank financing for this project? The story mentions everything but.
Also, putting another bank in the bottom floor of the Barnett building would be dead space and a waste. They need another restaurant to create the environment they want and Jacksonville deserves.
Vagabond Coffee will be on the first floor as well, so that helps.
QuoteCenterState Bank has agreed to put a branch on the first floor, but is not the major tenant. Vagabond Coffee has committed to a coffee shop in the lobby.
Some bank financing would be possibly provided by US Bank N.A.
QuoteU.S. Bank has provided term sheets for $40 million that it would lend the project.
full article: http://jacksonville.com/business/real-estate/2015-11-10/story/laura-street-trio-developer-has-new-partner-wants-8-million
QuoteBoth companies have construction and financing responsibilities. Of the nearly $78 million, the two firms would partner for $20 million in private equity and another $40 million through commercial loans. The remaining would be offset by about $9 million in Federal Historic Tax Credits and an $8 million ask from the city for public funding.
Molasky has done a host of government projects, including FBI centers in San Diego, Cincinnati and Minneapolis. It's done retail like big-box strip centers. And multifamily housing in its native Nevada and California.
However, the Laura Street Trio and Barnett Bank building would be the company's first historic redevelopment.
"It intrigued us," said Sher. "It's taking what once was beautiful and making it that way again. Really, with the history of these buildings, who wouldn't?"
Sher credits Jacksonville-based Danis Building Construction for the needed expertise in historic rebuilds. The company recently completed the Jessie Ball duPont Center, formerly the Haydon Burns Library.
Such a project could springboard Molasky to pursue other historic redevelopments or pursue other work in the Jacksonville area. The company also owns a Veterans Administration building in town.
The Downtown project brings a certain level of risk for the company, though.
Sher said US Bank N.A. would only secure 50 percent of the funds needed for the project, even with the Molasky's backing. Typically, it's 60 percent.
That's partially why the $8 million being asked of the city is important. It helps boost that equity, but also shows public support in such a project, he said.
And to show the city the company is engaged, it's Molasky's $3.1 million that's been placed in a private trust to pay off the mortgage owed to Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan.
Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546489
Thanks Lake. That was really helpful. Although I am still concerned that a "coffee shop in the lobby" won't be enough. There is a coffee shop in the BoA Building too but you would never know from the street. I guess one step at a time though.
I think we could put some pressure on the Mayor to use his Tally ties and our NE FL delegation to maybe get some funding from the state for historic preservation to at least take a little bit of the weight off of the city.
FYI - Looks like there is going to be a meeting with the DIA this Friday from 10-noon at the Ed Ball Building that is open to the public, however, the public will only be listening not asking questions. I am going to try to make it to listen in.
https://www.change.org/p/encourage-jacksonville-city-officials-to-approve-the-additional-10-needed-to-fund-the-barnett-trio-project/u/14243294
Center State bank will be on the bottom floor of a new building they are putting behind the Florida Life building (empty lot). This building will also feature a rooftop bar and tapas by Liz.
The Marriott will be in the upper floors of the new building, the Bisbee, and the florida life building.
The Bullbriar Restaurant will occupy the marble bank.
A large international bank will occupy the bottom floor of the Barnett Bank building. Also Vagabond will have a space in the lobby. Apartments in the upper floors.
The bottom floor of the Bisbee will house a grocery store/bodega featuring grab and go food by catering by liz.
Jon Insetta is opening another Black Sheep across the street at the Jacksonville Bank spot.
Lots of activity in and around the Trio if we get it done.
Don't forget about FSCJ turning 20 West into a dorm for 60 college students with a restaurant run by its culinary school immediately next door on Laura. The heart of the Northbank could quickly turn around with its major central dead zone being immediately activated with three blocks of around the clock, pedestrian scale activity.
This Atkins stuff is beginning to sound sketchy as hell:
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/11/19/wallacedia-wont-be-rushed-into-laura-street-trio.html
QuoteWallace said on Tuesday his team also had less than 10 days to review the plan and still haven't been provided documents needed to determine if the developer could meet the debt load.
Atkins, who said Wednesday morning he would be available to talk in the afternoon, did not answer a phone call later in the day.
One major issue that Wallace said would prevent the DIA from moving forward at all: The fact that Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan has foreclosured on the loan his Stache Investments Corp. provided to fund Atkin's purchase of the Barnett Bank building.
While Wallace said the foreclosure must be resolved before any city involvement, Atkins has said the foreclosure will be taken care of once the city provides funding.
What the hell kind of B.S. is that ? ? ? Honestly, this sounds bogus. It reads like they can't do a damn thing without the city stepping way the hell out on a limb and setting itself up to be suckered.
So per the article the city would also be responsible for building the garage?? I sure don't recall him mentioning that in his latest release. Honestly,you really do understand why the city has to be very cautious dealing with this guy. Hopefully it works out, we shall see.
Sounds to me like the city is just trying to be smart about it all. Wallace knows this is the biggest thing going downtown, he isn't trying to kill it. Let DIA review the project and negotiate with him for what the city will bring to the table. It's their job after all. I'm confident that if they are close enough to making this happen they can negotiate a favorable deal for the city and developer.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2015, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 19, 2015, 12:07:51 PM
Sounds to me like the city is just trying to be smart about it all. Wallace knows this is the biggest thing going downtown, he isn't trying to kill it. Let DIA review the project and negotiate with him for what the city will bring to the table. It's their job after all. I'm confident that if they are close enough to making this happen they can negotiate a favorable deal for the city and developer.
As long as the city is in the business of making sure Khan gets money, Im sure everything will be alright. ;) But yes, I think its close enough.
Hopefully Steve will be willing to share with other developers how he managed to put together a project with this kind of backing. It would be nice to have other options than the team of investors with the longest losing streak in our history. The ability to attract this level of investor here is pretty exciting. How he did it needs to be shared.
Did he mention during your breakfast meeting that the garage was not included in the 77 million and that it would be the responsibility of the city to build? Or is this Ian error in reporting by the JBJ?
QuoteTo move the project forward, Atkins is asking the city for $8 million in grants as well as having the city provide parking spaces, which could cost between $6 million and $10 million for a 300 to 700 space parking garage.
So we're looking at somewhere between $14 - $18 million from the city.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2015, 12:51:35 PM
QuoteTo move the project forward, Atkins is asking the city for $8 million in grants as well as having the city provide parking spaces, which could cost between $6 million and $10 million for a 300 to 700 space parking garage.
So we're looking at somewhere between $14 - $18 million from the city.
Yea, looks hat way. Was trying to find out from Stepehn above if perhaps an error in reporting? If the city building the garage is the case then it does increase the city amount to nearly 20%. Which personally I would probably still be ok with but I do see where it could potentially have the city even more doubtful with Mr Atkins as that was not mentioned in his public release. Also I see in the article where Wallace mentions the petition signatures that were received. This was never mentioned in the petition either. In fact the petition specifically mentioned that the 77 millions was the TOTAL cost of,the project. And the drawing they provided included a parking garage with retail. Perhaps he city will now look at,the number of petitioners signed with some skepticism. And I was one who signed it.
I'd like to know more about this garage too. Will the city own it? Will the development pay the city for the spots it's using in the garage? Or would they use the spots free for some predetermined period of time?
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2015, 12:51:35 PM
QuoteTo move the project forward, Atkins is asking the city for $8 million in grants as well as having the city provide parking spaces, which could cost between $6 million and $10 million for a 300 to 700 space parking garage.
So we're looking at somewhere between $14 - $18 million from the city.
That's what it's sounding like. Plus the fact that the city would be building and operating a garage but giving part (or all) of the spaces over to this development. It still may not be a terrible deal... if Atkins is really the guy who can pull it all off.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2015, 12:51:35 PM
QuoteTo move the project forward, Atkins is asking the city for $8 million in grants as well as having the city provide parking spaces, which could cost between $6 million and $10 million for a 300 to 700 space parking garage.
So we're looking at somewhere between $14 - $18 million from the city.
Total or just for the garage?
$6 to $10 million for just the garage.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:24:54 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Since you are obviously involved with the project as a tenant, were you aware that the garage being built by the city was part of the proposal as noted in the JBJ article this morning?
