QuoteBut Khan's strongest opinions were about Lot J and how it could bring a new energy to Jacksonville and revive downtown.
Three months ago, Jacksonville mayor Lenny Curry announced a tentative deal for the city to pay up to $233.03 million toward the cost of Khan's proposed $450 million development on parking Lot J next to TIAA Bank Field, but there's no agreement yet in place.
Curry said at the July 31 announcement that the Lot J development would "position Jacksonville for world-class events that we simply cannot compete for today."
Khan's development team, which includes The Cordish Companies as a partner, would build the entertainment district containing restaurants, bars, a 300-unit luxury high-rise tower, a 200-room boutique hotel, an office tower and outdoor stage, though the plan does have flexibility.
While Curry outlined the deal's framework, it still awaits approval by the Downtown Investment Authority, which hasn't heard yet on the agreement, and then the City Council.
Khan was especially passionate about building a high-end hotel on the river to serve as a focal point of a revived downtown area. His group is talking with three hotel operator candidates about being part of the Lot J development, and remains hopeful another five-star hotel can be built if a Hart Bridge overpass comes to fruition.
"We definitely want to have a better hotel experience than we do right now in Jacksonville," said Khan. "I get that all the time from executives who come in and leave town. It would be a higher hotel [on Lot J] than what we have [in Jacksonville].
"I think the ultimate thing is, we would like to envision a Four Seasons. That's what we're targeting on the river once the [Hart Bridge] overpass comes in. That's going to define the city. Really, what a difference that would make to have people come in who are going to stay in the city."
Khan relayed a story from an unidentified executive who stayed in Jacksonville, but left unsatisfied with his hotel accommodations.
"He goes and comes to Jacksonville and he says [the hotel experience] is the worst part of my thing," Khan said. "I could stay there a week, but I only want to stay two nights."
Full Article: https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191102/khan-jaguars-expect-lot-j-development-to-begin-early-2020
Lot's of nuggets in this article. Overall, it gives me the impression that there's a disconnect in what's considered downtown (really already knew this) and what's perceived as critically missing. I doubt the majority believe a high-end hotel will serve as the focal point of a revived downtown. That's a rich man's problem that will fail to address the more critical issues hampering the city.
What's the "Hart Bridge Overpass" that is being referred to in the article? And why is a hotel dependent upon it?
Khan wants COJ and FDOT to remove the elevated portion of the Hart Bridge Expressway ramps that run adjacent to the stadium. Bringing the expressway to ground and placing a stoplight at the stadium will allow more traffic to turn into Lot J. Without the extra traffic, much of what's proposed for Lot J isn't feasible....even with $233 million in public incentives.
Khan talks of a Four Seasons hotel on the river. For that to work, it will likely need to be a mostly self contained resort-style property given there is nothing within walking distance other than occasional events at the stadium complex to drive business. I am thinking something like the island Westin in the Savannah River or the stand-alone JW Marriott/Ritz Carlton in Orlando 8). Maybe Khan thinks he also has a future convention center in the bag.
^Maybe so, but how is that "transformational" for downtown?
Quote from: thelakelander on November 02, 2019, 01:00:57 PM
Lot's of nuggets in this article. Overall, it gives me the impression that there's a disconnect in what's considered downtown (really already knew this) and what's perceived as critically missing. I doubt the majority believe a high-end hotel will serve as the focal point of a revived downtown. That's a rich man's problem that will fail to address the more critical issues hampering the city.
It's the
dumbbell revitalization method, of course! In the
dumbbell method, the endpoints must cater to the elite who are served by peons running back and forth.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 02, 2019, 04:41:28 PM
^Maybe so, but how is that "transformational" for downtown?
Lake, agree and that's my point. Having little to do with downtown is why he will have to pull these other rabbits out of the hat to make it work, if it works at all. I don't see it doing anything for downtown and expect anything on Lot J to actually hurt as it will pull people away from downtown proper setting it back even more. If one thinks of thinks of downtown as including the stadium area, we could actually have a house divided in which both pieces fail.
Remind me, where else has Shad Khan done a similar and successful real estate development like this?
I'm aware I am a minority on the subject, but I strongly feel demolishing the ramps into downtown is a BIG mistake. It's only purpose is to help Lot J to the further detriment of downtown. This city is demolish-centric. A stop light at Lot J? That's funny. That will make me want to linger in Kahn's development? While we're at it, why not divert all I-95 traffic down Bay St.?
The Sports Complex is not Downtown Jacksonville. I don't care how many times Khan, Curry or their underlings say it. The Sports Complex is not Downtown Jacksonville. Also, the rich businessmen who can't bear the Omni or Hyatt for more than 2 nights are spoiled little babies. They should be forced to live for a week in a place with real challenges.
Snaketoz, if it is a minority, I join you in thinking removing the Hart Ramps is a dumb idea. For normal commuters to downtown, it will add two stop lights they don't face now: where the new ramp will come down to Bay at Gator Bowl Blvd. (by WJCT), and the Lot J signal. As they approach Intuition / AP Randolph, they will have a choice of going back up onto the ramps to go to Adams or Duval Streets, or staying on Bay - with a signal at APR. The real problem for commuters will be every time there is an event in the Sports Complex during the work week. Commuters that would normally be on the elevated ramps from about Liberty Street all the way across the bridge, will be forced into event traffic along Bay Street. Alternatively, Southside or Beaches commuters who use the Hart could use the Main Street or Mathews Bridges.
Note that New Bay (Khan Parkway?) will not have any more capacity (lanes) than the current Bay Street - 2 lanes each way.
And remind me, please, the Lot J site is shovel ready, correct? No environmental concerns or clean up needed, correct?
No, they're about to start testing the environmental situation to determine what type of clean up is needed.
Lake, what do you expect the outcome to be? The COJ will pay for remediation, correct?
^Correct. COJ will be paying for at least $233 million worth of things if council approves what the mayor's office wants. Remediation will be needed. However, it doesn't sound like they have a true idea of how much remediation is needed and how much it will ultimately cost.
They can always take funds from the hotel/apartment component since that is just a slush fund anyhow.
""I think the ultimate thing is, we would like to envision a Four Seasons. That's what we're targeting on the river once the [Hart Bridge] overpass comes in. That's going to define the city. Really, what a difference that would make to have people come in who are going to stay in the city."
Well those rich business men driving down Bay Street will enjoy the jail on one side and the delightful Berkman II on the other side on their way to The Four Seasons.
Is Curry aware of what is planned on Laura Street?
For what it's worth (which ultimately isn't a ton, considering how flexible the agreement is), the current term sheet lists the city's remediation contribution at $6.3 million. I don't think it's going to cost much more than that. The more likely scenario seems to be that it's a worst case estimate, with the unused funds (like all other unused funds from the city's contribution) going back into other portions of the project. I know they're out there testing now, but if you remember back when the Jags were going after JEA, Paul Harden said that they had already completed initial environmental analysis and believed that remediation would take less than three months.
Interesting to hear Khan finally come out and directly mention the Four Seasons goal, which would obviously coincide with a convention center. Perhaps not surprisingly, also interesting to hear his stance on a JEA sale change from "stupid idea" to "no comment." Huge Jags fan. I think having them here is great for the city. Totally get that, with the NFL in particular, you've got to pay to play. That said, when you factor in Lot J, the Shipyards, a convention center, and the inevitable stadium ask, we're putting ourselves in a position to hand the Jags more money than the GDP of some countries. Easily over a billion. To essentially create an adjacent, competing downtown for the well-to-do and out-of-towners, while nickel-and-diming the actual civic downtown core that our citizens live, work, play, and receive essential services in.
More power to him. It's cool that the Jags genuinely want to lay down long-term roots in the city. I don't fault him for making these asks. It's what sports owners all over the country are doing. Let our elected city officials and voters do their jobs and decide if it's the best use of city resources. Just wish we'd discuss it for what it is and quit with the narrative of Lot J being a downtown redevelopment project that's going to catalyze the rest of the urban core.
Lori Boyer on WJCT 89.9 FM RIGHT NOW!
Was in a meeting and missed it. Did she mention anything worth discussing here?
Quote from: Snaketoz on November 03, 2019, 06:53:24 AM
I'm aware I am a minority on the subject, but I strongly feel demolishing the ramps into downtown is a BIG mistake. It's only purpose is to help Lot J to the further detriment of downtown. This city is demolish-centric. A stop light at Lot J? That's funny. That will make me want to linger in Kahn's development? While we're at it, why not divert all I-95 traffic down Bay St.?
LOL...I get it snake. And I whole heartedly agree!
Quote from: AdamsOnAdams on November 03, 2019, 09:00:24 AM
The Sports Complex is not Downtown Jacksonville. I don't care how many times Khan, Curry or their underlings say it. The Sports Complex is not Downtown Jacksonville. Also, the rich businessmen who can't bear the Omni or Hyatt for more than 2 nights are spoiled little babies. They should be forced to live for a week in a place with real challenges.
I don't hate Mr. Kahn, but it appears that's what he is doing, trying to make Lot J either the central urban business district, or a separate downtown by the stadium apart from our tradition central downtown and urban core. As for those business men that don't like Omni or Hyatt, go stay in a Hotel in Ruskin or Baldwin; maybe then you'll more appreciate Hotels of the like and caliber of Omni and Hyatt! Or...go back from where you came from!
Quote from: MusicMan on November 03, 2019, 01:55:51 PM
""I think the ultimate thing is, we would like to envision a Four Seasons. That's what we're targeting on the river once the [Hart Bridge] overpass comes in. That's going to define the city. Really, what a difference that would make to have people come in who are going to stay in the city."
Well those rich business men driving down Bay Street will enjoy the jail on one side and the delightful Berkman II on the other side on their way to The Four Seasons.
Is Curry aware of what is planned on Laura Street?
Jail and Berkman II LOL...what a beautiful sight for those businessmen...again, LOL, on the way to the beautiful 700 feet tall (and I'll bet it will be the tallest when completed cause Kahn will want to make a statement). Anyhoo, hope it works out; I've got my skepticism lit up on this one, but trying to be positive.
Quote from: KenFSU on November 03, 2019, 02:32:27 PM
For what it's worth (which ultimately isn't a ton, considering how flexible the agreement is), the current term sheet lists the city's remediation contribution at $6.3 million. I don't think it's going to cost much more than that. The more likely scenario seems to be that it's a worst case estimate, with the unused funds (like all other unused funds from the city's contribution) going back into other portions of the project. I know they're out there testing now, but if you remember back when the Jags were going after JEA, Paul Harden said that they had already completed initial environmental analysis and believed that remediation would take less than three months.
Interesting to hear Khan finally come out and directly mention the Four Seasons goal, which would obviously coincide with a convention center. Perhaps not surprisingly, also interesting to hear his stance on a JEA sale change from "stupid idea" to "no comment." Huge Jags fan. I think having them here is great for the city. Totally get that, with the NFL in particular, you've got to pay to play. That said, when you factor in Lot J, the Shipyards, a convention center, and the inevitable stadium ask, we're putting ourselves in a position to hand the Jags more money than the GDP of some countries. Easily over a billion. To essentially create an adjacent, competing downtown for the well-to-do and out-of-towners, while nickel-and-diming the actual civic downtown core that our citizens live, work, play, and receive essential services in.
More power to him. It's cool that the Jags genuinely want to lay down long-term roots in the city. I don't fault him for making these asks. It's what sports owners all over the country are doing. Let our elected city officials and voters do their jobs and decide if it's the best use of city resources. Just wish we'd discuss it for what it is and quit with the narrative of Lot J being a downtown redevelopment project that's going to catalyze the rest of the urban core.
It won't catalyze anything in that area in my opinion for the exception of the build of Lot J next to the Stadium; I could be wrong, but I believe that Curry and Co. should also pay attention, equal attention mind you on the traditional downtown urban core along with Lot J. I think Lot J will be good, cool, etc., but don't neglect our traditional and historic CBD and urban core!
Quote from: MusicMan on November 04, 2019, 09:08:17 AM
Lori Boyer on WJCT 89.9 FM RIGHT NOW!
What did she say Music Man? Are they demolishing BOA Building, Wells Fargo Building, and all other buildings over 100 feet in height on the Northbank and Southbank? Just playing.
She's a good politician, so she didn't want to rock the boat on Khan, The Lot J issue..... She's pretty much on board with everything that is being proposed for downtown (i.e demolish The Landing) , lots of HOPE that good things will happen, but no guarantee.
There will be a replay I believe so you can check out the website and see when that is.
When I suggested we spend half of what has been pledged to LOT J on the rest of downtown (specifically the CBD) she didn't really comment....
If we spent half of what Lot J needs on the CBD, that would be a game changer with significant more economic impact. It would actually end the talk about revitalizing downtown by actually truly revitalizing it into a condition where market rate projects really become feasible.
That sounds great and all, but why accomplish that when we could just sell out the public for some sweet political (and personal) capital and replace Marco Rubio in the Senate before it finally blows up in everyone's faces?
Quote from: thelakelander on November 04, 2019, 12:06:06 PM
If we spent half of what Lot J needs on the CBD, that would be a game changer with significant more economic impact. It would actually end the talk about revitalizing downtown by actually truly revitalizing it into a condition where market rate projects really become feasible.
Well, to be fair, it isn't just how much is spent, but how. If you add up all the money (adjusted for inflation) to demolish buildings, build Seafood restaurants that never open, over-widen Riverside Avenue, build the largely useless Skyway, build mini parks for the homeless, etc., etc., it would total at least as much as 50% of Lot J, maybe 100%.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 04, 2019, 09:53:56 AM
Was in a meeting and missed it. Did she mention anything worth discussing here?
She stated that the Downtown core is her focus, not Lot J.
She's working on incentives for two restaurant & bar districts in Downtown.
Some two ways streets should be operational (Adams, etc) by 20/21.
Hogan Street cycle track, part of the Emerald Trail project, is projected for 2021.
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
She mentioned the owner of the illegal parking lot (where the Greyhound bus station used to be) has shown her plans for a highrise project on the site. Sounded conceptual.
And she mentioned that the privatized parking proposal was unsolicited, but now that it's out there, they'll be reviewing what parking services they'd like to see, then put it out to bid.
Two restaurant and bar districts? One being the "Elbow" and the other being what?
Quote from: RatTownRyan on November 04, 2019, 01:21:31 PM
Two restaurant and bar districts? One being the "Elbow" and the other being what?
Yeah. Shouldn't we get one established before we work on a second?
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
I can't fault her too much for this. She didn't champion this and pissing off Curry isn't ideal. On the other hand, there is no good logical answer for this.
Quote from: Steve on November 04, 2019, 02:04:53 PM
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
I can't fault her too much for this. She didn't champion this and pissing off Curry isn't ideal. On the other hand, there is no good logical answer for this.
"If you have a vacant piece of land, you are much more likely to get interest and creative input on what can go there, than if you're constraining someone to use an existing building," Boyer said.
From: https://news.wjct.org/post/jacksonville-dia-head-disappointed-khan-s-curse-comment
QuoteThe DIA is looking at old design proposals to decide whether the city needs to hire a consultant to update the designs before putting out requests for proposals.
So they are going to update designs of a never-built proposed project? I can see including prior proposals as information to bidders, but this seems odd to me.
QuoteBoyer said she's working on what she describes as a "major initiative" to create two Downtown restaurant districts.
One would run from City Hall down to the Landing along Laura and Hogan streets.
The other one is aimed at the Downtown area known as The Elbow.
Hemming Plaza will be the north anchor of the new district, but the vacant landing lot will be the southern anchor.
I think Melissa Ross read Bill Hoff's e mail question on air, correct?
"Yeah. Shouldn't we get one established before we work on a second?" Agree 100%.
Be nice to get a tenant back into Burro Bar for God's sake.
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 03:57:29 PM
Quote from: Steve on November 04, 2019, 02:04:53 PM
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
I can't fault her too much for this. She didn't champion this and pissing off Curry isn't ideal. On the other hand, there is no good logical answer for this.
"If you have a vacant piece of land, you are much more likely to get interest and creative input on what can go there, than if you're constraining someone to use an existing building," Boyer said.
From: https://news.wjct.org/post/jacksonville-dia-head-disappointed-khan-s-curse-comment
I just listened too it. Bad answer when talking about a downtown area with historic and unique building fabric. I'd argue someone only interested in greenfield development is likely to be less creative than one who is willing and can work within unique conditions. As such, your greenfield replacement is likely to be worse than what was torn down originally. The urban environment isn't for every one and we have to be accepting of that. So a bit of creativity towards adaptive reuse will be in order with any urban setting.
The Landing answer was a debatable one as well. The Sleiman plan was a private plan created by the building owner who knew exactly want he wanted to do with the property and the uses he proposed (hotel, apartments, etc.) didn't necessarily work with the existing structure. Since it was privately owned, it would be silly to expect someone else to come to the city and propose an adaptive reuse project of a privately owned structure. Once the city provided Sleiman with an early Christmas gift to acquire the buildings, it never truly considered the possibility of adaptive reuse a chance. While the existing structure isn't suitable for the SJTC-style stick built apartments Sleiman wanted to do, that doesn't mean it would not have been perfect for other uses such as a market, food hall, visitors center, museum, or some combination of all of them. Also, what's up with the we need unsolicited proposals and without them, that means no one is interested? That's a path that should be avoided if the goal is cohesive redevelopment.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 04, 2019, 04:25:07 PM
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 03:57:29 PM
Quote from: Steve on November 04, 2019, 02:04:53 PM
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
I can't fault her too much for this. She didn't champion this and pissing off Curry isn't ideal. On the other hand, there is no good logical answer for this.
"If you have a vacant piece of land, you are much more likely to get interest and creative input on what can go there, than if you're constraining someone to use an existing building," Boyer said.
From: https://news.wjct.org/post/jacksonville-dia-head-disappointed-khan-s-curse-comment
I just listened too it. Bad answer when talking about a downtown area with historic and unique building fabric. I'd argue someone only interested in greenfield development is likely to be less creative than one who is willing and can work within unique conditions. As such, your greenfield replacement is likely to be worse than what was torn down originally. The urban environment isn't for every one and we have to be accepting of that. So a bit of creativity towards adaptive reuse will be in order with any urban setting.
The Landing answer was a debatable one as well. The Sleiman plan was a private plan created by the building owner who knew exactly want he wanted to do with the property and the uses he proposed (hotel, apartments, etc.) didn't necessarily work with the existing structure. Since it was privately owned, it would be silly to expect someone else to come to the city and propose an adaptive reuse project of a privately owned structure. Once the city provided Sleiman with an early Christmas gift to acquire the buildings, it never truly considered the possibility of adaptive reuse a chance. While the existing structure isn't suitable for the SJTC-style stick built apartments Sleiman wanted to do, that doesn't mean it would not have been perfect for other uses such as a market, food hall, visitors center, museum, or some combination of all of them. Also, what's up with the we need unsolicited proposals and without them, that means no one is interested? That's a path that should be avoided if the goal is cohesive redevelopment.
Here here.
QuoteBut she also expressed concern about Khan's criticism of Jacksonville's hotel industry.
Khan had said, "Right now, the decision-makers, the influencers want to come to Jacksonville for business and get the hell out of there. It's bad for the image, and it's bad for business," according WJCT News partner The Florida Times-Union, which was present for the same media interview.
Khan then relayed a story of an unidentified executive, who he said left Jacksonville unsatisfied with his Jacksonville hotel accommodations.
As part of the Lot J development Khan said he "would like to envision a Four Seasons," the Times-Union quoted the Jaguars owner as saying.
Boyer defended Jacksonville's existing hotel industry.
"I think we have some very nice hotels Downtown. So I'm not nearly as critical of what we have available," she said.
Good for Lori Boyer here.
Hadn't read Shad Khan's full comments before, but man, the optics here are
terrible.The Jacksonville Jaguars, Daily's Place, the Jags practice facility, and likely Lot J* were quite literally built off the back of the city's hoteliers and the bed tax.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
Can you imagine how the owner of the Omni, or the Doubletree, or the Hyatt Regency must feel, collecting bed taxes that will potentially be used to prop up a competing hotel(s) for a billionaire who publicly bashed their facilities.
Good times in Jax.
*https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/city-could-use-hotel-bed-tax-to-fund-deal-lot-j-deal-finance-committee-chair-says
Quote from: vicupstate on November 04, 2019, 01:05:18 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 04, 2019, 12:06:06 PM
If we spent half of what Lot J needs on the CBD, that would be a game changer with significant more economic impact. It would actually end the talk about revitalizing downtown by actually truly revitalizing it into a condition where market rate projects really become feasible.
Well, to be fair, it isn't just how much is spent, but how. If you add up all the money (adjusted for inflation) to demolish buildings, build Seafood restaurants that never open, over-widen Riverside Avenue, build the largely useless Skyway, build mini parks for the homeless, etc., etc., it would total at least as much as 50% of Lot J, maybe 100%.
Demolishing buildings seems like the favorite pastime of our current mayor. Have you seen the buildings going up now in Brooklyn, now that Riverside Avenue is "over-widened". Yes, money on the skyway was wasted, money on other projects was wasted. That is not a good argument. We could, in theory, learn from past mistakes. Not likely with Lenny as mayor. Instead of throwing over $250 million at Shad Khan for Lot J maybe we could fund the Emerald Trail, and projects in the actual downtown area. Oh, but that would make no sense, it would not benefit politicians or billionaires!
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 03:57:29 PM
Quote from: Steve on November 04, 2019, 02:04:53 PM
Quote from: Bill Hoff on November 04, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
She had an incredibly ridiculous answer as to why The Landing is being torn down prior to seeking possible redevelopment or issuing an RFP.
I can't fault her too much for this. She didn't champion this and pissing off Curry isn't ideal. On the other hand, there is no good logical answer for this.
"If you have a vacant piece of land, you are much more likely to get interest and creative input on what can go there, than if you're constraining someone to use an existing building," Boyer said.
From: https://news.wjct.org/post/jacksonville-dia-head-disappointed-khan-s-curse-comment
Regarding the Landing, I believe they still have it backwards, putting the cart before the horse; they should not tear down the landing until something viable is chosen to fill in that void, and/or, some type of proposal (a successful and prosperous one mind you), might come up relative to reconstructing, overhauling, and renovating the current building instead of tearing it down; either or is fine with me, but to tear the Landing down, and as other properties in downtown Jax (history proves), it sits there for decades, an eyesore, with nothing have been planned, proposed, on the table, or built.
Quote from: RatTownRyan on November 04, 2019, 01:21:31 PM
Two restaurant and bar districts? One being the "Elbow" and the other being what?
These would be along Laura & Hogan Streets:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-ceo-working-on-incentives-plan-to-bring-restaurants-downtown
Cities that don't have a Four Seasons: Charlotte, Nashville, Tampa, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and a few other similar cities to Jax. I don't think Downtown can sustain Four Seasons rates without heavy discounts/incentives from Khan himself to Four Seasons.
So the City and its residents would be subsidizing Khan so that he could subsequently subsidize a Four Seasons, all in order to satisfy the overwhelming demand from the high end out of town executive market. Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here, or actually develop something sustainable?
Quote from: CityLife on November 05, 2019, 08:49:13 AM
Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here...?
I think you're on to something here.
Quote from: CityLife on November 05, 2019, 08:49:13 AM
Cities that don't have a Four Seasons: Charlotte, Nashville, Tampa, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and a few other similar cities to Jax. I don't think Downtown can sustain Four Seasons rates without heavy discounts/incentives from Khan himself to Four Seasons.
So the City and its residents would be subsidizing Khan so that he could subsequently subsidize a Four Seasons, all in order to satisfy the overwhelming demand from the high end out of town executive market. Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here, or actually develop something sustainable?
You're right that many cities don't have a Four Seasons, and further, many cities don't have a true 5 Star Hotel Downtown. Charlotte does have a 5 Star property (Ritz-Carlton), but all of those cities have a pretty strong market of 4 Star hotels. The Star Rating is a little subjective as the Hyatt Regency downtown is considered by some to be a 4 Star, which is a little generous. It's a nice property, but not on the level of a JW Marriott or something like that.
Now, I think you are correct in that you can't just build a downtown 5 Star hotel and expect it to be jammed full. Save for resort properties (where you have the spa, golf course, etc. and have a natural draw like the ocean) most places can't do that. The core issue isn't the hotel. The core issue is the fact that the downtown isn't in the shape to draw the demand to the 5 star hotel. Charlotte for example likely sustains the Ritz in part because of the significant corporate banking presence there.
I truly believe the Convention Center would help, and I always have. Large corporate conventions generally have some demand for a high end hotel for corporate CEOs that may be speaking/attending, VIP Keynotes, someone who works for a company that doesn't care about expense reports, etc. So, if the city and Khan do the convention center by the stadium (which I believe is a mistake but it could still work) and include two hotels (a larger one in the Hyatt realm and a smaller luxury property), It could work.
Now, will it help the core of downtown? Some. Will it have the same impact as a convention center in the core? Nope.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 04, 2019, 09:17:08 PM
QuoteBut she also expressed concern about Khan's criticism of Jacksonville's hotel industry.
Khan had said, "Right now, the decision-makers, the influencers want to come to Jacksonville for business and get the hell out of there. It's bad for the image, and it's bad for business," according WJCT News partner The Florida Times-Union, which was present for the same media interview.
Khan then relayed a story of an unidentified executive, who he said left Jacksonville unsatisfied with his Jacksonville hotel accommodations.
As part of the Lot J development Khan said he "would like to envision a Four Seasons," the Times-Union quoted the Jaguars owner as saying.
Boyer defended Jacksonville's existing hotel industry.
"I think we have some very nice hotels Downtown. So I'm not nearly as critical of what we have available," she said.
Good for Lori Boyer here.
Hadn't read Shad Khan's full comments before, but man, the optics here are terrible.
The Jacksonville Jaguars, Daily's Place, the Jags practice facility, and likely Lot J* were quite literally built off the back of the city's hoteliers and the bed tax.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
Can you imagine how the owner of the Omni, or the Doubletree, or the Hyatt Regency must feel, collecting bed taxes that will potentially be used to prop up a competing hotel(s) for a billionaire who publicly bashed their facilities.
Good times in Jax.
*https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/city-could-use-hotel-bed-tax-to-fund-deal-lot-j-deal-finance-committee-chair-says
From the link at the bottom of your post.
Quote"It's transformational," Bowman said. "It's not often someone comes knocking at your door saying I want to invest half-a-billion dollars in your city."
I freaking hate these uninformed lying self-serving politicians in City Hall! Do they think we are stupid? Khan isn't investing a half billion in anything. His share is about $200 million of the proposal.
Also, it is practically every month some jackwad proposes some type of 'game changer' for Jax.
Shad is trying to bring some of that London Arab money too the city lol
Quote from: CityLife on November 05, 2019, 08:49:13 AM
Cities that don't have a Four Seasons: Charlotte, Nashville, Tampa, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and a few other similar cities to Jax. I don't think Downtown can sustain Four Seasons rates without heavy discounts/incentives from Khan himself to Four Seasons.
So the City and its residents would be subsidizing Khan so that he could subsequently subsidize a Four Seasons, all in order to satisfy the overwhelming demand from the high end out of town executive market. Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here, or actually develop something sustainable?
Could be a little of both...yes?
Quote from: Steve on November 05, 2019, 09:16:05 AM
Quote from: CityLife on November 05, 2019, 08:49:13 AM
Cities that don't have a Four Seasons: Charlotte, Nashville, Tampa, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and a few other similar cities to Jax. I don't think Downtown can sustain Four Seasons rates without heavy discounts/incentives from Khan himself to Four Seasons.
So the City and its residents would be subsidizing Khan so that he could subsequently subsidize a Four Seasons, all in order to satisfy the overwhelming demand from the high end out of town executive market. Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here, or actually develop something sustainable?
You're right that many cities don't have a Four Seasons, and further, many cities don't have a true 5 Star Hotel Downtown. Charlotte does have a 5 Star property (Ritz-Carlton), but all of those cities have a pretty strong market of 4 Star hotels. The Star Rating is a little subjective as the Hyatt Regency downtown is considered by some to be a 4 Star, which is a little generous. It's a nice property, but not on the level of a JW Marriott or something like that.
Now, I think you are correct in that you can't just build a downtown 5 Star hotel and expect it to be jammed full. Save for resort properties (where you have the spa, golf course, etc. and have a natural draw like the ocean) most places can't do that. The core issue isn't the hotel. The core issue is the fact that the downtown isn't in the shape to draw the demand to the 5 star hotel. Charlotte for example likely sustains the Ritz in part because of the significant corporate banking presence there.
I truly believe the Convention Center would help, and I always have. Large corporate conventions generally have some demand for a high end hotel for corporate CEOs that may be speaking/attending, VIP Keynotes, someone who works for a company that doesn't care about expense reports, etc. So, if the city and Khan do the convention center by the stadium (which I believe is a mistake but it could still work) and include two hotels (a larger one in the Hyatt realm and a smaller luxury property), It could work.
Now, will it help the core of downtown? Some. Will it have the same impact as a convention center in the core? Nope.
Maybe THAT'S what Kahn is trying to do and the direction he's going; building the high end hotel and have it primarily supported by the new convention center, in which in my opinion, MUST BE BUILT and built close by Lot J. The high end hotel will have no sustenance in and of itself, and, there is nothing going on in our downtown to even closely justify building such a hotel. So I'll bet (sniff sniff) that they will build a convention center somewhere in that area along with the high end hotel in Lot J.
Quote from: JaGoaT on November 05, 2019, 10:42:35 AM
Shad is trying to bring some of that London Arab money too the city lol
And I've heard, and read, that London Arab money is old, sweet, and oh so nice!!! Bring it on!
A dedicated mass transit link from the core to the Stadium developments al la Milwaukee's Hop Streetcar would quickly transform JAX merging the current core with the Elbow, Shipyards, Lot J etc... Imagine a direct JRTC-core-Lot J route with a high capacity surface link. Of course JTA thinks they'll do this with tiny 15mph clown cars. Will they ever pull their heads out?
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 06, 2019, 07:42:18 PM
A dedicated mass transit link from the core to the Stadium developments al la Milwaukee's Hop Streetcar would quickly transform JAX merging the current core with the Elbow, Shipyards, Lot J etc... Imagine a direct JRTC-core-Lot J route with a high capacity surface link. Of course JTA thinks they'll do this with tiny 15mph clown cars. Will they ever pull their heads out?
No they won't Ock, and I had forgot about this; even extending the landing would do more good as well; but a mass transit link to Lot J, hopefully, would keep THE "connect" with the true downtown core definitely in check. I agree wholeheartedly!
Quote from: Steve on November 05, 2019, 09:16:05 AM
Quote from: CityLife on November 05, 2019, 08:49:13 AM
Cities that don't have a Four Seasons: Charlotte, Nashville, Tampa, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and a few other similar cities to Jax. I don't think Downtown can sustain Four Seasons rates without heavy discounts/incentives from Khan himself to Four Seasons.
So the City and its residents would be subsidizing Khan so that he could subsequently subsidize a Four Seasons, all in order to satisfy the overwhelming demand from the high end out of town executive market. Is Khan trying to build a fake City to try to trick people into coming here, or actually develop something sustainable?
You're right that many cities don't have a Four Seasons, and further, many cities don't have a true 5 Star Hotel Downtown. Charlotte does have a 5 Star property (Ritz-Carlton), but all of those cities have a pretty strong market of 4 Star hotels. The Star Rating is a little subjective as the Hyatt Regency downtown is considered by some to be a 4 Star, which is a little generous. It's a nice property, but not on the level of a JW Marriott or something like that.
Now, I think you are correct in that you can't just build a downtown 5 Star hotel and expect it to be jammed full. Save for resort properties (where you have the spa, golf course, etc. and have a natural draw like the ocean) most places can't do that. The core issue isn't the hotel. The core issue is the fact that the downtown isn't in the shape to draw the demand to the 5 star hotel. Charlotte for example likely sustains the Ritz in part because of the significant corporate banking presence there.
I truly believe the Convention Center would help, and I always have. Large corporate conventions generally have some demand for a high end hotel for corporate CEOs that may be speaking/attending, VIP Keynotes, someone who works for a company that doesn't care about expense reports, etc. So, if the city and Khan do the convention center by the stadium (which I believe is a mistake but it could still work) and include two hotels (a larger one in the Hyatt realm and a smaller luxury property), It could work.
Now, will it help the core of downtown? Some. Will it have the same impact as a convention center in the core? Nope.
In my opinion, I think a Four Seasons in Jacksonville should not be just a hotel; for example, the first 15 floors should be a hotel, the next 20 floors office, and the last 20 floors residential (don't lay into me I am just giving an example); it could be on a lower scale and height with less floors of course. To me, a pure hotel just wouldn't work in Big Jax unless it is built severely low scale (just a few stories and taking up a whole block or blocks .
