So this year's budget is year one of a plan to invest $1.2 billion into 223 projects over the next five years....
QuoteMayor Lenny Curry's proposed 2017-18 budget includes a major Downtown project — demolition of the old City Hall and Duval County Courthouse along East Bay Street.
His capital improvement plan includes $8 million to demolish the buildings, with another $8 million for the continued remediation of the Liberty Street and the Coastline Drive parking deck near the structures.
"If we are going to attract private dollars Downtown, we must prepare Downtown for private investment," Curry said Monday as he presented the budget to City Council.
In the past, ideas surfaced for a new convention center on the property as well as a public park or other private investment.
Curry said while there are no plans for the sites, demolishing the structures is more "about demonstrating that we're action-oriented, that we're not going to sit around and talk about it."
"When you have old, dilapidated buildings Downtown, what does that say to private investors? It says the city's not serious," he said.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/the-jacksonville-budget-mayor-taking-proactive-stance-on-development
QuoteThere is no proposed change in the millage rate. Curry intends to set aside $150.5 million for this year's share of his proposed five-year capital improvement plan, a $1.2 billion investment strategy that includes 223 ongoing or updated projects. Of that, $46.7 million would be paid for with available cash and grants and the remaining $103.7 million would be financed by debt. For 2017-18, Curry wants to begin work on 103 projects, including the $16 million to take down the old government buildings and repair the waterfront. He said another attraction to recruit private investment is to spend city money on infrastructure like roads, bridges and sidewalks.
I like the Mayor's "get it done" mentality, but that statement is simply a re-hashing of the same old mistakes of the past...and unless there is a concrete plan on the table, let's done just go demolishing buildings...especially that Annex.
^Yeah, it would be a real shame to lose that building without a firm plan for something to replace it. We wouldn't get that level of density again for a long time.
Have a plan to replace before you repeal, err..., uh demolish.
It appears Detroit's sugar daddy Dan Gilbert thinks adaptive reuse is an economically viable option there. Here's a few pictures from earlier this summer:
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-NDjkdmk/0/dada70cf/L/20170630_162800-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-3dk67J8/0/e03be924/L/20170704_123249-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-K9FqjWV/0/52c6f4fc/L/20170704_122823-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-47ZGzdq/0/1e76ef9b/L/Detroit7-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-BJvmLMp/0/6d0d3624/L/20170704_124130-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-XQfmkch/0/c4edf9db/L/20170704_124221-L.jpg)
Back in 2006
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/rust_belt/detroit/Woodward-night.jpg)
Many of the revitalized buildings on Woodward Avenue were abandoned back when this 2006 streetscape aerial was taken.
I believe and I'm hopeful Curry's administration has something up their sleeve that will be funded in the next four years of his plan. If not, spending $8 million to demolish without considering adaptive reuse is a questionable exercise.
How is that not exactly the same thing that was done the last 30 years - raze much of downtown and adjacent to "prepare it for development" ? Yeah, that's worked great so far....
If the buildings must be demolished, would it be possible to cheaply convert the area into publicly-accessible green space until a private developer becomes interested? That way, we have a nice green asset with ample waterfront views until something else comes along?
^I believe the plan is to sod it the way the Shipyards is sodded now. Other than parking for Jags games, there's not much of the public taking advantage of all that green space two blocks east. I doubt there will be much difference here. I just find it difficult to believe there's not something else coming down the pipeline that will be revealed at a later date.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 12:24:45 PM
^I believe the plan is to sod it the way the Shipyards is sodded now. Other than parking for Jags games, there's not much of the public taking advantage of all that green space two blocks east. I doubt there will be much difference here. I just find it difficult to believe there's not something else coming down the pipeline that will be revealed at a later date.
It is a convention center without a doubt. That is what most of the stakeholders including Mousa and Delaney have pointed to. However, it is frustrating hearing those words come out of the Mayor's mouth.
The more I read about this, the less it makes sense.
In what universe are the old Courthouse and Annex discouraging private development and "dilapidated" to the point that we need to prioritize $8 million in capital spending to bring them down?
If the plan was to bring down the buildings and build a new convention center, I would get it. But I'm not convinced at all that this is the end game. All of Curry's talk involves getting the property ready for private investment and development. Curry doesn't mince words, and if his vision for the space is a convention center, I think we'd know about it already.
Curry has also mentioned returning the property to greenspace while we figure out what to do with it.
Can you imagine? Undeveloped riverfront property stretching from the old courthouse site all the way down to Metro Park, with only 1.5 Berkmans in between.
I'd also argue that Jacksonville has a lot of riverfront development aspirations already between the Shipyards and the District, and historically, supply of prime downtown real estate has outstripped demand. Why would we rush to flood the market with even more riverfront property?
I can almost imagine a cartoonish scenario where we level the old Courthouse, Annex, and Berkman 2, and then re-issue an RFP for everything between the Hyatt and Metro Park. Hell, maybe we'll bulldoze the Landing for greenspace like the T-U advocates and solicit bids for the entire fucking riverfront.
Unless this paves the way for a game-changing convention center, it's prioritizing a problem that isn't really a problem, and needlessly wiping out potential assets.
Imagine how much good that $8 million could go for fixing legitimate problems, like transforming Hemming back into a signature public space, or improving the Landing, or starting remediation work at the Shipyards, or rebuilding the historic preservation fund, or expanding the MOSH, or incentivizing completion of the Berkman, or whatever.
Just feels like a lot of mid-sized ad hoc ideas for downtown transformation that don't necessarily align to a bigger-picture plan.
The article clearly states there is NO PLAN for the site.