Was the garage not listed in the petition purposefully (misleading) or because the Southeast Group wasn't aware that the garage was going to cost money ( proof of inexperience / incompetence) ?
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 19, 2015, 02:28:35 PM
Was the garage not listed in the petition purposefully (misleading) or because the Southeast Group wasn't aware that the garage was going to cost money ( proof of inexperience / incompetence) ?
From what I remember the garage was always a negotiation issue and was always unclear who was going to pay for it. Am I wrong? I seem to remember the garage topic coming up long ago in threads and articles.
Quotewith a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll.
These sentences are usually deal killers.
And this just in.....
Wallace: DIA won't be rushed into Laura Street Trio, Barnett dealhttp://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/11/19/wallacedia-wont-be-rushed-into-laura-street-trio.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2015-11-19&u=ws%2FwFtnjeqX1uMQ%2F9qEFWQ08d60585&t=1447970657 (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/11/19/wallacedia-wont-be-rushed-into-laura-street-trio.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2015-11-19&u=ws%2FwFtnjeqX1uMQ%2F9qEFWQ08d60585&t=1447970657)
Quote from: CCMjax on November 19, 2015, 04:33:16 PM
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 19, 2015, 02:28:35 PM
Was the garage not listed in the petition purposefully (misleading) or because the Southeast Group wasn't aware that the garage was going to cost money ( proof of inexperience / incompetence) ?
From what I remember the garage was always a negotiation issue and was always unclear who was going to pay for it. Am I wrong? I seem to remember the garage topic coming up long ago in threads and articles.
I guess if you can find it in a prior thread please share then you your recollection would be correct.
Quote from: edjax on November 19, 2015, 05:13:10 PM
Quote from: CCMjax on November 19, 2015, 04:33:16 PM
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 19, 2015, 02:28:35 PM
Was the garage not listed in the petition purposefully (misleading) or because the Southeast Group wasn't aware that the garage was going to cost money ( proof of inexperience / incompetence) ?
From what I remember the garage was always a negotiation issue and was always unclear who was going to pay for it. Am I wrong? I seem to remember the garage topic coming up long ago in threads and articles.
I guess if you can find it in a prior thread please share then you your recollection would be correct.
Well you Win the good memory award!!!!!! I found this is another thread on the topic. See #4.
BoldCityRealist
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 50
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Barnett And Laura Street Trio Site Plan September 2014
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2014, 02:29:29 PM »
Quote
I met with the SouthEast Group's marketing director yesterday for a private tour and she gave me the low down. I'd say I'm in the 90/10 group after that. They seem very confident that everything will workout. Apparently the secret NYC investor is a name we'd all a recognize. Take that as you will.
A few things make me nervous:
1) Why hasn't the investor unveiled if he's such a big deal? Wouldn't that push the Council to make a decision? Apparently, Aundra Wallace knows. That's it.
2) The restauranteur for the Marble Bank is local and from Fernandina. The contract is not officially signed. Refined Southern cuisine is going to be the style of the joint. The fact this isn't finalized makes me nervous, however.
3) Asking our City Council for $7mil is a lot. But SE Group feels that there are funds already set aside for this and it would not be coming from the budget/general fund (someone can enlighten me, but apparently there are monies set aside specifically for this project)
4) The other aspects of the proposal (my favorite pieces) will take A LOT of negotiating - for instance, it is asking Regions to turn their parking lot into a park (great idea!). It is asking the City to build a new garage where they have a (cheap) preexisting surface lot. This garage would accommodate both Regions, the current users of the lot, the Barnett, and the Laura St buildings, it would also have retail space along the first floors.... seems like a lot of *extra* money and political moves to get this part of the plan to happen.
I am in the camp that this is by far the most important project in DT Jax's history. It MUST be done if DT is to thrive. I hope it happens and that the Council believes in this vision. I was assured that many on City Council do. However, I'll believe it when I see it.
Quote from: stephendare on November 19, 2015, 10:54:15 AM
not knowing what you are talking about doesn't stop you does it?
Well, I've certainly learned you usually resort to this kind of nonsense when you're worried. And you should be. No one in the city needs to be an insider to know there well might be some hocus-pocus going on here:
Quote"This Summary of Terms is not a commitment, but rather a description of terms and conditions under which US Bank would consider providing financing," the document reads.
In addition to that, the use of the term sheet "as a basis for a discussion regarding a loan request" expired Monday, well before the city could have made a commitment.
What ? ? ? Why aren't y'all discussing this? Stephen is obviously an off-the-charts partisan on this Atkins effort but . . . does this makes sense to the rest of you?
No need for me to discuss. Things will play out one way or the other. However, I do hope that they can iron out a deal that will result in the project moving forward.
Is anybody going to this meeting today at 10? I was hoping to go but cannot make it.
From their petition site . . . . . .
"Nov 18, 2015 — As we near 1000 signatures, we want to update you on the effect you've had on this process. This petition motivated the DIA to schedule a special meeting this Friday, to give us the opportunity to present our plan to the DIA board. This is specifically for the DIA to ask questions about the project, but the public is welcome to attend and listen in (unfortunately you won't be able to ask your own questions, but it's a great opportunity to learn more about the project directly from us). If you're interested, please join us on Friday, November 20, from 10 a.m. - 12 p.m., in boardroom 851, located on the 8th Floor of the Ed Ball building (214 N. Hogan St., 32202). [If you have any disabilities, or special needs, please email bmeyer@coj.net to coordinate.]"
So... can anyone report on today's meeting?
Quote from: stephendare on November 20, 2015, 12:15:47 PM
dumb. This is about our downtown moving forward, and how we spend out tax monies, rattler gator, Unless you are volunteering orange park to help pay for our improvements to our urban core.
Still consistent; a non-substantive response disguised by a blatantly bogus take based on a point no one has been or was making. You do this for the sake of clicks ? ? ? Really ? ? ?
That's sad.
So Stephen . . . what I gather from that post is that nothing really happened at the meeting, nothing new was discussed, and it is good that I missed it because it was a complete waste of time? Oh and instead of saving our most important historic and iconic buildings on our most important and iconic street in our most important part of town we got gigantic video boards and pools in a football stadium. I'm not saying the stadium upgrades were necessarily a bad thing but it is starting to sound like the city does in fact put all their energy in one thing at a time, or at least the previous administration.
What did the city really have to do with the video boards other than approve the $$$$?
This isn't in defense of Khan but rather an indictment towards the ineptitude of others.
I think it would be a fair statement if they were procuring material, labor or managing the project in any way, shape or form, but I believe a huge reason that the boards were up so quickly and under budget was because the city's only responsibility was staying out of the way.
The garage is the piece that concerns me the most. The fact that the project has that major hurdle, combined with the lack of momentum after years of big announcements, encourages skepticism. But clearly, even skeptics would be excited for this or another similar project to come together.
Quote from: stephendare on November 20, 2015, 03:18:18 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 20, 2015, 03:15:12 PM
What did the city really have to do with the video boards other than approve the $$$$?
This isn't in defense of Khan but rather an indictment towards the ineptitude of others.
I think it would be a fair statement if they were procuring material, labor or managing the project in any way, shape or form, but I believe a huge reason that the boards were up so quickly and under budget was because the city's only responsibility was staying out of the way.
well trust me when I tell you (and you already know this) there is always a lot of explanation whenever something that expensive happens, and people want to talk talk. The talk talk is time consuming, and everyone wants to get in on part of the action. It sucks attention and focus away from other stuff unless you have clear management and well defined project goals.
This was definitely not a hall mark of the Brown years. Not a comment about Khan at all. Comment about Brown, who had one competent guy (Hand) in his office and a lot of other issues to manage. His economic development director should have been on top of it, but wasn't.
The DIA was still getting its bearings (and didn't have enough money any ways) and the administration would neither commit fully nor would it cut bait. At that point it probably needed the mayor to figure out how to get it done (just like Godbold, Delaney and Austin had had to do in previous admins) But......that didn't happen.
Stuff just got away from them and something really positive that Brown brought to the city was squandered by his own lack of follow through.
I'm glad Brown is gone. From reading your posts Stephen, I really believe Brown just didn't have a clue, was a poor leader, had very little management prowess and organizational skills, and your last phrase in the last sentence of your post, "BUT, THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN," probably points to the aforementioned in addition to just stark, real, and firm ineptitude. Case closed.