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 06, 2019, 07:42:18 PM
A dedicated mass transit link from the core to the Stadium developments al la Milwaukee's Hop Streetcar would quickly transform JAX merging the current core with the Elbow, Shipyards, Lot J etc... Imagine a direct JRTC-core-Lot J route with a high capacity surface link. Of course JTA thinks they'll do this with tiny 15mph clown cars. Will they ever pull their heads out?
Who exactly would ride this mass transit link? People aren't going to drive downtown, pay to park in a parking garage, then take a mass transit link the final mile. They will just drive to their final destination.
Quote from: Kerry on November 07, 2019, 09:24:29 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 06, 2019, 07:42:18 PM
A dedicated mass transit link from the core to the Stadium developments al la Milwaukee's Hop Streetcar would quickly transform JAX merging the current core with the Elbow, Shipyards, Lot J etc... Imagine a direct JRTC-core-Lot J route with a high capacity surface link. Of course JTA thinks they'll do this with tiny 15mph clown cars. Will they ever pull their heads out?
Who exactly would ride this mass transit link? People aren't going to drive downtown, pay to park in a parking garage, then take a mass transit link the final mile. They will just drive to their final destination.
As one of the tens of thousands of people who work downtown, I would take this all the time. I'd ride it go to Intuition to grab a beer after work, park in my company garage and take this to a game to avoid paying for parking/sitting in traffic, or whatever I damn well please.
I understand where you're coming from though. You and Nance just had a lovely steak dinner at the Mandarin Outback Steakhouse and are headed to an Imagine Dragons concert at Daily's. You just bought a brand new pair of Nike Monarchs, so you don't want those bad boys getting dirty from walking any farther than you absolutely have to and Nance is worried that one of the hoodlums on the mass transit will try to steal her new Pandora bracelet. Totally understandable that you and your suburban ilk wouldn't want to use this line.
^Ok folks, let's take about 20% off there.
I mean JTA operates a Game Day Shuttle from the Lavilla lots next to the interstate to the stadium, for less than the cost of parking near the stadium. I've taken that plenty of times since it means that I can take the interstates all the way to the lot with little traffic, I can ride in A/C to and from the stadium while people wait in traffic since the buses have some dedicated traffic preference near the congested stadium roads then I get to my car and I'm immediately on the interstate; bypassing most of the street stadium traffic. That takes the same amount of time, if not less, then fighting the traffic leaving the stadium. It also means I can stay until the end of the game too.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 07, 2019, 09:39:31 AM
Quote from: Kerry on November 07, 2019, 09:24:29 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 06, 2019, 07:42:18 PM
A dedicated mass transit link from the core to the Stadium developments al la Milwaukee's Hop Streetcar would quickly transform JAX merging the current core with the Elbow, Shipyards, Lot J etc... Imagine a direct JRTC-core-Lot J route with a high capacity surface link. Of course JTA thinks they'll do this with tiny 15mph clown cars. Will they ever pull their heads out?
Who exactly would ride this mass transit link? People aren't going to drive downtown, pay to park in a parking garage, then take a mass transit link the final mile. They will just drive to their final destination.
As one of the tens of thousands of people who work downtown, I would take this all the time. I'd ride it go to Intuition to grab a beer after work, park in my company garage and take this to a game to avoid paying for parking/sitting in traffic, or whatever I damn well please.
As a fellow downtown worker, I'd kill for a three-mile streetcar running in dedicated space from Five Points to the south, through Brooklyn, past the Landing/Laura Street, down Bay past the Old Courthouse site, through the Shipyards, terminating at the stadium.
Would use it multiple times a week.
If the city is hell bent on spending $200+ million to prop up Lot J, I almost think you need it to give it a shot at viability.
There's no universe where I'd take my car out of the garage, drive down to Lot J, pay to park, and grab lunch or a drink with a client or coworker.
Would happily take dedicated transit though, in the same way I regularly jump on the Skyway to Kings Ave. Station to grab food at Bearded Pig or V Pizza.
I lived in downtown Jax for 3 years - there aren't enough downtown residents and workers headed to anything that will ever be at Lot J to justify that expense.
If we are going to spend money on a streetcar then a line from the new transit hub/convention center to Brooklyn, 5-Points, and King St should be at the top of the list.
Alas, JTA can't even get a bikeshare system up and running so if you guys want to fantasize about taking some kind train/tram to Lot J have at it. It's never going to happen.
Quote from: Kerry on November 07, 2019, 12:51:50 PMJTA can't even get a bikeshare system up and running so if you guys want to fantasize about taking some kind train/tram to Lot J have at it. It's never going to happen.
It's pure fantasy.
We're already betting the farm on clown cars.
They won't be able to drive in mixed traffic or outpace a businessman walking with a limp, but if the drug dealer sitting in your lap happens to shoot you, the airport will be notified via fiber-optic cable.
Psssh, nobody would use it!
Oh wait, somebody WOULD use it? Hmm, better pivot...
Psssh! It'll never get built!
Kerry is never incorrect. His pessimism knows no bounds, nor does it ever fail to be the source of absolute truth in all things Jacksonville!
Orlando has already beat you with the autonomous shuttle service thing. You can't take this thing serious for a realistic mover of high volume capacity in a vibrant urban setting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRdk8ZShxaI
QuoteWith a fitting beep, doors opened and out stepped local elected officials and executives as confetti rained down over them outside the driverless bus.
The battery-powered driverless shuttle — operated by the mobility company Beep — had safely delivered them to the official opening of the free service, which will shuttle daily between the Laureate Park Village Center and Lake Nona Town Center. The route of about a mile will take about 12 minutes, toting 10 people at 15 mph.
"Tomorrow is here," said Rasesh Thakkar, senior managing director of Tavistock Development, which created Lake Nona.
Jérôme Rigaud, chief operating officer of the French company Navya that built the bus, hopes drivers and passengers grow to find the technology boring and a regular part of life. He pitched its safety to skeptics by asking how quickly drivers pick up their phones when they sit down in a vehicle.
Full article: https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orange-county/os-ne-autonomous-shuttle-launch-20190918-xyianpytbnbzvnc2x4oluur2pm-story.html
Quote from: Peter Griffin on November 07, 2019, 01:06:02 PM
Psssh, nobody would use it!
Oh wait, somebody WOULD use it? Hmm, better pivot...
Psssh! It'll never get built!
Kerry is never incorrect. His pessimism knows no bounds, nor does it ever fail to be the source of absolute truth in all things Jacksonville!
Okay, I guess a few people riding it once in awhile to get a beer after work doesn't technically qualify as nobody, but neither does the "I would take it all the time" really mean all the time, as in, I'll never ever go get a beer any other way.
Seriously, the basis of fixed guideway in Jax is so people can get a beer after work?
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2019, 01:54:49 PM
Orlando has already beat you with the autonomous shuttle service thing. You can't take this thing serious for a realistic mover of high volume capacity in a vibrant urban setting.
QuoteThe route of about a mile will take about 12 minutes, toting 10 people at 15 mph.
Hate to be the math guy here, but a 12 minute mile = 5 mph.
Roughly half speed of a goose running down the street.
The future is here.
Yeah, these AV's are dumb. Expanding the skyway doesn't seem to be feasible (but may be the best option considering just how many TOD's are popping up in LaVilla, and the potential for making the Brooklyn area a retrofitted TOD)
Buses and shuttles can be (and are) implemented now, I could see that as a WAY better stopgap/last-mile solution than these silly little clown cars. Heck, just start a fund and subsidize Uber or Lyft rides within the area. Inventing technology to solve a problem rather than using existing tech is the reason we still prop up the skyway, which is criminally underutilized.
Quote from: Kerry on November 07, 2019, 02:38:09 PM
Quote from: Peter Griffin on November 07, 2019, 01:06:02 PM
Psssh, nobody would use it!
Oh wait, somebody WOULD use it? Hmm, better pivot...
Psssh! It'll never get built!
Kerry is never incorrect. His pessimism knows no bounds, nor does it ever fail to be the source of absolute truth in all things Jacksonville!
Okay, I guess a few people riding it once in awhile to get a beer after work doesn't technically qualify as nobody, but neither does the "I would take it all the time" really mean all the time, as in, I'll never ever go get a beer any other way.
Seriously, the basis of fixed guideway in Jax is so people can get a beer after work?
I must be under the weather, but I'm actually leaning in the Kerry court here.
Here's my thought: On a large stadium event (Jags, FL/GA, etc.), I can see this thing being jammed full - no argument there. Further, as stuff develops downtown I can see this being more used for a Shrimp game or Concert at the arena. Dad Rock Live - as some affectionately refer to Daily's Place as - doesn't have enough quantity of events to move a needle (at least at present). So, if the entire draw on that side of Hogan's Creek is the Sports Complex, Intuition, and everything at Lot J built out as currently spec'ed, I'm not sure I see a massive use for this thing.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 07, 2019, 03:09:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2019, 01:54:49 PM
Orlando has already beat you with the autonomous shuttle service thing. You can't take this thing serious for a realistic mover of high volume capacity in a vibrant urban setting.
QuoteThe route of about a mile will take about 12 minutes, toting 10 people at 15 mph.
Hate to be the math guy here, but a 12 minute mile = 5 mph.
Roughly half speed of a goose running down the street.
The future is here.
One of my consultants lives in Lake Nona. She's been complaining about them slowing down traffic and having to drive around them. That's something they'll have to fine tune.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 07, 2019, 03:09:54 PM
Hate to be the math guy here, but a 12 minute mile = 5 mph.
Roughly half speed of a goose running down the street.
The future is here.
;D ;D ;D
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2019, 03:41:09 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 07, 2019, 03:09:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2019, 01:54:49 PM
Orlando has already beat you with the autonomous shuttle service thing. You can't take this thing serious for a realistic mover of high volume capacity in a vibrant urban setting.
QuoteThe route of about a mile will take about 12 minutes, toting 10 people at 15 mph.
Hate to be the math guy here, but a 12 minute mile = 5 mph.
Roughly half speed of a goose running down the street.
The future is here.
One of my consultants lives in Lake Nona. She's been complaining about them slowing down traffic and having to drive around them. That's something they'll have to fine tune.
Can you imagine what these things will do to the flow of vehicular traffic driving down Bay Street and Riverside Boulevard, where the JTA has proposed routes?
It just seems like such a tragically dumb idea on all counts.
Robo shuttles make so much more sense in the context of first-mile/last-mile solutions roving dense neighborhoods at low speeds and feeding people into fixed transit, rather than serving as the main transit system itself.
Not to mention the fact that, within 10 years, the private sector will have their own autonomous vehicles and shuttles on the roads. As a city, we can't possibly compete with the economy of scale that the Ubers and Lyfts will have.
We need to stick with what we actually have a competitive advantage in, which is fixed transit with dedicated ROW.
Not sure why we insist on overcomplicating
everything.
^Sticking with dedicated ROW should be a no brainer. being reliable and saving time are two of the best ways for transit to be competitive for choice riders. Without dedicated ROW within a congested urban area, you fail at those things no matter what the technology in the rolling stock may be.
At some point, there will need to be a discussion about what the true vision for downtown's future will be. If we really want it to be a dense area, right sizing streets and congestion will likely become a part of the landscape. Transit with the capacity to move a much larger amount of people will most likely have to be a part of that picture. Right now, the stuff being borrowed from various manufacturers has not advanced to a point of being able to even match the current Skyway from a capacity perspective.
With that said, I do like JTA's current plan of running those things down Bay Street Lake Nona/Las Vegas-style before screwing up the existing fixed Skyway system. If they fail to live up to expectations, not much money has been wasted if we need to move on to something else.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2019, 07:44:17 PM
^Sticking with dedicated ROW should be a no brainer. being reliable and saving time are two of the best ways for transit to be competitive for choice riders. Without dedicated ROW within a congested urban area, you fail at those things no matter what the technology in the rolling stock may be.
At some point, there will need to be a discussion about what the true vision for downtown's future will be. If we really want it to be a dense area, right sizing streets and congestion will likely become a part of the landscape. Transit with the capacity to move a much larger amount of people will most likely have to be a part of that picture. Right now, the stuff being borrowed from various manufacturers has not advanced to a point of being able to even match the current Skyway from a capacity perspective.
With that said, I do like JTA's current plan of running those things down Bay Street Lake Nona/Las Vegas-style before screwing up the existing fixed Skyway system. If they fail to live up to expectations, not much money has been wasted if we need to move on to something else.
I wish I could share your confidence. I thought JTA was going to take the Skyway out of service for the year (or more) long process to convert the Skyway track for AV's, while the Bay Street 'test' was underway. Are they going to wait to begin the conversion until they have some real-world ground-level experience?
There was a recent article (like a week or two ago) that made it sound like JTA would first run AVs down Bay Street between the JRTC and TIAA Bank Field first, before doing anything with the Skyway. The story mentioned they would have AVs running on Bay within three years. Maybe I read it the wrong way. I can't find it now.
What is the latest on Lot J? 6 months ago the City and Khan said they reached an agreement pending DIA and Council approval. Has any of that happened? The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. Any chance that date is met?
No, the DIA and Council have not approved the pending agreement yet and there's no chance Lot J will start construction before March 31.
Quote from: Kerry on January 13, 2020, 05:52:37 PM
The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. A
Where are you getting this from?
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 07:55:23 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 13, 2020, 05:52:37 PM
The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. A
Where are you getting this from?
That was the timeline the Jags gave.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:01:22 AM
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 07:55:23 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 13, 2020, 05:52:37 PM
The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. A
Where are you getting this from?
That was the timeline the Jags gave.
I've literally never seen that date from anyone at COJ or the Jaguars (two parties who are not shy on pumping up Khan's future investments for the better part of 10 years), and I went back and looked at every press release provided over the past year.
Neither the DIA nor City Council has approved (nor has even officially discussed) an economic development agreement for the Lot J proposal.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 14, 2020, 08:28:02 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:01:22 AM
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 07:55:23 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 13, 2020, 05:52:37 PM
The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. A
Where are you getting this from?
That was the timeline the Jags gave.
I've literally never seen that date from anyone at COJ or the Jaguars, and I went back and looked at every press release provided over the past year.
Neither the DIA nor City Council has approved (nor has even officially discussed) an economic development agreement for the Lot J proposal.
How many quotes from articles do you need/want?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/whats-next-for-lot-j-the-jaguars-dollar500-million-development-proposal
QuoteLamping said at the State of the Franchise last week and Curry reiterated Tuesday that the ramp demolition will begin after the Jaguars regular season ends Dec. 29, with possible delays if the team hosts a postseason playoff game.
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/sports/nfl/jacksonville-jaguars/shad-khan-jaguars-expect-lot-j-development-to-begin-in-early-2020/77-79913bc0-8d25-4950-aade-7f820bd27ae2
QuoteJaguars owner Shad Khan and president Mark Lamping told the Times-Union on Saturday they expect to get approval for the development of Lot J by January and anticipate ground-breaking to begin by the end of the 2020 first quarter.
After the last game, not IMMEDIATELY after ad you claimed.
ANTICIPATE GROUNDBREAKING which is not a commitment to a particular date.
You're extrapolating unduly
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 08:49:28 AM
After the last game, not IMMEDIATELY after ad you claimed.
ANTICIPATE GROUNDBREAKING which is not a commitment to a particular date.
You're extrapolating unduly
Holy crap dude - there was only 5 days between the Jags last game and the first playoff game. How "immediately after" is immediate to you?
Both Lamping and Curry said the removal would start after the Jags last game (Dec 29th) and if the Jags made the playoffs it would delay the start. The first playoff game the Jags could have been in was Jan 4th. There are 5 days in between those two, so clearly they meant construction would start within 5 days of the last game.
Hypothetically, what would need to happen (realistically) in order for this city's investment in Lot J to be "worth it"? 500 residents in that area? A Super Bowl 10-15 years after its built? A higher profile for the Gator Bowl? A Fortune 500 company moving in? Trickle down development down Bay Street and A Philip Randolph?
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:43:25 AM
Quote from: fieldafm on January 14, 2020, 08:28:02 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:01:22 AM
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 07:55:23 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 13, 2020, 05:52:37 PM
The ramps were supposed to come down immediately after the last game with Lot J construction starting before March 31. A
Where are you getting this from?
That was the timeline the Jags gave.
I've literally never seen that date from anyone at COJ or the Jaguars, and I went back and looked at every press release provided over the past year.
Neither the DIA nor City Council has approved (nor has even officially discussed) an economic development agreement for the Lot J proposal.
How many quotes from articles do you need/want?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/whats-next-for-lot-j-the-jaguars-dollar500-million-development-proposal
QuoteLamping said at the State of the Franchise last week and Curry reiterated Tuesday that the ramp demolition will begin after the Jaguars regular season ends Dec. 29, with possible delays if the team hosts a postseason playoff game.
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/sports/nfl/jacksonville-jaguars/shad-khan-jaguars-expect-lot-j-development-to-begin-in-early-2020/77-79913bc0-8d25-4950-aade-7f820bd27ae2
QuoteJaguars owner Shad Khan and president Mark Lamping told the Times-Union on Saturday they expect to get approval for the development of Lot J by January and anticipate ground-breaking to begin by the end of the 2020 first quarter.
One of those links doesn't even reference the first quarter of 2020 and only the FCN article is the only news source (including Jaguars.com, WJCT, Action News, News4Jax, Jacksonville.com and WOKV) that references tepid 'expectations' and 'anticipations' of the end of 2020 Q1... but, ok.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:54:51 AM
There are 5 days in between those two, so clearly they meant construction would start within 5 days of the last game.
I don't read this anywhere in the links you've posted, and think that's a ridiculous thing to pull out of the article.
I don't even get what your point is, man, do you think the project has been canceled? You must be smokin' some good stuff, dude, you're reading thing in articles that aren't even there.
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 09:03:54 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 08:54:51 AM
There are 5 days in between those two, so clearly they meant construction would start within 5 days of the last game.
I don't read this anywhere in the links you've posted, and think that's a ridiculous thing to pull out of the article.
I don't even get what your point is, man, do you think the project has been canceled? You must be smokin' some good stuff, dude, you're reading thing in articles that aren't even there.
Seriously? This to you doesn't mean between the last game and first playoff game?
QuoteLamping said at the State of the Franchise last week and Curry reiterated Tuesday that the ramp demolition will begin after the Jaguars regular season ends Dec. 29, with possible delays if the team hosts a postseason playoff game.
As for your second comment, do I think it has been canceled? Yes I do. As I have said many times I think the whole thing was based on the JEA headquarters selection and sale providing the City's funding portion and that process is now under a federal investigation. I think the whole thing got canceled as soon as JEA didn't pick Lot J.
"the ramp demolition will begin after the Jaguars regular season ends Dec. 29"
after...Dec. 29
that's it!
The project hasn't begun, it isn't canceled. You're seeing ghosts
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 09:12:33 AM
"the ramp demolition will begin after the Jaguars regular season ends Dec. 29"
after...Dec. 29
that's it!
The project hasn't begun, it isn't canceled. You're seeing ghosts
",with possible delays if the team hosts a postseason playoff game."
The first playoff game the Jags could have hosted was the Wildcard game on Jan 4th. The last possible date would have been Jan 12th if the Jags had won the division - so I guess you could make the argument that there was a 2-week window for construction to start.
Alas, I don't think it is cancel because construction hasn't started. I think it is canceled because there is no funding. My prediction - 2020 will be their last season in Jax (unless the NFL give the Jags a 2nd London game).
I don't think any reasonable person would make that argument, nor would they think that the statements you reference indicate that the construction would have started. A postseason could delay the start of construction, but that does not mean that it happens so immediately after the game that the ONLY thing delaying construction is a postseason game, nor that it is hinging on the final game to end and the parking lot to clear to immediately start breaking ground.
You've found an "immediately" somewhere in your head and pasted it into the articles as you read that simply. isn't. there.
And if you think that this was hinged on JEA, again, I think you're coming up with this stuff off the top of your head or connecting dots on a corkboard with strings.
None of the claims you've been harping on the last couple of days are substantiated or based in reality.
I can't find the link, but I remember a Jags employee named Pepe Sylvia saying construction would begin by January 10th and that would be a worst case scenario.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on January 14, 2020, 09:40:53 AM
I can't find the link, but I remember a Jags employee named Pepe Sylvia saying construction would begin by January 10th and that would be a worst case scenario.
;)
You can believe what you want.
Does anyone know the status of the environmental analysis? According to articles from 2018 the Jags said State Environmental Regulators would also need to signoff on any construction at Lot J as well. I haven't heard anything about State approval yet. I don't know what comes first so would the State Regulators need to sign-off before the City (DIA or Council) approves?
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 10:10:53 AM
You can believe what you want.
Does anyone know the status of the environmental analysis? According to articles from 2018 the Jags said State Environmental Regulators would also need to signoff on any construction at Lot J as well. I haven't heard anything about State approval yet. I don't know what comes first so would the State Regulators need to sign-off before the City (DIA or Council) approves?
And you can believe what you want, as well, misguided as it may be.
As for the environmental portion, the project is canceled anyway so the environmental assessment is no longer necessary, right?
Ugghhh I can't find any of these links today. There was a Carol in HR at the EPA who I remember sending a press release about signing off on the environmental aspects. Will continue to look for it.
Last I heard was the environmental assessment was tied up in litigation. Apparently, there are protected eagle's nests in the immediate vicinity and some groups don't want any development to happen. Some pretty complex Bird Law stuff really. I've been told the Sierra Club are bringing in an out of state lawyer, Jack Kelly to fight the case. Real hands on guy.
QuoteLast I heard was the environmental assessment was tied up in litigation. Apparently, there are protected eagle's nests in the immediate vicinity and some groups don't want any development to happen.
Are you sure that wasn't Philadelphia?
Most recent comment from Mark Lamping had construction realistically beginning in the "first half" of 2020, contingent on the development agreement being finalized.
I think spending $500 million to develop Lot J is a bad idea. If Khan wanted to transform Jacksonville he should spread out his investments around the CBD, it would be so much more effective.
My $.02
Quote from: MusicMan on January 14, 2020, 11:17:59 AM
I think spending $500 million to develop Lot J is a bad idea. If Khan wanted to transform Jacksonville he should spread out his investments around the CBD, it would be so much more effective.
My $.02
Between the Landing, old Courthouse site, and numerous other city owned parcels in the CBD, the Jags could build the exact same components, at a significantly lower cost without remediation and additional infrastructure expenses, in a way that genuinely would have positive externalities on downtown Jacksonville.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on January 14, 2020, 10:38:47 AM
Ugghhh I can't find any of these links today. There was a Carol in HR at the EPA who I remember sending a press release about signing off on the environmental aspects. Will continue to look for it.
I found this:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/lot-j-developer-wants-to-begin-soil-groundwater-testing-at-site
QuotePreliminary site work for Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan's proposed $450 million Lot J development could be near.
The Downtown Investment Authority Board will consider a resolution Wednesday granting Lot J development company Jacksonville I-C Parcel One Holding Company LLC a limited license to access the city-owned property for environmental testing.
According to the resolution, the 60-day license will allow the developers to collect groundwater and soil samples from the TIAA Bank Field parking lot, which could identify if contaminants are present at the future construction site.
This story was from Oct 10, 2019. Anyone know if DIA approved the 60-day license, or how to search for it myself? That next Wednesday would have been Oct 16th which means the 60 day permit would have expired on Dec 8, 2019. I don't think the EPA could sign-off on something that fast.
On Edit: It looks like it was approved in late Oct.
https://residentnews.net/2020/01/01/lot-j-project-inches-forward/
Never mind - found it: https://dia.coj.net/getattachment/about/Resolutions/RESOLUTION-2019-10-01_LOT-J-ACCESS.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US
I knew a lot of these jokes would go right under the radar...
It's Always Sunny in Jacksonville around here today, I like it!
Soil testing approval:
QuoteRESOLUTION 2019-10-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT AUTHORITY ("DIA") AUTHORIZING ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ("CEO") TO EXECUTE A PROPERTY ACCESS AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT") WITH JACKSONVILLE I-C PARCEL ONE HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, FOR THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE LOT J SURFACE PARKING LOT AND IDENTIFIED BY DUVAL COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER PARCEL NUMBER 130572 0150 ("PROPERTY'); INSTRUCTING THE DIA CEO TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY'S RISK MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND THE OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNCIL PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT; INSTRUCTING THE CEO TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTION TO EFFECTUATE THE PURPOSE OF THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, through the adoption of Ordinance 2014-560-E the City assigned management of certain City-owned properties and buildings to the DIA; and
WHEREAS, from time to time DIA staff is requested to allow for temporary use of its managed properties for such purposes as conducting due diligence activities in advance of disposition of real property; and
WHEREAS, DIA Resolution 2017-07-04 authorized the CEO of the DIA to execute certain access agreements within the parameters set forth therein, without the need to obtain approval by the DIA Board; and
WHEREAS, access agreements that include environmental, geotechnical, and other invasive due diligence activities, and access agreements that have terms for greater than six (6) months, require approval by the DIA Board prior to execution by its CEO, NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Downtown Investment Authority:
Section 1. The DIA finds that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. DIA hereby conditionally grants to Jacksonville I-C Parcel One Holding Company, LLC ("Licensee"), its agents, representatives, employees, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors, a limited license for access to enter upon the Property for the sole purpose of performing certain testing including but not limited to collection of groundwater samples from the monitoring wells, making of soil borings, taking of soil samples from the borings, the proper abandonment of any monitoring wells, disposal of soil and water generated from the testing (collectively, the "Work"). The Work shall be at no cost to DIA or the City.
Section 3. The Agreement shall continue for a period of sixty (60) days at which time it will expire unless extended in writing by the CEO of the DIA for up to an additional two (2) month period.
Section 4. Prior to execution of the Agreement by the DIA CEO, the CEO shall first obtain approvals of the Agreement by the City's Risk Manager, Director of Public Works and the Office of General Counsel.
Section 5. The DIA instructs its CEO to take all necessary action to effectuate the purpose of this Resolution.
Section 6. This Resolution shall become effective on the date it is signed by the Chair of the DIA Board.
So, any way to find out if it was approved by the City's Risk Manager and the Office of General Council?
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
Soil testing approval:
QuoteRESOLUTION 2019-10-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT AUTHORITY ("DIA") AUTHORIZING ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ("CEO") TO EXECUTE A PROPERTY ACCESS AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT") WITH JACKSONVILLE I-C PARCEL ONE HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, FOR THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE LOT J SURFACE PARKING LOT AND IDENTIFIED BY DUVAL COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER PARCEL NUMBER 130572 0150 ("PROPERTY'); INSTRUCTING THE DIA CEO TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY'S RISK MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND THE OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNCIL PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT; INSTRUCTING THE CEO TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTION TO EFFECTUATE THE PURPOSE OF THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, through the adoption of Ordinance 2014-560-E the City assigned management of certain City-owned properties and buildings to the DIA; and
WHEREAS, from time to time DIA staff is requested to allow for temporary use of its managed properties for such purposes as conducting due diligence activities in advance of disposition of real property; and
WHEREAS, DIA Resolution 2017-07-04 authorized the CEO of the DIA to execute certain access agreements within the parameters set forth therein, without the need to obtain approval by the DIA Board; and
WHEREAS, access agreements that include environmental, geotechnical, and other invasive due diligence activities, and access agreements that have terms for greater than six (6) months, require approval by the DIA Board prior to execution by its CEO, NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Downtown Investment Authority:
Section 1. The DIA finds that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. DIA hereby conditionally grants to Jacksonville I-C Parcel One Holding Company, LLC ("Licensee"), its agents, representatives, employees, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors, a limited license for access to enter upon the Property for the sole purpose of performing certain testing including but not limited to collection of groundwater samples from the monitoring wells, making of soil borings, taking of soil samples from the borings, the proper abandonment of any monitoring wells, disposal of soil and water generated from the testing (collectively, the "Work"). The Work shall be at no cost to DIA or the City.
Section 3. The Agreement shall continue for a period of sixty (60) days at which time it will expire unless extended in writing by the CEO of the DIA for up to an additional two (2) month period.
Section 4. Prior to execution of the Agreement by the DIA CEO, the CEO shall first obtain approvals of the Agreement by the City's Risk Manager, Director of Public Works and the Office of General Counsel.
Section 5. The DIA instructs its CEO to take all necessary action to effectuate the purpose of this Resolution.
Section 6. This Resolution shall become effective on the date it is signed by the Chair of the DIA Board.
So, any way to find out if it was approved by the City's Risk Manager and the Office of General Council?
The access was approved and they've been testing on the site for the past few months. If you travel down San Jose Boulevard past the Chik-Fil-A, traverse the Main Street Bridge and hung a right on to Bay Street... you could have clearly seen workers doing various tests. You must have been in Orlando with Johnson and his wife and kids while all of this was going on.
How does this movie end though? Are the Jags really moving to London this year, or is Khan going to bang that old lady and then play that song from the 80's?
Thanks for the confirmation. Like most people in Jax, since I don't live downtown now I don't have much reason to go there anymore.
So how does the process go?
Soil samples collected
Soil test completed
Contamination remediation plan submitted and approved (I assume by the State)
How does the development process work? Does the funding agreement get approved first by DIA and City Council and THEN Khan and Company put together the site plan and related documents for approval again, or do they do that all in one shot?
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 01:06:07 PM
Like most people in Jax, since I don't live downtown now I don't have much reason to go there anymore.
And then folks like yourself wonder why DT doesn't thrive.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 01:06:07 PM
So how does the process go?
You know that there's a great number of search engines available with which you can search how environmental soil survey procedures go, right?
Why do you even care? The project is canceled, right?
How timely
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20200114/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development
Here is why I am skeptical:
Clay Bennett had no intention of building a new arena in Seattle. He wanted to move the Sonics to OKC from the beginning so he made a proposal that he knew would never get approved.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/sonics-owner-unveils-model-for-proposed-renton-venue/
Khan is already trying to secure a second home game in London starting next season, and the NFL wants that also because they want a team in London.
http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/nfl-london-games-2020-uk-franchise
https://www.jaguars.com/news/khan-talks-business-lot-j-london-more
Honestly, I'm surprised the comments from Khan in the last article did just kill the whole thing dead in and of itself.
Quote
What's driven this for us is we want to give the community a different experience," Khan said. "Obviously football ... there is a limited demand for it. That's why we're playing the games here in London -- that the community can't support selling out eight games, so maybe there's something else we can do there for the hot-dog vendors, the hotel rooms, all the stakeholders who make a living off the game."
"If we are playing a game away, we want to have one mega-experience. That kind of makes up for that from our viewpoint. If we're playing more than one, we would want to have a couple or more."
Quote from: Josh on January 14, 2020, 01:19:38 PM
How timely
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20200114/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development
Very interesting read.
Interesting that the project cost has shot up by 40% in the last couple of months (from $500 million to $700 million).
Pretty sure the term sheet previously released was based on a $500 million project, with the city paying roughly half, as it typically has with these joint ventures with the Jags ($233 million).
I wonder if that $233 million is going to end up being north of $300 million based on the new estimates.
Not only that, but confirmation that the Jags are looking to have two home games in London and they want to hit the City up for an untold amount for the stadium just as Lot J is finishing construction. We could literally throw away $300 million on Lot J if we turn around and don't spend whatever the Jags want on a new/upgraded stadium. Only an idiot would put themselves in that position.
As for the price increase - it is the Seattle Sonics strategy. When the State, County, and City finally said No, team owners were wanting a $700 million stadium project. Then Bennett and Company said, "Well, we tried." and moved the team to OKC.
So basically nothing much has changed since last summer when Curry announced that a deal had been worked out between him and Iguana. Whenever they actually finish this agreement, it will then go to the DIA for approval and then council. Anything going vertical would eventually have to go before the DDRB and have to undergo it's own permitting process. All this means is no way in hell is anything breaking ground this spring, unless COJ spending money to begin cleaning contamination on the site is counted as "breaking ground". I wouldn't get my hopes up that anything will be completed and open by the time Curry's term is up.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 14, 2020, 02:47:06 PM
So basically nothing much has changed since last summer when Curry announced that a deal had been worked out between him and Iguana. Whenever they actually finish this agreement, it will then go to the DIA for approval and then council. Anything going vertical would eventually have to go before the DDRB and have to undergo it's own permitting process. All this means is no way in hell is anything breaking ground this spring, unless COJ spending money to begin cleaning contamination on the site is counted as "breaking ground". I wouldn't get my hopes up that anything will be completed and open by the time Curry's term is up.
Thanks. I was wondering if the financial package agreement would have to be different than the actual building permit process. Lamping said he wanted the whole deal done as one package so I wasn't sure what that meant. They can't delay too long because the Jags said they wanted Lot J open BEFORE they start stadium negotiations, and they wanted those negotiations wrapped up 4 years before the lease expires.