QuoteCurry said while there are no plans for the sites, demolishing the structures is more "about demonstrating that we're action-oriented, that we're not going to sit around and talk about it."
They are following the LaVilla model of 'tear it down and they will come'.
Why not just stick an "Available' sign on the properties and set the money aside for when there is an actual proposal.
Quote from: vicupstate on July 18, 2017, 01:43:16 PM
The article clearly states there is NO PLAN for the site.
QuoteCurry said while there are no plans for the sites, demolishing the structures is more "about demonstrating that we're action-oriented, that we're not going to sit around and talk about it."
They are following the LaVilla model of 'tear it down and they will come'.
Why not just stick an "Available' sign on the properties and set the money aside for when there is an actual proposal.
He says that right now in public but I don't buy it. There is something. If there isn't, this makes little sense. He basically contradicted this statement in his interview with the Times-Union. I have no inside knowledge other than I have heard from reputable people that there is a plan with a public-private partnership angle.
QuoteThose opportunities were one of the main topics Mayor Lenny Curry covered when he met Wednesday morning with the Times-Union Editorial Board.
On Curry's drawing board are possibilities like a convention center and hotel where the old city hall and courthouse now stand, more residences Downtown, more entertainment opportunities, development of the old Shipyards site and either the removal or completion of the Berkman Plaza eyesore.
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/ron-littlepage/2017-06-23/ron-littlepage-progress-laura-street-trio-game-changer-downtown
I do think until they are willing to put those plans out there, there should be no demo of the Annex, which is historic in many ways, just as the JEA Building as mid-century architecture towers.
Is the convention business healthy, in the aggregate? With social media and collaborative technologies proliferating, is the need diminishing for masses of people to gather for things other than sports and concerts?
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 11:54:50 AM
So this year's budget is year one of a plan to invest $1.2 billion into 223 projects over the next five years....
QuoteMayor Lenny Curry's proposed 2017-18 budget includes a major Downtown project — demolition of the old City Hall and Duval County Courthouse along East Bay Street.
His capital improvement plan includes $8 million to demolish the buildings, with another $8 million for the continued remediation of the Liberty Street and the Coastline Drive parking deck near the structures.
"If we are going to attract private dollars Downtown, we must prepare Downtown for private investment," Curry said Monday as he presented the budget to City Council.
In the past, ideas surfaced for a new convention center on the property as well as a public park or other private investment.
Curry said while there are no plans for the sites, demolishing the structures is more "about demonstrating that we're action-oriented, that we're not going to sit around and talk about it."
"When you have old, dilapidated buildings Downtown, what does that say to private investors? It says the city's not serious," he said.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/the-jacksonville-budget-mayor-taking-proactive-stance-on-development
Rummell has not purchased the property that the District will lie on from JEA? What's up with that?
Quote from: FlaBoy on July 18, 2017, 12:00:11 PM
QuoteThere is no proposed change in the millage rate. Curry intends to set aside $150.5 million for this year's share of his proposed five-year capital improvement plan, a $1.2 billion investment strategy that includes 223 ongoing or updated projects. Of that, $46.7 million would be paid for with available cash and grants and the remaining $103.7 million would be financed by debt. For 2017-18, Curry wants to begin work on 103 projects, including the $16 million to take down the old government buildings and repair the waterfront. He said another attraction to recruit private investment is to spend city money on infrastructure like roads, bridges and sidewalks.
I like the Mayor's "get it done" mentality, but that statement is simply a re-hashing of the same old mistakes of the past...and unless there is a concrete plan on the table, let's done just go demolishing buildings...especially that Annex.
I agree. Wait until something tangible and "development ready" is on the table, and then demolish them. Work to get the property developed, market and promote the property to not only locals, but outsiders as well (nation wide). We do not need to be making the same mistake as in the past with demolish it, leave it empty, and they will come.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 18, 2017, 12:06:55 PM
^Yeah, it would be a real shame to lose that building without a firm plan for something to replace it. We wouldn't get that level of density again for a long time.
I agree; those are two very nice, sturdy, and still modern 20th century buildings. Keep the wrecking ball and the bulldozers away until we know that that property where those two buildings sit, are ready for immediate development.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 12:18:37 PM
It appears Detroit's sugar daddy Dan Gilbert thinks adaptive reuse is an economically viable option there. Here's a few pictures from earlier this summer:
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-NDjkdmk/0/dada70cf/L/20170630_162800-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-3dk67J8/0/e03be924/L/20170704_123249-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-K9FqjWV/0/52c6f4fc/L/20170704_122823-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-47ZGzdq/0/1e76ef9b/L/Detroit7-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-BJvmLMp/0/6d0d3624/L/20170704_124130-L.jpg)
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Detroit-July-2017/i-XQfmkch/0/c4edf9db/L/20170704_124221-L.jpg)
Back in 2006
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/rust_belt/detroit/Woodward-night.jpg)
Many of the revitalized buildings on Woodward Avenue were abandoned back when this 2006 streetscape aerial was taken.
I believe and I'm hopeful Curry's administration has something up their sleeve that will be funded in the next four years of his plan. If not, spending $8 million to demolish without considering adaptive reuse is a questionable exercise.
No........it's not a "questionable exercise," it's just plain "a waste," and just plain stupid.
Quote from: heights unknown on July 18, 2017, 03:43:11 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 11:54:50 AM
So this year's budget is year one of a plan to invest $1.2 billion into 223 projects over the next five years....
QuoteMayor Lenny Curry's proposed 2017-18 budget includes a major Downtown project — demolition of the old City Hall and Duval County Courthouse along East Bay Street.