Quote from: edjax on November 19, 2015, 01:42:45 PM
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:24:54 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Since you are obviously involved with the project as a tenant, were you aware that the garage being built by the city was part of the proposal as noted in the JBJ article this morning?
The city as far as I know will be presented with multiple options as far as the parking garage is concerned. The developer might build it and today said that is what the developer prefers. At the meeting's closing today he was going to set up a meeting with the DIA and go over options for the garage next week. After stating that there were options to the parking garage development, the Board members present seemed to relax a bit knowing that the developer was willing to open that discussion.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 20, 2015, 05:39:03 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 19, 2015, 01:42:45 PM
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 12, 2015, 09:24:54 PM
The City will benefit from $152 million in total economic impact from the development, with a projected $17.5 million in operations each year and a $7 million increase in new regional payroll. In total, the project will generate 448 jobs during construction and 247 permanent mid-to-high wage jobs during operations. Plus it saves 4 historically significant buildings and gains a mixed use (parking plus retail) parking garage to support the development with plenty of excess to support the city.
Since you are obviously involved with the project as a tenant, were you aware that the garage being built by the city was part of the proposal as noted in the JBJ article this morning?
The city as far as I know will be presented with multiple options as far as the parking garage is concerned. The developer might build it and today said that is what the developer prefers. At the meeting's closing today he was going to set up a meeting with the DIA and go over options for the garage next week. After stating that there were options to the parking garage development, the Board members present seemed to relax a bit knowing that the developer was willing to open that discussion.
That is good to hear.
Still no discussion about an option to consider providing financing as opposed to a commitment to do so. Hmmmmmmmm.
Just a question? Does there really need to be a garage at this time. Many DT hotels in other cities have valet or find a public garage that could be several blocks away. When in DT Charleston I used a public garage 2 blocks away. If my memory is correct there are several under utilized garages near by. Is this what Jim Bailey meant in the JBJ article that other parking options would be discussed after Thanksgiving?
Sorry Atkins said he will have a new plan after Thanksgiving for 300 spaces, not Bailey.
According to SE Group:
We're excited to say that we've already reached out to DIA leadership to present our plan to develop and finance a new parking structure for the project and the downtown market. We will meet with them tomorrow in advance of the Thanksgiving Holiday.
Kind of tangential to the main topic, but how has building a garage in the Jacksonville CBD ever been a bad idea?
I wonder how many years the city opted to guarantee profits for this one? ::)
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,9426.0.html
Any update on the meeting?
Quote from: stephendare on November 23, 2015, 05:49:04 PM
And lets be frank. If we are going to move forward its going to take the kind of capitol that has either been non existent or unwilling here locally.
True . . . thus highlighting even further the odd antipathy to Shad Khan, who is the single most representative advertisement for the truth of that statement.
That's like your opinion, man.
Stephen, have you forgotten your ridiculously crude crusade against Shad Khan? If there has been any bootlicking it has been you carrying the water for -- I dont' know . . . Union interests? -- with this crazy and repeated insertion of "pollution" claims that have absolutely nothing to do with Shad and Jacksonville.
Bootlicking, indeed.
But we don't live in a parallel universe and everyone on this Board has had the opportunity to read your stuff. They know what the deal is. Squawk on, but they also know you've been cold-busted on the we need that kind of capitol that has either been non existent or unwilling here locally issue with respect to Shad Kahn. It's beyond debate. You might as well hush.
That's like a better opinion, man.
^You guys know it's spelled capital, right?
I'm not sure that Tallahassee would be willing to allow the capitol to be moved to downtown Jax....
Even if they did, I'm sure Tampa, Orlando and Miami would put up a good fight to land it as well....no matter how much money Khan and Atkins brings to the table. ;)
^ and even then, the capitol is just the physical buildings....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_State_Capitol
Tallahassee itself is Florida's capital city
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_capitals_in_the_United_States
;D
From the Jax Daily Record:
SouthEast principal Steve Atkins said he prefers to build a structure at 28 W. Forsyth St. The city-owned surface lot there has an assessed value of $940,000, according to the Duval County Property Appraiser's website.
Atkins said a proposal he's preparing to provide the DIA would be for a design-build done entirely by his team that would cost $12.5 million to $15 million. It would include 600-700 spots and have ground-level retail. Revenue sharing is a possibility, Atkins said.
A deal structured that way would require the city to give the site to the developer.
The developers also want an incentive commonly offered to new construction projects. REV grants allow developers to recoup a portion of the incremental increase in value on the property.
The grant being discussed for the Laura Street Trio/Barnett Bank project would cover 75 percent of the increased value over 20 years. A waiver by City Council is required because it goes above the 50 percent, 10-year mark.
The grant would come to about $2.6 million, according to project documents.
So Atkin's group is building the garage, which will not be competitively bid, and owned by the City? That estimate makes it seem like the cost per spot is $20K+
Quote from: stephendare on November 20, 2015, 02:42:16 PM
I think thats accurate, ccm. Although it was important for the DIA to see the faces in the actual physical room. To Curry's credit he is surrounded by famous multi taskers.
Hopefully someone will take the lead on this so that we don't strike out with three national investment groups in the space of 15 months. It would be nice to have a stream of investment relationships that don't rely on the same team of failure responsible for the past 40 years of demolition and catastrophe.
I wish I could tell you how frustrating watching brilliant projects get ignored over the decades becomes..
Just an observation here, not a disagreement - the firms you've mentioned are some of the best in what they do. If there's a deal to be had that makes a return worth investment, it will be done. I don't disagree with capital pulling out because incentives are the backbone of a deal making sense financially; if that's what it came down to (tell me if I'm wrong). Government is here to provide a stable and equitable place to do business, incentives are the cherry on top. These firms are pressured to place money, so I would think they had other reservations & what was being discussed wasn't necessarily a home run.
I'm just catching up on this thread, but great conversation!
Quote from: Downtown Objective on November 25, 2015, 02:14:02 PM
So Atkin's group is building the garage, which will not be competitively bid, and owned by the City? That estimate makes it seem like the cost per spot is $20K+
The way I read it the city gives Atkins the land. Atkins Develops at his cost of 12-15m for 700 spots and retail spaces. Then the city gives him Rev grants based on 75% of the property appreciation for 20 years. Atkins said he would be willing to discuss lot revenue sharing with the city. I assume that means that some of the profits generated by the lot could potentially go back to the city. All of this is according to the Daily Record. I know that they are working nonstop to make this a win win for everyone.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on November 25, 2015, 02:45:39 PM
Quote from: Downtown Objective on November 25, 2015, 02:14:02 PM
So Atkin's group is building the garage, which will not be competitively bid, and owned by the City? That estimate makes it seem like the cost per spot is $20K+
The way I read it the city gives Atkins the land. Atkins Develops at his cost of 12-15m for 700 spots and retail spaces. Then the city gives him Rev grants based on 75% of the property appreciation for 20 years. Atkins said he would be willing to discuss lot revenue sharing with the city. I assume that means that some of the profits generated by the lot could potentially go back to the city. All of this is according to the Daily Record. I know that they are working nonstop to make this a win win for everyone.
Thanks - I was able to find the article. That's worth $2.6MM... pretty big component not to come up in the initial meeting.
Quote from: stephendare on November 25, 2015, 04:26:27 PM
Quote from: Downtown Objective on November 25, 2015, 02:41:12 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 20, 2015, 02:42:16 PM
I think thats accurate, ccm. Although it was important for the DIA to see the faces in the actual physical room. To Curry's credit he is surrounded by famous multi taskers.
Hopefully someone will take the lead on this so that we don't strike out with three national investment groups in the space of 15 months. It would be nice to have a stream of investment relationships that don't rely on the same team of failure responsible for the past 40 years of demolition and catastrophe.
I wish I could tell you how frustrating watching brilliant projects get ignored over the decades becomes..
Just an observation here, not a disagreement - the firms you've mentioned are some of the best in what they do. If there's a deal to be had that makes a return worth investment, it will be done. I don't disagree with capital pulling out because incentives are the backbone of a deal making sense financially; if that's what it came down to (tell me if I'm wrong). Government is here to provide a stable and equitable place to do business, incentives are the cherry on top. These firms are pressured to place money, so I would think they had other reservations & what was being discussed wasn't necessarily a home run.