In July 2019 they said the Mayor's office and the Jags reached an agreement. Now they are saying that was just a tentative agreement and this is the real one. As noted earlier, the price went from $450 million to $700 million in just over 5 months.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 02:04:18 PM
...and they want to hit the City up for an untold amount for the stadium just as Lot J is finishing construction. We could literally throw away $300 million on Lot J if we turn around and don't spend whatever the Jags want on a new/upgraded stadium. Only an idiot would put themselves in that position.
This is a very scary and uncomfortably realistic situation we may find ourselves in.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 03:53:39 PM
In July 2019 they said the Mayor's office and the Jags reached an agreement. Now they are saying that was just a tentative agreement and this is the real one.
You sure do read things as you wish they were. Quotes from the links you posted earlier:
Quote"It's hard to speculate when something might happen. We're having very positive discussions now with the mayor's office, and I attribute that to our shared goals and vision for Downtown Jacksonville,"
QuoteHughes said representatives from the mayor's office and the Jaguars are in conversations and "nothing is on paper."
"The team is hammering out a development agreement right now, they're conversing to get something we can bring forward," Curry said.
QuoteThree months ago, Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry announced a tentative deal
QuoteKhan cautioned it's "a journey of many steps. I think it's a critical step, but there's no magic silver bullet."
Again, you've concluded the Jags are gone after 2020... and that the Hart Bridge removal has no funding... and that Lot J was dead because JEA chose the Ryan Companies to build at a City-owned lot along Adams Street... so why care about facts now?
Quote from: RiversideRambler on January 14, 2020, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 02:04:18 PM
...and they want to hit the City up for an untold amount for the stadium just as Lot J is finishing construction. We could literally throw away $300 million on Lot J if we turn around and don't spend whatever the Jags want on a new/upgraded stadium. Only an idiot would put themselves in that position.
This is a very scary and uncomfortably realistic situation we may find ourselves in.
And what choice would we have but to pay it?
We are sort of in that boat now with Daily's Place and the practice field. If the Jags leave we are stuck with a non-revenue generating practice facility but have to give profits from Daily's Place to the Jags forever. This couldn't be more f-ed up if the City tried.
We should had a clause to the Lot J development agreement that says if the Jags leave town all partnership properties revert to 100% city ownership. Since the Jags said they aren't leaving it shouldn't be a problem.
Quote from: RiversideRambler on January 14, 2020, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 02:04:18 PM
...and they want to hit the City up for an untold amount for the stadium just as Lot J is finishing construction. We could literally throw away $300 million on Lot J if we turn around and don't spend whatever the Jags want on a new/upgraded stadium. Only an idiot would put themselves in that position.
This is a very scary and uncomfortably realistic situation we may find ourselves in.
On the flip side, $300 million for Lot J.. and then 5-8 years later another $500 million in stadium upgrades (which is in the same range of costs associated with Hard Rock Stadium renovations in Miami)... on top of the $400-ish million spent on the stadium and surrounding developments since 1993.... for basically 50 years (initial 30 year lease plus say a 20 year extension) is still VASTLY cheaper than the $1.5 billion being spent on new stadiums nowadays.
Jacksonville has really stretched out their dollars on JMS/Alltell Stadium/Everbank Field/TIAA Bank Field over the last 25 years... including hosting a Super Bowl in 2005. Frankly, in comparison to other NFL cities, there's been a lot of value engineered in these gradual upgrades/maintenance/additions.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 14, 2020, 04:23:32 PM
Again, you've concluded the Jags are gone after 2020... and that the Hart Bridge removal has no funding... and that Lot J was dead because JEA chose the Ryan Companies to build at a City-owned lot along Adams Street... so why care about facts now?
It all gets so tiring... it's like banging your head against the wall and expecting the wall to agree with you about a project being built, but just when it seems like it's gonna give way it asks you about how the soil survey is coming along.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 14, 2020, 04:23:32 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 03:53:39 PM
In July 2019 they said the Mayor's office and the Jags reached an agreement. Now they are saying that was just a tentative agreement and this is the real one.
You sure do read things as you wish they were. Quotes from the links you posted earlier:
Quote"It's hard to speculate when something might happen. We're having very positive discussions now with the mayor's office, and I attribute that to our shared goals and vision for Downtown Jacksonville,"
QuoteHughes said representatives from the mayor's office and the Jaguars are in conversations and "nothing is on paper."
"The team is hammering out a development agreement right now, they're conversing to get something we can bring forward," Curry said.
QuoteThree months ago, Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry announced a tentative deal
QuoteKhan cautioned it's "a journey of many steps. I think it's a critical step, but there's no magic silver bullet."
Again, you've concluded the Jags are gone after 2020... and that the Hart Bridge removal has no funding... and that Lot J was dead because JEA chose the Ryan Companies to build at a City-owned lot along Adams Street... so why care about facts now?
Please identify what I got wrong. In July the City and Khan did announce they reached an agreement.
July 31, 2019
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/city-jaguars-owner-reach-incentives-deal-on-dollar450-million-lot-j-development
QuoteThe city has reached a deal with Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan and his investment company, Iguana Investments Florida LLC, to help finance a more than $450 million development in Lot J near TIAA Bank Field.
Mayor Lenny Curry announced the agreement Wednesday in a video address posted to the city's social media platforms. Negotiators for Khan and Curry have been working on the deal since Jaguars and Iguana President Mark Lamping unveiled the latest plans for Lot J in April.
Jan 14, 2020
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20200114/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development
QuoteJaguars President Mark Lamping said negotiations with mayor's office are close to finalizing a proposed deal for Lot J development. Lamping said he hopes ground-breaking could occur in the spring.
Jaguars President Mark Lamping said negotiations with the city on a development deal for Lot J next to the stadium are "very close" to finalizing a deal that could go to City Council with an eye toward ground-breaking in the spring.
Last July, Mayor Lenny Curry announced a financial framework for a development deal for the city to pay up to $233.3 million, including $208.3 million in hard money, for its share of the cost of building a miniature urban neighborhood anchored by an entertainment district.
...
Lamping said the financial framework announced by Curry last July was a starting point for talks on hammering out a full development deal.
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 09:08:25 AM
I think the whole thing got canceled as soon as JEA didn't pick Lot J.
This is probably the biggest thing you got wrong today, and reiterated it over and over again
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 14, 2020, 04:43:27 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 09:08:25 AM
I think the whole thing got canceled as soon as JEA didn't pick Lot J.
This is probably the biggest thing you got wrong today, and reiterated it over and over again
Don't be mad. Hells Bells - the Jags and City announced today they are inches away from a $700 million downtown project. You should be as happy as a puppy with two peters. Jags fans should literally be dancing in the streets.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 14, 2020, 04:29:48 PM
Quote from: RiversideRambler on January 14, 2020, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 02:04:18 PM
...and they want to hit the City up for an untold amount for the stadium just as Lot J is finishing construction. We could literally throw away $300 million on Lot J if we turn around and don't spend whatever the Jags want on a new/upgraded stadium. Only an idiot would put themselves in that position.
This is a very scary and uncomfortably realistic situation we may find ourselves in.
On the flip side, $300 million for Lot J.. and then 5-8 years later another $500 million in stadium upgrades (which is in the same range of costs associated with Hard Rock Stadium renovations in Miami)... on top of the $400-ish million spent on the stadium and surrounding developments since 1993.... for basically 50 years (initial 30 year lease plus say a 20 year extension) is still VASTLY cheaper than the $1.5 billion being spent on new stadiums nowadays.
Jacksonville has really stretched out their dollars on JMS/Alltell Stadium/Everbank Field/TIAA Bank Field over the last 25 years... including hosting a Super Bowl in 2005. Frankly, in comparison to other NFL cities, there's been a lot of value engineered in these gradual upgrades/maintenance/additions.
This is a great point. There's a pricetag for buying into the major league sports monopolies, and we've come out on the cheaper end of it compared to many.
Let see what the final deal is. Unfortunately, with the City's track record of getting the wrong end of the stick on such deals and ballooning costs that change the deal once the City is stuck with it, I don't have much expectation that reality comes close to what has been promised to date.
As a taxpayer, I expect to be greatly disappointed and taken advantage of. One would hope, after JEA, deals like this would get a new level of scrutiny by the City Council and others in the community but I will have to see it to believe it.
This is all on top of the inherent risks of the project's success once it is built. If it fails to deliver, who is left holding the bag? Add the uncertainties of stadium "improvements" and that the Jags might play less than 6 or 7 games here a year and I am trying to figure out why the taxpayers should put up $233 million (from what source?) for Lot J, especially given that the rest of the City is bleeding from underfunded needs.
By the way, I find it disingenuous when the Jags bemoan the "small" Jacksonville market as such risk was supposedly offset by a sweetheart (i.e. free+) stadium deal. On this basis, they shouldn't always need that additional "local revenue" because they don't have those higher "local expenses" (see privately built stadiums such as LA).
Lamping said again that the new agreement will still be 50/50. That is going to make the City's share about $350 million if true. We'll probably have to borrow that money.
Jesus Christ...
There's got to be a point where it just isn't worth it anymore. By the time we pay for Lot J to do nothing for downtown, pay to tear down the Hart ramps, pay to renovate the stadium, pay for the convention center (because of course we will), and then pay for the rest of the Shipyards, we're looking at what, $2 billion? And for what, a team that has failed for two decades to get their shit together? And to top it off, the city doesn't even get the profit?
Where does the buck stop? When do we as a city decide that if this is the cost of an NFL team, especially one that doesn't even win, that it just isn't worth it anymore? For Christ's sake, at least when UF spends $80 million on a football training facility, or a new baseball stadium, we know it's going to a decent team that wins games, and pays its way. I don't go to bed feeling like my tuition is doing nothing but getting people paid to suck.
Like, I understand the idea of civic pride. I love wearing Gator gear in college. The football games have some amazing atmosphere. But at a time when crime is still on the rise, education is in desperate need of funding, and we can't even seem to get the ball rolling on simple improvements that would enormously raise the quality of our urban core, there has to be a point where we stop letting the Jaguars eat our faces.
Quote from: sanmarcomatt on January 15, 2020, 09:12:16 AM
First, you can't put a price tag on a community coming together as one to cheer on the Jags ( It helps if you have 'Imagine' playing in the back ground).
I know you're joking, but it turns out we can absolutely put a price tag on that. It's at least a few billion dollars.
Quote
Second, we could have a Four Seasons where Con can entertain his 2 & 20 bro's.
So you're saying I should raise that guess to $2.5 billion?
Interesting feedback from Jag's season ticket holders in article below. Looks like a high percentage are ready to jump ship. Interesting that many cite Lamping's comments about lack of fan support as pissing them off - as much as frustration with the Jags record. If these diehards are backing down, we could be approaching a point where many here may refuse to support dumping endless taxpayer dollars into Jags-related projects.
https://www.jacksonville.com/sports/20200115/jaguars-fans-sound-off-about-season-tickets-renewals-or-staying-home-in-2020 (https://www.jacksonville.com/sports/20200115/jaguars-fans-sound-off-about-season-tickets-renewals-or-staying-home-in-2020)
Khan is taking some heat for saying there is limited demand for football in Jax and seeking a second game in London....but he isn't wrong. The Jags don't release gate attendance but they know what it is. I would have find it again but the highest revenue for a single game by the Jags was way down on the list highest revenue games in the NFL. Selling out the stadium every Sunday wouldn't solve their funding problem.
Quote from: Kerry on January 15, 2020, 05:37:16 PM
Khan is taking some heat for saying there is limited demand for football in Jax and seeking a second game in London....but he isn't wrong. The Jags don't release gate attendance but they know what it is. I would have find it again but the highest revenue for a single game by the Jags was way down on the list highest revenue games in the NFL. Selling out the stadium every Sunday wouldn't solve their funding problem.
If selling out the stadium doesn't solve their funding problem, then how did we get a team in the first place? A sell out is maximum revenue so what didn't they get? If the ticket and suite prices are not high enough, they had to know, based on cost of living, they were not going to get LA or NY prices in Jacksonville, FL. At this point, the lack of sell outs or even ability to raise ticket prices relates mostly to the lack of a quality product on the field and, now, apparently, the team management dissing the fans, not the capacity to achieve appropriate revenue goals.
I also will repost my earlier comment that the reason we, as a small market, landed the team in the first place was, knowing we couldn't match the revenue possibilities of larger cities, keeping the expense of being here much lower. And, note that Kahn, accordingly, paid a much lower price for the Jags than an NFL team in a bigger market would sell for, thus, reducing his investment, and, therefore, his need to get revenues commensurate with the larger markets. Kahn appears to be a driven businessman, striving to squeeze every last dollar out of his investments. No surprise there but the community isn't obligated to insure he gets those last dollars.
QuoteBy the way, I find it disingenuous when the Jags bemoan the "small" Jacksonville market as such risk was supposedly offset by a sweetheart (i.e. free+) stadium deal. On this basis, they shouldn't always need that additional "local revenue" because they don't have those higher "local expenses" (see privately built stadiums such as LA).
Quote from: sanmarcomatt on January 15, 2020, 04:20:31 PM
I expect sales to be challenging unless boating peasants is a larger demographic than I thought. They have teal blood in their veins.
I doubt we're a large enough demographic to keep the team here.
When I have my tinfoil hat on, this is the slowplay to relocate without breaking the lease, or at least until he can purchase one of the 2 stadiums across the pond, but then I let the teal flow and continue to convince myself that this time it'll work and the team will get better with some continuity.
But yes, I'll be plopping down my $$$ for the season at some point and time, but unlike other years, I will actually call my tix rep and see what 'free' stuff they're willing to give - because I'm almost willing to give up the 7 games at home so that London, Green Bay and Indianapolis aren't such hits to this peasant's discretionary budget.
If Jax supposedly isn't 'large enough' for a NFL team, then Tampa Bay, Cincinnati and the LA Chargers (no brainer) aren't 'large enough' either...Don't give me that "Tampa and Cincinnati is larger than Jax" garbage... Those three teams have histories of having ALL AROUND worst attendance than Jacksonville.
I'm sick of Khan's and Lamping's BS; their total impatience in a rapidly growing city, with a awful product on the field is wearing very very thin with me. Their constant whining is creating voids with our diehard fanbase. They want the attendance of the Patriots with an ever-5-11 team year after year. I don't hear any whining from Tampa Bay and Cincinnati, and their attendance is significantly worse than Jax. I'm not feeling the Jags brass right now; they aren't reasonable.
Quote from: I-10east on January 15, 2020, 08:09:27 PM
If Jax supposedly isn't 'large enough' for a NFL team, then Tampa Bay, Cincinnati and the LA Chargers (no brainer) aren't 'large enough' either...Don't give me that "Tampa and Cincinnati is larger than Jax" garbage... Those three teams have histories of having ALL AROUND worst attendance than Jacksonville.
I'm sick of Khan's and Lamping's BS; their total impatience in a rapidly growing city, with a awful product on the field is wearing very very thin with me. Their constant whining is creating voids with our diehard fanbase. They want the attendance of the Patriots with an ever-5-11 team year after year. I don't hear any whining from Tampa Bay and Cincinnati, and their attendance is significantly worse than Jax. I'm not feeling the Jags brass right now; they aren't reasonable.
It probably has to do with TV viewership and merchandise sales.
Quote from: Kerry on January 15, 2020, 05:37:16 PM
Khan is taking some heat for saying there is limited demand for football in Jax and seeking a second game in London....but he isn't wrong. The Jags don't release gate attendance but they know what it is. I would have find it again but the highest revenue for a single game by the Jags was way down on the list highest revenue games in the NFL. Selling out the stadium every Sunday wouldn't solve their funding problem.
Ticket revenue is shared among the league and players. Only luxury suite revenue is kept by the team.
My guess is that the Jags should have a second game in London and think that is good for all parties involve. Heck, I would add a preseason game in London as well.
Quote from: JaxAvondale on January 15, 2020, 08:20:05 PM
My guess is that the Jags should have a second game in London and think that is good for all parties involve. Heck, I would add a preseason game in London as well.
I'm all for it, but the biggest discussion that I'm seeing from a lot of the diehards on SM - Why bother paying $1500 per season when you're only getting 7 real games (possibly 6) when you can get better seats from the secondary market?
$150/seat isn't horrible, but when you really figure it's $215/seat, the wasted money starts adding up - especially when you can get into the lower bowl for ~$50 on the secondary (+fees) on game days. It's a legit problem and I don't think winning is going to cure much.
Once more of the diehards start sitting home on Sundays and realize that they enjoy the game a helluva lot more from their 80" flatscreen in the AC, then getting them to come back to the stadium becomes a monumental task above and beyond winning some games.
Quote from: sanmarcomatt on January 15, 2020, 08:00:55 PM
Was hoping that comment wouldn't be wasted. Nice to see you're paying attention :)
8)
Either sell the team to a new owner that cares about the city and the football team (Tom Coughlin?), or move the damn team to Orlando; I think they'd do good down there (change the name to the FLORIDA JAGUARS).
Quote from: heights unknown on January 15, 2020, 09:55:40 PM
Either sell the team to a new owner that cares about the city and the football team (Tom Coughlin?), or move the damn team to Orlando; I think they'd do good down there (change the name to the FLORIDA JAGUARS).
The Bucs would never allow them in Orlando. The list of other cities willing/able to spend money on an NFL team isn't very long either.
Quote from: JaxAvondale on January 15, 2020, 08:17:22 PM
Quote from: Kerry on January 15, 2020, 05:37:16 PM
Khan is taking some heat for saying there is limited demand for football in Jax and seeking a second game in London....but he isn't wrong. The Jags don't release gate attendance but they know what it is. I would have find it again but the highest revenue for a single game by the Jags was way down on the list highest revenue games in the NFL. Selling out the stadium every Sunday wouldn't solve their funding problem.
Ticket revenue is shared among the league and players. Only luxury suite revenue is kept by the team.
There is a bit more nuance to this....The 32 teams equally share 63 percent of the money generated by television deals, any national sponsorship revenue, a third of all ticket money, and any revenue from non-NFL events that are held in NFL stadiums.
Personal seat licenses, luxury suite deals, club seat tickets, stadium sponsorship, parking, merchandising, concessions are where larger market teams have a significant advantage over small market teams.
My questions on the Lot J deal is.. if the price tag continues to rise is Jax still bound by the 50/50 partnership?
Just how is Jax supposed to generate revenue from whatever form Lot J takes to meet both debt obligations and benefit the city when Lot J in of itself is isolated from the CBD/Riverside/Brooklyn and at best TIAA Bank Field hosts what 15 events a year?
Regarding Lot J, my major question would be if we have $233 to $350 million to invest/subsidize, why have we not conducted a true analysis of if this project generates the highest ROI for taxpayers when it comes to downtown. That's an insane amount of money that could easily flood a district like the Northbank, back to life in record time.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 16, 2020, 09:08:34 AM
Regarding Lot J, my major question would be if we have $233 to $350 million to invest/subsidize, why have we not conducted a true analysis of if this project generates the highest ROI for taxpayers when it comes to downtown. That's an insane amount of money that could easily flood a district like the Northbank, back to life in record time.
Because Lot J isn't about reviving downtown or anything remotely like that. It is 100% about transferring $200 million (maybe even more now) in direct cash to the Jags to keep them in Jax. According to the framework agreement reached back in July the Jags aren't obligated to build anything and they get to keep all the money anyhow. If Curry thought he could get away with giving the Jags a semi full of cash he would just go that route.
Quote from: Kerry on January 15, 2020, 08:16:44 PM
It probably has to do with TV viewership and merchandise sales.
I doubt it. With apathetic ticket sales, merchandise goes down the tubes regardless. TV viewership is only a big deal with big market/bandwagon teams; it would be very contrasting and lopsided with say JAX vs SEA or DAL. JAX vs TB or CIN, not so much. Also the NFL is probably the most small market friendly pro league in sports, in term of divvying up money between all of the teams.
Quote from: heights unknown on January 15, 2020, 09:55:40 PM
or move the damn team to Orlando; I think they'd do good down there (change the name to the FLORIDA JAGUARS).
Im so triggered by this. Tampa (second largest metro in FL behind Miami) has awful attendance (worse than Jax) but dammit, freaking Orlando just up I-4 would have diehard crazy super fans, with consecutive 70K sellouts for the foreseeable future....
Even though Khan and Lamping's optics often leave a bit to be desired, the Jags have got to be one of the most open and forthcoming franchises in the NFL. We all - Khan included - want a winning team on the field, but to Lamping's point, winning alone isn't going to change the realities of our market size, and the fact that we're still a relatively young franchise without a lot of regional support trying to fill an oversized stadium nine Sundays a year. It's a challenge, in terms of keeping up revenue-wise with franchises in much larger markets, with more corporate support and multi-generational fanbases. This isn't a "knock" on Jacksonville, just economic reality.
Khan and Lamping talk constantly of their strategy to make the franchise competitive financially, and that plan hasn't really deviated since Weaver sold the team. Play a lucrative "home" game in London to offset lower-than-NFL-average ticket prices in Jacksonville. Seek new revenue streams to increase the team's bottom line locally (Daily's Place has been huge for the Jags, as could Lot J (Jacksonville Live! would host 100+ concerts and event annually, and all of the other activity in the sports complex would essentially make Lot J a 365-day-a-year revenue stream). Host more big events at the stadium (Lynyrd Skynyrd, Rolling Stones, Green Day/Weezer, etc.).
The fanbase can be way too sensitive, cherry-picking comments to be upset about and spinning conspiracy theories about London while ignoring all the positive comments Khan and Lamping make about the Jacksonville fans and these moves that they are clearly and transparently trying to make to lay down long-term roots in Jacksonville.
Even the stadium situation, if you actually listen to and read Lamping's comments from a business rather than emotional perspective, they're pretty open and fair. The Jags want to get way, way ahead of the stadium talks now and come up with a plan that the city can plan towards, rather than holding Jacksonville up at the last minute. It's great that this discussion is happening 10 years in advance, the Jags aren't asking for anything now, and the framework that they're discussing (not a new stadium, but major upgrades to improve actual, functional problems with the stadium that are affecting business - protection from the elements, wider concourses, easier movement between levels) is perfectly reasonable and again suggests to anyone with a functioning brain that the Jags aren't trying to force an exit of the market.
In terms of Lot J and the stadium, I think you've got to kind of look at it in the same way that the city looked at the $121 million investment in the stadium back when we were trying to get an NFL team in the early 1990s. Ed Austin felt like it was a terrible deal for the city, and almost single-handedly killed our chances of landing an NFL team as a result. I think it was Delaney who played a big part in changing his mind by kind of reframing the argument to be less around paying $121 million to rebuild the stadium, and more about investing $121 million to secure a long-term NFL franchise for Jacksonville.
Lot J ask is currently $230 million, and $400 million is probably a safe estimate for the stadium based on recent renovations of Hard Rock Stadium in Miami. Taking all emotion out of it and bitterness over wins and losses, the rational question here is, "Would a $630 million investment in the sports complex be worth it to keep the Jags in Jacksonville through 2050." In addition to snuffing out relocation rumors for good, we'd also have a much stronger sports complex with additional entertainment options, the ability to host more and bigger events, a stronger value prop in terms of keeping Florida/Georgia, a catalyst for an improved Metro Park/Shipyards, etc.
There's rational arguments to be made both ways, but as a guy who genuinely believes that the Jags are very, very important to this community, I think it's a pretty decent investment. Better for the average Jacksonville citizen than a new convention center for example, I'd argue.
I think if we hammer out the stadium deal after the Lot J deal, as Lamping has suggested that the Jags want to do, it gives us significantly more leverage down the line to say no to unreasonable asks related to the Shipyards.
Jags fan and youtuber 'UCF Jaguar' described Khan's clandestine ways perfectly; going to these BS national media groups, and talking crap against the fans like always... He's nearly nonexistent with the Jax media.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqYnYvKR-Fo
Ken_FSU, why are you assuming that a $630 million taxpayer bailout of the Jags now is all tge Jags would ask for over the next 30 years? Look how much the City has spent on the Jags since the stadium was built. When digging a hole so deep you can't get out of it step 1 is to stop digging.
Khan is a billionaire 7X over. The Jags are woeth over $2 billion all by themselves. Khan's boat is worth north of $350 million. He could sell his boat and pay for Lot J with cash. I'm having a hard time understanding why the taxpayers are involved at all with Lot J.
The NFL sales pitch has always been, "We create intangibles that will put your city on a world stage and bring untold growth and wealth." Well, here we are 20 years later havibg to use tax dollars to shore up the team's finances and that "payoff" has never materialize. If the NFL was investment we lost big time.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 16, 2020, 11:05:59 AMIn terms of Lot J and the stadium, I think you've got to kind of look at it in the same way that the city looked at the $121 million investment in the stadium back when we were trying to get an NFL team in the early 1990s. Ed Austin felt like it was a terrible deal for the city, and almost single-handedly killed our chances of landing an NFL team as a result. I think it was Delaney who played a big part in changing his mind by kind of reframing the argument to be less around paying $121 million to rebuild the stadium, and more about investing $121 million to secure a long-term NFL franchise for Jacksonville.
Lot J ask is currently $230 million, and $400 million is probably a safe estimate for the stadium based on recent renovations of Hard Rock Stadium in Miami. Taking all emotion out of it and bitterness over wins and losses, the rational question here is, "Would a $630 million investment in the sports complex be worth it to keep the Jags in Jacksonville through 2050." In addition to snuffing out relocation rumors for good, we'd also have a much stronger sports complex with additional entertainment options, the ability to host more and bigger events, a stronger value prop in terms of keeping Florida/Georgia, a catalyst for an improved Metro Park/Shipyards, etc.
There's rational arguments to be made both ways, but as a guy who genuinely believes that the Jags are very, very important to this community, I think it's a pretty decent investment. Better for the average Jacksonville citizen than a new convention center for example, I'd argue.
I think if we hammer out the stadium deal after the Lot J deal, as Lamping has suggested that the Jags want to do, it gives us significantly more leverage down the line to say no to unreasonable asks related to the Shipyards.
Hard Rock Stadium's $500 million in recent renovations were privately funded by Stephen Ross and it has no Lot J component. Jax will end up paying a lot more than $630 million to keep the Jags in town through 2050. Providing $233 million for Lot J won't keep them here. It's only pad sites for future development (with Iguana being in position to flip it) and a smaller Landing that we'll own and be on the hook for when it ultimately fails (and like the Landing, it will if we don't keep putting money into it). So specifically for Lot J, the discussion about of where is the upfront cash coming from and what is being unfunded or ignored city wide as a result should be open and transparent. As proven by the BJP, if given the opportunity to be a part of the decision making process, perhaps the community would be willing to tax itself a bit more to not only fund Jags improvements, but a host of other very important and critical community needs that have been long ignored by city leaders.
Quote from: Kerry on January 16, 2020, 11:29:13 AM
Ken_FSU, why are you assuming that a $630 million taxpayer bailout of the Jags now is all tge Jags would ask for over the next 30 years?
It won't be all they ask for.
But if we hammer out a stadium plan sooner than later that extends the lease for another 15-20 years, we have infinitely more leverage to say no when the Jags come asking for a convention center, or heavily subsidized residential towers in the Shipyards down the road.
100% agree, Lake, on the need for openness and transparency, as well as public input.
Saying no and taking our chances that the Jags walk is a perfectly valid option as well that shouldn't be immediately discounted.
That said, this is Jacksonville Florida, where nothing is vetted, and based on this quote from yesterday, it sure sounds like we're going to see some artificial urgency injected into the discussion to make sure no one asks too many questions.
Quote"I've been hearing now for about two weeks that they're close to final deal... I know the expectation is to be able to break ground sometime this spring, so we need a bill to go to city council so they need move fast," Mayor Curry said.
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/mayor-curry-says-city-and-jaguars-close-to-finalized-deal-for-lot-j-development/77-0a50b5c8-8174-4161-8f7b-c6462916317b
Breaking ground must be viewed as COJ starting to clean the property or executing some contract. Permitting for anything going vertical will take some time and involvement with other agencies like SJWMD and the process of going through the DIA, council and DDRB alone will take months. Plus, Curry is pretty bad a estimating timelines. We're nearly a year into his second term and the courthouse parking lot removal/riverwalk reconstruction thing is still not close to being done.
Clarification by Lamping on the viability comment.
https://www.bigcatcountry.com/2020/1/16/21068792/mark-lamping-jaguars-comments-winning
Quote from: Kerry on January 14, 2020, 09:55:18 PM
Lamping said again that the new agreement will still be 50/50. That is going to make the City's share about $350 million if true. We'll probably have to borrow that money.
I am no fan of the Jags sucking up taxpayer dollars for all their projects and fully expect they will be back for more than the $233 million originally floated for the City's investment in Lot J.
However, I think the 50/50 that Kerry referred to above relates to Khan's split with Cordish Companies, not the City. Here is the quote with 50/50 in the article:
QuoteHe said Khan and the Cordish Companies, which would split the private investment on a 50-50 basis, already are able to finance their portions of the project.
As to taxpayer investment in the Jags we have the original cost of the stadium, 50% of the (for a few months) "world's largest" scoreboards, swimming pools and other stadium "improvements/updates" and Daily's Place. I think the City also pays out of pocket for JSO and some stadium maintenance and who-knows-what else. All in and adjusted for inflation, we have to be around or above $500 million in current dollars from the taxpayers.
Add not only $233 million (and likely much more when the environmental cleanup costs finally come in and the inevitable cost overruns on any construction) for Lot J but also the near $50 million for the Hart Bridge ramp removal for the total benefit of Khan's projects and millions more on the "Innovation Corridor" that, interestingly enough, mostly runs by the Shipyards and Metro Park and terminates at Lot J, Daily's and the Stadium, all Khan projects. Then there are future "improvements" to the stadium that are likely to be at least several hundred million more dollars. Add it all up, and in present dollars, we taxpayers will easily have over $1 billion invested in Jags-related projects within the very near future.
Quote from: Kerry on January 16, 2020, 11:29:13 AM
The NFL sales pitch has always been, "We create intangibles that will put your city on a world stage and bring untold growth and wealth." Well, here we are 20 years later having to use tax dollars to shore up the team's finances and that "payoff" has never materialize. If the NFL was investment we lost big time.
There are a number of national studies that clearly demonstrate that intangible benefits, such as a community's self esteem, is about all taxypayers get from professional sports team investments. Not only are there no real/tangible hard dollar economic benefits but teams may actually subtract from local economies via the taxpayer dollars redirected to them over better investments in their respective communities and fans redirecting their entertainment dollars to billionaire team owners vs. local businesses that would recycle more of those dollars in their local communities.
Thanks for clarifying the 50/50 comment. I read that article again last night and realized that Lamping was talking about their agreement with Cordish. Interesting though that if the City pays 1/2 and Cordish/Khan split a 1/2 then Khan is only putting up 1/4 the cost.
If Lot J is such a money-maker why cut anyone else in on the deal, especially if you could fund the whole thing yourself?
Quote from: Kerry on January 17, 2020, 08:05:18 AM
If Lot J is such a money-maker why cut anyone else in on the deal, especially if you could fund the whole thing yourself?
Why pay for 100% when someone will give you x% for the asking? The entity making the contribution isn't going to get a cut of the profits. And since the city is going to 'own' the improvements, there will be no property taxes either.
I was under the impression that the city was paying 1/2 the cost and the Jags and Cordish were splitting the other half, but that may not be right.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 17, 2020, 08:33:46 AM
Quote from: Kerry on January 17, 2020, 08:05:18 AM
If Lot J is such a money-maker why cut anyone else in on the deal, especially if you could fund the whole thing yourself?
Why pay for 100% when someone will give you x% for the asking? The entity making the contribution isn't going to get a cut of the profits. And since the city is going to 'own' the improvements, there will be no property taxes either.
I was under the impression that the city was paying 1/2 the cost and the Jags and Cordish were splitting the other half, but that may not be right.
Good points.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 17, 2020, 08:33:46 AM
I was under the impression that the city was paying 1/2 the cost and the Jags and Cordish were splitting the other half, but that may not be right.
Yes, this is correct. Also, unless the terms are dramatically different from what was released last year, the stuff outside of Live! (which is what the city will own) will likely be built by others at some point when the market can support their use.
https://twitter.com/ChrisHongTU/status/1295764731479969800?s=20 (https://twitter.com/ChrisHongTU/status/1295764731479969800?s=20)
Big news on the Shipyards/Metro Park front: Downtown Investment Authority CEO Lori Boyer said Shad Khan's deal allowing him to be the master developer has expired. The DIA will now seek new bids for the property.
Boyer said it's possible Khan's development firm, Iguana Investments, will submit a proposal to develop the land, but she anticipates it will be "significantly different" than his original proposal, which entailed him investing $500 million into the 70-acre parcel.