His capital improvement plan includes $8 million to demolish the buildings, with another $8 million for the continued remediation of the Liberty Street and the Coastline Drive parking deck near the structures.
"If we are going to attract private dollars Downtown, we must prepare Downtown for private investment," Curry said Monday as he presented the budget to City Council.
In the past, ideas surfaced for a new convention center on the property as well as a public park or other private investment.
Curry said while there are no plans for the sites, demolishing the structures is more "about demonstrating that we're action-oriented, that we're not going to sit around and talk about it."
"When you have old, dilapidated buildings Downtown, what does that say to private investors? It says the city's not serious," he said.
Full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/the-jacksonville-budget-mayor-taking-proactive-stance-on-development
Rummell has not purchased the property that the District will lie on from JEA? What's up with that?
Due diligence.
From the T-U last week:
QuoteThe state Department of Environmental Protection recently signed off on a clean bill of health for the site, a crucial regulatory hurdle that had to be crossed before the development team could close on the property. It's just a matter of paperwork at this point.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 12:24:45 PM
^I believe the plan is to sod it the way the Shipyards is sodded now. Other than parking for Jags games, there's not much of the public taking advantage of all that green space two blocks east. I doubt there will be much difference here. I just find it difficult to believe there's not something else coming down the pipeline that will be revealed at a later date.
Then quit being so secretive and at least give a hint; if not a hint, then reveal it or don't raze, bull doze, or ball wreck anything until development, development, development is imminent.
Quote from: heights unknown on July 18, 2017, 03:48:36 PM
Quote from: FlaBoy on July 18, 2017, 12:00:11 PM
QuoteThere is no proposed change in the millage rate. Curry intends to set aside $150.5 million for this year's share of his proposed five-year capital improvement plan, a $1.2 billion investment strategy that includes 223 ongoing or updated projects. Of that, $46.7 million would be paid for with available cash and grants and the remaining $103.7 million would be financed by debt. For 2017-18, Curry wants to begin work on 103 projects, including the $16 million to take down the old government buildings and repair the waterfront. He said another attraction to recruit private investment is to spend city money on infrastructure like roads, bridges and sidewalks.
I like the Mayor's "get it done" mentality, but that statement is simply a re-hashing of the same old mistakes of the past...and unless there is a concrete plan on the table, let's done just go demolishing buildings...especially that Annex.
I agree. Wait until something tangible and "development ready" is on the table, and then demolish them. Work to get the property developed, market and promote the property to not only locals, but outsiders as well (nation wide). We do not need to be making he same mistake as in the past with demolish it, leave it empty, and they will come.
Exactly, and any "concrete plan" should include a building or buildings that are as tall or taller than the current ones. We need high rises in downtown and it doesn't further the cause when you tear down a high rise (like the 15 story annex) and replace it with only a 4 story structure, regardless of the use.
From Ron Littlepage's new column:
QuoteCurry and his team have chosen some solid priorities.
Downtown is clearly on the move, and Curry is right to propose spending $8 million to finally demolish the old county courthouse and old city hall.
Doing that and providing the money to complete the Liberty Street repair project will make available an attractive piece of riverfront property that will be ripe for development, perhaps for a public/private partnership for a new convention center.
Here's my question.
We've heard a lot of people throw around the term "public/private partnership" in regards to a potential convention center at the site of the old Courthouse/Annex, including Littlepage.
Does anybody even stop to consider how such a thing would even work, or who the private partner would be?
Los Angeles - one of the most desirable convention cities on the planet - hasn't been able to find a private partner to help get a new convention center off the ground. Neither could Miami or Fort Lauderdale. In fact, there isn't a single convention center in the United States built upon a public/private partnership. Zero. None.
For the most part, convention centers are loss leaders that draw attendees in to spend money at hotels, restaurants, etc.
Gonna make a bold claim:
There's zero chance that Curry pushes for a convention center on the site of the Annex and/or Courthouse.
He's looking east.
Let's use our heads here.
1) Curry has clearly stated to local media that the intent of the Annex and Courthouse destruction is to "make them more attractive sites for private development." Again, he's been very direct about his goals with downtown. If these demolitions were paving the way for a new convention center, we'd know about it prior to the budget being released.
2) Curry has also been stating for the last 6 months that downtown progress was going to come on the back of public/private partnership.
3) Historically speaking, the
only prayer that a new Jacksonville convention gets built under a public/private partnership is if it is attached to Khan's proposed Metro Park hotel.
4) Khan has pushed for it. At the Daily's Place groundbreaking, he said, "We have, across the street, a great opportunity for a high-end hotel/convention center, which this town really needs." His Shipyards plans feature a lot of exhibition space around the hotel as well.
It's a FAR less desirable spot for a convention center than the blocks being demo'd, but reading between the lines, and also looking at moves made by the Jaguars organization in the last couple of years, I think it's pretty clear where this thing is going. Metro Park becomes a hotel/convention center, jointly financed by the Jags and the city, and Bold Events either operates or co-operates the venue.
Khan's Shipyard plans call for an up to 500 room hotel. The Jags play 8 games a year in Jacksonville. Who's filling those rooms the other 344 nights a year? Who's keeping the adjacent restaurants and retail in Khan's proposal busy throughout the year?
Think about it, particularly through the lens of how Khan typically operates.
Every project has a public and private component.
1) 2013 - $63 million in stadium upgrades, co-funded by the city ($43 million) and the Jags ($20 million). The Jags got expensive new club sections and cabanas, infrastructure upgrades, and the public got new video boards.