I'm just catching up on this thread, but great conversation!
Thanks DO. To be honest, we have an incredibly self sabotaging apparatus in our downtown redevelopment entities. Every developer who has dealt with the city would cite the government component to be the worst thing about the failed process.
Certainly if you would like some enlightenment as to how dysfunctional the interventions by the City are into development, have lunch with Alex Coley (or Steve Williams for that matter) or the handful of people who have managed to build downtown successfully downtown.
One of the first things that will shock you is how long its been since there has been an actual development downtown. We went through the American High without a single downtown project outside of the Library, the two Courthouses and the Veterans Arena---in other words all tax funded projects. Hal from The Metropolitan and John Rood from the Carling/11East are the only two private developers who got anything done, and all three projects were renovations, not new builds.
Certainly that alone should indicate how poisonous the multiple layers of numbskullery have been downtown for literally decades.
That "numbskullery" or DUMBskullery needs to end.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 25, 2015, 09:18:58 AM
^You guys know it's spelled capital, right?
You beat me to the punch CZ; now I don't have to point that out. As an Administrator by trade, it really irks me when educated professionals get the spelling of that word wrong; especially when I see it on news casts, news networks, etc.
The parking garage land should be sold to the developer or an RFP issued contingent on breaking ground.
How much did the garage on Bay St cost?
This is just a waste of time if the city isn't going to agree to the other terms anyways.
That would make The Southeast Group look bad.
Like they're not an experienced developer or something.
How much does it cost to get unwaivering support on this site anyways? Surely it's more than a lunch.
Despite "overlooking" the cost of the parking garage - was it left off of the financing agreements as well? What about the whole foreclosure issue - as an example of being poorly prepared ? And lack of experience. These are reasons for my concern and they've been posted.
What hasn't been posted is why the SEG should be supported other than they were vetted by some financial group under the assumption that the city/DIA would pay for about 15%ish and $12-15 million dollar parking garage would magically appear.
Of course I want something there but ever since acquiring the properties the SEG has been incompetent.
Are you surprised that the largest recent private development in dtjax would take experience? I don't know if there's more hubris on the side of the Atkin's guy or the side with the guy that believes their personal relationship is worth overlooking the facts.
Just do like a Pro / Con list, man. We've asked you for your Pro reasons but instead we've seem to create a list supporting Kahn.
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 26, 2015, 08:36:13 AM
How much does it cost to get unwaivering support on this site anyways? Surely it's more than a lunch.
Despite "overlooking" the cost of the parking garage - was it left off of the financing agreements as well? What about the whole foreclosure issue - as an example of being poorly prepared ? And lack of experience. These are reasons for my concern and they've been posted.
What hasn't been posted is why the SEG should be supported other than they were vetted by some financial group under the assumption that the city/DIA would pay for about 15%ish and $12-15 million dollar parking garage would magically appear.
Of course I want something there but ever since acquiring the properties the SEG has been incompetent.
Are you surprised that the largest recent private development in dtjax would take experience? I don't know if there's more hubris on the side of the Atkin's guy or the side with the guy that believes their personal relationship is worth overlooking the facts.
Just do like a Pro / Con list, man. We've asked you for your Pro reasons but instead we've seem to create a list supporting Kahn.
It is worth supporting SEG because they have had the most comprehensive and thoughtful plan for revitalizing that block than anyone else that has stepped to the plate. They may not have deserved this level of support before they gained the support of larger "outside of jax" national banks and investment firms but now they do. That means these partnering companies truly believe in this project. Atkins does not appear to have experience with this exact type of project but does with property investment and historical structures in general, and his partners have more than enough experience, which is why he has partnered with them. The last hurdle seems to be the City of Jacksonville and people like you. And the COJ appears to be working harder at getting this done than ever before, that may be all it takes. No investors have wanted to be pioneers when it comes to downtown Jax and it seems like a lot of it has to do with the layers of barriers and disorganization within the COJ. It's a culture that needs to change but does not change over night. There has been Hallmark with the Brooklyn developments but nothing in the heart of downtown. So when one comes along that now has serious financial backing and public support, it is important to continue that support.
Another thing, other projects like the Landing and Khan's plans have produced a lot of debate on the use of space, and the plans produced haven't felt 100% right yet to everyone. There really is no debate on the uses for this project and tenants have already been lined up for several of the spaces. It's pretty straight forward and I think most everyone agrees the plan is great for the location. It needs to get done the way they have planned, everyone knows that.
The parking garage was always a question mark and it is not as if it was overlooked or somehow missed in the plans. They have been discussing the parking garage for years, it came up in the original plan. I believe a year or two back the idea was for the city to pay for the garage, and that was one of the things that may have stalled the project. In my opinion, it would be a good deal for the city even if they did have to contribute 12-13 mil for the garage plus the other $8 mil. Look around the country, $20 mil for a huge downtown revitilization in public money is not that much. Jax can come up with the money if they think it is important enough, and they certainly could come up with $8 mil and the motivation to give the plot of land to SEG to develop the garage on their own. I really don't see the city losing in the long run on this one if their investment is incremental throughout construction.
The "outside of Jax" support - that seemingly vets the project to you - is willing to do so without a garage?
Then by all means, proceed with the $xx million from the city - which still hasn't been approved - and proceed with the plan. It seems like the ask is being fuddled.
Quote from: whyisjohngalt on November 26, 2015, 10:25:01 AM
The "outside of Jax" support - that seemingly vets the project to you - is willing to do so without a garage?
Then by all means, proceed with the $xx million from the city - which still hasn't been approved - and proceed with the plan. It seems like the ask is being fuddled.
Well, what "vets" the project as a whole to me is that it is something that absolutely has to happen for downtown Jax to have any chance of a Renaissance that its citizens and leaders have been waiting for for decades. There has been a new interest in downtowns across the country the last two decades and Jax is in danger of yet again missing the boat while many other cities continue to ride the wave of people moving back closer to city cores and improving downtown activity. From what I have read and know about Atkins and SEG I don't think they are qualified to go it alone on a project like this, which is why I am not surprised it didn't work out before. This seems to be your main argument too if you go back and read your posts. However, if he partners with the right people, which it looks like he has a pretty good team this time, it should have a good chance of being a success. It's business 101, if you want to expand your brand and take on a different market, it's a good idea to partner with those who have additional resources and the knowledge. It's similar to Danis and Batson-Cook (two large competing local contractors) teaming up on certain projects. They may not have the resources to go it alone on a particularly large project with a lot at stake but both want to gain that big project experience and maybe it's an opportunity to push into a certain market.
And I'm not saying the COJ should let them proceed without establishing an agreement and just leave the $$numbers hanging out there in space, come on! But they need to come to an agreement that makes sense for everyone and do it quickly and efficiently. We all know how developments like this evolve at this state. The longer they go in limbo the more likely the investors are to drop out one by one and shift their resources elsewhere, ie in this case not Jacksonville. It's not a pipe dream project like the latest tallest building in the world IN IRAQ, with some smoked up futuristic mega city surrounding it that doesn't actually exist, crazy talk. It's not a $500 million shipyards project, that would actually be more like $1 billion+ if they built what was shown in those renderings. It is a relatively straight forward renovation and the best possible reuse of iconic, functional historic buildings already built in the center of the city. It is proposed to be less than $100 million and the city would only have to account for what sounds like somewhere between 10-20% at most. Not unheard of, and actually a pretty good deal, for a major revitalization spark project for a city the size of Jacksonville. DT Jax has done a fairly good job improving the streetscape on Laura Street, sprucing up and bringing more activity to Hemming Park and surrounding area, and doing little improvements here and there. That sets up nicely for a large restoration project right in the center of all that recent investment.
Anyway, I have cut way too much into my Thanksgiving on this topic, that is how important I think this project is. I'm going to eat some turkey now!
Hey, CCM, you're absolutely right.
I am simply proposing that the best thing for this project (and the city) is for Atkins/SEG to not be involved.
Thanks for your insight and clear reasoning instead of close minded cheerleading.
Quote from: stephendare on November 25, 2015, 06:01:34 PM
normally it makes me crazy as well. Which makes the typo doubly embarrassing, lol. My bad.