Boyer's understanding is that Khan is still highly interested in bringing a boutique hotel, like a Four Seasons, to part of the property. But she said the rest of the plan could be scaled back.
"I would guess at the moment, it is less dense than what we originally saw," Boyer said. "It's entirely possible, if not probably, that some of the things that were contemplated on the Shipyards may go on Lot J."
And, this is why you don't demolish things in anticipation of development.
Now, I do think the right decision was to demo the Hart Bridge ramps. But, it should have been done with the development.
I was against the demo-ing of the Hart ramps from the get go. Now, I will agree with you partially Steve. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. I used the Hart ramps into downtown frequently over the years and always thought they were essential to access many places easily. Now, most of those places have been demolished and also the best way to get to them. Sad.
By my count it's $56M:
$25M of COJ money for Hart Ramps
$9 for the Bay Street Gov't Complex
$22 for the Landing demo (including "East Lot" court decision)
What an ROI.
Anyone remember when people were wondering which project would break ground first? Shad Khan's Shipyards or Jeffrey Vinik's Water Street Tampa? I guess we now know the answer:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-7mMkNBw/0/X2/i-7mMkNBw-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-jb6rSxs/0/X2/i-jb6rSxs-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-nTGXhcm/0/X2/i-nTGXhcm-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-HTKVt4K/0/X2/i-HTKVt4K-X2.jpg)
Gee...who could have seen this coming. Chalk another one up to the Puppet and the Master.
Two logical outcomes seem to be:
1) The Jags remain committed to Jacksonville, and eventually develop Lot J and Met Park over the next 10 years.
2) The Jags are over dealing with Jacksonville, and have lost interest in outside development.
Just a week ago, we heard that the Jags wanted to conduct environmental tests at Met Park, so I still think number one is the more likely scenario.
From the Jags perspective, I'm not sure it still makes sense to claim master developer status for the Shipyards. Pie in the sky as it might be, the Jags/Cordish have three phases of construction in their Lot J (and potentially Met Park) plan before they'd even think about developing the Shipyards. That's gotta be 15 years away. Their priorities have obviously shifted away more toward the stadium area.
That said, good luck with that RFP of the heavily contaminated Shipyards property if we couldn't even get more than two responses for a much better, much cleaner piece of mixed-use property at the old Courthouse site.
Still a weird move though during a pandemic to take the property from Khan and RFP it. Gotta say, I'm losing a lot of faith in Lori Boyer as head of DIA. She's great when it comes to the nuts and bolts street-level stuff, but I question her handling of a lot of these larger properties. Still wish we would have brought in someone with a national track record and international connections with the development community.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on August 18, 2020, 04:45:16 PM
Still a weird move though during a pandemic to take the property from Khan and RFP it. Gotta say, I'm losing a lot of faith in Lori Boyer as head of DIA. She's great when it comes to the nuts and bolts street-level stuff, but I question her handling of a lot of these larger properties. Still wish we would have brought in someone with a national track record and international connections with the development community.
this one is in no way her fault - and given the sweetheart deal Khan was going to get from Curry, I'm happy to see it expire. Now it can be renegotiated with more ROI in quality and $ to the taxpayers.
QuoteStill wish we would have brought in someone with a national track record and international connections with the development community.
Anyone with that level of experience would be committing career suicide to come to Jacksonville.
Quote from: Steve on August 18, 2020, 02:44:47 PM
By my count it's $56M:
$25M of COJ money for Hart Ramps
$9 for the Bay Street Gov't Complex
$22 for the Landing demo (including "East Lot" court decision)
What an ROI.
I believe we should also count the FDOT and Federal monies used in demolishing the Hart Ramps. I recall this would bring the taxpayer's investment in their demolition to nearly $50 million just for that.
Wonder if Khan's reluctance will rub off on the Doro project? They should be getting nervous about the area based on this.
I also wonder if Curry isn't happy (maybe instigated) that Khan is backing down as I didn't see a way for him to secure the $233 million promised after the COVID impact on City finances and the JEA scandal's impact on Curry's standing with the voters.
Lastly, I hope this gives a boost to the Downtown group advocating for more green space, especially along our waterfront. Would be amazing if both Khan and Rummel turned back their properties along the water to the City. I think this is best for out City over the decades to come vs. heavily subsidized and risky developments put on the taxpayers' backs while enriching Curry's buddies.
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 18, 2020, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on August 18, 2020, 04:45:16 PM
Still a weird move though during a pandemic to take the property from Khan and RFP it. Gotta say, I'm losing a lot of faith in Lori Boyer as head of DIA. She's great when it comes to the nuts and bolts street-level stuff, but I question her handling of a lot of these larger properties. Still wish we would have brought in someone with a national track record and international connections with the development community.
this one is in no way her fault - and given the sweetheart deal Khan was going to get from Curry, I'm happy to see it expire. Now it can be renegotiated with more ROI in quality and $ to the taxpayers.
Maybe Boyer is trying to show that Jax is finally growing a back bone. Curry has been around for 5.5 years and has failed to deliver on almost every promise he's made. As people are starting to look at life after curry we need to stop pandering to big money and be smarter with who we partner with on city owned land downtown. The pie in the sky billion dollar projects that will never materialize need to take a backseat to smart development. If Curry could, he'd let Khan hold onto the project indefinitely regardless of signs of progress. I like that we took it away.
Well, this is something. At this point, as much as it sucks to be dealt this hand, I think there are ways of making it all work.
So here's my Magical Plan to Save Downtown:
Finish tearing down the Hart ramps. I've been fine with this, honestly. If anything I wish it would all stay at street level instead of going back elevated. Develop the street-level grid and factor in the Skyway (Or U2C, assuming they seriously build that out as planned).
At this point, I feel like it'd be worth it to just eat the cost of remediating the Shipyards, assuming that the city will get back at least some of that cost from selling it off in parcels as the economy starts to recover. At this point it should be obvious that big master planned developments don't work here, given this is the third time the Shipyards have failed to materialize and the District is still one of our many glorious grass fields. Maybe remediate it by section and sell it, then move on. It won't be a nice master planned area, but it won't be grass next to water either.
Move Metro Park wherever would be suitable, I'm assuming either part of the Shipyards or somewhere else. It'd be nice to have a real signature urban park but I don't think we'd be willing to spend on it. If Khan wants to build his Four Seasons, he can get the land but he should pay to build it.
Tearing down City Hall is one of our worst mistakes, but what's done is done. Let Spandrel build their apartments on the Courthouse block and work with Hyatt to build an exhibition hall on the City Hall block. Now that the Shipyards Convention Center is clearly much further away, we should push ahead to work with Hyatt.
With that accomplished, we could give the Terminal to Brightline to incentivize them to hurry up and bring service to Jax, with the requirement that they also include Amtrak service. We'll maybe also end up with Park Line apartments, so that's a plus.
Dust off the 2015 plan for the Landing and find someone to get it built. Add parking. What's been done is done, we just have to do better. We knew before this happened that it would decimate walkability in the urban core, and the prophecy has come to pass.
While all of those big picture ideas are being worked on, take care of the little things to make the streets more walkable and encourage adaptive reuse or infill instead of demolition. Once the groundwork is laid there, expand the focus to the rest of Duval and the First Coast from a regional standpoint. Get the northwest some sewers. Miami's paying Brightline half a billion to run commuter rail for them, maybe that's something to consider, I don't know.
Please feel free to tear this to shreds for being unrealistic and expensive.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on August 18, 2020, 06:57:53 PM
Move Metro Park wherever would be suitable, I'm assuming either part of the Shipyards or somewhere else. It'd be nice to have a real signature urban park but I don't think we'd be willing to spend on it. If Khan wants to build his Four Seasons, he can get the land but he should pay to build it.
Can someone tell me why there is such a big push to move Metro Park? Is it just so developers can take a crack at it? I grew up going there and it seems like a real shame to lose it as a park, especially if all they plan to build on it is a hotel (we all know the pie in the sky development dreams for Downtown Jax do not and will not ever happen). Or am I missing something?
Marcus, I don't want to tear your post to shreds. The only part I dislike is the "what's done, is done" part. That is the problem we have in Jacksonville. We keep electing and re-electing political puppet hacks who keep making the same pie in the sky mistakes, with impunity. Anybody with a pulse who listened to Lenny Curry when he first ran for mayor speak, should have realized the guy was an empty suit. Sure, he was a bigshot in the Florida Republican party, but what were his real qualifications to lead a large city? To think he was re-elected depresses the Hell out of me. He is just a figure head for the fleecing of our citizens. He has set Jacksonville back at least 20 years. Knowing our voters, when his term is up, another boy-wonder will be elected to replace him. All he'll have to do is be approved by Shad Con, promise not to raise taxes, and have a "R" beside his name. I'm giving up!
Quote from: Captain Zissou on August 18, 2020, 06:48:57 PMMaybe Boyer is trying to show that Jax is finally growing a back bone. Curry has been around for 5.5 years and has failed to deliver on almost every promise he's made. As people are starting to look at life after curry we need to stop pandering to big money and be smarter with who we partner with on city owned land downtown. The pie in the sky billion dollar projects that will never materialize need to take a backseat to smart development. If Curry could, he'd let Khan hold onto the project indefinitely regardless of signs of progress. I like that we took it away.
Agreed with all, but I'd counter by saying that the Shipyards isn't, and shouldn't be, a short-term priority for Jacksonville or the DIA right now. It's been vacant for 20+ years, the last two RFPs have shown literally no credible interest in the property outside of Shad Khan, and we've got much bigger fish to fry on the riverfront at the Landing, at the Old Courthouse site, with the Emerald Trail and Morris/Times-Union property, etc.
There's no money in anyone's three or five year plans at the city to spend $35 million remediating the Shipyards, so we couldn't even parcel it out for development right now. And there's no universe where a developer is going to come along and front the cost for remediation.
If Shad Khan genuinely has no interest in the property anymore and wants to open it up for someone else to develop, then there's no story here. But if it's a power play by the DIA/Boyer, I think it's a bad move. They haven't been shy to hand out extensions to a dozen other developers, it feels petty to yank the Shipyards from the Jags when it's not development ready and history at both the Shipyards and the Ford on Bay has shown that there probably won't be other suitors, and certainly not other suitors with the pockets of Khan.
Also, in regards to Khan's long-held desire to build a Four Seasons/upscale hotel at Met Park, this quote really made me want to bang my head against the wall. Between the Landing, Courthouse site, Shipyards, and Met Park, we've got a hundred acres of empty riverfront land on the Northbank alone. Beggars can't be chosers. I'd rather see any development at the Shipyards/Met Park than another 20 years of public workshops, market studies, failed RFPs, etc.
QuoteBoyer said she expects Khan to submit a new proposal that still includes a luxury hotel [at Metropolitan Park], but she said the rest of the plan could be significantly different than the original.
Carlucci said Tuesday he has reservations about shuttering Metropolitan Park, which he has described as a sacred public space despite its sparing use in recent years.
He said any replacement would need to be ambitious and "spectacular." He said the new status of the Shipyards property should serve as a "reset" to allow the public weigh in on the future of the property.
"We can't settle for hotels and office space, but we need to have a park that's got a lot of attractions and amenities that will attract people," Carlucci said. "Let's not settle for 'that--will-do.' I want to reach for the stars. I want people to be excited about their city."
Quote from: Steve on August 18, 2020, 02:44:47 PM
By my count it's $56M:
$25M of COJ money for Hart Ramps
$9 for the Bay Street Gov't Complex
$22 for the Landing demo (including "East Lot" court decision)
What an ROI.
Don't forget the $63 million Innovation Corridor.
In five years time, there will be an experimental clown car station at the ruins of the Jacksonville Landing, ready to take you - in mixed traffic - past the ruins of an Annex/Old Courthouse site stuck in ligitation hell, through the contaminated brownfields of the Shipyards, past the ruins of the Hart Bridge ramps, and to a stadium that may or may not still play host to a professional football team.
You still won't be able to find a cup of coffee past 6 PM downtown, but if a gunshot were to be fired at the clown car, the vehicle will alert Jacksonville International Airport, which will send a fiber-optic beacon to the sunken USS Adams, which will fire a nuclear warhead at the Berkman II.
Of all of the demos that have happened in the last 15 years, has there been any construction to replace any structures on their existing lots?
By my count these are all "no's" and I'm sure I'm missing several more. Also, I'm aware that some of these have replacements in other locations, but the fact is their original lots are still empty.
- Greyhound Station
- Metropark Amphitheater
- Old Courthouse
- Landing
- Hart Ramps
- 638 W Forsyth
- Main Street Pocket Park
I know the Jags are still interested and working hard to develop the shipyards. I saw a recent presentation showing everything in the current plan and it was transformative. In another thread someone posted the Park plan of it which is correct. So met part would be moved to surround Hogans Creek as well as a riverwalk spanning the entire length. Current met park through APRandolph and the area in front of Maxwell House would be Five star hotel, Offices, a medical center and many Apt Residences. It does look less ambitious from previous plans, but so much is going to lot J. I have no doubt Shad wants to develop this and will if he can make the right deal with the city. Remediation is still a major factor. Sorry, not allowed to post pictures.
Pardon my cynicism, but this
QuoteI have no doubt Shad wants to develop this and will if he can make the right deal with the city.
means, "Jacksonville taxpayers take all the risk, and if there is profit, it all goes to Shad Khan."
Quote from: jaxjaguar on August 19, 2020, 02:58:40 AM
Of all of the demos that have happened in the last 15 years, has there been any construction to replace any structures on their existing lots?
By my count these are all "no's" and I'm sure I'm missing several more. Also, I'm aware that some of these have replacements in other locations, but the fact is their original lots are still empty.
- Greyhound Station
- Metropark Amphitheater
- Old Courthouse
- Landing
- Hart Ramps
- 638 W Forsyth
- Main Street Pocket Park
You accidentally put a 1 in there. I think you meant to say demolition in the last 5 years.
Does Kahn REALLY want to develop all of the Shipyards,,,,even in a stronger market? Or does he really want the area around the stadium - Lot J and current Met Park?
I actually have no issue with the concept of swapping of Met Park with the Shipyards land around Hogan's Creek. Now in reality, a park is more than just sod so I don't see a lot of money lying around the develop it.
Regardless of all of this, I consider the area of downtown bound by Liberty/River/State/I-95 to be MUCH more important.
I want Lot J. I've always been for it. I would even like the ambitious plans for the Shipyards. I don't think Khan is trying to rip off the city. He is a business man and making money is what they do, so that's ok. My problem is the worst mayor in my lifetime, Curry. Austin wasn't great but Curry is horrible. He is costing us millions of dollars. It would be ok with me if we were getting something in return. There will be traffic jams near the stadium now with no development in sight. Wasn't that the justification for tearing down the ramps? I'm certainly ok with the ramps coming down in exchange for something being developed. But as usual Curry never has a "bird in the hand" before he brings out the wrecking ball. He is going to leave office with a bombed out downtown with NOTHING to attract people from the suburbs to come downtown for. I promise you the people of Jax WILL NOT drive downtown for a park. Maybe on New Year's Eve or 4th of July. There is no other reason to go down for. Jacksonville is controlled by idiots with no vision. We have to be one of the worse cities of our size in America. When Curry said you won't recognize downtown when I leave office, boy he sure wasn't kidding. It will take years to recover from the debacle of Jacksonville. Be glad we have the beach and miles and miles of waterfront all over the county.
When the Hart Bridge ramps were still there, everybody knew that the right lane was the one that would take you directly to the stadium. The rest of the traffic could continue on. Now that those ramps are gone, going down there and fighting the stadium or event traffic on game day/concert day/the fair is going to be one huge cluster, if you are specifically trying to get somewhere else. (Unless you go out of your way and take the Matthews). These ramps were removed without asking for taxpayer input (vote) - do the taxpayers have any recourse for them having been removed under these conditions - Khan let the agreement fall through. To me this was his carefully calculated move. And somebody was gullible enough to proceed with demolition without the other end of the bargain underway. And here we are.
I mean, there's a difference between whether something is good or bad versus whether something is good or bad right now. I strongly believe taking the ramps down is the right thing to do. I strongly disagreed that it should happen in hopes of a development, much like we tore down the old City Hall or Landing in hopes of a development.
Quote from: avonjax on August 19, 2020, 09:46:38 AM
I want Lot J. I've always been for it. I would even like the ambitious plans for the Shipyards. I don't think Khan is trying to rip off the city. He is a business man and making money is what they do, so that's ok. My problem is the worst mayor in my lifetime, Curry. Austin wasn't great but Curry is horrible. He is costing us millions of dollars. It would be ok with me if we were getting something in return. There will be traffic jams near the stadium now with no development in sight. Wasn't that the justification for tearing down the ramps? I'm certainly ok with the ramps coming down in exchange for something being developed. But as usual Curry never has a "bird in the hand" before he brings out the wrecking ball. He is going to leave office with a bombed out downtown with NOTHING to attract people from the suburbs to come downtown for. I promise you the people of Jax WILL NOT drive downtown for a park. Maybe on New Year's Eve or 4th of July. There is no other reason to go down for. Jacksonville is controlled by idiots with no vision. We have to be one of the worse cities of our size in America. When Curry said you won't recognize downtown when I leave office, boy he sure wasn't kidding. It will take years to recover from the debacle of Jacksonville. Be glad we have the beach and miles and miles of waterfront all over the county.
I'm with you. I like Lot J, and still think it would be a great asset to the city. It fills a need, and potentially solidifies the Jags as a Jacksonville franchise for decades to come. But it's just a total failure on all parties involved - Curry, Khan, and the DIA - that we don't have a deal done that the public can weigh in on, tied to stadium enhancements, a long-term lease extension, and guaranteed floor on the number of home games the Jags play in Jacksonville each year.
We talk about the cost of the Hart Bridge removal to make way for this project, but to Steve's point, it's still a positive development for the riverfront. The larger cost might be booting Rockville (and it's $10-$15 million annual impact on our hotels, restaurants, and businesses) to Daytona Beach before a shovel was even in the ground. We're also losing a second Jags home game to London in perpetuity (when travel resumes) because of construction impacts from a project for which a development agreement isn't even signed.
If we're going to do it, let's do it. Break ground as soon as possible, lock the Jags in long-term, and start reaping the benefits of the additional development by the stadium.
Also, talk seems to be that the DIA/Lori Boyer weren't trying to strong-arm Khan/Iguana. Instead, it sounds like nobody at the DIA even had a clue that the development agreement had expired until Matt Carlucci discovered it on his own when researching the recent Met Park bill. If true, it seems like a pretty major dropped ball by the DIA right as the Jags were starting to pick talks back up about moving forward with some form of development. I don't know what it will cost to re-issue the RFP, but it's gotta take time, money, and focus away from RFPing the Landing and resolving issues at Ford on Bay.
At the end of the day, it seems like it's going to be a non-story from the Jags point of view. Per their official statement, they're no longer actively pursuing development of the "western portion" of the Shipyards and plan to bid on Met Park & the eastern portion of the Shipyards.
Which is what we've kind of known all along. None of their pie-in-the-sky renders from the last several years have shown any development on the western Shipyards.
Either they're going to build the thing, or they're not, regardless of the new issue with the development agreement.
(https://snipboard.io/ovImeU.jpg)
I don't have the blanket dislike for Curry that many people here do (he's done some good things to go with the bad), but it is pretty crazy how quiet he's gotten here in the last few months with things like the mask mandate (no-showing the press conference), Lot J (deferring all questions to the DIA), the RNC debacle, etc. First one to release a video when things are going good, shrinks away when they're not.
^^ What would be a good thing Curry has done?
I think the DIA wasn't paying attention because I think this, the Landing, and to a degree the Bay Street Gov't complex are dealt with by the Mayor's office and Boyer is purposely staying away from the hot potatoes. This is what I expected from her when she got the position and the positives of her being in the position is she knows which potatoes are hot.
Now should she have to deal with this? Of course not, but I can't blame her for that one.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on August 19, 2020, 10:52:02 AM
I don't have the blanket dislike for Curry that many people here do (he's done some good things to go with the bad), but it is pretty crazy how quiet he's gotten here in the last few months with things like the mask mandate (no-showing the press conference), Lot J (deferring all questions to the DIA), the RNC debacle, etc. First one to release a video when things are going good, shrinks away when they're not.
Nate Monroe wrote an amazing piece about this like a month ago. Here's a quote from it:
Quote
The question is gaining traction these days, even as the mayor insists he is no lame duck: Has Curry simply given up?
Here's my take - I mostly agree with Monroe. I think Curry has a passion for the political wheeling and dealing that comes with being the party chair. I think he likes climbing the political ladder for the sake of climbing the political ladder. I think he was hoping this and a few accomplishments as mayor would lead him to either the governorship (with Ron "Where's my Apology" DeSantis ascending somewhere in DC) or something in DC for him. Now, his marquee accomplishments that he wanted to happen aren't, and he's left with hard problems: crime, infrastructure, etc., things which there is no Easy Button...especially since his funding source was JEA. He hoped the RNC would put him back in good graces with DC but again...Trump and his people called that off and had to once Sheriff Williams raised the white flag.
So now his choice is to sell his soul to Trump or not, but bottom line is municipal issues aren't going to help him do that either way.
Quote from: vicupstate on August 19, 2020, 10:58:17 AM
^^ What would be a good thing Curry has done?
Support for the Emerald Trail and the Norman Studios project.
That's all I've got.
Shad Khan is no fool, obviously. I think he, along with Curry, but for different reasons that happen to lead to the same point, wanted this deal to expire.
After COVID, the world, and especially Downtown Jacksonville, isn't going to be clamoring for more office buildings, hotels, convention centers, entertainment complexes and retail. That was the driver for much of Khan's plans. It doesn't take a genius to see that much of what might have been a potentially feasible, but always somewhat risky project, is now just beyond the pale of success under the best of circumstances.
Don't be surprised to see other like projects slow down or get cancelled like Rumell's project and even Durbin Park in St. Johns county. Why build more when we can't support what already is there?
Residential seems to be the only development with reasonably low risk now thanks to low interest rates and the Fed's priming the pump with hand outs. If that changes, watch that slow down too. A big chunk of the economy is not doing well and it has been masked up to now. After the elections, regardless of who wins, watch the well begin to dry up. Then, comes the bill for paying for the trillions already laid out. Not saying it isn't appropriate, but there is no such thing as a free lunch either.
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on August 19, 2020, 11:34:43 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on August 19, 2020, 10:58:17 AM
^^ What would be a good thing Curry has done?
Support for the Emerald Trail and the Norman Studios project.
That's all I've got.
Throwing budget and support behind less sexy projects as well that were the right thing to do ($11 million for the Moncrief cemetery comes to mind, along with big allocations for Northwest Jacksonville in the upcoming budget).
Proactively offering to sign the new HRO, which was a big change from the last go 'round,.
Removal of Confederate statues and willingness to move away from troubled names for public spaces.
Fantastic handling of COVID-19 compared to the rest of the state. Florida's been a train wreck, but Jacksonville was a real leader in many ways in terms of response and testing. Amazing how quickly we stood up a telemedicine plan through Telescope Health and erected so many testing facilities around the city capable of handling large loads. We were also ahead of the curb in antibody testing. Aid distribution was as much of a finely-oiled machine as it could be in such an unprecedented situation as well.
Solicitation of federal grants (especially transportation grants, even if they haven't always gone to the right projects).
Seems silly to try to unload these enormous parcels and go for these home runs all the time. Create a master plan for the area. Break it up into smaller parcels that will be accessible to smaller investors and get these properties back on the tax rolls to facilitate infrastructure improvements that will attract more business investments.
I imagine that we'd be able to attract more interest in a few 2 acre lots across from the stadium than a 46 acre lot. Why is this so hard?
Why not just put this project on the shelf completely? If a developer is truly interested they will contact the DIA. Until then, move on to something that can actually be accomplished. Invest in the Northbank core instead and if that is ever successful, it will make the Shipyards even more desired and profitable. The 35 million dollars required to make the Shipyards dirt clean would get a half dozen (or more) buildings renovated in the NB core.
When the Jags announced they were playing two games in London in 2020, I wanted to hear a statement from the city saying there would be no Lot J funding if they followed thru...Of course crickets from the St James.
That's when I knew Lenny was a pathetic coward, who will always acquiesce to our loser NFL owner.
When people ask about the whether Khan will move the team, I always counter with whether or not he will still own the team in 5-6 years. I have heard Tony Khan on a podcast be very cavalier that his father bought a distressed asset from a cash strapped owner.
Much like the former Sea Turtle Inn, the group that acquired the hotel had no intention in investing in better service to make the stay better. They instead spent all of their capital on improvements to the site in order to increase the value of the asset in then flip it.
The Jags spent their first four years of ownership under Shad Khan's extremely under the salary cap, like the $45M under the cap, which is about what he spent on video boards and pools. That's money he didn't spend making the team better, just like those sand paper towels at the Sea Turtle this shit will leave you chaffed.
Quote from: vicupstate on August 19, 2020, 06:01:48 PM
Why not just put this project on the shelf completely? If a developer is truly interested they will contact the DIA. Until then, move on to something that can actually be accomplished. Invest in the Northbank core instead and if that is ever successful, it will make the Shipyards even more desired and profitable. The 35 million dollars required to make the Shipyards dirt clean would get a half dozen (or more) buildings renovated in the NB core.
Agree 100%. Let Metropolitan Park sit where it is for now, put this whole thing on ice and focus on things that can actually advance the needle for downtown, that also come with a higher ROI for the taxpayers. Consider it a blessing in disguise that this thing as gone belly up for now.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 18, 2020, 03:45:51 PM
Anyone remember when people were wondering which project would break ground first? Shad Khan's Shipyards or Jeffrey Vinik's Water Street Tampa? I guess we now know the answer:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-7mMkNBw/0/X2/i-7mMkNBw-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-jb6rSxs/0/X2/i-jb6rSxs-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-nTGXhcm/0/X2/i-nTGXhcm-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-HTKVt4K/0/X2/i-HTKVt4K-X2.jpg)
I always understood Miami "slam dunking" Jacksonville relative to building, construction, developing, etc. downtown; but when Tampa and Orlando, and even smaller cities (supposedly) like Fort Lauderdale, Sarasota, West Palm Beach, St. Petersburg, all have vibrant downtowns and are beating the stank out of Jax, that's sad...real sad. It just infuriates me when I visit Tampa and that City is just bursting at the seams with construction; cranes, cranes, cranes, development, construction, bee hive of activity like harvester ants.......and Jax? Dead. I know most of you can and might justify why those cities downtowns are so much more vibrant, dense, and prosperous, but Jax is Florida's largest city. I am mainly talking to the leaders of Jax and its Government, but IMO if you can't live up to it, let it go!
Quote from: marcuscnelson on August 18, 2020, 06:57:53 PM
Well, this is something. At this point, as much as it sucks to be dealt this hand, I think there are ways of making it all work.
So here's my Magical Plan to Save Downtown:
Finish tearing down the Hart ramps. I've been fine with this, honestly. If anything I wish it would all stay at street level instead of going back elevated. Develop the street-level grid and factor in the Skyway (Or U2C, assuming they seriously build that out as planned).
At this point, I feel like it'd be worth it to just eat the cost of remediating the Shipyards, assuming that the city will get back at least some of that cost from selling it off in parcels as the economy starts to recover. At this point it should be obvious that big master planned developments don't work here, given this is the third time the Shipyards have failed to materialize and the District is still one of our many glorious grass fields. Maybe remediate it by section and sell it, then move on. It won't be a nice master planned area, but it won't be grass next to water either.
Move Metro Park wherever would be suitable, I'm assuming either part of the Shipyards or somewhere else. It'd be nice to have a real signature urban park but I don't think we'd be willing to spend on it. If Khan wants to build his Four Seasons, he can get the land but he should pay to build it.
Tearing down City Hall is one of our worst mistakes, but what's done is done. Let Spandrel build their apartments on the Courthouse block and work with Hyatt to build an exhibition hall on the City Hall block. Now that the Shipyards Convention Center is clearly much further away, we should push ahead to work with Hyatt.
With that accomplished, we could give the Terminal to Brightline to incentivize them to hurry up and bring service to Jax, with the requirement that they also include Amtrak service. We'll maybe also end up with Park Line apartments, so that's a plus.
Dust off the 2015 plan for the Landing and find someone to get it built. Add parking. What's been done is done, we just have to do better. We knew before this happened that it would decimate walkability in the urban core, and the prophecy has come to pass.
While all of those big picture ideas are being worked on, take care of the little things to make the streets more walkable and encourage adaptive reuse or infill instead of demolition. Once the groundwork is laid there, expand the focus to the rest of Duval and the First Coast from a regional standpoint. Get the northwest some sewers. Miami's paying Brightline half a billion to run commuter rail for them, maybe that's something to consider, I don't know.
Please feel free to tear this to shreds for being unrealistic and expensive.
Yes, now that THIS has happened, dust off those 2015 plan(s), and before and after that, relative to building a replacement for the Landing. I would guess one of the reasons why the landing was demolished was because of Shad Khan and his "pie in the sky" promises for the Shipyards and Lot J. We need to get that foot traffic back into the "real" urban downtown core and let Khan and Miss Curry do what they want to do. Sheesh!!!!!!!
Quote from: heights unknown on August 19, 2020, 09:01:30 PM
I always understood Miami "slam dunking" Jacksonville relative to building, construction, developing, etc. downtown; but when Tampa and Orlando, and even smaller cities (supposedly) like Fort Lauderdale, Sarasota, West Palm Beach, St. Petersburg, all have vibrant downtowns and are beating the stank out of Jax, that's sad...real sad. It just infuriates me when I visit Tampa and that City is just bursting at the seams with construction; cranes, cranes, cranes, development, construction, bee hive of activity like harvester ants.......and Jax? Dead. I know most of you can and might justify why those cities downtowns are so much more vibrant, dense, and prosperous, but Jax is Florida's largest city. I am mainly talking to the leaders of Jax and its Government, but IMO if you can't live up to it, let it go!
Tampa did what Orlando and St. Petersburg successfully pulled off years before them. They got out of their own way and started spending money on quality of life things like better parks, streets, riverwalks, museums, a convention center, etc. While still pretty depressing if you remember when there was retail on Franklin, you can feel the buzz of change and revitalization in the air. What's happened there over the last decade is a good example for Jax.
^Yep. The cleanup and improvements around Lake Eola, street and sidewalk improvements, park cleanups and improvements, nightly lane closures to allow foot traffic, designated uber lots, etc all made huge differences in the "all day" experience in downtown Orlando. The program managers have been hitting it out of the park to by making sure there are multiple events throughout the day, nearly every day.
The new Dr Phillips Center is amazing too. It's been so successful they've already expanded it. It's an iconic looking building from the outside and the interior design is modern and breathtaking in scale.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 19, 2020, 09:26:14 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on August 19, 2020, 09:01:30 PM
I always understood Miami "slam dunking" Jacksonville relative to building, construction, developing, etc. downtown; but when Tampa and Orlando, and even smaller cities (supposedly) like Fort Lauderdale, Sarasota, West Palm Beach, St. Petersburg, all have vibrant downtowns and are beating the stank out of Jax, that's sad...real sad. It just infuriates me when I visit Tampa and that City is just bursting at the seams with construction; cranes, cranes, cranes, development, construction, bee hive of activity like harvester ants.......and Jax? Dead. I know most of you can and might justify why those cities downtowns are so much more vibrant, dense, and prosperous, but Jax is Florida's largest city. I am mainly talking to the leaders of Jax and its Government, but IMO if you can't live up to it, let it go!
Tampa did what Orlando and St. Petersburg successfully pulled off years before them. They got out of their own way and started spending money on quality of life things like better parks, streets, riverwalks, museums, a convention center, etc. While still pretty depressing if you remember when there was retail on Franklin, you can feel the buzz of change and revitalization in the air. What's happened there over the last decade is a good example for Jax.
You bet "Lake;" and THAT'S where I was coming from!
Nate Monroe, once again, calls it like it is:
Quote
Tearing down a bridge to somewhere
COMMENTARY | Jacksonville has a hardened addiction to chasing the Big Project: The billion-dollar something-or-other that will finally put this city by the river on the map, to prove to the world it belongs in the conversation, downtown's long-desired road to Damascus.
And so when Jaguars owner Shad Khan suggested years ago he might be interested in building something — or a lot of things, it depends on which rendering one believes — one day, maybe, on Metropolitan Park, what did you expect would happen? The city has rushed headlong to fulfill Khan's dreams (and his wallet) and has indicated time and again it will bow to one generous concession after the next: Give away remediated public land for free? Pay off the feds to weasel out of replacing downtown riverfront park space? Gift nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in public subsidies? All and more are on the table.