2) 2016 - $90 million in stadium upgrades, co-funded by the city ($45 million) and the Jags ($45 million). On the surface, the public got a new amphitheater for fifty cents on the dollar, but in reality, we really co-financed a new practice field for the Jags and almost $20 million in club upgrades to Everbank as well.
3) 2018 - $$$ for a new hotel and convention center, co-funded by the city ($$$) and the Jags ($$$). Again, it will probably be spun politically and by the media as Jacksonville getting a convention center for fifty cents on the dollar through a 50/50 partnership with the Jags, but in reality, we'll be co-financing Khan's hotel as well.
The alternative is that Khan simply builds a hotel on the Metro Park site that is 100% privately funded. That's not his MO.
Watch it happen.
It all adds up.
So essentially we're going to do more of the same thing that left LaVilla and the Shipyards so desolate in the first place and just pray that the private sector decides to simply do us a favor and build things for us. When instead, we could try to protecting the density we do have and trying to grow more in other places.
We tear down the Courthouse/Annex, Khan becomes the only option in town for a future convention center unless we choose to build a new one from scratch.
Some things really never change.
The whole Khan thing is just speculation.
Quote from: heights unknown on July 18, 2017, 03:55:00 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 18, 2017, 12:24:45 PM
^I believe the plan is to sod it the way the Shipyards is sodded now. Other than parking for Jags games, there's not much of the public taking advantage of all that green space two blocks east. I doubt there will be much difference here. I just find it difficult to believe there's not something else coming down the pipeline that will be revealed at a later date.
Then quit being so secretive and at least give a hint; if not a hint, then reveal it or don't raze, bull doze, or ball wreck anything until development, development, development is imminent.
More flex space.
Free parking?
If you have FREE or taxpayer subsidized parking you don't care about parking.
Before you pull my post ask about Unity Plaza (Its not just a retention pond) and those sacrificial investors who have lost everything. The noticed meeting that had Council members Newby and Anderson along with the 3 guys and DB with the TU. Parking was another issue.
The DIA wants it down. So down it comes.
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on July 19, 2017, 01:25:18 AM
The whole Khan thing is just speculation.
This. I've heard some credible rumors specifically about the courthouse site in recent weeks. I don't know if they'll materialize but they're out there. Also, there are some examples of public private partnerships involving convention center complexes and hotels. The Irving Convention Center at Las Colinas and its Westin is an example. There, Provident Resources Group (PRG) threw in $115 million. Without more details, it's pretty hard for me to speculate one way or another on this one. Nevertheless, the talk about demolishing to spur downtown revitalization or encourage private investment sounds like the same ole, same ole.
QuoteThe Irving Convention Center at Las Colinas and its Westin is an example. There, Provident Resources Group (PRG) threw in $115 million.
Do you know specifically how the private money was allocated? Was it more so for the Hotel that included ownership of it?
KenFSU makes a lot of sense. I have never heard of a PPP involving a Convention Center either.
You have to wonder if the Hyatt would surviving on its own if KenFSU is right and the CC went to the Stadium District.
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on July 19, 2017, 01:25:18 AM
The whole Khan thing is just speculation.
Clearly, but so is anything else at this point.
I hope I'm wrong, it's a terrible idea.
I've heard things from a few credible sources, that point to a potential P3 CC deal at the courthouse site. It's not impossible to pull off, but it's one of those things where I'll believe it when I see it (which is how I view most major DT projects today....including the Shipyards). The economy is only going to be good for so long. So those projects that don't quickly get moving will probably fizzle out like most proposed a decade ago.
As for the convention center, I think you guys are more accurate if you're envisioning a full 100% brand new convention center complex. However, I'm not sure Jax really needs to go all out. The Hyatt already has a comparable amount of meeting and ballroom space to the Prime Osborn and it's centralized. What it does not have is an exhibition hall. The Prime Osborn's main problems are that it is in the middle of nowhere, it's dated and the exhibition hall is too small. So really what we need is a bigger/modern exhibition hall in a centralized area of town that is connected to additional meeting/ballroom space and lots of hotel rooms. If that's the position taken, you're looking more at a P3 hotel type of deal that includes attached meeting space.
Another city that recently did something similar is Norfolk. Nofolk doesn't have a traditional convention center downtown. So they did a P3 with Gold Key | PHR Hotels & Resorts for a luxury Hilton hotel, conference center, restaurants and parking garage. It just opened and is across the street from another hotel/conference center (Waterside Marriott), that the city landed with a similar P3 deal.
https://pilotonline.com/news/government/local/incentives-in-norfolk-smooth-path-for-developer-of-hotel-conference/article_8ff96d05-4bdd-5059-b3d6-f7fb668a0c96.html
Here's pictures of both of those hotel and conference centers from a stop I made through there earlier this year:
Waterside Marriott and convention center
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Norfolk-March-2017/i-QvwX2PC/0/686ce571/XL/20170324_180508-XL.jpg)
Hilton on Main (the P3 new mixed use center) on the left and Waterside Marriott (the older P3 hotel/convention space) on the right.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Norfolk-March-2017/i-nqzrKPZ/0/d951b719/XL/20170324_180456-XL.jpg)
Hilton on Main
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Norfolk-March-2017/i-xLmkBRL/0/04d1e4e8/XL/20170324_204149-XL.jpg)
Waterside Marriott convention center on right, hotel rooms above and public parking garage on left
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Norfolk-March-2017/i-2TQmF5S/0/e7023c4b/XL/20170324_204211-XL.jpg)
"Doing that (demolition) and providing the money to complete the Liberty Street repair project will make available an attractive piece of riverfront property that will be ripe for development"
Well one thing we've got plenty of already is "attractive piece of riverfront property ripe for development."
Shipyards? School Board site? Met Park?