Stephen you know you're alright; they might try to work you but you hold up very well; now, let's try and help to get that Laura Trio rebuilt, up, and open for business.
[1] Maybe you could start, Stephen, by explaining why you're so fixated on the identity of this person. My goodness, are the questions and concerns posed rendered illegitimate by anonymity? Really?
[2] If this type of package is not unheard of and actually a pretty good deal for a major revitalization spark project for a city the size of Jacksonville -- why has it been so damn difficult to get this thing done? It seems exceedingly convenient to blame this largely on the supposed layers of incompetent bureaucracy within the City of Jacksonville or on a cadre of disinterested local power elite.
Hello to All - I've read for a long time but am new to posting this forum. I'm not sure if all these comments come from people who are "in the know", but it seems like there are personal agendas here. I for one am very interested in seeing the Barnett and Laura Street Trio redeveloped, and I went to the meeting at DIA last week and listened to the plans very carefully. I will say that I was quite impressed with what is being proposed from the developer team.
Atkins and his team seem to have a firm grip on this project and the investment they are proposing is a substantial one. The City would be wise to make the proposed public investment as this would revolutionize the center of downtown. One of the previous comments suggested that Atkins shouldn't be involved. That seems like a ridiculous statement as the man owns the property. I happen to know a surgeon that operates out of a facility that Atkins developed and owned years ago. He swears by the guy and says he's the best landlord that he's ever had. Aside from that, the folks he is working with, contractors, architects, etc. are all names that say success. Seems like that is the real deal.
For as long as those buildings have sat vacant in the middle of downtown and based on the condition that they are in, we should all probably be very supportive of anyone willing to make it happen, especially with the tenants that are signed-up (Chase, Marriott, the Marble Bank restaurant). If those type of companies are on-board, then the plan must be solid.
Why do we continually tear down the stuff we keep saying we need and the people trying to make it happen. Seems to me that is what has held our city back. Set personal agendas aside and let's get it done. If not this, then what?? I haven't seen anyone else step-up. I say thanks Mr. Atkins!
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 26, 2015, 06:16:31 PM
[1] Maybe you could start, Stephen, by explaining why you're so fixated on the identity of this person. My goodness, are the questions and concerns posed rendered illegitimate by anonymity? Really?
[2] If this type of package is not unheard of and actually a pretty good deal for a major revitalization spark project for a city the size of Jacksonville -- why has it been so damn difficult to get this thing done? It seems exceedingly convenient to blame this largely on the supposed layers of incompetent bureaucracy within the City of Jacksonville or on a cadre of disinterested local power elite.
With regards to #2, nobody has had a serious credible plan for these buildings until now. It was vacant for a long time then Kuhn bought it from the city before the market crashed and then he went bankrupt, then Atkins bought it with a serious plan but maybe not the proper backing, and now he is back with better backing and support.
The interest in historic building reuse simply hasn't been there in Jacksonville like it has been in many other places, I have come to understand this over the last 3 years of living here. For whatever reason, the interest in downtown simply hasn't been there in general. As I said previously, investors have been scared to be the downtown pioneer here in Jax, which I don't quite follow and don't know all the details, but nobody wants to lead the charge. It could have to do with the projects that did happen suffered from very bad timing and bad luck and weren't very successful, or it could have to do with dealing with the city, but I'd bet it's based mostly on comparables not doing well. The market is changing, we are starting to see more serious interest in downtown and eventually someone is going to break through and this team that Atkins has put together is the best so far to do it in my opinion.
Quote from: Glue182 on November 26, 2015, 08:10:16 PM
Hello to All - I've read for a long time but am new to posting this forum. I'm not sure if all these comments come from people who are "in the know", but it seems like there are personal agendas here. I for one am very interested in seeing the Barnett and Laura Street Trio redeveloped, and I went to the meeting at DIA last week and listened to the plans very carefully. I will say that I was quite impressed with what is being proposed from the developer team.
Atkins and his team seem to have a firm grip on this project and the investment they are proposing is a substantial one. The City would be wise to make the proposed public investment as this would revolutionize the center of downtown. One of the previous comments suggested that Atkins shouldn't be involved. That seems like a ridiculous statement as the man owns the property. I happen to know a surgeon that operates out of a facility that Atkins developed and owned years ago. He swears by the guy and says he's the best landlord that he's ever had. Aside from that, the folks he is working with, contractors, architects, etc. are all names that say success. Seems like that is the real deal.
For as long as those buildings have sat vacant in the middle of downtown and based on the condition that they are in, we should all probably be very supportive of anyone willing to make it happen, especially with the tenants that are signed-up (Chase, Marriott, the Marble Bank restaurant). If those type of companies are on-board, then the plan must be solid.
Why do we continually tear down the stuff we keep saying we need and the people trying to make it happen. Seems to me that is what has held our city back. Set personal agendas aside and let's get it done. If not this, then what?? I haven't seen anyone else step-up. I say thanks Mr. Atkins!
Glue - welcome to the board. I have no personal agenda in this other than I want to see Laura Street become a great American street and downtown become a place of interest other than just an area of town people pass through to get to an event at the sports complex. And the historic buildings on this block are critically important to the significance of DT Jax if restored. If left in the current state or demolished, all hope will be lost for any revitalization of downtown any time soon because it will be such a devastating morale blow to everyone interested in downtown and will turn countless other investors away who are currently eyeballing this project and watching how it goes. Again, NOBODY WANTS TO BE A PIONEER, but if someone goes in first and gets the ball rolling, others will follow. Atkins is willing to do this with minimal and extremely manageable help from the city. A deal must get done this time around. I cannot speak for the agendas of others on this board, whether they are investors or whether they for some reason would like to torpedo this project.
Everyone I speak with, city planning or people fond of downtown all want to see this project take wings and fly, but there is only so much you can do with it, as it carries a stigma of negativity ever since Kuhn came to town to tell us his vision, before the crash. No doubt it is a great space, but Atkins may be his own worst enemy.
Look at the Bostwick building, the family tried for years to get the building torn down, get out from the city fines, so what do they do? They sell to the food/eatery group and get out from under the building and let someone else take over the building and a business at the site. The bad karma gone, removed from the table.
For years, the city had no idea what to do or how to replace the aging Met Park Amphitheater, and now it looks as though it may have an answer and partner with Khan. City got out of its own way to look to make this happen for the citizens who want to go to outdoor concerts closer to Jax, than SA.
Atkins bought the trio in 2011, asked for 5 million in tax credits then, now has come back and asked for 8 million, not unheard of in real estate for figures to change, but there are now new "equity partners", who need good and proper vetting, as no one wants to see the City invest 8 million and the partners decide to pull out. Its a big project, a big deal and could be a serious black eye, (Shipyards) if not vetted properly, even then, it could still blow up.
My question, as someone who does not do these deals or work in this large of a real estate project, why not just get US Bank or Mulasky to float the 8 million that the city is being asked to provide? Why does this project "need" city cash? If the deal is really that good to start with, why not find another local partner or some bank to provide the funding? 8 million is a lot for a project that impacts a select few.
Quote from: mtraininjax on November 28, 2015, 04:07:46 AM
Everyone I speak with, city planning or people fond of downtown all want to see this project take wings and fly, but there is only so much you can do with it, as it carries a stigma of negativity ever since Kuhn came to town to tell us his vision, before the crash. No doubt it is a great space, but Atkins may be his own worst enemy.
Look at the Bostwick building, the family tried for years to get the building torn down, get out from the city fines, so what do they do? They sell to the food/eatery group and get out from under the building and let someone else take over the building and a business at the site. The bad karma gone, removed from the table.
For years, the city had no idea what to do or how to replace the aging Met Park Amphitheater, and now it looks as though it may have an answer and partner with Khan. City got out of its own way to look to make this happen for the citizens who want to go to outdoor concerts closer to Jax, than SA.
Atkins bought the trio in 2011, asked for 5 million in tax credits then, now has come back and asked for 8 million, not unheard of in real estate for figures to change, but there are now new "equity partners", who need good and proper vetting, as no one wants to see the City invest 8 million and the partners decide to pull out. Its a big project, a big deal and could be a serious black eye, (Shipyards) if not vetted properly, even then, it could still blow up.