And yet the city, despite tremendous effort and expense, continues to find its day of salvation is always just out of reach.
At this point, who can even say anymore what, exactly, Khan plans on building between Lot J — the parking lot adjacent to TIAA Bank Field — and Metropolitan Park across the street? Every time a new question arises, or a new unflattering development surfaces, Khan simply rearranges the set pieces on his colorful renderings and pretends as if nothing is amiss....
.....It turns out what the city has actually done is bid development rights away it doesn't have to a developer who wouldn't commit, and now it's ready to bid it out again, and likely that same developer with less grandiose plans will win the rights the city doesn't have to a piece of property that can't be developed.
Sounds like a plan.
Read the whole column here:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/08/20/jacksonvilles-dance-jaguars-owner-proves-fruitless/5608279002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/08/20/jacksonvilles-dance-jaguars-owner-proves-fruitless/5608279002/)
Nate Monroe is a treasure.
Monroe's a dolt. There's a dozen successful freeway removal projects out there that everyone and their grandmother knows about. Cities are looking at more. And he's complaining because a few spans of sparsely used and fugly concrete are being removed.
He's a natural born complainer. A broken clock.
Jacksonville not only needs to tear down those useless lanes, they need to tear down the Berkman II. No doubt when the city finally gets around to that in 18 years, Monroe will be complaining about it to. Dark.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 21, 2020, 12:20:14 PM
Monroe's a dolt. There's a dozen successful freeway removal projects out there that everyone and their grandmother knows about. Cities are looking at more. And he's complaining because a few spans of sparsely used and fugly concrete are being removed.
He's a natural born complainer. A broken clock.
Jacksonville not only needs to tear down those useless lanes, they need to tear down the Berkman II. No doubt when the city finally gets around to that in 18 years, Monroe will be complaining about it to. Dark.
I think you are missing the point. Taxpayers keep spending tens of millions of dollars tearing down things for projects that never happen. There is no ROI. Meanwhile, we destroyed something that still had a continuing or potential residual value that could have lasted for many more years until a real project showed up.
And, there is a difference between publicly funded projects and private ones. If the City tears down Berkman, they will put a lien on the property for the cost. Of course, knowing Jacksonville, we will allow the sale of the land for a bargain price and never recover the lien amount. What the City, instead of handing out easy permits for demolition of historic buildings, should be pursuing is the disposition of the Berkman, a much bigger eyesore than anything else. Curry could have one last demo thrill to boot and go out with a real bang!
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on August 20, 2020, 11:06:58 PM
Nate Monroe, once again, calls it like it is:
Quote
Tearing down a bridge to somewhere
COMMENTARY | Jacksonville has a hardened addiction to chasing the Big Project: The billion-dollar something-or-other that will finally put this city by the river on the map, to prove to the world it belongs in the conversation, downtown's long-desired road to Damascus.
And so when Jaguars owner Shad Khan suggested years ago he might be interested in building something — or a lot of things, it depends on which rendering one believes — one day, maybe, on Metropolitan Park, what did you expect would happen? The city has rushed headlong to fulfill Khan's dreams (and his wallet) and has indicated time and again it will bow to one generous concession after the next: Give away remediated public land for free? Pay off the feds to weasel out of replacing downtown riverfront park space? Gift nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in public subsidies? All and more are on the table.
And yet the city, despite tremendous effort and expense, continues to find its day of salvation is always just out of reach.
At this point, who can even say anymore what, exactly, Khan plans on building between Lot J — the parking lot adjacent to TIAA Bank Field — and Metropolitan Park across the street? Every time a new question arises, or a new unflattering development surfaces, Khan simply rearranges the set pieces on his colorful renderings and pretends as if nothing is amiss....
.....It turns out what the city has actually done is bid development rights away it doesn't have to a developer who wouldn't commit, and now it's ready to bid it out again, and likely that same developer with less grandiose plans will win the rights the city doesn't have to a piece of property that can't be developed.
Sounds like a plan.
Read the whole column here:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/08/20/jacksonvilles-dance-jaguars-owner-proves-fruitless/5608279002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/08/20/jacksonvilles-dance-jaguars-owner-proves-fruitless/5608279002/)
Awesome Nate, awesome; truth surely be told! I don't know when or if this madness ever stops, but it has to. Jax is now the weakest and feeblest major city in the State of Florida; there's NOTHING really going on in the urban core/downtown Jax. Dead as a possum run over by a semi tractor trailer truck. Hope it all changes before we all push up daisies!
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 21, 2020, 12:20:14 PM
Monroe's a dolt. There's a dozen successful freeway removal projects out there that everyone and their grandmother knows about. Cities are looking at more. And he's complaining because a few spans of sparsely used and fugly concrete are being removed.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on August 21, 2020, 01:04:01 PM
I think you are missing the point. Taxpayers keep spending tens of millions of dollars tearing down things for projects that never happen.
You + Monroe are not just missing the point, you're refusing to acknowledge it.
It's a freeway removal project. Some proposed development is the catalyst , not the reason. The reason is that it's not needed AND it's standard urban renewal stuff.
Removing that stretch of elevated freeway is what you do to build great places.
San Francisco, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Portland, et al. have all done this sort of thing.
Nothing to do with the proejct. Those project can occur w/ the lanes in place. That's just a cover story; a catalyst for getting the funds.
If you want a great place in the city, ya gotta remove the elvated sprawling subrban freeway.
I don't have a problem with removing the freeway. The part I hate is they are making things worse. If you're going to remove a freeway....remove it all. Not just the middle 1/4 mile.
The other thing is let's just say Curry was pulling the entire thing down. Is that really the most important thing downtown right now? I'd argue no.
We are YEARS away from any real construction at that site. Save the money and do something else with it, grow the economic base downtown THEN come back to it.
If there was a plan (sorry the CRA plan isn't detailed enough to lead to this outcome) that identified primary retail thoroughfares and Bay was identified as one, then a ramp demo could still make sense. Basically by taking down the entire thing west of Talleyrand, would send more auto traffic down Bay all the way through downtown as opposed to Adams, Forsyth and Duval. The higher AADT would create more through traffic visibility for properties on Bay, helping lead to a better market condition for retail clustering along the corridor. The reduction of AADT on the parallel streets would make them more suitable for lane diets and repurposing of those corridors to add dedicated cycle tracks, wider sidewalks for outdoor dining, more on-street parking, etc.
Any way to stop the stupid ramp up to the flyovers that would connect Adams/Duval?
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2020, 06:48:44 AM
The other thing is let's just say Curry was pulling the entire thing down. Is that really the most important thing downtown right now? I'd argue no.
We are YEARS away from any real construction at that site. Save the money and do something else with it, grow the economic base downtown THEN come back to it.
The federal and state money can't just be saved. It's a multiyear process just to get it. You've gotta spend it while it's there.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 24, 2020, 03:54:51 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2020, 06:48:44 AM
The other thing is let's just say Curry was pulling the entire thing down. Is that really the most important thing downtown right now? I'd argue no.
We are YEARS away from any real construction at that site. Save the money and do something else with it, grow the economic base downtown THEN come back to it.
The federal and state money can't just be saved. It's a multiyear process just to get it. You've gotta spend it while it's there.
That doesn't make the project worth it. It was basically $12.5M from the Feds, State, and COJ. The state grant didn't take a ton of legwork. The federal one did, but again, that doesn't make it worth it. Plus, how much time and effort was spent applying for those grants? Your argument would make sense if the money just fell into our laps like the Stork dropping off a Baby. That's not what happened; COJ lobbied those organizations for a long time for this. Lobby for something else.
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2020, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 24, 2020, 03:54:51 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2020, 06:48:44 AM
The other thing is let's just say Curry was pulling the entire thing down. Is that really the most important thing downtown right now? I'd argue no.
We are YEARS away from any real construction at that site. Save the money and do something else with it, grow the economic base downtown THEN come back to it.
The federal and state money can't just be saved. It's a multiyear process just to get it. You've gotta spend it while it's there.
That doesn't make the project worth it. It was basically $12.5M from the Feds, State, and COJ. The state grant didn't take a ton of legwork. The federal one did, but again, that doesn't make it worth it. Plus, how much time and effort was spent applying for those grants? Your argument would make sense if the money just fell into our laps like the Stork dropping off a Baby. That's not what happened; COJ lobbied those organizations for a long time for this. Lobby for something else.
And, those grants could be applied for when "needed".
The really sad part is all those grant and City dollars should have been spent in parts of the City and on projects that are in much greater need presently and for many decades prior. Khan, with Curry's backing, basically pushed his way to the front of a very long line that usually takes years to move to the front of, if ever.
The alleged urgency evaporated when Khan pulled back so this wasn't really all that urgent in the end, if it ever was. Back to the points made by Nate Monroe.
A few years back a few of us from The Jaxson's predecessor site met with the staff of Rep Corrine Brown. During that meeting, the staff brought up that in Washington, Jacksonville had a reputation for either squandering grant money, or being unable to show a ROI on the money.
Now, Corrine Brown hasn't been in DC for a few year and this was obviously a while ago, but today are we any better?
The point is, federal money is real money. Maybe I'm in the minority but I feel like as a city we have an obligation to show a good ROI when asking for state and federal funds. It's kind of like a kid that rarely asks for anything. When they do, you're more apt to listen versus the kid that has asked for 163926495 things for Christmas by the time it's March 15th.
Or maybe I'm just old fashioned about these sort of things and I take it too seriously when others give me money.
It's squandered tax money. Whether its local, state or federal, its public funds that could have been put to better use.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 23, 2020, 03:04:38 PM
The reason is that it's not needed AND it's standard urban renewal stuff.
Removing that stretch of elevated freeway is what you do to build great places.
San Francisco, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Portland, et al. have all done this sort of thing.
If you want a great place in the city, ya gotta remove the elvated sprawling subrban freeway.
Oh what irony
Development project for Lot J is back on
https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local/duval-county/development-project-lot-j-is-back/EMD5SL3CONAY3G6PGBL7HXXO4Q/
I am SOOOO excited!
We're overdue for a new set of renderings. Will be interesting to see how much we're expected to be on the hook for.
It's going to be really interesting to see if stadium improvements are mentioned.
There's been a lot of buzz in the last week about this coming back online in October, potentially as part of a larger package inclusive of upgrades to TIAA Bank field. Seems to be a feeling that Lot J is a done deal. If City Council is there tomorrow for the announcement, it's gotta be at the finish line.
I also don't think it's a coincidence either that Rise closed on the Doro property a few days ago either. Paul Harden is involved with the Rise development, and has also been deeply involved with the Lot J project. Seems logical that Rise might have pulled the trigger once they knew that Lot J was moving forward.
Going to be really interesting to see what the funding mechanism is.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 04, 2020, 09:52:19 PM
It's going to be really interesting to see if stadium improvements are mentioned.
There's been a lot of buzz in the last week about this coming back online in October, potentially as part of a larger package inclusive of upgrades to TIAA Bank field. Seems to be a feeling that Lot J is a done deal. If City Council is there tomorrow for the announcement, it's gotta be at the finish line.
I also don't think it's a coincidence either that Rise closed on the Doro property a few days ago either. Paul Harden is involved with the Rise development, and has also been deeply involved with the Lot J project. Seems logical that Rise might have pulled the trigger once they knew that Lot J was moving forward.
Going to be really interesting to see what the funding mechanism is.
Sounds like the usual "backroom" dealing. I didn't think the City Council members could commiserate on an issue without holding a publicly noticed meeting. If they are collectively in on this already, how did they come together? Are you telling me the mayor and Harden lobbied them individually and acted as intermediaries for the discussion that they are supposed to have in the public eye? Hmmm... Nate Monroe may need to investigate this further if that is the case.
"acting as intermediaries" among Council member is also a violation of the Sunshine Laws
Sounds like no stadium upgrades included in the announcement tomorrow.
Just Lot J.
Per Channel 4, there will be a six week period of review and audit of the proposal by the city.
Also sounds like the public ask will be less than the last round, though no details yet on whether the development itself will be scaled back.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 04, 2020, 10:27:29 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 04, 2020, 09:52:19 PM
It's going to be really interesting to see if stadium improvements are mentioned.
There's been a lot of buzz in the last week about this coming back online in October, potentially as part of a larger package inclusive of upgrades to TIAA Bank field. Seems to be a feeling that Lot J is a done deal. If City Council is there tomorrow for the announcement, it's gotta be at the finish line.
I also don't think it's a coincidence either that Rise closed on the Doro property a few days ago either. Paul Harden is involved with the Rise development, and has also been deeply involved with the Lot J project. Seems logical that Rise might have pulled the trigger once they knew that Lot J was moving forward.
Going to be really interesting to see what the funding mechanism is.
Sounds like the usual "backroom" dealing. I didn't think the City Council members could commiserate on an issue without holding a publicly noticed meeting. If they are collectively in on this already, how did they come together? Are you telling me the mayor and Harden lobbied them individually and acted as intermediaries for the discussion that they are supposed to have in the public eye? Hmmm... Nate Monroe may need to investigate this further if that is the case.
No idea who on city council knows what, besides the fact that several members of City Council are going to be there tomorrow at the press conference.
But talks have been on-again off-again between the DIA and Iguana for over a year now, so I'm sure details have made the rounds like things typically do in this city.
On Harden specifically, didn't say he lobbied anyone, just that it seemed to be a pretty good indicator that Lot J was imminent when Rise closed on the Doro property on Wednesday. Harden represented Rise on the project, and he's represented Iguana throughout the Lot J saga. He pitched JEA on Lot J. He has been heavily involved with the Met Park/Shipyards land swap stuff. Etc. The Rise project makes far less sense in the absence of Lot J.
LOL. When Harden "represents" someone in a project involving elected officials, he is likely being hired to lobby them as much as anything. Some have referred to him as the 20th City Council member (for those not in the know, we have 19 elected City Council members) because he spends so much time in the City Council's chambers. And its notable that he is a major contributor and fund raiser for many City Council members.
Ken, with all due respect, I believe you are underestimating how this town works 8). There are plenty of great attorneys in Jacksonville. There is a reason so many developers looking for handouts choose him.
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 04, 2020, 09:20:52 PM
I am SOOOO excited!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE)
Quote from: vicupstate on October 05, 2020, 04:41:05 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 04, 2020, 09:20:52 PM
I am SOOOO excited!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE)
Show the REAL music video you coward! (*sarcasm)
https://youtu.be/uHrgRJFd5Vc (https://youtu.be/uHrgRJFd5Vc)
Quote from: itsfantastic1 on October 05, 2020, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on October 05, 2020, 04:41:05 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 04, 2020, 09:20:52 PM
I am SOOOO excited!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iwBM_YB1sE)
Show the REAL music video you coward! (*sarcasm)
https://youtu.be/uHrgRJFd5Vc (https://youtu.be/uHrgRJFd5Vc)
You're both wrong.
This is the correct version, particularly for Lot J.
https://youtu.be/1QBHO6ek2mU?t=36
Why would you be scared, Ken?
Afraid of spending millions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize sprawling development to prop up a football team that really shouldn't need it, and at best doesn't deserve it right now?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on October 05, 2020, 10:27:24 AM
Why would you be scared, Ken?
Afraid of spending millions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize sprawling development to prop up a football team that really shouldn't need it, and at best doesn't deserve it right now?
All jokes aside, I don't hate Lot J, or any of the ancillary development or stadium upgrades, as long as it's tied to a long-term lease extension and a guaranteed floor on the number of home games played in Jacksonville for the life of the lease, and as long as the public has the opportunity to weigh in on it.
It's
very, very expensive to be an NFL city in 2020.
The revenue sharing model, for better or worse, demands that we keep up with the rest of the league.
We've got one of the oldest stadiums in the NFL, and a stadium that's routinely ranked as one of the worst in the league.
If we want to remain an NFL city - and there are good arguments to be made on both sides on the value and opportunity cost of remaining an NFL city long-term - we're going to have to open up the piggybank.
The Jags have the fourth oldest stadium in the NFL.
As a reminder, here's what the NFL Stadiums constructed in the last decade have cost:
Allegiant Stadium in Vegas - $1.8 billion
SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles - $5 billion
Mercedes-Benz in Atlanta - $1.6 billion
Vikings Stadium in Minnesota - $1.1 billion
Levi's Stadium in San Fran - $1.3 billion
Metlife Stadium in New York - $1.6 billion
AT&T Stadium in Dallas - $1.2 billion
At minimum, we'd probably be looking at a public contribution of $700 million to $1.2 billion, depending on how much Khan would actually kick in, plus the loss of a complete season during construction, if the Jags demanded a new stadium as a condition of signing a long-term lease extension in the absence of other revenue streams.
To me, that's worst case scenario. Potentially dropping a billion with nothing to show for it except a new stadium that's used 20 times a year.
If the Jags think they can remain competitive from a revenue perspective and are willing to sign a long-term lease extension based on a combination of smaller revenue driving projects in lieu of a full stadium replacement, I think that's actually preferable - again, *if* we think it's worth it as a city to keep the Jags here long-term.
All comes down to deciding as a city how many hundreds of millions of dollars (if any) we're willing to spend to keep the Jags here for another 30 years.
If the number is $1 billion, for example, I'd rather see it be used for lower-cost stadium upgrades and a bunch of surrounding revenue-driving uses that the public can enjoy and that will boost the profile of the sports complex as an event destination, rather than foregoing the ancillary stuff and dumping it all into a new stadium.
Fully understand that others might feel differently, but I think there's a good case to be made for Lot J as long as it's tied to a lease extension/floor on Jacksonville home games. We're going to need to pony up one way or the other, and Jacksonville Live! in particular makes sense for the growth of the sports district and fills a genuine need for more dining and bars in an area that's not easily walkable to the CBD.
Definition of insanity though would be striking a massive deal with Iguana on the project with no protections for the city in place in terms of lease or home games.
Opens us up to be gouged on Phase II, Met Park, or a stadium plan.
Would love to see Flex N Gate at Lot J. That would make me a huge cheerleader because that would be a real economic coup for Jax and the Stadium District. I doubt that happens though.
Other than that, while I don't believe what has been proposed is any more game changing than a couple of RISE Doro style projects being built next to each other (I really hate when Jax leaders over sell these type of projects), I'm good with infill market rate development at Lot J (and any other place in the city), as the ROI is positive and doesn't hurt existing downtown businesses or drain public funds for more worthwhile community investments.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 04, 2020, 10:27:29 PM
I didn't think the City Council members could commiserate on an issue without holding a publicly noticed meeting.
City Council met privately with Iguana last week.
Link?
A lot to say about that Ken, but I'm gonna see what they've got here.
Here's an estimate from Ben Becker:
https://twitter.com/BenBeckerANjax/status/1313131610905157632
Quote
Just in: Sources tell me this is the breakdown of the Lot J deal the City will announce at noon:
$450 million total
$150 million city
$300 million Shad
That's a smaller incentives request than previously proposed. Any idea if the development plan has changed?
Live: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/05/city-jaguars-unveil-latest-lot-j-development-plans/3621450001/
Only caught the end of it. Lot J construction timeline is dependent on city approval. The groundbreaking date thrown out was early 2021. Whenever construction actually begins, it would take 36 months to construct.
News is trickling out now. From Mike Mendenhall:
Quote$450 million development at Lot J with a boutique hotel, two residential for-lease buildings with 400 units, 40,000 square feet of class A office space and a Live! entertainment Arena.
The city will pay for its $152.7 million incentive deal for the project through a bond.
I saw the whole thing, but no site plan renderings, etc. Obviously the economics are better in terms of city investment but I'd need to see some more details in order to comment.
One number that seemed unimpressive was 40k SqFt of office space - that's pretty small considering. Now, I'm not suggesting they should build a 500k SqFt high-rise with no commitments, and I'd like to see the rest of the details in order to comment fully.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 05, 2020, 12:21:19 PM
That's a smaller incentives request than previously proposed. Any idea if the development plan has changed?
Major changes appear to be:
- Residential scaled back from 700-750 units down to 400
- More restaurant/retail than originally proposed
- Reintroduction of limited Class A office space (40k sf) into Phase I
- Some changes to parking (I thought I heard two garages?)
I need to re-listen, I might be wrong, but it sounds like the $60 million grant in the original proposal that the city would gift the developers has turned into a 20-year, $60 million loan that the City would extend to Cordish/Iguana instead.
New breakdown appears to be much closer to what I originally wanted to see (a 33/33/33 partnership between Jacksonville, Iguana, and Cordish, rather than a 50/50 public private split, with Coridish and Iguana each only chipping in 25%).
Video renders looked pretty rad, though value engineering will rear its head I'm sure.
Won't be a new urban neighborhood, but it will add a lot of vibrancy to the sports & entertainment district that should help keep Florida/Georgia pumping and bring in some new events as well.
Did I hear that Khan was kicking in $300 million?
P.S. The Q&A was fun.
So rare to see Khan, Lamping, and Curry up there with an open mic.
Nate Monroe tends to get all the accolades, but Christopher Hong is really great too.
Quote from: blizz01 on October 05, 2020, 12:44:02 PM
Did I hear that Khan was kicking in $300 million?
Khan and Cordish will split that $300 million (plus overruns).
So, roughly $150 million from the city, $150 million from Shad Daddy, and $150 million from Cordish.
...an equitable agreement? This is sounding a great deal more reasonable.
I can imagine that money would be magic anywhere else in downtown, but if we have to spend it out there there are certainly worse ways to have made this deal. Shame about no guarantees on the team staying or stadium stuff though.
Here's the presser:
https://twitter.com/Jaguars/status/1313147957978501120?s=20
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 05, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on October 05, 2020, 12:21:19 PM
That's a smaller incentives request than previously proposed. Any idea if the development plan has changed?
Major changes appear to be:
- Residential scaled back from 700-750 units down to 400
- More restaurant/retail than originally proposed
- Reintroduction of limited Class A office space (40k sf) into Phase I
- Some changes to parking (I thought I heard two garages?)
I need to re-listen, I might be wrong, but it sounds like the $60 million grant in the original proposal that the city would gift the developers has turned into a 20-year, $60 million loan that the City would extend to Cordish/Iguana instead.
New breakdown appears to be much closer to what I originally wanted to see (a 33/33/33 partnership between Jacksonville, Iguana, and Cordish, rather than a 50/50 public private split, with Coridish and Iguana each only chipping in 25%).
Video renders looked pretty rad, though value engineering will rear its head I'm sure.
Won't be a new urban neighborhood, but it will add a lot of vibrancy to the sports & entertainment district that should help keep Florida/Georgia pumping and bring in some new events as well.
There's also an additional surface parking lot, which was not in the plans before. I tend to think the Garages will be for the "tenants" of the place (apartments, office, etc.) and then the visitors/tailgators would use the surface lot. That would actually bring the cost down quite a bit as that garage over the retention pond wasn't cheap.
I still won't be happy about this unless there's something to create a hard tie for the Jags to not only Jacksonville, but the site in Jacksonville. I realize the investment of $150M from both Khan and Cordish is material, but unless there's a hard tie to the site then well, there is no tie to the site.
Site plan and renderings from COJ's Twitter:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjlF3RlWsAAgYs6?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjlF3RzWkAAgdJ2?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjlF3RzWsAEXauh?format=jpg&name=large)
Where is that tower? Is that part of a phase 2 that isn't included in this deal? If that bottom picture is looking west, it would imply the tower and parking garage in the background may be a future vision for the surface parking lot.
I'll say this: Clearly, the Mayor's office engaged folks all over the place to toss their support in to the project immediately after the announcement. I find that interesting as at times during Curry's administration he's seemed to say, "Forget everyone else, I'm going to do it myself."
Clearly he's not doing that here. My previous complaint that it was nearly 50/50 Public/Private obviously changes - this is ~33/67 Public/Private. Now, the product is smaller - much less in terms of apartments, but more in terms of restaurant/retail space.
Economically, this is a better detail for COJ. I'm not saying it tips the scales for me (I was against it previously), but it's undoubtedly better.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 05, 2020, 01:28:34 PM
Where is that tower? Is that part of a phase 2 that isn't included in this deal? If that bottom picture is looking west, it would imply the tower and parking garage in the background may be a future vision for the surface parking lot.
Correct, that's Phase II.
The Phase II discussed previously included two towers (residential for the first, and office for the second) connected by a parking garage.
It's not a game changer or anything as sold originally but it seems more doable and manageable for the market. Assuming it happens as proposed, you can then see some possible synergy with it and the Rise proposal. Also, let's say from right now, if everything goes well, this phase is completed around 2024. Are we looking at a Lot J/Shipyards 20 year buildout?
On the renderings, the surface lot is currently a retention pond. I never realized it was that easy to fill them in - but this is the second one proposed recently downtown (the Florida Blue garage was the first).
If we can safely do that without flooding someone out (I'm assuming someone dug a hole in the ground for a reason) then great. Additionally, there's also the Channel 12 guy wire on that site - you may be able to do what they need to do and not move that where the previous rendering would have required it to be moved I believe.
I hope they're considering ground level retail in the base of the residential, otherwise that may turn into a weird dead block
Like previously mentioned, I don't get how the 3D renderings lines up with the site plan (and maybe they don't - perhaps there is a concept of a Phase 2 on the surface lot).
Unquestionably, this plan is way more realistic, though I don't think this would be considered crazy transformative or anything.
These were the Phase 2 details, as an FYI:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/jaguars-already-planning-phase-ii-for-lot-j-development
Rewatching the video, a couple of the venues specifically shown in the flyover:
- Under Armour Sports Bar (I'd imagine this would be similar to the multi-level sports bars at most Cordish Live! venues, like Live! at the Battery or Fox Sports Midwest Live! in St. Louis)
- Toyota Backyard (looks like a smaller version of something like Arlington Backyard at Texas Live)
- PBR Jacksonville (the country themed bar present in a lot of Cordish developments)
- Miller Tavern & Beer Garden (restaurant & bar also present at Arlington Live)
- Daily's Marketplace
- Jag's Fit gym
You've gotta think that the reintroduction of 40,000 square feet of office space means that they've got a tenant lined up. Can't think of anyone off the top of my head that would fit that bill though. Fanatics was a name thrown around a lot in the past, but feels too small.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 05, 2020, 02:21:45 PM
Fanatics was a name thrown around a lot in the past, but feels too small.
Definitely too small. They'd have to split the operation (which you could do - Call Center, then everyone else). But that's not advantageous.
Now, if someone was REALLY interested and needed more SqFt, I'm sure they'd make it work. See Example: JEA HQ
Doesn't JEA need a hardened facility around 40,000 square feet? This would be a bad site for that though.
I think they are likely to want a brand new stadium with a roof. For them, it makes too much sense in being able to host events and for games during the heat of August/September/October. I know they have looked at alternatives through upgrades but I see a half cent type tax referendum likely for a stadium and convention center combo similar to Indianapolis with Jags running the convention side of things. That would mean a lot of space likely connected between the stadium/amphitheater/convention center to host conventions, bowl games, or even a draft combine in the future.
They need more events down there for this Jax Live! concept to work. These Live! venues are usually connected to baseball stadiums with 81 games a year, not NFL football and some NBA/NHL venues with 41 games. I can't think of an NFL stadium that doesn't have a parking lot surrounding it because there are not enough events to require more and people love tailgating.
Doubtful the Jags agreed to anything related to not ever relocating.
Also, with the gambling landscape changing, do not be surprised long term if a Casino is in the plans and Cordish has a lot of ties to casinos around the country.
Quote from: Steve on October 05, 2020, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 05, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on October 05, 2020, 12:21:19 PM
That's a smaller incentives request than previously proposed. Any idea if the development plan has changed?
Major changes appear to be:
- Residential scaled back from 700-750 units down to 400
- More restaurant/retail than originally proposed
- Reintroduction of limited Class A office space (40k sf) into Phase I
- Some changes to parking (I thought I heard two garages?)
I need to re-listen, I might be wrong, but it sounds like the $60 million grant in the original proposal that the city would gift the developers has turned into a 20-year, $60 million loan that the City would extend to Cordish/Iguana instead.
New breakdown appears to be much closer to what I originally wanted to see (a 33/33/33 partnership between Jacksonville, Iguana, and Cordish, rather than a 50/50 public private split, with Coridish and Iguana each only chipping in 25%).
Video renders looked pretty rad, though value engineering will rear its head I'm sure.
Won't be a new urban neighborhood, but it will add a lot of vibrancy to the sports & entertainment district that should help keep Florida/Georgia pumping and bring in some new events as well.
There's also an additional surface parking lot, which was not in the plans before. I tend to think the Garages will be for the "tenants" of the place (apartments, office, etc.) and then the visitors/tailgators would use the surface lot. That would actually bring the cost down quite a bit as that garage over the retention pond wasn't cheap.
I still won't be happy about this unless there's something to create a hard tie for the Jags to not only Jacksonville, but the site in Jacksonville. I realize the investment of $150M from both Khan and Cordish is material, but unless there's a hard tie to the site then well, there is no tie to the site.
How big was the Live venue before? The current report is 75,000 square feet of retail.
Is this 75k considered to be Live! or additional retail space on the ground floor of the hotel and apartment buildings? For scale's sake, the Landing was 126,000 square feet.
From article in Daily Record it states there will be 75k in retail AND the 100k Live Entertainment venue.
^It's hard to tell, as the wording in the term sheet is a bit vague and can be read either way:
"The district will consist of an entertainment venue with restaurants and retail and street-level restaurants and retail in the amount of 75,000 square feet."
Speaking of which, I'm looking at both term sheets, and here's how the new term sheet breaks down versus the old.
Ad valorem tax rebate:
Old term sheet - $25 million max rebate (75% over 20 years) for residential tower, hotel, and office space
New term sheet - $25 million max rebate (75% over 20 years) for two residential mid-rises only potentially suplimented by some form of completion payment if necessary for the hotel to get this "rebate" number up to $25 million
Jacksonville Live Arena!
Old term sheet - $50 million for the city's half of the Live! arena building; if this piece costs less than $100 million, the Jags could use the city's money for hotel or residential portions instead
New term sheet - $50 million for the city's half of the Live! arena building; if this piece cost less than $100 million, the city will be refunded half of the difference
Infrastructure improvements:
Old term sheet - $93 million solely financed by the city
New term sheet - $78 million* solely financed by the city
*Even with the reduction in infrastructure commitments included in the new agreement ($15 million), the city would still be on the hook for the difference in one of two ways. If Phase II moves forward, the city would be on the hook (per the agreement) for contributing up to $15 million toward a new parking garage for the next phase (the difference between the original $93 million in infrastructure commitments and the $78 million included in the new agreement). Or, if environmental remediation proves to be more costly than originally anticipated, the $15 million "difference" might be owed by the city as well.
Grant vs. Loan:
Original term sheet - The city gives the developers $65 million in free cash to "facilitate" the development
New term sheet - The city loans the loans the developers $65 million (secured by a $13 million deposit from Cordish/Khan)
Because the city is still on the hook for the full $93 million in infrastructure improvements, it looks like the only major difference between the two term sheets is that $65 million contribution from the city to "jump start" the development has switched from a cash handout to a loan (no terms disclosed).
We're incurring the full infrastructure costs, paying for half of the Live! arena, and providing a $25 million REV grant for the residential, and the Jags/Cordish are paying for half of the Live! arena, and all construction costs of the hotel, office, and residential components.
In terms of what we're getting for the new agreement versus the old, we're getting 100 more parking spots (1,400 vs. 1,300, with the 100 extra spots being structured in the residential garages), a comparable number of hotel rooms (200 in the old agreement, 150-250 in the new one), more residential (400 units vs. 300), and a lot less office space, which feels like a good thing (120k in the old agreement, 40k in the new one).
Also looks like the parking terms are slightly more favorable to the Jags in the new term sheet versus the old (the Jags formerly got to keep any parking proceeds above "historical levels" for all parking at Lot J; now, they get to keep all parking revenue outright from residential users).
Interesting that a note in the new term sheet seems to tip the Jags hand as to what they're thinking for Met Park (new term sheet references a luxury hotel, condos, marina, office and ground-level retail at a total cost of around $250 million).
Ken_FSU,
Sounds like the plan they put forward already. I have to imagine they still want a convention space nearby because, again, football and some concerts isn't enough. It is also a hike to get over there if you are going to the Arena for an event. It's part of what I don't love about this plan. Arena/Baseball Grounds have way more events than the stadium. The Jax Live! is kind of isolated there by the stadium.
Quote from: Steve on October 05, 2020, 01:41:13 PM
On the renderings, the surface lot is currently a retention pond. I never realized it was that easy to fill them in - but this is the second one proposed recently downtown (the Florida Blue garage was the first).
I don't think you can fill them in unless you relocate them close by. This was done with a pond at San Jose and Oak Bluff to allow the Chick-Fil-A and Zoes to get built. They just rebuilt the pond on the rear of the property from the original spot on the front.