Not sure Littlepage has actually driven around down there lately.
Quote from: KenFSU on July 19, 2017, 08:13:24 AM
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on July 19, 2017, 01:25:18 AM
The whole Khan thing is just speculation.
Clearly, but so is anything else at this point.
I hope I'm wrong, it's a terrible idea.
Courthouse/Annex site is the best place for the convention center to have the most impact. However, the stadium site is not a terrible idea as you say. You would basically have the stadium, convention center, a hotel, amphitheater, and practice field (additional enclosed space) all connected at a unique venue. The Arena and Baseball Grounds are easy walking distance. The biggest winner would be the development on A Philip Randolph there. The big draw back is a hurting and very dead downtown gets very little stimulus from a convention center a mile away and the same problems remain for Bay St/Elbow and the Landing. Nevertheless, if Khan agreed to pay for half or 40% of the convention site/hotel, that is a tough deal to turn down. To me the clear spot is the Courthouse/Annex sites, but #2 would be a Khan project connected to our investments in the stadium district.
I hope Lake is right though with another hotel/convention center on the Courthouse/Annex site which is what Curry said was on the drawing board in his annual meeting with the TU Editorial Board.
Quote from: FlaBoy on July 18, 2017, 02:14:09 PM
He says that right now in public but I don't buy it. There is something. If there isn't, this makes little sense. He basically contradicted this statement in his interview with the Times-Union. I have no inside knowledge other than I have heard from reputable people that there is a plan with a public-private partnership angle.
QuoteThose opportunities were one of the main topics Mayor Lenny Curry covered when he met Wednesday morning with the Times-Union Editorial Board.
On Curry's drawing board are possibilities like a convention center and hotel where the old city hall and courthouse now stand, more residences Downtown, more entertainment opportunities, development of the old Shipyards site and either the removal or completion of the Berkman Plaza eyesore.
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/ron-littlepage/2017-06-23/ron-littlepage-progress-laura-street-trio-game-changer-downtown
I do think until they are willing to put those plans out there, there should be no demo of the Annex, which is historic in many ways, just as the JEA Building as mid-century architecture towers.
Unfortunately, that did not keep previous administrations from doing the same thing. "Demolish and they will come" most often did not happen, only the "demolish" part as witnessed by the many empty lots downtown.
Maybe the current administration is different and I am not saying that they do not hope something will be built, but why not wait until a developer puts money on the table and then raze it.
One way would be to have the investors pay for the demolition and then reimburse them (fully or partially) once the new development has been built rather than the city paying up front with no risk to the developers.
Why don't we just sell the southside generating station and the Shipyards, Courthouse, Metro-park sites to SHIELD so they have space to build an underwater base for their heli-carriers... That's a real thing, right?
Can anybody show me a CC in a city and density of Jax that is as far away from the CBD as a Shipyards CC would be?
Quote from: Jim on July 19, 2017, 12:13:18 PM
Can anybody show me a CC in a city and density of Jax that is as far away from the CBD as a Shipyards CC would be?
The Georgia International Convention Center in Atlanta - located in between Hartsfield-Jackson Airport and the Rental Car Center*
(I put a "*" by this because Atlanta also has the Georgia World Congress Center that is right by CNN Center/Georgia Dome/Centennial Olympic Park.
Quote from: Jim on July 19, 2017, 12:13:18 PM
Can anybody show me a CC in a city and density of Jax that is as far away from the CBD as a Shipyards CC would be?
Despite my comment, I agree with you - mainly because it's a lot easier in a city like Jacksonville to locate a convention center next to a 1,000 room hotel than to get someone else to build a 1,000 room hotel.
Quote from: Steve on July 19, 2017, 12:18:57 PM
Quote from: Jim on July 19, 2017, 12:13:18 PM
Can anybody show me a CC in a city and density of Jax that is as far away from the CBD as a Shipyards CC would be?
The Georgia International Convention Center in Atlanta - located in between Hartsfield-Jackson Airport and the Rental Car Center*
(I put a "*" by this because Atlanta also has the Georgia World Congress Center that is right by CNN Center/Georgia Dome/Centennial Olympic Park.
Steve, you need a ** too because Jax certainly is not the same size and density as Atlanta.
Atlanta is a huge sunbelt sprawler. In reality, Jax's urban area is probably denser than Atlanta's. Atlanta is just at a totally different scale. With that said, I'm sure if we'd search hard enough, we could find another poor example of a struggling CC a mile away from everything. However, until I hear something different from credible sources, I'm going to stick with the rumor that the latest discussion is involving a CC at the courthouse site and not the Shipyards.
Honestly, who (beyond the density freaks -- and you knows who you be -- right?) gives a damn if the convention center is in the Sports and Entertainment district or at the old Courthouse? Get it built !!!
Damn, y'all can overthink shiznit with the best of them. I'm sure the appropriate parties will do their due diligence and have a plan for making it work wherever the hell it's built. Subsudizing it is in the offing anyway, isn't it ? ? ?
We've moved from Tacachale bellowing not this shiznit again to multiple folks now openly speculating about the very real possibility of a public-private partnership making something happen. That's progress on the board, I presume, but . . . damn.
Lol, anyone interested in not wasting tax dollars should take a view towards making sure whatever we do has the best chance to succeed. History shows we end up with expensive white elephants when we throw good money after poorly vetted projects. The Prime Osborn is a great example of what can happen when a public project is too isolated from the things that make those types of facilities a success.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 19, 2017, 12:52:17 PM
Honestly, who (beyond the density freaks -- and you knows who you be -- right?) gives a damn if the convention center is in the Sports and Entertainment district or at the old Courthouse? Get it built !!!