My question, as someone who does not do these deals or work in this large of a real estate project, why not just get US Bank or Mulasky to float the 8 million that the city is being asked to provide? Why does this project "need" city cash? If the deal is really that good to start with, why not find another local partner or some bank to provide the funding? 8 million is a lot for a project that impacts a select few.
First of all, I believe the city investment would be incremental, ie if they never broke ground I don't think they would lose anything, possibly a million or two. If they only make it to 50% the city has only paid around $4 mil and maybe another developer jumps in at that point. I don't know if that is exactly how it will be written up but I have heard it will be incremental, so the city wouldn't be in danger of losing $8 mil with no work done.
Second, as said before, with all the work needed to be done on the buildings and the current market rates, it is likely that the project will not be profitable for the developers if they fork over 100% of the investment money. Maybe the way their numbers work out, they would be about $8 mil short of where they want to be in the end, I don't know, but this is likely why they need city money. Incentives from the city are proposed for just about every project like this. But the city would not be throwing money away on this, it is an investment in downtown's future and myself and many others don't think downtown can truly become great until these buildings are restored. It's the heart and soul of downtown. As a taxpayer I would gladly sacrifice a little extra in the next couple years to make it happen.
Quote from: Bativac on September 23, 2015, 11:04:35 AM
At this point, anything with the words "Laura Street Trio" attached to it goes into the "meaningless press release" pile. I wish they would just not even mention it anymore until someone has actually started construction.
Quote from: mtraininjax on November 28, 2015, 04:07:46 AM
Atkins bought the trio in 2011, asked for 5 million in tax credits then, now has come back and asked for 8 million, not unheard of in real estate for figures to change, but there are now new "equity partners", who need good and proper vetting, as no one wants to see the City invest 8 million and the partners decide to pull out. Its a big project, a big deal and could be a serious black eye, (Shipyards) if not vetted properly, even then, it could still blow up.
FYI... Atkins didn't buy the Trio until 2013.
Quote from: mtraininjax on November 28, 2015, 04:07:46 AM
My question, as someone who does not do these deals or work in this large of a real estate project, why not just get US Bank or Mulasky to float the 8 million that the city is being asked to provide? Why does this project "need" city cash? If the deal is really that good to start with, why not find another local partner or some bank to provide the funding? 8 million is a lot for a project that impacts a select few.
That's a fair question, and the answers is that it takes a public investment to make a public/private/partnership work. If you look at the numbers, you can see that without the public investment, the private investors don't make much if anything in return on their investment. Unfortunately, the Jacksonville market doesn't offer big returns on its own, at least not yet. If we want others to invest in Jacksonville, then you have to incentivize that to get it started. Look at every deal the city has made with companies to relocate to downtown in the last several years. They all get incentive $ and they certainly don't need the money. Seems to me if we want to turn our city's downtown around, this is what it takes until it can attract and support all types of businesses on its own. But to say it only effects a select few isn't fair in my opinion. This project would transform the center of downtown. That has a value onto itself that we may not even be able to measure and ultimately gets us where we want to be as a competitive marketplace.
If this project ever gets started and or completed, it's going to take a lot more than this single project to turn downtown JAX around.....this is a start but it's wrong to think that this project will fix all that is wrong with the core of downtown JAX....
Agreed, there's a lot that's needed. But I don't think you get there without it.
Problem is, from what I can see the city has no vision or plan that it is actively pursuing or promoting for downtown revitalization.........there are multiple projects being talked about in different parts of the city but no plan to implement or connect them.......
The last plan I can recall for JAX was Better Jacksonville........why would an investor want to invest into a downtown with no plan for improvement....especially a downtown that is a disaster......
Quote from: stephendare on November 28, 2015, 10:39:59 AM
Quote from: Glue182 on November 28, 2015, 10:29:29 AM
Agreed, there's a lot that's needed. But I don't think you get there without it.
And more importantly, the project steps through an open door into a different model of finance that doesn't depend on Jacksonville to invest heavily into a project. Because of 30 years of development and planning, the Jville money is betting on sprawl and that is where it is invested. They literally see no reason for them to spend money in the core. This is something that you can ask Alex Coley about in fact. Or the Hardens (who built Everbank Plaza and have a place in the Olympian heights of the Peninsula)
So while no one project is going to restore downtown, building instead of demolishing is a good step. Outside financing (which is exponentially larger than local) is a good step, and firms with experience building urban density is a good step.
There are a few people who object to the Developer because he doesn't already have their millions in the bank and therefore doesn't 'deserve' to have access to this kind of project with this kind of financing. It kind of pisses them off that one of the crabs is crawling out of the box, I suspect. But other than 'Who is he?' it bears noting that no real criticism has been levelled. Just the impudence of not belonging to the hot girls clique at private school.
So, there are millionaires in Jacksonville who don't want this to proceed because they don't like "Atkins"? That seems very small town to me. Are these some of the critical people (WIJG) here? Have they offered to invest in this project? Are they competitors?
Quote from: tpot on November 28, 2015, 10:52:06 AM
The last plan I can recall for JAX was Better Jacksonville........why would an investor want to invest into a downtown with no plan for improvement....especially a downtown that is a disaster......
the Better Jacksonville Plan was a list of projects that would be built if voters passed a local sales tax.
As for downtown plans, here is the history following Better Jacksonville
http://www.coj.net/departments/downtown-investment-authority/downtown-development.aspx
And earlier this year, the downtown CRA and associated Business Investment & Development Plan were passed
http://www.floridaplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/3-Document-2_CRA-Plans.pdf
http://www.coj.net/departments/downtown-investment-authority/docs/20150202_bid-plan.aspx
Modify message
Quote from: Glue182 on November 26, 2015, 08:10:16 PM
Hello to All - I've read for a long time but am new to posting this forum. I'm not sure if all these comments come from people who are "in the know", but it seems like there are personal agendas here. I for one am very interested in seeing the Barnett and Laura Street Trio redeveloped, and I went to the meeting at DIA last week and listened to the plans very carefully. I will say that I was quite impressed with what is being proposed from the developer team.
Atkins and his team seem to have a firm grip on this project and the investment they are proposing is a substantial one. The City would be wise to make the proposed public investment as this would revolutionize the center of downtown. One of the previous comments suggested that Atkins shouldn't be involved. That seems like a ridiculous statement as the man owns the property. I happen to know a surgeon that operates out of a facility that Atkins developed and owned years ago. He swears by the guy and says he's the best landlord that he's ever had. Aside from that, the folks he is working with, contractors, architects, etc. are all names that say success. Seems like that is the real deal.
For as long as those buildings have sat vacant in the middle of downtown and based on the condition that they are in, we should all probably be very supportive of anyone willing to make it happen, especially with the tenants that are signed-up (Chase, Marriott, the Marble Bank restaurant). If those type of companies are on-board, then the plan must be solid.
Why do we continually tear down the stuff we keep saying we need and the people trying to make it happen. Seems to me that is what has held our city back. Set personal agendas aside and let's get it done. If not this, then what?? I haven't seen anyone else step-up. I say thanks Mr. Atkins!
My sentiments exactly; well said my Friend, and I agree; thanks for attending the meeting and intently listening and seeing whether 2 + 2 does indeed equal 4 for all parties.
Quote from: tpot on November 28, 2015, 10:21:05 AM
If this project ever gets started and or completed, it's going to take a lot more than this single project to turn downtown JAX around.....this is a start but it's wrong to think that this project will fix all that is wrong with the core of downtown JAX....
I agree but I don't think anyone in this thread has suggested that this project alone will solve all of downtown's issues. It is the fact that there will be no start to a renaissance without this project happening. And tearing them down will only yield negative criticism of a backwards thinking city, demolition will not lead to new buildings going up in their place.
Quote from: tpot on November 28, 2015, 10:52:06 AM
The last plan I can recall for JAX was Better Jacksonville........why would an investor want to invest into a downtown with no plan for improvement....especially a downtown that is a disaster......
They may start looking in Jax (and many already have) when equivalent properties in places like Miami are 10 times what you can get in Jax. Not saying Jax is the same city as Miami, in fact it is extremely different, and right now that may be a good thing for someone making an investment here.