You can also build over the pond. I understand there is a "pond" under the Wells Fargo building. Walmart in Mandarin has part of their parking lot built over a pond. Don't know, but maybe Fla. Blue's garage is also built over what was there. My guess is this is the option they would use here although it will cost more. No way SJRWM is going to allow these ponds to just go away given it seems impossible to not build them in the first place when new construction of any significance is undertaken. Once built, they are likely there forever in one form or another.
Not sure how they engineer away the guy-wire for Channel 12's antenna unless they can build around it or the station is moving it to a suburban antenna farm. The only other station with an antenna near downtown is Channel 4. With advances in technology, maybe there are new opportunities making moving worthwhile.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 05, 2020, 01:37:35 PM
Are we looking at a Lot J/Shipyards 20 year buildout?
Looks like they have moved on mostly from the Shipyards to Metro Park per the article's quotes below Now it's Lot J/Metro Park 8).
QuoteIguana's development rights at the Shipyards expired in August. DIA CEO Lori Boyer said Sept. 9 that Iguana representatives said they plan to submit a new development proposal focusing on the adjacent Metropolitan Park that only incorporates a small portion of the Shipyards....
...However, Lamping said the latest pitch to the DIA would free more than 30 acres for riverfront parkland.
"You're much better off focusing on the eastern end of the Shipyard rather than along the entire St. Johns River. So that's what we've done," Lamping said. "What we discussed with the DIA in terms of scale of that Shipyard project will end up being greater in every metric compared to what we originally chose to do – larger project, more expensive, more residences, more hotel rooms, more office space."
The DIA board signaled it wants Boyer to engage the National Park Service to consider trading Metropolitan Park, which is federally controlled, for the city-owned Shipyards property.
Soooooo...would it be appropriate in saying that MAYBE this is one of the reasons why, aside from the debacle between the City and Landing Owner Sleiman, that the Landing was allowed to be razed? Just a question and my hunch. But still, they really need to build something on the Landing property as Lot J is far removed from the bullseye of the Downtown Urban Core.
Quote from: heights unknown on October 05, 2020, 08:29:36 PM
Soooooo...would it be appropriate in saying that MAYBE this is one of the reasons why, aside from the debacle between the City and Landing Owner Sleiman, that the Landing was allowed to be razed? Just a question and my hunch. But still, they really need to build something on the Landing property as Lot J is far removed from the bullseye of the Downtown Urban Core.
Two reasons why tearing down the Landing plays into Khan's hands:
1. Eliminates entertainment competition in the greater Downtown area. Live! will be all by itself and now likely suck out whatever little night life remains in the central business district if it takes off.
2. Offers the City another riverfront parcel to barter with the National Park Service so Khan can get control of Metro Park.
Curry taking care of his #1 campaign supporter. We need to count the $15 to $20 million spent on the Landing as an additional subsidy to these projects.
The Jags long string of poor performance, and we get this. I hate everything about this project. If the money was spread around all of downtown we would get so much more bang for the $$$. Don't forget, the stadium and Lot J sit in an Enterprise Zone. At the end of the day Khan walks with all the money, if there is any left.
Quote from: heights unknown on October 05, 2020, 08:29:36 PM
Soooooo...would it be appropriate in saying that MAYBE this is one of the reasons why, aside from the debacle between the City and Landing Owner Sleiman, that the Landing was allowed to be razed? Just a question and my hunch.
It would be appropriate to say not maybe but absolutely.
People who left Jax read this stuff purely for the entertainment value. "Why does it keep happening in Jax?" Because people who care give up and move on.
Was it just me or did Kahn and Lamping seem uninterested at the presser?
Quote from: Papa33 on October 06, 2020, 09:08:47 AM
Was it just me or did Kahn and Lamping seem uninterested at the presser?
C'mon man, they just want to be able to make enormous amounts of profit at taxpayer expense...
The stadium and Lot J...I can already see the Mother of All Greenspace coming.
Chris Hong and Nate Monroe at the T-U are ripping apart the financing deal for this one. I haven't had time to process exactly what they're saying but I bet they aren't wrong.
Now, it may still make sense to move forward (or not). I'm also thinking that it's possible to continue to negotiate here (and they don't want to agree to better terms maybe we walk away).
Curry on 1010xl in 5 mins re Lot J.
Curry and the 1010XL guy have no clue of what they're talking about when it comes to planning and the urban core. They don't get it. It is what it is. Hopefully, in the future for downtown's sake, someone will. Things will really blossom a lot faster than we imagine when that day comes.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 06, 2020, 03:47:13 PM
Curry and the 1010XL guy have no clue of what their talking about when it comes to planning and the urban core. They don't get it. It is what it is.
He talked 2/3 times about "critics". Felt like a veiled shot at this forum haha.
LOL, probably. I figured the big public critic would be Nate Monroe. I personally haven't written much about it. I don't mind infill development at the stadium. I'd like to see development on all of our surface parking lots. However, only a fool would believe having a smaller Landing next to the stadium is a "game changer" for downtown. That's about as suburban oriented of a perspective as they come. I prefer discussion around what may be the real issue at hand. Figuring out what's needed (and how much it will cost) to keep the Jags in town long term. This seems to be a small part of that. I see another +$100 million request for incentives for the next phase of Lot J.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 05, 2020, 08:53:05 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on October 05, 2020, 08:29:36 PM
Soooooo...would it be appropriate in saying that MAYBE this is one of the reasons why, aside from the debacle between the City and Landing Owner Sleiman, that the Landing was allowed to be razed? Just a question and my hunch. But still, they really need to build something on the Landing property as Lot J is far removed from the bullseye of the Downtown Urban Core.
Two reasons why tearing down the Landing plays into Khan's hands:
1. Eliminates entertainment competition in the greater Downtown area. Live! will be all by itself and now likely suck out whatever little night life remains in the central business district if it takes off.
2. Offers the City another riverfront parcel to barter with the National Park Service so Khan can get control of Metro Park.
Curry taking care of his #1 campaign supporter. We need to count the $15 to $20 million spent on the Landing as an additional subsidy to these projects.
To me this is off kilter, out of character and to say the least insane. I guess no one wants all of downtown to prosper just the area in and around the stadium...again, insane! If you look at other successful and thriving cities downtowns, ALL of their downtown has something to offer in ALL areas; not just one particular area. Not everyone will want to come to the stadium area. Something similar to the Landing in the urban core would be a sane and viable alternative for those who do not want to fight the crowds at the new entertainment venue around the stadium.
Quote from: MusicMan on October 05, 2020, 09:38:13 PM
The Jags long string of poor performance, and we get this. I hate everything about this project. If the money was spread around all of downtown we would get so much more bang for the $$$. Don't forget, the stadium and Lot J sit in an Enterprise Zone. At the end of the day Khan walks with all the money, if there is any left.
That's exactly what I was trying to say as well "Music Man." Why cram all of the goodies at Lot J; why not have something in various areas in the downtown central core and not just crammed up at Lot J? I guess that's too hard for them to do. At least build something, a replacement at the Landing site.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 06, 2020, 03:47:13 PM
Curry and the 1010XL guy have no clue of what they're talking about when it comes to planning and the urban core. They don't get it. It is what it is. Hopefully, in the future for downtown's sake, someone will. Things will really blossom a lot faster than we imagine when that day comes.
The majority of sports talk guys have *zero* idea about anything urban core. A couple of the younger ones do. Frangie does an occasional remote broadcast from Strings Sports Brewery in Springfield now, and you can tell by his comments he spends no time anywhere but the suburbs & beach (like many in Jax). Clueless. Frustrating to hear the misinformation spread so far & wide.
I think Khan, Cordish and co should have to disclose to the public how they will utilize the federal Opportunity Zone as part of the project.
I would normally say this is none of the public's business, since it is related to their personal or business capital gains taxes, but the City is giving away so much local money that the public should also know how much the federal government will be subsidizing the project in terms of tax breaks on capital gains. Khan will be able to defer a substantial amount of recent capital gains upon the initial investment and if he keeps the initial investment in the property for more than 10 years, will not pay any capital gains on the appreciation of the property. I believe Khan and Cordish are able to lure additional investors into the project through the same process.
I'm all for REV Grants and reasonable incentives, but think Jaxons need to understand the total financial picture of the development, before throwing so much free money at Khan. I wish I had the time to do some estimates of how much he will save/make by using the Opportunity Zone model, but perhaps someone else can. This page describes the process well.
https://www.wellsfargo.com/the-private-bank/insights/planning/wpu-qualified-opportunity-zones/#:~:text=To%20defer%20a%20capital%20gain,in%20Qualified%20Opportunity%20Zone%20Property.
^Mark Lamping said back in January that Lot J would not use the opportunity zone program, though the quote reads somewhat ironically now, seeing as how the Jags have asked the city to loan them $65 million.
QuoteThe area around the stadium is part of a Federal Opportunity Zone that city officials successfully got designated in 2018 by then Gov. Rick Scott and the federal government.
The national program offers tax breaks to investors who put money into developing opportunity zones. The stadium area is one of several in Jacksonville that got designated.
Lamping said the Lot J development would not utilize the opportunity zone program, however.
He said the program is "really beneficial for projects that are looking for investors," but "we're not in that situation."
He said Khan and the Cordish Companies, which would split the private investment on a 50-50 basis and already are able to finance their portions of the project.
Source: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/politics/county/2020/01/14/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development/112152302/
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2020, 05:24:09 PM
^Mark Lamping said back in January that Lot J would not use the opportunity zone program, though the quote reads somewhat ironically now, seeing as how the Jags have asked the city to loan them $65 million.
QuoteThe area around the stadium is part of a Federal Opportunity Zone that city officials successfully got designated in 2018 by then Gov. Rick Scott and the federal government.
The national program offers tax breaks to investors who put money into developing opportunity zones. The stadium area is one of several in Jacksonville that got designated.
Lamping said the Lot J development would not utilize the opportunity zone program, however.
He said the program is "really beneficial for projects that are looking for investors," but "we're not in that situation."
He said Khan and the Cordish Companies, which would split the private investment on a 50-50 basis and already are able to finance their portions of the project.
Source: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/politics/county/2020/01/14/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development/112152302/
Unless they are financing 100% of their portion of the project, they would be fools to not use the Opportunity Zone benefits. Unless, Khan has enough other write offs, or some other tax strategies that us peasants aren't aware of.
I really don't have a problem overall with the proposal. Theres some things I think could have been done differently/better but overall I can stomach it.
For me the screwing around, dragging things out and lack of communication from Khan and Curry was/has been my main bugbears. The lack of clarity regarding lot J, combined with the continual push to the extra London games and the teams best players wanting out/being traded was just a PR mess. This proposal now appears much more sensible and realistic. Beforehand felt like just tease renderings of glossy high rises with no substance. Although I still expect pointless bureaucratic squabbling to delay construction starting. Also, I don't feel the average joe in this city reads much into the Khan/Curry relationship. You just needed to listen to 1010 today or read the various Jags social media pages to realise this. Its all praise.
The area already has the stadium, the baseball grounds, the arena, Dailys Place. In ten years time its probably going to have a soccer stadium and a convention center of some sort as well. These are all areas that are active on evenings and weekends. I like the walkway from the entertainment area to the other ground floor retail areas. Can't say I'm jumping for joy at some of the likely tenants at the Live! venue, but the area is crying out for cluster of bars and restaurants regardless. The lack of office space is disappointing and I can't help but think given our large suburban office presence there must have been potential takers, but for whatever reason there either isn't the appetite for the market or they did a poor job of attracting tenants due to leasing terms/costs or the like and perhaps a big reason for the watered down plans. JEA was just reshuffling the deck chairs and a lazy effort. As far as retail, would like to see the usual amenities that tenants will seek. A grocery store, gym, starbucks, some casual food options, that sort of thing.
The Landing going hasn't exactly provided a boom in leasing or activity in the existing downtown units. The immediate core is just a hard sell when you are heavily reliant on office workers.
I expect something smaller (more achieveable) for the waterfront now also. A smaller convention center, a parking garage and maybe another mixed use building of some sort.
Reality has kicked it appears with regards to the pie in the sky projects.
Quote from: CityLife on October 06, 2020, 05:33:09 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2020, 05:24:09 PM
^Mark Lamping said back in January that Lot J would not use the opportunity zone program, though the quote reads somewhat ironically now, seeing as how the Jags have asked the city to loan them $65 million.
QuoteThe area around the stadium is part of a Federal Opportunity Zone that city officials successfully got designated in 2018 by then Gov. Rick Scott and the federal government.
The national program offers tax breaks to investors who put money into developing opportunity zones. The stadium area is one of several in Jacksonville that got designated.
Lamping said the Lot J development would not utilize the opportunity zone program, however.
He said the program is "really beneficial for projects that are looking for investors," but "we're not in that situation."
He said Khan and the Cordish Companies, which would split the private investment on a 50-50 basis and already are able to finance their portions of the project.
Source: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/politics/county/2020/01/14/jaguars-president-says-talks-with-city-close-to-deal-for-700-million-lot-j-development/112152302/
Unless they are financing 100% of their portion of the project, they would be fools to not use the Opportunity Zone benefits. Unless, Khan has enough other write offs, or some other tax strategies that us peasants aren't aware of.
To use the Federal opportunity zone credits, you have to be reinvesting capital gains from disposing of an existing investment. For someone with Khan's wealth, it likely would be not too hard for him to raise his equity portion from such gains. Let's say he "puts down" 10% or $45 million for this project (thanks in large part to the City picking up 33% of the risk) and in 10 years the $450 million is sold for $550 million (that's only about 2% a year appreciation so very conservative). He clears a $100 million profit on $45 million invested and all of the $100 million is forever free of Federal income tax and the tax on the $45 million was deferred for up to 10 years or 2026, whichever comes first, and then discounted by 15%.
Someone also needs to see if this project will be subject to property taxes if it is technically on leased City owned land.
The ultimate failure of Federal opportunity zones is they do nothing for the residents who live in them as there are no requirements to cater to their needs or hire them for projects benefiting from being in the Zone. Many residents actually lose as the Zones can speed up or encourage gentrification.
Looks like Curry didn't learn anything about transparency from his JEA experience and is mimicking the pension plan's "kick-it-down-the-road-to-make-me-look-good-now, higher-costs-to-taxpayers-be-damned" smoke and mirrors approach.
Turns out this deal is back to the taxpayers backing a scaled back project for the originally proposed $233 million in subsidies. Starting out with a "loan" that charges no interest, takes 50 years to get repaid, if ever, and is structured so Khan gets effectively a grant without paying income tax on it. Who knows what else follows for Phase II and the Stadium. As the T-U points out, Khan is getting dollars roughly equal to the City's entire capital expenditure on the rest of the populace for the year. The arrogance is simply amazing even for "give-it-all-away-in-bad-back-room-deals Jacksonville."
I see Curry looking at another JEA-type scandal for his administration.
Full article at:
Quotehttps://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/06/jacksonville-wants-give-khan-interest-free-65-million-loan-lotj/3636734001/
Excerpt:
QuoteJacksonville taxpayers will give Jaguars owner Shad Khan $65.5 million through an unusually structured loan that would charge no interest, take up to 50 years to repay and significantly lessen Khan's tax burden, according to the proposed deal he's reached with City Hall to build a mixed-use development on Lot J next to TIAA Bank Field that was announced Monday.
Under the novel arrangement, the city will provide an upfront payment of $65.5 million to the billionaire's development team. Instead of repaying the loan over a fixed schedule, the developers would make an upfront deposit of $13.1 million into a trust account, where the city expects it to grow in value over decades. The city would collect the money when the account's value reaches $65.5 million or 50 years, whichever happens first.
Counting the loan, Curry has proposed committing as much as $233.3 million in public subsidies to the project, including as much as $205 million in hard cash. In comparison, the city plans to spend roughly $240 million this year across the city on big-ticket capital projects and infrastructure improvements.
Khan's development team, which is a partnership between himself and the Cordish Companies, plans to invest $229 million in the project, although the amount is actually $174.4 million when the proceeds of the city loan are accounted for.
The loan included in the deal is known in the real estate industry as a "breadbox loan," a novel financial program designed to allow developers to receive money from municipal governments, much like a grant, while avoiding the significant federal tax impact of actually receiving one, according to documents created by UTW Capital, LLC, a firm that manages these types of loans.
Although governments can expect to be repaid under "reasonable circumstances," these loans can be structured to free a developer of any future obligation to make a lender whole in the event the initial deposit doesn't grow enough over the 50-year period to repay the loan, according to the UTW Capital documents.
The city hasn't released any documents providing specific details about the structure of the loan. Mayor Lenny Curry said during a press conference Monday that the city would loan Khan's development team $65.5 million, but he didn't say the loan would be interest free or take the city as long as 50 years to be repaid.
Interest-free 'breadbox loan'
A summary of the deal provided to the media by Curry's office described the arrangement as a "breadbox loan" but also failed to mention the loan was interest free. Instead, Curry's office provided that information in response to questions from the Times-Union....
...The city had initially proposed giving Khan's development team a $65 million grant, but the development deal announced on Monday, which was the first of any kind City Hall has struck with Khan related to his grand plans to build an urban village near the stadium, called for the money to be provided in a long-term, zero-interest loan.
In the interest of Hanlon's razor, I'd like to ask:
Are Curry and his team actively making this deal as much in Khan's favor as they can without being too obvious, or do they just not know how to negotiate? The fact that they obfuscated the facts about the loan until the TU started sniffing implies the former. And the way that despite repeated alarm about how this doesn't include any consideration of the lease or stadium, they don't seem to have made any effort to at least demand more games are played here is ludicrous. It feels like Curry tries to fight everyone except the people he should be fighting.
I'd like to dedicate this next song to Curry and Khan...what a power couple! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liKhLNY5GYI
Ok, if you don't have a T-U subscription, get one:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/10/08/shad-khan-rolls-jacksonville-city-hall/5909591002/
Monroe hit it out of the park here with this column.
Quote from: Steve on October 08, 2020, 09:04:30 AM
Ok, if you don't have a T-U subscription, get one:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/10/08/shad-khan-rolls-jacksonville-city-hall/5909591002/
Monroe hit it out of the park here with this column.
Great closing line.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 04, 2020, 10:27:29 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 04, 2020, 09:52:19 PM
It's going to be really interesting to see if stadium improvements are mentioned.
There's been a lot of buzz in the last week about this coming back online in October, potentially as part of a larger package inclusive of upgrades to TIAA Bank field. Seems to be a feeling that Lot J is a done deal. If City Council is there tomorrow for the announcement, it's gotta be at the finish line.
I also don't think it's a coincidence either that Rise closed on the Doro property a few days ago either. Paul Harden is involved with the Rise development, and has also been deeply involved with the Lot J project. Seems logical that Rise might have pulled the trigger once they knew that Lot J was moving forward.
Going to be really interesting to see what the funding mechanism is.
Sounds like the usual "backroom" dealing. I didn't think the City Council members could commiserate on an issue without holding a publicly noticed meeting. If they are collectively in on this already, how did they come together? Are you telling me the mayor and Harden lobbied them individually and acted as intermediaries for the discussion that they are supposed to have in the public eye?
Mark Lamping and Paul Harden did, in fact, meet with city council members individually last week, per the Daily Record.
Nate Monroe retweeted these pictures posted by James Poindexter and added this commentary to Mr. Poindexter's comment of "How it started. How it's going.":
QuotePeople forget the city *just* put up half the money for the amphitheater and practice field (of which Khan gets all the upside). That was also supposed to be transformational. Then Khan turned right around, complained about viability and tried to take a second home game away.
Promised:(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejz0mAiWsAcfyzM?format=jpg&name=medium)
Delivered:(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejz0mAgXsAMfZl3?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Nate Monroe nailed it with these concluding lines, especially the very last one. He just needed to add that Khan is sacking not just the Mayor but, more importantly, Jacksonville taxpayers.
As an aside, I bet a huge contingent of Jag's ticket holders live in St. Johns, Nassau and Clay counties and they contribute nothing to this project. On top of just being an awful deal for taxpayers, we need to realize at this point that half or more of our City support for the Jags likely benefits non-Jax taxpayers.
QuoteGive him credit: For all of Khan's on-the-field incompetence, he can still roll City Hall on a sweetheart deal. One of the most prolific political donors in the city, Khan has cultivated an entire generation of elected officials who jump at his beck and call. In particular, Khan has played the star-struck, football-obsessed Curry like a fiddle. He lets the mayor play assistant coach at spring training and invites him to ride on the team's chartered plane to away games.
Curry, with this deal in hand, thinks he scored a touchdown. In reality, Khan sacked him.
You should look at the value engineering of the Lot J renderings over the last few years. All those towers are gone and the hotel probably won't happen immediately because there may not be a market for it. So you're getting a Landing replacement and a 220 Riverside for that incentives package. Alone, in isolation this is no more of a game changer than the Landing was 30 years ago. Yet it appears to be a big part of keeping the Jags in town. There will be more requests for hundreds of millions in incentives for future development that appears to already be viable in Brooklyn. IMO, this conversation should be less about Lot J and more about what do the Jags need to become viable long term in Jax. Jax needs to figure that out and cohesively integrate it into an overall plan for DT.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 08, 2020, 11:41:27 AM
Nate Monroe retweeted these pictures posted by James Poindexter and added this commentary to Mr. Poindexter's comment of "How it started. How it's going.":
QuotePeople forget the city *just* put up half the money for the amphitheater and practice field (of which Khan gets all the upside). That was also supposed to be transformational. Then Khan turned right around, complained about viability and tried to take a second home game away.
Promised:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejz0mAiWsAcfyzM?format=jpg&name=medium)
Delivered:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejz0mAgXsAMfZl3?format=jpg&name=900x900)
^Lot J discussion aside, I do think that James Pointdexter tweet about Daily's Place is a little misleading.
Comparing the original renders to what might be the least flattering picture of Daily's Place possible.
The amphitheater's design obviously changed from initial renders to execution.
But sleek exterior aside, do we really think that this odd open-air alternative (with standalone private practice facility that most certainly would have eaten up more of the budget) would have been a better, more functional alternative than the Daily's place we did get with awesome sight lines, a full roof, and shared infrastructure and connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and the new club level?
(https://snipboard.io/UdLMlb.jpg)
An amphitheater is something that Jacksonville had needed and had been trying to push through since the Delaney administration.
Funding came from the bed tax, the venue has filled a significant hole in the Jacksonville entertainment landscape, it's been a big success as an additional revenue driver for the Jags (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20190709/st-augustines-amp-jacksonvilles-dailys-place-rank-among-top-15-amphitheaters-worldwide), and at worst, the city breaks even/shows a small profit from its addition to the sports complex (https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local/action-news-jax-investigates-if-dailys-place-is-a-hit-or-flop-for-taxpayers/1010370672/).
It's a legitimately cool venue too that is fantastic for live events and that the city should find more creative ways to use (the flex field in particular).
Design definitely changed, but I don't necessarily agree with the argument that the city somehow got fleeced/swindled by Daily's Place.
Here are some alternate pictures that are a little more flattering:
(https://populous.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Populous_DailysPlace_Ewing-6668v2.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DA4Vd2OUAAAsKHb.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DA4VdhGUMAAlw8Q.jpg)
(https://www.structurflex.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Dailys-Place-Flex-Field-Exterior-9.jpg)
(https://populous.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/dailysplace_flexfield_jaguars-1.jpg)
(https://populous.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Populous_DailysPlace_Ewing-0232v2_rev.jpg)
Agree. I mean, even the sky was more ominous...
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 08, 2020, 12:39:46 PM
^Lot J discussion aside, I do think that James Pointdexter tweet about Daily's Place is a little misleading.
Comparing the original renders to what might be the least flattering picture of Daily's Place possible.
The amphitheater's design obviously changed from initial renders to execution.
But sleek exterior aside, do we really think that this odd open-air alternative (with standalone private practice facility that most certainly would have eaten up more of the budget) would have been a better, more functional alternative than the Daily's place we did get with awesome sight lines, a full roof, and shared infrastructure and connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and the new club level?
(https://snipboard.io/UdLMlb.jpg)
An amphitheater is something that Jacksonville had needed and had been trying to push through since the Delaney administration.
Funding came from the bed tax, the venue has filled a significant hole in the Jacksonville entertainment landscape, it's been a big success as an additional revenue driver for the Jags (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20190709/st-augustines-amp-jacksonvilles-dailys-place-rank-among-top-15-amphitheaters-worldwide), and at worst, the city breaks even/shows a small profit from its addition to the sports complex (https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local/action-news-jax-investigates-if-dailys-place-is-a-hit-or-flop-for-taxpayers/1010370672/).
It's a legitimately cool venue too that is fantastic for live events and that the city should find more creative ways to use (the flex field in particular).
Design definitely changed, but I don't necessarily agree with the argument that the city somehow got fleeced/swindled by Daily's Place.
I agree SOMEWHAT. Color me as someone that's underwhelmed by Daily's Place. The sound quality is hit and miss (likely because the place is 98% concrete), and it's an oven in the summer because there's no breeze (the breeze over there comes from the river and we stuck a football field with walls around it). Obviously it's not going to win any awards architecturally, and I'm okay with THAT part of it. Additionally, I do like that it shares some things with the stadium - that part is nice. So, I'd say it's a mixed bag.
Also, what I'd love to know is how much did the Flex Field part cost, and how much did the amphitheater cost? While the flex field might be able to be used for things other than the Jags such as a Lot J press conference when social distancing is needed, we would have never built that venue if not for the Jags - an amphitheater on the other hand we may have.
Quote from: Steve on October 08, 2020, 01:54:23 PMAlso, what I'd love to know is how much did the Flex Field part cost, and how much did the amphitheater cost? While the flex field might be able to be used for things other than the Jags such as a Lot J press conference when social distancing is needed, we would have never built that venue if not for the Jags - an amphitheater on the other hand we may have.
This is why I think it oversimplifies things a bit when the city says that we got an amphitheater for 50 cents on the dollar.
Not that simple.
The $90 million project broke out as:
- $45 million for the amphitheater
- $20 million for the flex field
- $26 million for the club seat upgrades
If you view the club seats and flex field as facilities that the city wouldn't have otherwise built, then another way to look at it is that the city paid the full cost of Daily's Place and the Jags paid for the flex field and club upgrades.
Either way, again, it came out of the bed tax, which by current ordinance has to be used at the sports complex, and filled an existing need, so I have a hard time being too upset or feeling too fleeced by this one.
Y'all forget the middle set of renderings in 2016 or so, between the first pictures and the final products. Personally, they're the ones that sold me.
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/8399002/jags-amp-renderings2.jpg)
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/8398952/jags-amp-renderings1b.jpg)
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/8398992/jags-amp-renderings2b.jpg)
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/8399012/jags-amp-renderings5.jpg)
Also perhaps worth nothing is this rendering from 2013:
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/217935_standard.png)
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 08, 2020, 03:02:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on October 08, 2020, 01:54:23 PMAlso, what I'd love to know is how much did the Flex Field part cost, and how much did the amphitheater cost? While the flex field might be able to be used for things other than the Jags such as a Lot J press conference when social distancing is needed, we would have never built that venue if not for the Jags - an amphitheater on the other hand we may have.
This is why I think it oversimplifies things a bit when the city says that we got an amphitheater for 50 cents on the dollar.
Not that simple.
The $90 million project broke out as:
- $45 million for the amphitheater
- $20 million for the flex field
- $26 million for the club seat upgrades
If you view the club seats and flex field as facilities that the city wouldn't have otherwise built, then another way to look at it is that the city paid the full cost of Daily's Place and the Jags paid for the flex field and club upgrades.
Either way, again, it came out of the bed tax, which by current ordinance has to be used at the sports complex, and filled an existing need, so I have a hard time being too upset or feeling too fleeced by this one.
Per the Visit Jacksonville web site [https://www.visitjacksonville.com/about (https://www.visitjacksonville.com/about)/]:
QuoteVisit Jacksonville is funded by bed tax dollars. The 6 percent bed tax is placed on all hotel rooms in Duval County. Of the 6 percent tax collected, 2 percent is allocated to the Sports Complex Upkeep Fund, 2 percent to the bond TIAA Bank Field and 2 percent to the Tourist Development Council of Duval County. Part of the TDC's portion is used to fund Visit Jacksonville.
So 2/3 of our bed tax pretty much goes to benefit the Jaguars. People need to recognize that some of that money could be paying for more tourist development and, most importantly, a convention center or subsidizing other attractions like a music museum, aquarium or ship. Bottom line, tax dollars of any kind so heavily directed to a specific purpose come at the expense of a variety of other purposes. So, I am not necessarily fine with the Jag's soaking up most of our bed taxes for decades to come.
I would also challenge the belief the City gets a return on investment on these deals. Starting with the Jags, numerous national studies have concluded that pro sports teams lift civic pride but lower civic finances. Given the deal the Jags have with the City, its no question that applies here.
As to the design of the structure, a 3D view of Daily's on Google shows mostly a boxy structure with little to no embellishments or design features to make it attractive from the ground level. It looks like it was built on the cheap.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 08, 2020, 07:39:24 PM
Per the Visit Jacksonville web site [https://www.visitjacksonville.com/about (https://www.visitjacksonville.com/about)/]:
QuoteVisit Jacksonville is funded by bed tax dollars. The 6 percent bed tax is placed on all hotel rooms in Duval County. Of the 6 percent tax collected, 2 percent is allocated to the Sports Complex Upkeep Fund, 2 percent to the bond TIAA Bank Field and 2 percent to the Tourist Development Council of Duval County. Part of the TDC's portion is used to fund Visit Jacksonville.
So 2/3 of our bed tax pretty much goes to benefit the Jaguars. People need to recognize that some of that money could be paying for more tourist development and, most importantly, a convention center or subsidizing other attractions like a music museum, aquarium or ship. Bottom line, tax dollars of any kind so heavily directed to a specific purpose come at the expense of a variety of other purposes. So, I am not necessarily fine with the Jag's soaking up most of our bed taxes for decades to come.
There's actually not as much wiggle room in that 2/3 of the bed tax as you think.
1/3 of our bed taxes go strictly to debt service on the infrastructure bonds the city issued in 1993 to fund an 80% reconstruction of the old Gator Bowl. Jacksonville Municipal Stadium (e.g. TIAA) is a publicly owned facility that the city agreed to build in order to lure an NFL franchise to Jacksonville. I'd argue that the Jags don't directly benefit from this 2%, as they're not realizing a dime of these bed taxes. It's strictly interest payments on a debt that the city knowingly took on long before Shad Khan came along.
The other 1/3 noted above is purely for upkeep of not just TIAA Bank Field, but also for VyStar Memorial Arena, the Baseball Grounds, and now Daily's Place. These facilities are expensive to maintain and require repairs and upgrades on an annual basis. If this 2% was reallocated elsewhere, there's a really good chance that we'd have to dip into the general fund to cover these expenses, particularly as our sports facilities are upgraded and modernized. Same as above, The Jags benefit from these bed taxes, but so do the Icemen, Jumbo Shrimp, Giants, Gators, Bulldogs, and the thousands of artists and performers who have hosted shows and events at the sports complex.
For now, the 2/3 allocation is kind of the bed we've made (see what I did there?), and I'd argue that it's less about giving a handout to the Jags from our bed taxes, and more about having nice facilities as a city and actually keeping up with their maintenance (the sports complex might be the only place that the city is actually good at doing this, thanks to the bed tax ordinance).
Any thoughts on years of being sold this...
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-tswqKcg/0/bcb317fc/L/Lot%20J%20-%201-L.png)
and ending up with this for nearly the same amount of public incentives?
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-DgR9FRv/0/a6e28aac/L/Lot%20J%20-%202-L.png)
Looks like it went from a Live! surrounded by multiple modern high-rise towers into a Live! surrounded by 220 Riverside and a shorter, upscale version of Brooklyn's Residence Inn. Don't get fooled by the towers at the bottom of the bottom image. That's showing a future phase (with a separate public incentives request) on top of this deal's surface parking lot.
Pointing this out, I always said that original rendering package wasn't feasible for this market. The second one is more of the Jax market's speed.
Quote1/3 of our bed taxes go strictly to debt service on the infrastructure bonds the city issued in 1993 to fund an 80% reconstruction of the old Gator Bowl. Jacksonville Municipal Stadium (e.g. TIAA) is a publicly owned facility that the city agreed to build in order to lure an NFL franchise to Jacksonville. I'd argue that the Jags don't directly benefit from this 2%, as they're not realizing a dime of these bed taxes. It's strictly interest payments on a debt that the city knowingly took on long before Shad Khan came along.
The City may own the stadium in name but the Jags are, operationally, the owners of the stadium (with a sweetheart deal that gives them most of the revenues and very little of the expenses) that we taxpayers paid for and give to them essentially rent and almost maintenance free so explain how the Jag's don't directly benefit from that 2% share of taxes.