Damn, y'all can overthink shiznit with the best of them. I'm sure the appropriate parties will do their due diligence and have a plan for making it work wherever the hell it's built. Subsudizing it is in the offing anyway, isn't it ? ? ?
We've moved from Tacachale bellowing not this shiznit again to multiple folks now openly speculating about the very real possibility of a public-private partnership making something happen. That's progress on the board, I presume, but . . . damn.
The 'If you built it, they will come' approach is better than the urban planning and development approach.
Gotcha.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 19, 2017, 12:52:17 PM
I'm sure the appropriate parties will do their due diligence and have a plan for making it work wherever the hell it's built.
Imagine the city we would be living in if that assumption were true for the past 60 years.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 19, 2017, 12:52:17 PM
Honestly, who (beyond the density freaks -- and you knows who you be -- right?) gives a damn if the convention center is in the Sports and Entertainment district or at the old Courthouse? Get it built !!!
Damn, y'all can overthink shiznit with the best of them. I'm sure the appropriate parties will do their due diligence and have a plan for making it work wherever the hell it's built. Subsudizing it is in the offing anyway, isn't it ? ? ?
We've moved from Tacachale bellowing not this shiznit again to multiple folks now openly speculating about the very real possibility of a public-private partnership making something happen. That's progress on the board, I presume, but . . . damn.
To be clear, my "not this shit again" comment was directed at your (repeated) comments about the president giving us money to demolish the Hart Bridge ramps out of his still elusive infrastructure budget, not the convention center. Not that I want to I want to get us talking about that shit again ;)
Common Sense 101 - Budget the $8M for demolition.
Include that demo is included in the RFP, but won't happen until certain benchmarks are met in planning, design & FINANCING from the winning developer.
It's still not 100% guaranteed that we won't end up with another un-planned, sodded parking lot in the heart of downtown, but at least we're not completely shooting ourselves in the foot. (again)
Quote from: Jim on July 19, 2017, 01:03:28 PM
The 'If you built it, they will come' approach is better than the urban planning and development approach.
Gotcha.
No, the equivalence of Shad Khan and his team *and* their clearly demonstrated juice (and wisdom) with the uninspired people who did the Prime Osborn Convention Center wishful thinking is the deal with me.
You think you can follow that now?
I mean, what has Shad done here that has turned into a disappointment? Or uninspired. Apparently, all some of y'all can do is remain trapped in the past. Gotcha.
But by all means, do babble on . . .
density, density, density !!!
Quote from: Tacachale on July 19, 2017, 01:12:27 PM
To be clear, my "not this shit again" comment was directed at your (repeated) comments about the president giving us money to demolish the Hart Bridge ramps out of his still elusive infrastructure budget, not the convention center. Not that I want to I want to get us talking about that shit again ;)
Dance that jigaboo, bwah,
dance !!!
Quotehe Prime Osborn is a great example of what can happen when a public project is too isolated from the things that make those types of facilities a success.
You forget that there was STUFF, a neighborhood, next to the Prime Osborn, until the City decided to tear it all down. The Prime was a great idea, but the city liked to year down neighborhoods during the 90s. They did so for the sports and entertainment district.
There were some vacant warehouses in the vicinity. However, there was never a hotel, entertainment and a cluster of dining options complementing the Prime Osborn. No matter where the convention center is moved, if those things aren't adjacent, it's going to struggle to meet whatever potential we think one may have in Jax.
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 20, 2017, 12:05:48 PM
Quotehe Prime Osborn is a great example of what can happen when a public project is too isolated from the things that make those types of facilities a success.
You forget that there was STUFF, a neighborhood, next to the Prime Osborn, until the City decided to tear it all down. The Prime was a great idea, but the city liked to year down neighborhoods during the 90s. They did so for the sports and entertainment district.
I work next door to the Prime Osborne. What used to be across the street and in the surrounding blocks were not complementary to conventions. While razing them was unfortunate in terms of the neighborhood itself, they were never a part of the support structure that typically surrounds a convention center.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 19, 2017, 12:52:17 PM
Honestly, who (beyond the density freaks -- and you knows who you be -- right?) gives a damn if the convention center is in the Sports and Entertainment district or at the old Courthouse? Get it built !!
Come on man, people
should give a damn.
A convention center is both a major investment and a major opportunity to catalyze downtown Jacksonville. It's the type of opportunity that only comes around every few decades and we can't afford to screw it up in a rush to just "get it built."
There was a similar debate 30 years ago when we suddenly had some grant money in the coffer to build a new signature urban park in downtown Jacksonville.
Jake Godbold's original proposal involved building a truly urban green esplanade connecting the Jacksonville Landing and the Prime Osborne Convention Center along the below strip.
(https://s12.postimg.org/zf4o7f2bh/Untitled2.png)
The plan ran into some opposition over the closure of Water Street, and in a rush to "get it done" and avoid losing out on the grant money, the city literally decided at the last minute to build their new signature urban park a mile and a half to the east by the stadium.
Look how well that one turned out, and think about how different things might have been had we made a better choice.
Think about that opportunity cost. 30 years of wasted potential. Tens of millions of dollars about to be spent to raze and relocate the park via land swap because we chose the wrong spot the first time.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 20, 2017, 08:05:34 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on July 19, 2017, 01:12:27 PM
To be clear, my "not this shit again" comment was directed at your (repeated) comments about the president giving us money to demolish the Hart Bridge ramps out of his still elusive infrastructure budget, not the convention center. Not that I want to I want to get us talking about that shit again ;)
Dance that jigaboo, bwah, dance !!!
lol wut
(http://i.imgur.com/Vcne3du.jpg)
*again, I apologize for my skills in Paint.