Another thing, downtown Jax isn't exactly a disaster in my book . . . . go to Gary, Indiana or Flint, Michigan and you will see downtown economic disaster zones. Jax actually has the infrastructure and buildings in place in the core of downtown (centered around the Barnett, Trio and Hemming Park), it just needs these buildings to be brought back to life. DT at least has activity at certain times, it is just not 24/7 because there aren't enough people living or staying down there outside of weekday business hours.
Actually, I take that back about Flint. They have done a decent job recovering from a disastrous last couple decades. Gary on the other hand is still pretty awful.
But the point, CCMjax, is still valid -- downtown Jacksonville isn't a disaster.
However, let me try my question again because there seems to be a determined insistence to not address the particular elephant I'm interested in: If this type of package is not unheard of and actually a pretty good deal for a major revitalization spark project for a city the size of Jacksonville -- why are these outside entities taking what seems to me the extraordinary step of requiring city mandated investment before they will even CONSIDER evaluating their real involvement? It seems exceedingly convenient to blame the inability of the project to come together on the supposed layers of incompetent bureaucracy within the City of Jacksonville or on a cadre of disinterested local power elite or on Atkins not belonging to the correct clique.
All of those takes are conveniently subjective (IMHO) and they don't address the objective requirement. I admit my curiosity may arise completely from my freely admitted naiveté on this type of development project -- but can someone show something similar occurring in some other municipality? Or, conversely, has this type of thing blown up in a city's face?
I'm not skeptical about the merits of the project, I'm just more curious than anything else.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 30, 2015, 08:06:01 AM
But the point, CCMjax, is still valid -- downtown Jacksonville isn't a disaster.
However, let me try my question again because there seems to be a determined insistence to not address the particular elephant I'm interested in: If this type of package is not unheard of and actually a pretty good deal for a major revitalization spark project for a city the size of Jacksonville -- why are these outside entities taking what seems to me the extraordinary step of requiring city mandated investment before they will even CONSIDER evaluating their real involvement? It seems exceedingly convenient to blame the inability of the project to come together on the supposed layers of incompetent bureaucracy within the City of Jacksonville or on a cadre of disinterested local power elite or on Atkins not belonging to the correct clique.
All of those takes are conveniently subjective (IMHO) and they don't address the objective requirement. I admit my curiosity may arise completely from my freely admitted naiveté on this type of development project -- but can someone show something similar occurring in some other municipality? Or, conversely, has this type of thing blown up in a city's face?
I'm not skeptical about the merits of the project, I'm just more curious than anything else.
Giving big incentives to launch catalyst projects (especially when utilizing large old buildings) are pretty common in second rate cities attempting to breathe life back into their morbid downtowns. In the 1990s, Lakeland gave empty city-owned buildings away for something like $1 to lure companies like Publix to shift some of their corporate office departments to downtown.
QuoteFlorida Trend - April 1, 1995
Downtown Lakeland readies for an influx of new workers, while the region's rural counties struggle to create new jobs.
Unemployment remains stubbornly high in much of South Central Florida, but from industrialized Lakeland to the farmland of Hardee, Okeechobee and counties in between, there's a new determination to capitalize on the area's natural resources and geographic location.
In Lakeland, it hasn't been easy to jump-start development in the city's core business district, with its hodgepodge of low-rise office, retail and industrial buildings. But this year and next, two local businesses will take the lead. Watkins Motor Lines and Publix Super Markets are renovating a total of 260,000 square feet of commercial space and bringing 850 jobs downtown.
What convinced the businesses to make the move? Free rent. Both Watkins and Publix are moving into buildings donated, by Burdines and J.C. Penney, to the Lakeland Downtown Development Authority (LDDA) in exchange for tax credits. The LDDA, desperate for downtown activity, offered Watkins and Publix 20-year leases at $1 a year.
Since the Watkins and Publix announcements, other businesses have followed with commitments to the city. ...
https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-17001348.html
Lakeland also had an early 20th century hotel in similar condition to the Trio. Back in 1998, that city ended up selling the vacant 10-story building for 50% less than what they paid for it. They also allowed the developer to lease 40 spaces in a nearby parking garage for $35 month.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1346&dat=19960510&id=laZNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qvwDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5301,6886261&hl=en
A decade ago, Detroit gave big money to get the long abandoned Book Cadillac hotel renovated into a Westin. Here's how that deal broke down:
QuoteHow the Book Cadillac deal stacks up
Financing for renovation and rehabilitation of the Book Cadillac Hotel pending closing:
Loans:
iStar Financial Inc. first mortgage - $ 48.0 million
Section 108 HUD Loan- $ 18.0 million (includes $8.25 million Michigan Magnet Fund loan/New Markets Tax credits)
Detroit General Retirement System - $9.0 million
Downtown Development Authority (includes $1 million Wayne County grant)
Development Loan - $5.8 million
Remediation Loan - $6.7 million
MSHDA/State Loan - $6.0 million
National City New Markets Tax credits loan* - $1.0 million
National City Bank condo construction loan - $6.0 million
Lower Woodward Housing Fund Gap Loan - $2.5 million
Total: $103 million
Tax Credits:
State of Michigan Historic Tax Credits - $4.6 million (includes Shorebank bridge loan)
Federal Historic tax credits - $ 20.0 million
Single Business/Brownfield tax credits – Hotel: $7.4 million, Condos: $1.1 million
Total: $ 33.1 million
Equity:
Developer equity - $15.0 million (includes $12.5 million loan from First Independence National Bank)
Conservation easement equity (National City Community Development Corp.) - $ 28.0 million
Total: $43.0 million
Grand total: $179.1 million
*Converts to equity
Note: Additional funds totaling $4.7 million are available if needed from iStar ($2 million); National City New Markets ($1.7 million); and Maget Loan Fund ($1 million).
Sources: Detroit Economic Growth Corp.; Book Cadillac development agreement; Crain research.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20060612/SUB/60609029/one-for-the-book
Orlando gave a couple million in tax breaks and incentives to get a project with an urban Publix off the ground in the midst of the 2000s urban real estate boom:
Quote"A full-service grocery store is one of the last pieces of the puzzle in making downtown the 24-hour city we all envision," he said.
David Eichenblatt, an Atlanta developer who is wrapping up the conversion of the former Four Points by Sheraton Hotel to condominiums, said the introduction of a downtown grocery store is a big deal.
Stan Gerberer, an associate with Fishkind & Associates, an Orlando-based economic consulting firm, said that a grocery chain's interest in building downtown means that the industry is recognizing downtown's worth.
After all, it costs at least twice as much to build a store in a downtown than it does in the suburbs because of land costs and infrastructure.
"If the volume isn't there, they could see huge losses," he said. "Absolutely, it's a milestone for downtown Orlando."
While the name of the grocery was treated as an open secret when developer Kevin Lawler, with a newly formed Tampa development partnership, made a presentation Wednesday afternoon to the Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board, Lawler repeatedly said a 29,000-square-foot grocery store is central to the plan.
CRA board members repeatedly called it a Publix while Lawler, with Thornton Park Partners, said that he is obligated to keep the name secret for now.
If it is approved by the City Council, the $75 million project -- dubbed the Thornton Park project -- would be built at the corner of Central Boulevard and Lake Avenue.
It will also have about 312 residential units and about 5,000 square feet of retail space and about 3,000 feet of office space -- as well as underground parking for residents and shoppers.
The project got the approval of the CRA, including about $3.7 million in incentives and tax breaks, which will go before the City Council in mid-November.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-10-28/news/0410280235_1_downtown-grocery-mayor-buddy-dyer-downtown-orlando
Philly implemented one of the most forward looking public sector incentives packages 15 years ago. Their 10-year city-wide tax abatement program immediately resulted in a 263% increase in new construction in the early 2000s.
http://www.biaofphiladelphia.com/ufiles/abatement_report.pdf
I could go on, but you should be able to get the gist. You have to pay to play when you're the ugly duckling wanting Grade A type developments that are too risky for private money. The key to these type of deals is to make sure that the money being invested stimulates a ROI that's more than just seeing this particular block of old buildings restored.
It would be harder, by far, to find a city that DIDN'T incentivize the first major project or two that got the ball rolling.
I would remind everyone that the money involved is less than HALF of what the city paid in incentives to get the The Carling rehabbed. Ditto for the 11 E. building. Also, that is after a DECADE of construction inflation.