I agree, the sports complex is more than just the stadium but given its relative size and complexity, I would expect the stadium (and now its connected adjunct, Daily's Place) to also eat up the lions share of the maintenance 2%. Again, the Jags are pretty much the sole beneficiaries of the stadium and, now, Daily's.
My point is, if ROI was used as the criteria for taxpayer "investments," the Jags would have some pretty healthy competition from alternatives but the City isn't interested in that approach.
No public leader wants the Jags to leave town on their watch. That fear will always remain a factor until they're locked in for the long term.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 08, 2020, 09:14:11 PM
Any thoughts on years of being sold this...and ending up with this for nearly the same amount of public incentives?
Looks like it went from a Live! surrounded by multiple modern high-rise towers into a Live! surrounded by 220 Riverside and a shorter, upscale version of Brooklyn's Residence Inn.
Pointing this out, I always said that original rendering package wasn't feasible for this market. The second one is more of the Jax market's speed.
You mention 220 Riverside and Brooklyn's Residence Inn in jest, but here's what I still can't wrap my head around:
The term sheet lists the total price tag on the two residential buildings, totaling 400 units, and the 150-200 room hotel, as
$229 million. Keep in mind, this is for the buildings only, as all hardscaping, utilities, infrastructure, etc. is lumped separately as a city obligation.
220 Riverside was built almost a decade ago, so it's hard to compare construction costs, but let's look at something like the Doro project next door. It's 247 units with a a 284 spot garage, with a estimated construction cost of $48 million.
(http://snipboard.io/wcKCIl.jpg)
Here's Vista Brooklyn, which also appears similar in overall design. It's 308 units with a 450 spot garage, with an estimated construction cost of $55 million.
(https://snipboard.io/1fERoF.jpg)
Using an average cost-per-unit of these two recent, nearby developments with ample retail and structured parking as a baseline, we'd expect 400 similar residential units at Lot J to cost
~$75 million to construct total.Subtract that from the $229 noted in the term sheet for residential and hotel cost, and that leaves an absolutely insane
$154 million left over for the 150-200 room hotel pictured here on the top right:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-DgR9FRv/0/a6e28aac/L/Lot%20J%20-%202-L.png)
For context, at Texas Live! in Arlington, the massive 14-story story hotel pictured below, with a swim-up bar, 35,000 square feet of convention space, a full fitness center, an outdoor infinity pool, an event lawn and a private rooftop terrace cost $150 million.
(https://snipboard.io/yl9T6L.jpg)
Something just seems wonky with the new renders and the price tag overall.
This, combined with the term sheet stating that hotel construction might lag several years behind residential and Live Arena! construction makes me wonder if the space labeled as "Hotel/Retail" in Cordish's renders is actually the 40,000 square feet of office space.
(https://snipboard.io/FOgRdQ.jpg)
The structure in that top right section seems to be closer in scale to 40,000 SF of office space than an up to 200-room hotel.
(https://snipboard.io/7zW25C.jpg)
My guess is that either these renders are either half-baked and the structures will be more vertical than pictured, or (and more likely) the hotel will end up over the retention pond at a future date and necessitate a separate parking garage that the city will be on the hook for another $15 million for. Maybe that's what that phantom tower in the background is.
Even then, I'm just baffled as to how 400 mid-rise residential units and 200 hotel rooms can cost $229 million.
Compare this to another project like Phase II of Ballpark Village in St. Louis (https://stlballparkvillage.com/ballpark-village-phase-2), which included a 29-story glass residential tower, a new headquarters for PWC, a Live by Loews hotel with 220 rooms and meeting space, a gym, and a metric ton of retail and streetscape improvements, which had a $260 million price tag, and I just don't see how the $229 million quote matches what it's in that render.
In terms of the new Lot J renders and project scope being so much less impressive (but more market appropriate) than the new renders/scope, what's really interesting is that the city's contributions for both plans are similar, but the reduction in scale is pretty much exclusively isolated to the portions of the project that the Jags/Cordish are funding (hotel, residential, office). Infrastructure and Live! Arena taxpayer contributions are identical in both term sheets, and parking and REV grant terms are actually more favorable toward the Jags in the new term sheet.
Nate Monroe taking on the powers-that-be. Khan, Harden & Curry entertained numerous City Council members on his yacht to grease the skids for this project: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/10/09/shad-khan-his-yacht-and-city-council/5936491002/
(https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/10/09/shad-khan-his-yacht-and-city-council/5936491002/)
A possible strategy for Khan is to use Lot J/Metro Park as a way to raise the ante on the Jags lease renewal negotiations. By hooking the City for over $200 million, when the Jag's lease comes up in 2030, he can proffer that not only would the City lose the team if it doesn't capitulate to his demands, but the Lot J/Metro Park developments will be a lot less successful (if they are at all) and valuable if he pulls the team. So, we taxpayers would be facing an empty stadium and no return on hundreds of millions it taxpayer dollars. Talk about being backed into a corner.
Photo credit: Bruce Lipsky/ Florida Times Union:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/10/09/NFTU/7daf1375-df25-4ef6-bfa9-c50ef73c85bd-met_6Kismet012712.jpg?width=1320&height=746&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
That's his old yacht, the current one is a lot larger :o
Legislation is being introduced today by Tommy Hazouri.
A couple of things stick out that the media still either has wrong, or is missing entirely:
1) The Lot J development will not include a 100,000 SF Live Arena with restaurants/bars and an additional 75,000 square feet of retail/restaurant space. At least not per the development agreement. Lot J will include a total of 75,000 square feet in retail/restaurant space, with the exception of maybe any retail space that ends up in the hotel or residential units (the agreement is vague as to whether this would count toward the 75,000 sf). The media keeps saying 100,000 square feet for the Live! portion + 75,000 sf, but this just doesn't seem to be true.
2) The 40,000 in office space appears to be built into what is considered the $100 million "Live! Venues" portion of the development. This is important because the city is paying half for the Live! venues. From my reading, this suggests that a good portion of Jacksonville's $50 million contribution toward the "Live! Arena!" could conceivably be used for Class A office space considered to be part of the development that would then be handed over to Cordish to operate.
3) The agreement is $12.5 million in cash heavier than most people think. The $25 million rev grant for the residential & hotel components has quietly turned into a $12.5 million rev grant for the residential portion (at 20 years, requiring an exception), and a $12.5 million cash payment doled out over five years as a "completion grant" for the hotel. So, if the hotel is built, we're essentially giving Cordish/The Jags their $13 million breadbox deposit back.
4) Terms have also quietly changed from the city potentially being on the hook for $15 million for a parking garage if Phase II is developed, to the city being responsible for all cost overruns up to $15 million on any public portion of the project (which includes remediation, infrastructure, and the Live! venues/office portion). I'd kiss another $15 million in cash goodbye.
5) Agreement gives Jags/Cordish the option of flipping the hotel parcel to a third-party developer if they so choose. Probably not a huge surprise, but there's no minimum specs for the hotel included in the agreement (beyond 150+ rooms). I think they're committed to building the hotel, but it doesn't seem like there's anything in the agreement that stops them from flipping it to someone to build a hotel on the cheap and then pocketing the $13 million completion grant either.
$208 million in bonds will fund the project, if approved, which should cover our $50 million for half of the Live! venue, $77 million in infrastructure, $12.5 million for the hotel grant, $15 million for cost overruns, and $65 million for the breadbox loan (minus the Jags $13 million deposit). No modification to the TIAA Bank Field lease included in the agreement (with the exception of removing Lot J from the demised premises list). Agreement between the City and the Jags/Cordish specifically for management of the property will be for 35 years, with provisions for another 40 in extensions.
It's easy to bring emotion into what's ultimately a business decision in term's the Jags' record or Khan's personal wealth, but if Lot J brings some much-needed vibrancy to the sports complex, is a step toward keeping the Jags here for another 20-30 years beyond 2029 (which we're just going on blind faith on, because no one is willing to rock the boat and have that larger conversation about everything the Jags are looking for in terms of stadium renovations and the Shipyards), and maybe helps spark some additional development between Berkman II and Met Park, I don't have a huge issue with it. That said, the agreement should be a lot more specific about what we're getting at Lot J.
I don't see this not going through. We don't have many politicians willing to say no to the Jags. I also don't see it as being anything transformational. I fear the Live! will ultimately fail worse than people think the Landing did. So hopefully, it will be designed so that it can be adaptively reused into something else like a museum when that time comes. At the end of the day, I hope everything works out for the Jags, downtown, the Eastside and the city as a whole.
The Jags can leave for all I care. I have not watched a single game this year, and I will not support them in any way as long as they continue to take advatage of us like that. Go Gators.
It gets better.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/curry-wants-to-city-to-borrow-dollar208-3-million-for-lot-j-development
Why would we trust Khan to build a successful Lot J development. He has failed at building a football team. He should have stuck with auto parts! I wish he would load the entire Jags organization on his little ship and sail to England and stay there.
Maybe lot J is to compliment AEW wrasslin' at Daily's place. That's been arguably successful. But don't get me started on Fulham FC.
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on October 13, 2020, 01:21:32 PM
The Jags can leave for all I care. I have not watched a single game this year, and I will not support them in any way as long as they continue to take advatage of us like that. Go Gators.
I think it oversimplifies things and distracts from the bigger issue at hand when we boil it down to "Rich Jaguars trying to steal from poor Jacksonville." I certainly understand how the public can feel like they're being fleeced by the way that all parties involved have handled this Lot J situation (pre-mature announcement, private council meetings on yachts, the stench of JEA still in the air, etc.), but I think all the headlines are missing the bigger point here.
It's exorbitantly expensive to host an NFL franchise in 2020. The salary cap just keeps rising off the back of the TV deals, cities continue to build $1 billion+ stadiums and complementary development to push up their local revenues, and because of the NFL's unique profit-sharing arrangement, teams
have to keep up in terms of local revenue to be sustainable.
Shad Khan didn't move the first home game to London because he was "greedy." He moved it to boost the team's local revenue to stay competitive (jokes about on-field performance here). We're a small market that can't absorb the huge personal seat license and high ticket prices of markets multiple times our size, nor do we have the corporate sponsorship base that large cities do, so the Jags absolutely do need to rely on creative ways to boost local revenue if we're going to be a sustainable team in Jacksonville as more and more franchises boost their local revenues.
That's where things like Daily's Place and Lot J come in.
With the way that the NFL has grown in the last 15 years, these asks would be coming in no matter who owned the team.
Hence, the easy, low-hanging fruit is to be mad at the Jags and question why they're trying to fleece us, while the harder, more complicated, more relevant question is, "Do we want to keep putting all of our eggs in the NFL basket as a city to preserve this asset we kind of lucked into 30 years ago?"
And while it would be GREAT for Shad Khan to Dan Gilbert the city of Jacksonville and pay for all of this stuff on his own, I don't think he should be expected too either just because of his success in other ventures.
Best estimates I've seen have the Jags turning a profit of around $18-20 million a year.
If you look at that number in a vacuum, I think what they're actually reinvesting in the sports complex is fairly reasonable, but it's up to us as a city to have a hard conversation about whether having the NFL here is worth chipping in as much as we do.
Quote from: jdamiano on October 13, 2020, 01:40:47 PM
Why would we trust Khan to build a successful Lot J development. He has failed at building a football team. He should have stuck with auto parts! I wish he would load the entire Jags organization on his little ship and sail to England and stay there.
Khan's just the wallet.
Lot J (and any subsequent development) is more about Cordish's track record, and to a lesser extent, Mark Lamping's.
Looking at Cordish's other similar developments in cities like St. Louis, Philly, Arlington, Atlanta, KC, and considering the full context (surrounding uses, taxpayer subsidies) should provide a better prediction about success/failure than the Jags' inability to retain defensive talent or kick 20-yard field goals.
Quote from: blizz01 on October 13, 2020, 02:18:08 PM
Maybe lot J is to compliment AEW wrasslin' at Daily's place. That's been arguably successful.
I'd say inarguably.
AEW has been dominating cable ratings, growing a young, diverse fanbase, and has already received a massive, $200 million, four-year extension from TNT based on the success of year one.
Wish that Tony could translate that same success to the Jags.
What's interesting is that if you watch AEW or listen to Tony on podcasts, he really does seem more invested in Jacksonville than his Dad.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 13, 2020, 10:51:39 AMI also don't see it as being anything transformational.
Agreed, with the caveat that I think it will be more transformational for the CBD than it will be for downtown, and not in a good way. I don't think it's direct competition in terms of day-to-day use, but I do see the new Live! District replacing the CBD as the city's premier gathering space. All the events that used to be held at the Landing (Florida/Georgia, New Year's Eve, free concerts, political rallies, etc.) will shift all the way down to the stadium, distancing the Laura Street corridor from all of the positive externalities associated with being Jacksonville's front lawn. Especially since the bonds are going to be paid back based on incremental earnings realized in the Live! District. Unfortunately incentivizes us to shift things away from downtown proper.
This is not to compare Green Bay and Jacksonville but the point about local revenue is salient for all NFL franchises... The Packers began a "Lot J" project a few years ago an it has been a huge success. The Packers do not have a deep pockets owner nor is the city filled with particularly rich donors... The Titleown (Lot J) project is essential to the future financial viability of the Green Bay Packers...
https://www.titletown.com/about/news/2018/october/titletown-development-announces-plans-for-phase-2
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 13, 2020, 10:20:00 AM
Legislation is being introduced today by Tommy Hazouri.
A couple of things stick out that the media still either has wrong, or is missing entirely:
1) The Lot J development will not include a 100,000 SF Live Arena with restaurants/bars and an additional 75,000 square feet of retail/restaurant space. At least not per the development agreement. Lot J will include a total of 75,000 square feet in retail/restaurant space, with the exception of maybe any retail space that ends up in the hotel or residential units (the agreement is vague as to whether this would count toward the 75,000 sf). The media keeps saying 100,000 square feet for the Live! portion + 75,000 sf, but this just doesn't seem to be true.
2) The 40,000 in office space appears to be built into what is considered the $100 million "Live! Venues" portion of the development. This is important because the city is paying half for the Live! venues. From my reading, this suggests that a good portion of Jacksonville's $50 million contribution toward the "Live! Arena!" could conceivably be used for Class A office space considered to be part of the development that would then be handed over to Cordish to operate.
3) The agreement is $12.5 million in cash heavier than most people think. The $25 million rev grant for the residential & hotel components has quietly turned into a $12.5 million rev grant for the residential portion (at 20 years, requiring an exception), and a $12.5 million cash payment doled out over five years as a "completion grant" for the hotel. So, if the hotel is built, we're essentially giving Cordish/The Jags their $13 million breadbox deposit back.
4) Terms have also quietly changed from the city potentially being on the hook for $15 million for a parking garage if Phase II is developed, to the city being responsible for all cost overruns up to $15 million on any public portion of the project (which includes remediation, infrastructure, and the Live! venues/office portion). I'd kiss another $15 million in cash goodbye.
5) Agreement gives Jags/Cordish the option of flipping the hotel parcel to a third-party developer if they so choose. Probably not a huge surprise, but there's no minimum specs for the hotel included in the agreement (beyond 150+ rooms). I think they're committed to building the hotel, but it doesn't seem like there's anything in the agreement that stops them from flipping it to someone to build a hotel on the cheap and then pocketing the $13 million completion grant either.
$208 million in bonds will fund the project, if approved, which should cover our $50 million for half of the Live! venue, $77 million in infrastructure, $12.5 million for the hotel grant, $15 million for cost overruns, and $65 million for the breadbox loan (minus the Jags $13 million deposit). No modification to the TIAA Bank Field lease included in the agreement (with the exception of removing Lot J from the demised premises list). Agreement between the City and the Jags/Cordish specifically for management of the property will be for 35 years, with provisions for another 40 in extensions.
It's easy to bring emotion into what's ultimately a business decision in term's the Jags' record or Khan's personal wealth, but if Lot J brings some much-needed vibrancy to the sports complex, is a step toward keeping the Jags here for another 20-30 years beyond 2029 (which we're just going on blind faith on, because no one is willing to rock the boat and have that larger conversation about everything the Jags are looking for in terms of stadium renovations and the Shipyards), and maybe helps spark some additional development between Berkman II and Met Park, I don't have a huge issue with it. That said, the agreement should be a lot more specific about what we're getting at Lot J.
Great summary Ken.
A couple of other things to add. On the City's own website, it says that the
maximum period for a REV Grant is 15 years. The City is giving Khan a 20 year REV Grant (property tax abatement) for the residential units. The City has an exemption from the 15 year maximum grant period, but from all indications, these are going to be your run of the mill mid-rise apartments that you find on the outer fringes of urban areas around the country. Is there anything in the term sheet even requiring some type of qualitative conditions that need to be met in terms of design and amenities?
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but from the Daily Record article, it appears that the Live Site and Office/Retail/Hotel will all remain under City ownership. This means that Khan and Cordish will not ever pay property taxes on those parcels. This is completely counter to the concept of providing upfront cash incentives (even if from bed taxes), particularly in a TIF district. Generally, incentives are given upfront with the idea that you will at least capture future ad valorem taxes to offset the upfront payment. In the case of DT Jax's CRA, the increased taxes (after development) would go directly into the CRA to help other downtown projects.
The amount of ad valorem taxes that Khan/Cordish will not pay the city over the life of the 75 year lease should also be included in the calculations of the City's total incentive package.I'm pro-development and pro-incentives, but the City appears to be getting completely screwed here.
I don't see any way to say no to this. We can thank Curry for negotiating a bad deal for us, but no one in politics wants to lose the Jags and that's a likely outcome of not giving them what they want here.
Quote from: CityLife on October 13, 2020, 05:55:35 PM
Great summary Ken.
The City has an exemption from the 15 year maximum grant period, but from all indications, these are going to be your run of the mill mid-rise apartments that you find on the outer fringes of urban areas around the country. Is there anything in the term sheet even requiring some type of qualitative conditions that need to be met in terms of design and amenities?
Thanks!
Nothing in the term sheet or the legislation introduced today that lays down any minimum requirements for the residential units. Just the number of units ("approximately 400"), and the general classification "luxury residential."
QuoteAlso, correct me if I'm wrong, but from the Daily Record article, it appears that the Live Site and Office/Retail/Hotel will all remain under City ownership. This means that Khan and Cordish will not ever pay property taxes on those parcels. This is completely counter to the concept of providing upfront cash incentives (even if from bed taxes), particularly in a TIF district. Generally, incentives are given upfront with the idea that you will at least capture future ad valorem taxes to offset the upfront payment. In the case of DT Jax's CRA, the increased taxes (after development) would go directly into the CRA to help other downtown projects. The amount of ad valorem taxes that Khan/Cordish will not pay the city over the life of the 75 year lease should also be included in the calculations of the City's total incentive package.
Per the legislation introduced today, the Live! Venues (Live Arena plus presumably the office space) and all roadways and right-of-way will remain under city ownership. The residential and hotel components will be transfered to the developer at no cost, and should be subject to property taxes.
City Council met tonight to discuss the legislation, and apparently, it was a real zoo.
Doesn't sound anybody has seen the full development agreement, which the legislation references, but may or may not actually exist yet.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 13, 2020, 07:28:27 PM
I don't see any way to say no to this. We can thank Curry for negotiating a bad deal for us, but no one in politics wants to lose the Jags and that's a likely outcome of not giving them what they want here.
No one in politics wants to lose the Jags.....
Fast backward....... a person in the State Attorney office deemed Republican nominee for Mayor.
John Delaney reportedly stunned, for days,soon grasped NFL Franchise directive.
Much of the public is done with it.
"Go Jags!" Go Away
Not Public $$$$$$ to Lot J
Bummer for promoters to not have come up with a better Identifier than " Lot J".
I would conduct or attend formal " Protest".
Jax longtime, your comments below are positively noted.
It's clear Curry has just flat out laid down for Khan to, sadly, be followed by an obedient City Council. There is no evidence in these terms that the City is getting anything out of this deal other than a good screwing.
Live! is going to be worse than the Landing as it isn't on the river, isn't in the heart of the City and is smaller. The City has already lost tens of millions on a lousy business deal with several garages including one in the stadium district and now were are going to pay to build another one with 700 spaces? And, who wants to live in an apartment building that isn't near any grocery stores, pharmacies, other stores or green space of any significance (after Metro Park disappears)? Or anything else worthwhile in walking distance? And, is next to a noisy entertainment venue and facilities overwhelmed by traffic for major events that Khan will try to increase?
Why am I so pessimistic? Because Jacksonville has a long history of big dreams and "savior" projects* that fall far short of success or the grand visions promised early on and/or are poorly conceived and disappear. And, because Khan, in all likelihood, is only doing this deal to (1) line his pockets with very little to no risk to him so failure be damned if it doesn't work out and (2) to make the taxpayers even more invested in the Jags so when their lease comes up he has even greater leverage to further extract taxpayer dollars for a new stadium so we don't lose what we already have invested in him and his projects. Just watch.
* Examples of such projects include the Cross-Florida Barge Canal, Offshore Power Systems, the Landing, the Jags (after 25 years, the urban core or general welfare of the City is no better for their arrival), the Skyway, the convention center, Shipyards, the District, Berkman Plaza, the Landing, the county courthouse, the airport and, very likely, the soon-to-be the dredged river. Plus countless "smaller" projects.
Interestingly, to me, some of our best advancements have been initiated and driven by our non-profit community, not the City. They include the Emerald Trail, Riverside and Springfield historic districts, the Hayden Burns library renovation, our museums and theaters, the Symphony, our colleges and universities, Mayo, Baptist and St. Vincent's hospitals, etc. Much of the contrast comes from these civic organizations gaining the support of our citizenry and being altruistic rather than dictating to them what's best for them with little or no citizen input and/or catering to special interests looking to get enriched.
Quote from: Florida Power And Light on October 13, 2020, 09:14:28 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on October 13, 2020, 07:28:27 PM
I don't see any way to say no to this. We can thank Curry for negotiating a bad deal for us, but no one in politics wants to lose the Jags and that's a likely outcome of not giving them what they want here.
No one in politics wants to lose the Jags.....
Fast backward....... a person in the State Attorney office deemed Republican nominee for Mayor.
John Delaney reportedly stunned, for days,soon grasped NFL Franchise directive.
Much of the public is done with it.
"Go Jags!" Go Away
Not Public $$$$$$ to Lot J
Bummer for promoters to not have come up with a better Identifier than " Lot J".
I would conduct or attend formal " Protest".
Jax longtime, your comments below are positively noted.
What?
Quote from: Papa33 on October 13, 2020, 01:27:20 PM
It gets better.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/curry-wants-to-city-to-borrow-dollar208-3-million-for-lot-j-development
My goodness; don't know if this is getting better. Lot of money being thrown around and a lot debt to boot. We shall see how it pans out.
Bill hits its first snag:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/incomplete-parking-deal-holds-up-lot-j-legislation
Curry's team reminds me of the movie Casino where they put Artie Piscano in charge to make sure everything is taken care of right (in the movie, "So nobody skimmed the skim"). The problem is, just like Artie Piscano, these guys are a disaster; they could (mess) up a Cup of Coffee.
I mean, they're developing a parking lot, creating a new parking lot and two garages. Is it too much to ask to have a parking agreement as part of developing a parking lot.
Good for Hazouri. Color me suspicious, but was the plan to bring the parking agreement to Council minutes before the meeting where they would take action on the bill?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on October 14, 2020, 12:51:36 PM
Good for Hazouri. Color me suspicious, but was the plan to bring the parking agreement to Council minutes before the meeting where they would take action on the bill?
I believe your suspicions are well founded. I think the mayor's office was trying to pull a fast one.
20 years ago the voters of Brown county Wisconsin were asked to support a half cent sales tax for stadium renovations and a "stadium district"... this is the result...
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/10/15/lambeau-field-sales-tax-still-pays-dividends-20-years-later-green-bay-packers/5817065002/
Lot J development financial projections still being calculated
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/lot-j-development-financial-projections-still-being-calculated
QuoteJacksonville City Hall hasn't performed its own financial analysis of Lot J
Jacksonville City Hall has not performed an independent financial analysis of Shad Khan's proposed Lot J mixed-use development and is instead relying on assumptions about the project's economic benefits that have been provided by the billionaire's development team, which is seeking as much as $233.3 million in subsidies from taxpayers.
In fact, a summary of Lot J's estimated economic benefits provided to City Council members, which was prepared by Mayor Lenny Curry's office and Khan's development team, contains the same figures — and in some cases nearly the exact same words — included in a summary of an entertainment district built by one of Khan's development partners in Arlington, Texas, which is located near the stadiums of two major league sports franchises.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/21/jacksonville-city-hall-hasnt-performed-financial-analysis-lot-j/6003832002/
They really can't help themselves, can they?
They had basically all year to come up with a proposal for Lot J and they couldn't help but lie and obfuscate about what they wanted to do with a quarter billion dollars in taxpayer money. I'm shocked it's still a quarter billion dollars! I thought we were looking at a three-way $150m split. The absolute nerve of these people...
Shades of JEA and the faux pension fund fix. Curry is a CPA but you would never know it they way he throws fictitious numbers around. Either he is stupid or he is the king of deception. I think most of us know which it is.
No ROI, no economic analysis, no construction costs, no real building plans, no promises to extend the Jag's contract to stay here, no breakdown of jobs created and for how long, numbers copied and pasted from another project, a $65 million no-interest "loan" not mentioned... no questions asked at all about a project asking $233+ million from the taxpayers! Thanks Mayor for NOT watching out for the City you lead, once again. Just like your hand picked JEA board didn't ask any questions of your handpicked CEO Zahn or his billion dollar plan to rip off the taxpayers. Just like you mortgaged future taxpayers at much greater costs so you could kick the can down the road on the pension to free up big dollars to give to your select "friends."
Fact is Curry only represents himself and those few who give big $$$ to his campaign. If anyone on the City Council votes for this project the way it is currently presented, they should be voted out of office. Let's see if the Council is back under Curry's thumb (not looking good when 13 appear with Khan and Curry to support Lot J when it turns out they have zero to go on other than visiting Khan on his yacht) after distancing during the JEA scandal. I note that 3 Council members voted against issuing a subpoena this week for Tim Baker for the Council's investigation while 5 who have spoken against a subpoena for Baker previously used his services.*
City Hall isn't just crooked nowadays, it's blatantly crooked. Shame on the voters for being asleep at the wheel.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/council-committee-votes-4-3-to-subpoena-tim-baker-in-jea-probe (https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/council-committee-votes-4-3-to-subpoena-tim-baker-in-jea-probe)
*Partial excerpt with emphasis added:
Quote...Committee Chair Brenda Priestly Jackson and members Matt Carlucci, Randy DeFoor and Garrett Dennis voted in favor of subpoenaing Baker and his businesses. Micheal Boylan, Ju'Coby Pittman and Sam Newby voted against the move....
....Five of the six Council members who hired Data Targeting Research between May 2017 and May 2019 to work on their election campaigns spoke against the subpoenas during the meeting.
Council members LeAnna Cumber, Terrance Freeman, Randy White, Ron Salem and Rory Diamond used Baker's company for campaign services, according to filings with the Duval County Supervisor of Elections.
DeFoor also hired Baker's company but has become a vocal critic of his involvement in the push to privatize JEA.
She, along with Scott Wilson and Priestly Jackson, serves on the Special Investigatory Committee leading the Council probe. Diamond was a committee chair but resigned in September.
He urged the committee to vote against the subpoena Oct. 20. He wants the seven-month investigation to end and the Investigatory Committee to issue its final report.
Council member Reggie Gaffney argued the investigation shows Baker is a "good business person" and was "just trying to make a living."
Cumber and Council member Aaron Bowman said that the investigative committee's authority to subpoena doesn't extend beyond what's needed to make legislative changes to ensure problems with JEA's ITN don't happen again....
QuoteA financial impact analysis of the $445 million Lot J development commissioned by the Jacksonville Jaguars shows additional retail space and assumes $402.2 million in tax revenue over 30 years.
The Jaguars and the city released the analysis Oct. 22 after City Council Auditor Kim Taylor told the Finance Committee on Oct. 20 that the mayor's office had not provided complete financial projections to her office.
The report is from Chicago-based C.H. Johnson Consulting Inc., contracted by the Jaguars' development team.
Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/curry-releases-lot-j-financial-analysis-commissioned-by-the-jaguars
City Council Town Hall tonight with the Jags and general public to discuss Lot J.
Should be feisty.
https://www.coj.net/city-council/events/all-events/council-member-public-meeting-lot-j-(1)
P.S. Curious what you guys think of:
1) Should City Council approve this project?
2) Will City Council approve this project?
With the qualifier that the optics couldn't have possibly been handled any worse by all parties involved - the mayor's office, City Council, and the Jags - and the qualifier that I fully recognize that the deal is more lopsided than it should be, I think we need to pull the trigger on it. The Jags are too important to the city to play a game of chicken with a billionaire. Earn some goodwill, get the Jags further invested in/anchored in Jacksonville, and save the hardball for the stadium/Shipyards negotiations.
I'm less confident that City Council is going to approve it than I was two or three weeks ago. I could see them asking for certain things only for negotiations to go dark for another year or two. Ultimately though, I think it gets approved under the condition that we bond another $40-$100 million for other long-promised infrastructure projects.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 01:19:10 PM
City Council Town Hall tonight with the Jags and general public to discuss Lot J.
Should be feisty.
https://www.coj.net/city-council/events/all-events/council-member-public-meeting-lot-j-(1)
What happened to the damn...excuse me please...I mean, darn link?!
I see the issue - the link doesn't have the closing parenthesis:
https://www.coj.net/city-council/events/all-events/council-member-public-meeting-lot-j-(1) (https://www.coj.net/city-council/events/all-events/council-member-public-meeting-lot-j-(1))
^Thanks Steve!
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 01:45:53 PM
P.S. Curious what you guys think of:
1) Should City Council approve this project?
2) Will City Council approve this project?
With the qualifier that the optics couldn't have possibly been handled any worse by all parties involved - the mayor's office, City Council, and the Jags - and the qualifier that I fully recognize that the deal is more lopsided than it should be, I think we need to pull the trigger on it. The Jags are too important to the city to play a game of chicken with a billionaire. Earn some goodwill, get the Jags further invested in/anchored in Jacksonville, and save the hardball for the stadium/Shipyards negotiations.
I'm less confident that City Council is going to approve it than I was two or three weeks ago. I could see them asking for certain things only for negotiations to go dark for another year or two. Ultimately though, I think it gets approved under the condition that we bond another $40-$100 million for other long-promised infrastructure projects.
Teams like the Jags and the other cities where there is only one major sports team in town really don't realise how lucky they are. They get all the local fan attention, all the corporate dollars, all the public money they need. They get all the back page headlines they want. I honestly don't think say being an NFL team in a small market like Jacksonville where you are competing with no one is worse than being say the LA Chargers in a huge city with a million other major pro/college teams and no one gives a shit about you.
However, I agree mostly. Given Jacksonville's stature as a city, the team is very important for our civic pride and our national/worldwide image, so I'd be inclined to give them more leeway than a lot of other cities might hand them.
1) No. There is substantial doubt as to whether the city did its due diligence in negotiating this deal. They've been dishonest about the details, obfuscated information, and dismissed widespread concerns. The deal as we know it appears to simply be a bad deal in terms of public expenditures.
2) The odds are probably around 50-50. There is going to be significant public opposition. 2023 is sooner than one might think, and the council members outside the political machine have their own interests to protect. But if Curry really wants to get this done, and can twist enough arms without breaking the law, he probably will.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 01:45:53 PM
With the qualifier that the optics couldn't have possibly been handled any worse by all parties involved - the mayor's office, City Council, and the Jags - and the qualifier that I fully recognize that the deal is more lopsided than it should be, I think we need to pull the trigger on it. The Jags are too important to the city to play a game of chicken with a billionaire. Earn some goodwill, get the Jags further invested in/anchored in Jacksonville, and save the hardball for the stadium/Shipyards negotiations.
There's also something to be said for putting our foot down at some point. Does hosting an NFL team have to mean completely lacking a spine with the owner? Conceding at every point of conflict?
QuoteBut if Curry really wants to get this done, and can twist enough arms without without getting caught breaking the law until the deal is done, he probably will.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on October 29, 2020, 06:18:23 PMThere's also something to be said for putting our foot down at some point. Does hosting an NFL team have to mean completely lacking a spine with the owner? Conceding at every point of conflict?
I do agree with this, I just think it's a matter of choosing a hill to die on, and I don't think Lot J is that hill.
I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful.
No substantial money from our general fund has gone directly to the Jags since Khan took ownership.
If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.
It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.
The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.