24/7/365 looking backwards and providing examples that mean nothing today.
Damn.
Jake Freakin' Godbold? Seriously ? ? ?
Okay. Density, density, density (newsflash -- from May to October we have an average high temp in the 80s or 90s and high humidity, but . . . density? Y'all are really that damn . . . dense -- see what I did there?).
Okay, okay, okay.
Maybe it *has* to be built down where y'all want it. Fine. But it's also quite possible (to me, at least) that it *needs* to be built down in the Sports and Entertainment District because we have a different kind of city, with a different kind of challenges, a City that needs a different kind of group pushing for a convention center who aren't slaves to seriously tired and inapplicable density concepts.
Maybe, just maybe. But, hell, y'all are the experts. Time will tell.
^ That post has Alderman Park Lover amounts of crazy in it.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 24, 2017, 10:12:57 AM
24/7/365 looking backwards and providing examples that mean nothing today.
Damn.
Jake Freakin' Godbold? Seriously ? ? ?
Okay. Density, density, density (newsflash -- from May to October we have an average high temp in the 80s or 90s and high humidity, but . . . density? Y'all are really that damn . . . dense -- see what I did there?).
Okay, okay, okay.
Maybe it *has* to be built down where y'all want it. Fine. But it's also quite possible (to me, at least) that it *needs* to be built down in the Sports and Entertainment District because we have a different kind of city, with a different kind of challenges, a City that needs a different kind of group pushing for a convention center who aren't slaves to seriously tired and inapplicable density concepts.
Maybe, just maybe. But, hell, y'all are the experts. Time will tell.
We aren't different enough for such different approaches. Every city also has their own unique challenges. But more to the point, show me an instance of what you are proposing working. And I'm going to ask you again, can you show me a CC in a city and density of Jax that is as far away from the CBD as a Shipyards CC would be?
Saying we are different (elaborate please) means we have to do different (CC more than a mile away from CBD) is baseless planning without any historical, economic, industry or practical support. When you are building a half a billion $ project, those factors shouldn't not be taken frivolously and pushed forward on simply, "Hey, we're different."
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 24, 2017, 10:12:57 AM
24/7/365 looking backwards and providing examples that mean nothing today.
Damn.
Jake Freakin' Godbold? Seriously ? ? ?
Okay. Density, density, density (newsflash -- from May to October we have an average high temp in the 80s or 90s and high humidity, but . . . density? Y'all are really that damn . . . dense -- see what I did there?).
Okay, okay, okay.
Maybe it *has* to be built down where y'all want it. Fine. But it's also quite possible (to me, at least) that it *needs* to be built down in the Sports and Entertainment District because we have a different kind of city, with a different kind of challenges, a City that needs a different kind of group pushing for a convention center who aren't slaves to seriously tired and inapplicable density concepts.
Maybe, just maybe. But, hell, y'all are the experts. Time will tell.
Lol, there's nothing different about Jax. It's hot as hell in Houston, New Orleans, San Antonio, Savannah, Charleston and Miami as well. Yet, all of these Sunbelt cities have embraced building/enhancing pedestrian scale density within their downtown cores and have witnessed much economic benefit as a result.
If the heat has any impact at all it should lead to more density, not less. I would not think twice about walking a half-mile to public transportation in New York because the high today is 73. But I'm driving to lunch downtown today in Jacksonville, because a 103-degree heat index means I will be drenched in sweat before I get to the end of my block, let alone Kings Avenue station.
I've been to conferences in Chicago and Denver and walked plenty of mileage... But in Jacksonville, if I was staying at the sports complex, I probably would not walk downtown in business-casual attire. Too damn hot.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on July 19, 2017, 01:18:31 AM
So essentially we're going to do more of the same thing that left LaVilla and the Shipyards so desolate in the first place and just pray that the private sector decides to simply do us a favor and build things for us. When instead, we could try to protecting the density we do have and trying to grow more in other places.
I really, really,
really don't want to jinx it, but there are some subtle early signs that the economy may have peaked as well. Local unemployment is up, you're starting to see scattered stores and restaurants closing around town, and the construction industry has flattened. I don't think we need to worry about a recession anytime soon, but if the economy does take a dip before all these newly demolished properties find buyers, we really could be looking at history repeating itself all over again.
Some of you act like the shipyards are on the south side, geez it's not that far, you can walk from Wells Fargo to shipyards in very little time.
The most successful convention centers have hotels, restaurants, bars, etc. immediately adjacent or well within a 1/4 mile radius of the facility. It's probably a closer to walk from the Prime Osborn to Wells Fargo than it is to walk over to EverBank Field (which is where the Jags hotel and conference center is planned). Other than being next to the stadium, it really is no different from the convention center's current isolated location. Except the Skyway (when it operates) makes it feasible to cut out the lion's share of that walking distance.
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on July 24, 2017, 02:59:48 PM
Some of you act like the shipyards are on the south side, geez it's not that far, you can walk from Wells Fargo to shipyards in very little time.
That's a 7,100 foot (1.35 mile) walk from the corner of Bay and Larura to Met Park. Don a suit, make that trek at mid-day and let me know how lovely that stroll was. It's a 25-30 minute walk.
For the record, the south bank is actually much closer. From Bay and Laura to Prudential and Main (large parking lot suitable for a CC) is only a little more than half the distance. Even walking all the way to the District is shorter than Met Park.
And the current CC is just 3,500 feet from the same starting point and we all know that's too far from the CBD and supporting/symbiotic businesses.