This deal involves FOUR buildings, five if you count the new garage, versus only one with those other deals.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 30, 2015, 10:22:13 AM
It would be harder, by far, to find a city that DIDN'T incentivize the first major project or two that got the ball rolling.
I would remind everyone that the money involved is less than HALF of what the city paid in incentives to get the The Carling rehabbed. Ditto for the 11 E. building. Also, that is after a DECADE of construction inflation.
This deal involves FOUR buildings, five if you count the new garage, versus only one with those other deals.
And how much did the city give Khan for the stadium upgrades? Wasn't it more than half the total cost? They sure did jump on that pretty quickly, and you can't even tell what they upgraded with that $60 million until you get all the way into the stadium and see the world's largest D-E-F-E-N-S-E displayed across the sky and glance over and see small pools floating in space at one far end of the stadium. The rest of the stadium still looks lost in the mid-90's.
RG - The point is, the city can come up with the money if they really think it is worth it, which it is 110%. People need to realize this is an investment for the city as well, not just the developers. This is not going to be a totally private endeavor. We need to stop thinking a developer is going to waltz into a city with a struggling downtown and magically offer to throw 100% of their own money at a project like this with higher than average risk just because he or she really wants to see the downtown succeed . . . . it ain't gonna happen. Not now, not 5 years from now, not 10 years from now, it's not how large developers work. They are asking for incentives to potentially cover the risk and always do in situations like this, nothing earth shattering or shady about the concept. The developers are willing to cover 80 to 90% of the cost without city money, the city should jump on this opportunity if everything checks out. Everybody knows this project has to happen in order for downtown to really take a leap, it's just a matter of how and when.
Hard to compare apples to apples. The city owns the stadium and has a revenue source dedicated for such improvements. It does not own the Trio and Barnett buildings and there is no revenue source directly set aside for their restoration. With that said, I also agree that the money can be found if the deal is determined to be worth the risks.
QuoteInside the dilapidated buildings that developers see filling a big hole in Downtown
By David Chapman, Staff Writer
There's a hole in the middle of the Barnett Bank building.
Seventeen holes, actually. One right after the next, starting on the second floor up to the 18th. The alignment creates an almost hypnotizing pattern for those who peer upward through the historic Downtown building.
The holes weren't for show, though. They had purpose for a former developer. Instead of piping out debris through windows, the thought was to push it down the holes and have it come crashing down into a pile.
The idea worked. The plan for the building didn't. It was scrapped, another stop in a series of starts.
When developer Steve Atkins bought the building and the neighboring Laura Street Trio, the debris collected from all the floors above was still there.
"He was chest deep in it," said Lisa Goodrich, director of marketing and community engagement for Atkins' development team, SouthEast Group.
But instead of keeping the holes and putting an elevator in their place, Atkins wants to fill them in and save the space. Much like he does the trio of buildings across Laura Street.
"Most people previously only saw value in the Barnett," said Goodrich. "For the Trio, it was 'tear them down and put up a parking garage.'"
Saving all four buildings was Atkins' driving motivation, she said.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546577
The article just says $8 million and doesn't mention the parking garage $ needed. Are they going to proceed without the garage? If not it seems misleading to separate the real $ requirements. We can just ride the skyway anyways so at least break ground on one of the buildings without the lis pendens.
Ennis, thank you for the substantive response (Stephen, take notice).
But . . . why are y'all responding as if I'm questioning the need for city involvement? Or the city putting up money? I'm not questioning any of that and, as I've said, I'm in support of the project.
What has not been addressed up-thread as best as I can tell, however, is this thing of outside entities requiring the city to commit millions of dollars before they will consider going forward with an evaluation to determine whether they will, in fact, do this project.
It may be fairly standard, I don't know, but what is difficult about understanding that direct question?
It's unfortunate to me that some want to drag comparisons with Shad Khan into this. That said, the rather obvious differentiation from these folks with Shad Khan is that Shad has invested millions in Jacksonville -- these outside folks that Atkins has theoretically partnered with, not a penny.
^The Detroit and Philly examples both required those respective cities to commit millions before their various projects materialized. In Detroit, the Book Cadillac had been vacant since 1984. To get it going again, the city actually acquired the building before having a developer on board. Renovation didn't happen until 2008. Philly selected to bypass millions in annual property tax revenue (for a full decade) in order to incentivize citywide redevelopment.
From Change.org
Dec 1, 2015 — SouthEast Group met with the DIA last Tuesday and presented options to build and finance a new parking structure large enough to serve the new tenants, residents and customers of the Laura Street Trio and the Barnett, as well as provide more parking for our growing urban community. As the DIA continues to perform its due diligence, we hope that they will finish their review in time for us to receive approval at the next DIA meeting. We expect to hear good things this week!
The community support of the Barnett and the Trio has been tremendous, and it has been our pleasure to give back as much as possible. As we prepare for construction, the days of Art Walk using the Laura Street Trio lot for its Food Truck Village will be coming to an end.
Please join us on Wednesday, December 2nd for the last Art Walk of the year, and shop local! #weloveartwalk
So that being said we can take the parking garage bullet out of the gun. Unless someone has an issue with the city giving the developer and its team a plot of underutilized land (Surface Lot across from the marble bank) and some rev grants so they(SEG) can invest 15 million on something that will benefit not only the development but the general public.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 21, 2015, 06:26:04 AM
Still no discussion about an option to consider providing financing as opposed to a commitment to do so. Hmmmmmmmm.
There are many ways to finance commercial real estate, but it is common in bank financing for a term sheet to be presented based on a high level understanding of a deal... followed by a full underwrite in instances like this when a strong equity partner is lined up and a gap in financing exists that would be filled by a public entity.
Quote from: sschwartz2929 on December 02, 2015, 10:45:03 AM
So that being said we can take the parking garage bullet out of the gun. Unless someone has an issue with the city giving the developer and its team a plot of underutilized land (Surface Lot across from the marble bank) and some rev grants so they(SEG) can invest 15 million on something that will benefit not only the development but the general public.
It's a $940,000 plot of land in addition to the increased revenue grant %. Is the Trio devekipment contigent on getting the parking garage?
Why don't they just buy the land and not make any mortgage payments?
Just saw this, a new Courtyard by Marriott in a renovated building in San Francisco's Union Square neighborhood just opened.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2015/12/historic-san-francisco-marriott-union-square.html
Was formerly run as 150 room student housing, now 166 room Courtyard by Marriott. The pictures make it look very very nice! Probably an idea of what's in store for the Trio if the ball ever gets rolling. This reno cost $38M, or roughly $229K/key.
^ I stayed in this one in 2009...another promising portent of what's likely to come for the Trio.
http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/phldc-courtyard-philadelphia-downtown/
I've stayed in quite a few. They can be quite nice and unique. This was the lobby of a Courtyard in a restored early 20th century office building in DT San Diego from a few back:
(http://www.cdeangelisphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Courtyard-Marriott-San-Diego-Branch.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/San-Diego-2011/i-ndLKBT4/0/M/P1490161-M.jpg)
http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/sancd-courtyard-san-diego-downtown/
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 08, 2015, 12:28:08 PM
^ I stayed in this one in 2009...another promising portent of what's likely to come for the Trio.
http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/phldc-courtyard-philadelphia-downtown/
I've stayed in that one. Not very nice, but stayable. Good views. Philly's one of those markets where you can stay in a really nice hotel for cheap cheap, too, I guess depending on the time.
Nothing beats the grandeur of these older buildings.
That San Diego lobby is pretty spectacular. Reminds me of the Brown in Louisville.
The developer for the DT San Diego hotel was J Street Hospitality: http://jstreethospitality.com/portfolio/
The have extensive hospitality experience and track record. Maybe they would lead this project for us?
Quote from: fieldafm on December 02, 2015, 01:14:33 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 21, 2015, 06:26:04 AM
Still no discussion about an option to consider providing financing as opposed to a commitment to do so. Hmmmmmmmm.
There are many ways to finance commercial real estate, but it is common in bank financing for a term sheet to be presented based on a high level understanding of a deal... followed by a full underwrite in instances like this when a strong equity partner is lined up and a gap in financing exists that would be filled by a public entity.
Thank you for the info, fieldafm.