^It's roughly the equivalent of walking from the center of UNF to the Town Center.
And how many people do you see making that walk each day?
The lack of imagination y'all exhibit is embarrassing.
The lack of comprehension that worldwide leaders are being solicited by Shad Khan to work with him on The Shipyards project is equally embarrassing. Not Hans Tanzler or Jake Godbold era leaders, worldwide leaders.
The backwards-looking &%#@%& shiznit casually tossed out here -- honestly, what the hell? There's nothing unique about Jacksonville? From the man who says we're . . . Memphis ? ? ?
Dayyuummmm !!! The last I looked, we're the only city in the nation and perhaps the world with an amphitheater connected to both an exhibition hall and a football stadium. Pretty damn unique -- that is, if someone would just get their head out of their four-corner-contact and take an objective look around. Perhaps not to urban core snobs but ultimately who gives a damn about them anyway?
Wake up, Ennis. Let us see what Iguana and Shad Khan and his crew come up with, shall we ? ? ?
RG, it's the lack of real urban core planning that gave us the southbank, Brooklyn and La Villa. The first two look like suburban office parks with taller buildings. La Villa was killed with no plans at all.
Nobody is saying ignore Khan and what he is doing. In fact, most of us are quite welcoming of his initiatives. What we are saying is that you cannot build a $500 million CC and expect it to be successful without the proper infrastructure around it.
Quote from: RattlerGator on July 25, 2017, 02:56:48 PM
The lack of imagination y'all exhibit is embarrassing.
The lack of comprehension that worldwide leaders are being solicited by Shad Khan to work with him on The Shipyards project is equally embarrassing. Not Hans Tanzler or Jake Godbold era leaders, worldwide leaders.
(http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg)
Lol, you need a reference? You should be on Khan's payroll.
QuoteThe backwards-looking &%#@%& shiznit casually tossed out here -- honestly, what the hell? There's nothing unique about Jacksonville? From the man who says we're . . . Memphis ? ? ?
Memphis is a fine city with great BBQ. Why are you hating on it?
QuoteWake up, Ennis. Let us see what Iguana and Shad Khan and his crew come up with, shall we ? ? ?
I'm awake and hope Iguana and Shad Khan do well. However, being awake and wearing rose colored glasses are two totally different things.
Per the Daily Record, the RFP to demo the old courthouse/Annex is imminent.
Looks like this is a thing that's going to be happening sooner than later.
P.S. Site search doesn't seem to be working.
Yes, it was a given once the demo money was included in this year's budget a few months back. I'll get Lunican to see what's going on with the search feature.
I wish they would just demo the courthouse until there is a deal in hand written in blood that requires the old City Hall to be removed. COJ has such a bad history with this sort of thing. The old City Hall has a lot of height and SF that could be used for just about anything.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 11, 2017, 10:57:18 AM
I wish they would just demo the courthouse until there is a deal in hand written in blood that requires the old City Hall to be removed. COJ has such a bad history with this sort of thing. The old City Hall has a lot of height and SF that could be used for just about anything.
I really don't understand why we need to demo
anything.This city spent the 90s razing almost all of Lavilla to the ground. There are still masses of empty plots that are only
now being filled in. There's acres and acres of land on both sides of the river that won't have shovels in the ground for years. And yet somehow, we need to raze even
more? Completely ridiculous.
Really, why not tell developers that they can bring the bulldozers as long as they're immediately followed by construction cranes? Nothing less. Either build in with the space that's already there, or not waste a heartbeat before building after cleanup.
Not sure of this is supposed to be public, but I just overheard someone mention January 18 as an important date regarding the courthouse and annex.
I agree with your basic sentiment Marcus but you might have those vacant buildings there for a long time. They will deteriorate and the cost of demo might go up.
Also it means any worthwhile project will be contingent on the city completing the demo and then environmental cleanup after that, so whatever goes in will still be a "hurry up and wait situation."
FYI The Shipyards is basically STILL WAITING ON ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP BEFORE ANYTHING CAN BE DONE THERE. IT's a big expensive time consuming job which the COJ has not even started.
I believe you could come up with several worthwhile projects that could reuse the City Hall Annex, sooner than later if it were a priority for reuse. It's not and that's why it sits empty. I've seen cities lease or sell properties like that for a $1 as aggressive ways to get companies to fill or restore them sooner rather than later. In those cases, the concern wasn't trying to rape someone on the sell of city-owned property. The reasoning was if you could fill dead space quick, you'd bring hundreds of new employees downtown, return properties back to the tax rolls, while stimulating foot traffic to support existing nearby businesses.
If a good plan with a good design appeared for the courthouse, i would not be in favor of demoing it either. I suspect the special purpose function of the building may prevent that, plus it isn't very appeally architectural to start with. It also isn't as tall as a replacement building MIGHT be. I don't see those issues with City Hall annex though.
I don't see how a delay would increase demo costs on the Annex either. Clearly it will be a simple impolsion job.
I thought both of those were contaminated with lead and asbestos. NO?
Quote from: MusicMan on December 13, 2017, 10:33:08 AM
I thought both of those were contaminated with lead and asbestos. NO?
Most likely yes, but whether you renovate or demo it, you have to remove it.
Quote from: KenFSU on December 08, 2017, 03:07:33 PM
Per the Daily Record, the RFP to demo the old courthouse/Annex is imminent.
Looks like this is a thing that's going to be happening sooner than later.
So . . . perhaps it's time to get my man Ennis those rose-colored glasses?
Before we even get to see what Iguana and Shad Khan and his crew come up with.
Love ya, bruh!
but of course the answer is we need common sense laws about bulldozers! ;)