Would be DELIGHTFUL if City Council and the mayor's office demanded a seat with Khan and Lamping, negotiated all of this out in one package, identified a funding mechanism, and let voters have the final say, but we're talking about a City Council that takes six years to fix a fountain and didn't even know during the town hall today that Lot J lies in an opportunity zone.
The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.
I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.
The risk of action is obviously scary and risky when nothing is formalized, but I'd still prefer to get the ball moving, get Shad Khan, Cordish, and the Jags further vested in Jacksonville with Lot J, and then start playing a little harder ball as soon as possible with the stadium conversation.
P.S. Quick overview of the how the Town Hall went this evening:
1. Matt Carlucci welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introduced the co-host of the town hall, Randy DeFoor
2. Carlucci went over the rules of the Town Hall: Mark Lamping would be given 30 minutes to give a presentation about Lot J and the benefits it would provide to the city, and then the final 90 minutes of the meeting would be for members of the public to weigh in. Time limit was two minutes per speaker, so they could fit as many people as possible in.
3. The floor was turned over to Mark Lamping. Lamping made some brief statements, before queuing up a roughly 15-minute video presentation about Lot J. I don't think there was anything particularly new in it, other than Lamping stating that under the new parking agreement, the city would get all parking proceeds from Jags games for the first time (though if parking spaces are cut in half due to residential and hotel users, it's probably a wash for the city). Otherwise, it was just the same video they already showed, plus a video Q&A session with Lamping where he answered the most commonly asked questions about the project (straight from the term sheet, in most cases).
4. Lamping was done in less than 20 minutes, so they opened the floor for public comments.
5. About 90% of the comments were anti-Lot J, questioning priorities and viability. Lots of good comments, and lots of emotional comments about things that probably aren't paramount to whether we should agree on a development term sheet or not (the Jags record, the mayor's optics, the City Council's yacht rides, Shad Khan's personal wealth, the demolition of the Landing, etc.).
6. There were several points surprisingly early in the meeting where comments seemed exhausted and they had to prod for more.
I get the sense that Carlucci and DeFoor were expecting a much, much bigger crowd. It looked like the Zoom peaked at about 140 attendees, with a lot of media members, City Council members, and Jags representatives (like Jim Woodcock) on the call. Realistically, there were probably just over 100 members of the public and maybe 25 public comments. For how much this Town Hall was advertised and how big this project is (biggest in city history), I was pretty surprised how low-key and tame it turned out to be. Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 08:12:03 PM
I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful.
You're forgetting the various attempts, including the Shipyards proposal that arguably killed the convention center RFP, the JEA headquarters deal, and even to some extent the attempted JEA sale itself.
Also, I imagine part of the public perception issue is the fact that there's just so much else crying out for fixes right now, that have done so for years, so when City Hall moves so quickly to acquiesce to whatever Khan proposes, it feels like that's money that has been taken. I was under the impression that at least part of those projects were from other financial instruments, but if I'm mistaken, consider that my bad.
Quote
If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.
It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.
The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.
Part of the problem seems to be that they (both the Jags and Curry) seem to refuse to be honest about this. You probably saw how many cagey answers Lamping gave about some of the questions in his video. (Although I guess he deserves a
little credit for putting those questions in at all.) It'd make things a lot easier if they just openly said, "look, we're an NFL team, we're working on the on-field performance but it costs a lot of money for us to be here, and from a financial standpoint we have to be at least somewhat competitive." Might not necessarily earn fans, but it'd probably get them less enemies.
Quote
The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.
I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.
Speaking to the on-field performance issue again, you eventually run into some people who feel that a professional team just isn't worth it, when there are so many other problems going on. People pissed about the broken promises of consolidation might not give a crap how much it costs to run an NFL team when the sewer lines that were promised 50 years ago still aren't there. What good are the Jaguars if crime is still sky-high, or if it feels like we haven't invested in anything but the Stadium District? For all those issues to be there, in favor of a franchise that still isn't good, for the pockets of one of the richest people in the country, is a painful case to make.
I've said before that it's a shame the NFL doesn't allow something like Green Bay's ownership structure for any other team, because I think our market is one that would really appreciate a structure like that. Things like this would probably be at least a little less controversial without the threat of moving, and with more "normal" people being able to have a stake in the team.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 09:06:27 PM
Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.
I was there! Probably the youngest person to speak.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on October 29, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 08:12:03 PM
I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful.
You're forgetting the various attempts, including the Shipyards proposal that arguably killed the convention center RFP, the JEA headquarters deal, and even to some extent the attempted JEA sale itself.
Also, I imagine part of the public perception issue is the fact that there's just so much else crying out for fixes right now, that have done so for years, so when City Hall moves so quickly to acquiesce to whatever Khan proposes, it feels like that's money that has been taken. I was under the impression that at least part of those projects were from other financial instruments, but if I'm mistaken, consider that my bad.
Quote
If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.
It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.
The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.
Part of the problem seems to be that they (both the Jags and Curry) seem to refuse to be honest about this. You probably saw how many cagey answers Lamping gave about some of the questions in his video. (Although I guess he deserves a little credit for putting those questions in at all.) It'd make things a lot easier if they just openly said, "look, we're an NFL team, we're working on the on-field performance but it costs a lot of money for us to be here, and from a financial standpoint we have to be at least somewhat competitive." Might not necessarily earn fans, but it'd probably get them less enemies.
Quote
The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.
I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.
Speaking to the on-field performance issue again, you eventually run into some people who feel that a professional team just isn't worth it, when there are so many other problems going on. People pissed about the broken promises of consolidation might not give a crap how much it costs to run an NFL team when the sewer lines that were promised 50 years ago still aren't there. What good are the Jaguars if crime is still sky-high, or if it feels like we haven't invested in anything but the Stadium District? For all those issues to be there, in favor of a franchise that still isn't good, for the pockets of one of the richest people in the country, is a painful case to make.
I've said before that it's a shame the NFL doesn't allow something like Green Bay's ownership structure for any other team, because I think our market is one that would really appreciate a structure like that. Things like this would probably be at least a little less controversial without the threat of moving, and with more "normal" people being able to have a stake in the team.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 09:06:27 PM
Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.
I was there! Probably the youngest person to speak.
^I remember seeing you, now that you mention it!
The young people stick out :D
Really good comments!
And I'm actually with you on all the above.
There's a strong case that fulfilling the promises of consolidation and taking care of our underserved neighborhoods is more important than maintaining our NFL franchise. To your point, that's why I wish it was an open, fleshed out, public discussion culminating in some sort of a vote, rather than secretive back-alley dealings that result in rushed, incomplete legislation.
Cagey is a good term for Lamping tonight. He's usually a little better and more transparent at the State of the Jags presentations. I'm not sure that video is going to win anyone over. Particuarly the straw man argument about why it's ok to loan the Jags $65 million for Lot J ("because it's better than giving us a $65 million grant outright.")
To your point, it would have been refreshing to hear him say, "We can't triple ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the league, so the rent we get from the apartments and office space is going to help prop up our local revenue." Rather than all the histrionics about the immeasurable, once-in-a-lifetime boost in civic pride and psychological happiness that will result from having mide-rise apartments in the stadium parking lot.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 29, 2020, 09:49:08 PM
^I remember seeing you, now that you mention it!
The young people stick out :D
Really good comments!
And I'm actually with you on all the above.
There's a strong case that fulfilling the promises of consolidation and taking care of our underserved neighborhoods is more important than maintaining our NFL franchise. To your point, that's why I wish it was an open, fleshed out, public discussion culminating in some sort of a vote, rather than secretive back-alley dealings that result in rushed, incomplete legislation.
Cagey is a good term for Lamping tonight. He's usually a little better and more transparent at the State of the Jags presentations. I'm not sure that video is going to win anyone over. Particuarly the straw man argument about why it's ok to loan the Jags $65 million for Lot J ("because it's better than giving us a $65 million grant outright.")
To your point, it would have been refreshing to hear him say, "We can't triple ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the league, so the rent we get from the apartments and office space is going to help prop up our local revenue." Rather than all the histrionics about the immeasurable, once-in-a-lifetime boost in civic pride and psychological happiness that will result from having mide-rise apartments in the stadium parking lot.
I also forgot to mention the pending Hart Ramp teardown, the giving up on Metro Park for a move in Khan's favor, and possibly to some extent the newly-announced MOSH move. One could also argue about the Doro, which is getting a $6 million grant from DIA, while moving to a location that is possibly at least motivated by Lot J, although I guess that's technically besides the point.
They absolutely would get a lot further a lot faster by just being honest about what they want/need, and letting the public decide whether it's worth investing into vs all the other stuff. Lying by obfuscation is still lying.
They probably didn't get as much participation from the public because most already feel this thing is in the bag.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on October 29, 2020, 10:38:57 PM
I also forgot to mention the pending Hart Ramp teardown, the giving up on Metro Park for a move in Khan's favor, and possibly to some extent the newly-announced MOSH move. One could also argue about the Doro, which is getting a $6 million grant from DIA, while moving to a location that is possibly at least motivated by Lot J, although I guess that's technically besides the point.
I'd also toss in the Landing acquisition and demolition as a related cost. There's certainly millions more being spent in public funds to make this project feasible then bed tax money. Things are just being piecemealed to death, as opposed to us having a transparent vision and discussion about the urban core's needs (including keeping the Jags), identifying the overall cost and working to prioritize projects or increase taxes to pay for these things. I admit, some of this type of planning and talk will never go over well with those who get elected on themes involving fiscal conservatism. So in the end, we end up paying more.
In addition, when the bed tax was set up, it didn't only have to be spent on the Jags. In any event, no matter where the funds come from, it's always going to be a situation where funds are spent at the expense of something else. Our money and sources for it will never be finite. It's not the end of the world or an argument that we shouldn't invest in the Jags. It's just the reality of the world we live in today.
Uh oh.
QuoteAn overwhelming majority of Jacksonville voters are opposed to the city's plan to invest over $200 million in the development of an entertainment complex at Lot J near TIAA Bank Field, according to a new poll.
The public opinion poll conducted by Barcelo & Company found 70 percent of those surveyed object to the city having such a huge stake in the project, with 25 percent strongly opposed to it. That's compared to 17 percent who support it, 6 percent of them strongly in favor of it.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2020/10/30/most-jacksonville-voters-oppose-citys-stake-in-lot-j-development/
Plenty of hot takes on Twitter about it.
https://twitter.com/wjxt4/status/1322546368645419008?s=21
Its a giant dog turd in the middle of a parking lot, who can blame them..........
Now if you think that will prevent it from happening, I've got some swamp I want to sell you....
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/30/city-council-members-want-jaguars-extend-lease-get-lot-j-money-jacksonville-downtown/6082956002/
I just don't see a universe where the Jags concede to a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
I've heard that one council member suggested a 30-year extension if Lot J is approved.
This is patently absurd considering the very real issues our stadium has in terms of battling the Florida elements.
Further show how much more sense it would have made to package Lot J, Stadium upgrades, and Met Park into one agreement tied to a long-term lease extension and guaranteed ceiling on games played in London.
The yacht is back.
Wonder if Khan will be at the meeting tomorrow.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 01, 2020, 01:41:13 PM
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/30/city-council-members-want-jaguars-extend-lease-get-lot-j-money-jacksonville-downtown/6082956002/
I just don't see a universe where the Jags concede to a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
I've heard that one council member suggested a 30-year extension if Lot J is approved.
This is patently absurd considering the very real issues our stadium has in terms of battling the Florida elements.
Further show how much more sense it would have made to package Lot J, Stadium upgrades, and Met Park into one agreement tied to a long-term lease extension and guaranteed ceiling on games played in London.
Exactly why they should package this with a stadium renovation and a lease extension.
Quote from: Steve on November 04, 2020, 10:16:52 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 01, 2020, 01:41:13 PM
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/30/city-council-members-want-jaguars-extend-lease-get-lot-j-money-jacksonville-downtown/6082956002/
I just don't see a universe where the Jags concede to a lease extension based on Lot J alone.
I've heard that one council member suggested a 30-year extension if Lot J is approved.
This is patently absurd considering the very real issues our stadium has in terms of battling the Florida elements.
Further show how much more sense it would have made to package Lot J, Stadium upgrades, and Met Park into one agreement tied to a long-term lease extension and guaranteed ceiling on games played in London.
Exactly why they should package this with a stadium renovation and a lease extension.
I've been in touch with several city council members about this very issue.
Within city council specifically, I get the sense that there isn't a very deep understanding of NFL economics, where our stadium currently stands in age and revenue-driving amenities versus the rest of the NFL, how that effects the other 31 teams that share revenue with us, and the broader local revenue challenges that make Jacksonville a difficult market where creative solutions are necessary.
Expecting a long-term lease extension from the Jags for a $200 million Lot J project removed from the stadium reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about the NFL lease landscape over the last 20 years.
By my math, and I've done a lot of it, it's going to cost Jacksonville between $500 and $540 million in public contribution to get a long-term lease extension from the Jags. This is based on median public contribution for all NFL franchises that have gotten long-term lease extensions in the last 15 years, adjusted for inflation.
All emotion aside about Khan's personal wealth, or Jacksonville's other priorities, or the JEA scandal, or Curry's backdoor talks, or who was or wasn't on Khan's yacht, the simple fact is, the NFL club comes with a high price tag, and $500-$540 million is what we should expect and plan to spend across the Jags portfolio if we think it's worth keeping the team here beyond 2029. It's not personal or outwardly unfair. It's simply us being treated like any other NFL market.
Khan ain't gonna build us a new stadium. He's not going to privately finance all of Lot J. He's not going to remediate the Shipyards at his own expense.
But, to me, he's also proven that he's not going to up and move the team if Jacksonville is willing to play by the same rules as the other 31 NFL cities.
Wish it was different, and wish NFL cities got a cut of the television money for providing the stadiums, but that's just not the reality, and bashing Khan for that is akin to hating the player, rather than hating the game.
To me, the simplest approach would be to just sit down with the Jags, agree on an all-in figure that it's going to take to get a 20-30 year lease extension, cap the number of London games at 1 per season, sign the deal, and then figure out how to appropriate that cash together as you go.
Like I've said all along, if it's going to take Jacksonville kicking in ~$500 million to subsidize $~1.2 billion in projects to get a lease extension from the Jags, I'd personally rather see that $1.2 billion in development spread across 365-day uses at Lot J, Met Park, and more moderate stadium upgrades (like at Hard Rock in Miami) rather than sinking our full investment into a brand new, $1 billion+, amenity-rich, revenue-driving stadium that's only going to be used 10 times a year.
Best scenario, of course, is letting the public vote on whether we want to commit that much money to keep the Jags, and how we want to fund it.
Does your ~$500 million include the ~$200 million from the City for Lot J, or is it on top of it? Is this an argument for doing a comprehensive package - Lot J, Stadium Upgrades, Metro Park - for a lease extension?
The cynic in me says, a couple years or so after we sign the ~$200 million Lot J deal, the Jags come back with a ~$500 ask for stadium upgrades for a lease extension.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on November 04, 2020, 11:50:06 AM
Does your ~$500 million include the ~$200 million from the City for Lot J, or is it on top of it? Is this an argument for doing a comprehensive package - Lot J, Stadium Upgrades, Metro Park - for a lease extension?
The cynic in me says, a couple years or so after we sign the ~$200 million Lot J deal, the Jags come back with a ~$500 ask for stadium upgrades for a lease extension.
The figure is all-in to total public contribution tied to long-term lease extension.
Which, to your point, is why in a perfect world we'd negotiate everything as a package.
Grossly simplifies the conversation as well.
It's significantly easier to sell a ~$500 million package to the city under the auspices that it will lock the Jags in for 7-8 home games per year through 2059 than it is sell them on ~$200 million under the auspices that Buffalo Wild Wings will sell enough garlic parmesan wings to cover the interest on a 30-year bond.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 04, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
To me, the simplest approach would be to just sit down with the Jags, agree on an all-in figure that it's going to take to get a 20-30 year lease extension, cap the number of London games at 1 per season, sign the deal, and then figure out how to appropriate that cash together as you go.
Like I've said all along, if it's going to take Jacksonville kicking in ~$500 million to subsidize $~1.2 billion in projects to get a lease extension from the Jags, I'd personally rather see that $1.2 billion in development spread across 365-day uses at Lot J, Met Park, and more moderate stadium upgrades (like at Hard Rock in Miami) rather than sinking our full investment into a brand new, $1 billion+, amenity-rich, revenue-driving stadium that's only going to be used 10 times a year.
This. The investment is one thing; it's what's the return on it that's the issue.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-committee-to-consider-dollar12-5-million-lot-j-tax-incentive
Really interesting meeting thus far with the full council.
Cordish and Lamping have presented really well, IMO.
A couple of notes from the meeting thus far:
- Lamping directly addressed stadium upgrades during the meeting. The Jags, the City, and outside consultants and stakeholders (including UF and UGA, it seems) are in the process of a five-phase analysis of what will be needed for the stadium long-term. Phase I has been completed. Primary findings seemed to suggest that the existing stadium is structurally sound and that upgrades, rather than a new stadium, will probably be the way we go. All stakeholders are "ahead" of those discussions, but it will be a couple of years before an exact price is known. Lamping confirmed that, whatever is needed at the stadium, Khan/the Jaguars would be putting "significant' private capital into the upgrades.
- Cordish, rather than the city, will be responsible for all capital improvement and maintenance costs across the new Lot J development, including the Live! Arena. I believe this is new information.
Really thorough job now by the Auditor's office picking apart the proposed legislation.
Auditor's projected ROI is $.44, Brian Hughes' and team estimated $1.69.
~1/4 of the estimate? That seems like a significant departure from expectations.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 05, 2020, 01:01:17 PM
Lamping directly addressed stadium upgrades during the meeting. The Jags, the City, and outside consultants and stakeholders (including UF and UGA, it seems) are in the process of a five-phase analysis of what will be needed for the stadium long-term. Phase I has been completed. Primary findings seemed to suggest that the existing stadium is structurally sound and that upgrades, rather than a new stadium, will probably be the way we go. All stakeholders are "ahead" of those discussions, but it will be a couple of years before an exact price is known. Lamping confirmed that, whatever is needed at the stadium, Khan/the Jaguars would be putting "significant' private capital into the upgrades.
So they just don't know? It seems we were all expecting upgrades vs a new stadium, so I guess them agreeing is a good thing. But it's rather disappointing that they're so early in the process that it'll be years before they have solid numbers on what taxpayers will have to pitch in. Personally, "significant private capital" means basically nothing to me. Are they not putting significant private capital into Lot J? Or should we also expect to pay ~half of whatever the cost for the upgrades will be?
Quote
Cordish, rather than the city, will be responsible for all capital improvement and maintenance costs across the new Lot J development, including the Live! Arena. I believe this is new information.
Is this a change, or did we just not know about this?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 05, 2020, 02:26:07 PM
~1/4 of the estimate? That seems like a significant departure from expectations.
I'd guess that the true number probably lies somewhere in the middle.
Though, realistically, any 30-year ROI calculation for a deal like this probably isn't worth the napkin it's drawn on.
QuoteSo they just don't know? It seems we were all expecting upgrades vs a new stadium, so I guess them agreeing is a good thing. But it's rather disappointing that they're so early in the process that it'll be years before they have solid numbers on what taxpayers will have to pitch in. Personally, "significant private capital" means basically nothing to me. Are they not putting significant private capital into Lot J? Or should we also expect to pay ~half of whatever the cost for the upgrades will be?
We should definitely expect to pay up to half for stadium upgrades if we want to secure a long-term lease extension. It's a city owned facility, we're a small market, and a 50/50 split seems to be the precedent that's been established with all of these Jags projects. Would expect the city contribution to be $250-$350 million in 2020 dollars, assuming there isn't some magical way to get the state to kick in like we see with a lot of other NFL cities (Florida might have prohibited this a few years ago, I think).
QuoteCordish, rather than the city, will be responsible for all capital improvement and maintenance costs across the new Lot J development, including the Live! Arena. I believe this is new information.
Is this a change, or did we just not know about this?
I believe this was a concession made by Cordish, though I could be mistaken.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 04, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
Within city council specifically, I get the sense that there isn't a very deep understanding of NFL economics...
Expecting a long-term lease extension from the Jags for a $200 million Lot J project removed from the stadium reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about the NFL lease landscape over the last 20 years.
Wish it was different, and wish NFL cities got a cut of the television money for providing the stadiums, but that's just not the reality, and bashing Khan for that is akin to hating the player, rather than hating the game.
I say why are we playing their game at all? NFL economics are divorced from reality, and unless cities refuse to play ball the NFL will continue to take advantage of them. We can't separate issues like the better uses for public money because resources are limited. We'll be paying interest on the bonds taken to fund this project at the expense of other priorities.
QuoteContrasting views on economic impact of Lot J development
The City Council Auditor projects a lower return on investment for the $450 million project than the mayor's office.
QuoteCouncil Auditor Kim Taylor projected that the city would receive a return of 44 cents for every $1 invested in the project. The mayor's office, through the Office of Economic Development, calculated a return of $1.69 for every $1 invested.
Taylor said a financial analysis provided by Chicago-based C.H. Johnson Consulting Inc. was used as a basis for both ROIs. She said competing calculations came down to "a difference in philosophies."
Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/contrasting-views-on-economic-impact-of-lot-j-development
QuoteChief Administrative Officer Brian Hughes, who said Nov. 5 he was the city's lead negotiator on the Lot J deal, defended the Curry administration's ROI calculations.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/72yi4D3MAuxVu/giphy.gif)
There are a lot of interesting tidbits here.
QuoteDuring prepared remarks, Curry praised the Jaguars, Cordish and the proposed public-private partnership. "There is no line of people waiting and willing" to invest more than $200 million in private capital Downtown, Curry told the Council.
"But let's be clear, we are absolutely at a crossroads for Downtown. Local, national and global development interests are watching the decisions we're about to make. They want to know, are we ready to be bold. Are we going to be bold?" Curry said. "When it's time to push the button — the green or the red — again, vote your conscience but understand we're sending a very clear message to the economic community at large."
Curry bringing back some of his "are we bold enough?" hits from the failed RNC debacle.
QuoteCouncil Finance Committee Chair Matt Carlucci went further than DeFoor. He filed emergency legislation Nov. 4 that would contract Orlando-based Robert Charles Lesser & Co. LLC for an independent analysis and an economic market assessment of Lot J and the development agreement.
If approved at the Council meeting Nov. 10, the city would pay the firm $26,500 to determine Lot J's market viability in Jacksonville as part of the city's due diligence.
This seems... like due diligence. $26k is nothing at all compared to the $200m of the whole project.
QuoteRCLCO Managing Director Gregg Logan said at the meeting the he performed market assessments for Jacksonville developer Peter Rummell as co-lead of the proposed $600 million Downtown Southbank project The District.
Speaking of large and questionable public investments...
QuoteDeFoor wants to tie the Lot J deal to an extension of the Jaguars' stadium lease, which runs through 2030.
"The only way this project makes any sense at all is if the Jaguars' stadium lease is extended at least 25 years and then they commit to a certain number of home games. All the rest can be on mutually agreeable terms," she said.
DeFoor going hard. Could be an "Art of the Deal" angle here, "making sense" doesn't mean "this is non-negotiable".
QuoteHughes and Jaguars President Mark Lamping said in their Council comments that the Lot J deal should be separate from a stadium lease renewal. Lamping said entities like the TaxSlayer Gator Bowl Association and the Universities of Florida and Georgia also have a stake in stadium improvements but not directly in Lot J.
"We have 10 seasons left on our lease, including this year. Sitting here today, it would be really difficult for us to accurately predict what the stadium may need, not only 10 years from now, but the expectation is a lease extension," Lamping said.
Makes me wonder when exactly they expect to have a prediction.
^Entire meeting is available here:
It's long, but the video is chapter-marked.
https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/clip/2600?view_id=1&redirect=true
Councilmember Danny Becton has issued six pages of questions about the Lot J deal, and the Council Auditor's report on the deal:
https://www.dannybecton.org/cm-becton-submits-questions-and-concerns-after-careful-review/
Some good questions in there. Will there be good answers?
There is a lot of information at that link:
Lot J Conceptual Site Plan
Original Bill 2020-648 and Exhibits
2020-648 Fact Sheet
2020-648 Bill Summary
Developmental Agreement
Council Auditors Report of Nov. 5
Q&A from the Council Committee as a Whole meeting of Nov. 4
Summary of Jaguars Lease Amendments
C/m Becton's Questions of 11/16
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 04, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
By my math, and I've done a lot of it, it's going to cost Jacksonville between $500 and $540 million in public contribution to get a long-term lease extension from the Jags. This is based on median public contribution for all NFL franchises that have gotten long-term lease extensions in the last 15 years, adjusted for inflation.
All emotion aside about Khan's personal wealth, or Jacksonville's other priorities, or the JEA scandal, or Curry's backdoor talks, or who was or wasn't on Khan's yacht, the simple fact is, the NFL club comes with a high price tag, and $500-$540 million is what we should expect and plan to spend across the Jags portfolio if we think it's worth keeping the team here beyond 2029. It's not personal or outwardly unfair. It's simply us being treated like any other NFL market.
Khan ain't gonna build us a new stadium. He's not going to privately finance all of Lot J. He's not going to remediate the Shipyards at his own expense.
But, to me, he's also proven that he's not going to up and move the team if Jacksonville is willing to play by the same rules as the other 31 NFL cities.
Wish it was different, and wish NFL cities got a cut of the television money for providing the stadiums, but that's just not the reality, and bashing Khan for that is akin to hating the player, rather than hating the game.
To me, the simplest approach would be to just sit down with the Jags, agree on an all-in figure that it's going to take to get a 20-30 year lease extension, cap the number of London games at 1 per season, sign the deal, and then figure out how to appropriate that cash together as you go.
Like I've said all along, if it's going to take Jacksonville kicking in ~$500 million to subsidize $~1.2 billion in projects to get a lease extension from the Jags, I'd personally rather see that $1.2 billion in development spread across 365-day uses at Lot J, Met Park, and more moderate stadium upgrades (like at Hard Rock in Miami) rather than sinking our full investment into a brand new, $1 billion+, amenity-rich, revenue-driving stadium that's only going to be used 10 times a year.
Best scenario, of course, is letting the public vote on whether we want to commit that much money to keep the Jags, and how we want to fund it.
I am not a betting man, but, if I was, I would quickly wager with you that $500 million is a low ball number by the time Khan and company are finished "negotiating" with the City. I am going to figure the minimum is $1 billion or higher. We saw this same game when the stadium was originally built for the Jags. The final costs were multiple times the original "estimates" used to "suck" the City into the project. Same for the Courthouse and many other City capital projects (see, for example, projects not built from the Better Jacksonville plan due to cost overruns). Bait and switch will be back, mark my words. It's standard operating procedure with those asking for favors from the City and this will be another Exhibit A. Once the City is on the hook, just reel in the taxpayers for more.
So, to flog the deceased equine, your $500 million is "all in" and includes the $250 million we are about to invest; thus the next 'ask' for stadium upgrades and Metro Park will be only another $250 million? I share jaxlongtimer's skepticism about the total. I expect the upgrades/metro package to be around $500 million from the City. And that's if it is indeed a "package" and the Metro Park (4 Seasons Park?) development doesn't come as another separate development deal.
I think a few of us have been saying for some time that by the time all is said and done (Lot J, TIAA Bank, Metro Park, and stuff like Hart Ramps), we will likely have spent well over a billion dollars on this football team over the course of ten or so years.
In a wiser city (perhaps a wiser state and country), this would likely be cause for a frank conversation on how much we truly value having an NFL team, and if the cost presented is truly worth it to do so. We have plenty of other teams, between the Armada, Jumbo Shrimp, Icemen, and probably some other smaller teams I'm forgetting right now. Maybe billions of taxpayer dollars to prop up an NFL team that isn't even performing on the field, while so much else is struggling isn't the right thing to do.
But alas, this is Lenny Curry's Jacksonville.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on November 16, 2020, 11:06:05 PM
So, to flog the deceased equine, your $500 million is "all in" and includes the $250 million we are about to invest; thus the next 'ask' for stadium upgrades and Metro Park will be only another $250 million? I share jaxlongtimer's skepticism about the total. I expect the upgrades/metro package to be around $500 million from the City. And that's if it is indeed a "package" and the Metro Park (4 Seasons Park?) development doesn't come as another separate development deal.
It probably got lost, but my main point was that, based on NFL precedent, we aren't going to get a lease extension for less than $500 million to $540 million in public subsidy. It's patently absurd and demonstrates an overall lack of awareness about the age of our stadium and the current NFL landscape for City Council members to demand a 25-year lease extension based on a $200 million contribution to an ancillary mall. A 30-second Google search should demonstrate that that's not how stadium leases work.
The danger obviously, and the reason the negotiations have been so backward, is that we're kind of putting the cart before the horse here in terms of negotiating the ancillary stuff
before we negotiate stadium improvements and subsequent lease extension. If we negotiated everything as a package, inclusive of stadium upgrades, I think we could get an extension through at least 2049 for less than $600 million as a city. In exchange for the Jags agreeing to play nice and finance half of the stadium upgrades ($500-$600 million), we'd agree to play nice and subsidize a portion of the ancillary projects up to $XXX, with any additional ask having to go through City Council. The lease extension would be signed, and we wouldn't have this looming threat in 2029 shifting the balance of future negotiations.
The problem with piecemealing Lot J, and potentially Met Park, before stadium upgrades is that we obviously lose a lot of that negotiating leverage when the stadium talks do happen. I don't think the Jags are going to up and leave the market in 2029 after pumping so much private investment into these other projects, but I do think it'll be easier for them to squeeze us for either a larger contribution to the stadium upgrades, or a grander, more expensive upgrade plan.
I don't think it'll be a billion dollars, but I do think we're on track for about $700-$750 million in the next ten years with the way things are going:
- $233 million for Lot J
- $100 million for Met Park
- $50 million for the Shipyards park
- $300 million for stadium upgrades
- $80 million for Lot J Phase II
Still fine with Lot J moving forward (in whatever form City Council approves), as I think it's a good project that will have positive externalities beyond what the auditor is projecting, there's still almost a decade on the stadium lease, and it makes sense to get the project going when the sports complex is quiet from the pandemic and the Jags can't move home games to London because of construction, but would love see anything else negotiated as a package.
To Marcus's point above, and the point everyone has been making for a long time, we do need to have a conversation as as city sometime though about whether being an NFL city is worth the huge public investment that's necessary to remain in the game. Will never happen. No City Council member or mayor is going to lose the NFL on their watch. But it would be nice.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 17, 2020, 09:57:02 AM
It's patently absurd and demonstrates an overall lack of awareness about the age of our stadium and the current NFL landscape for City Council members to demand a 25-year lease extension based on a $200 million contribution to an ancillary mall. A 30-second Google search should demonstrate that that's not how stadium leases work.
how about a 5-year extension?
With all of the $ handed out recently (including the Landing) the City will be hard-pressed to come up with $500 million for stadium improvements in the next decade. A lease extension would give residents some assurances from the team and give the City more time to get financing in order for major stadium upgrades.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 17, 2020, 09:57:02 AM
It probably got lost, but my main point was that, based on NFL precedent, we aren't going to get a lease extension for less than $500 million to $540 million in public subsidy. It's patently absurd and demonstrates an overall lack of awareness about the age of our stadium and the current NFL landscape for City Council members to demand a 25-year lease extension based on a $200 million contribution to an ancillary mall. A 30-second Google search should demonstrate that that's not how stadium leases work.
The danger obviously, and the reason the negotiations have been so backward, is that we're kind of putting the cart before the horse here in terms of negotiating the ancillary stuff before we negotiate stadium improvements and subsequent lease extension. If we negotiated everything as a package, inclusive of stadium upgrades, I think we could get an extension through at least 2049 for less than $600 million as a city. In exchange for the Jags agreeing to play nice and finance half of the stadium upgrades ($500-$600 million), we'd agree to play nice and subsidize a portion of the ancillary projects up to $XXX, with any additional ask having to go through City Council. The lease extension would be signed, and we wouldn't have this looming threat in 2029 shifting the balance of future negotiations.
The problem with piecemealing Lot J, and potentially Met Park, before stadium upgrades is that we obviously lose a lot of that negotiating leverage when the stadium talks do happen. I don't think the Jags are going to up and leave the market in 2029 after pumping so much private investment into these other projects, but I do think it'll be easier for them to squeeze us for either a larger contribution to the stadium upgrades, or a grander, more expensive upgrade plan.
EXACTLY
This is like needing a house, but building a garage first. We build a garage then the builder says, "well construction prices have risen so your house is going to cost a lot more now"
Exactly why I've been saying that this wrapped up WITH the stadium improvements will necessitate a MUCH larger investment, but we then have real leverage to ask for something in return (lease extension, max of 1 exported game, etc.)
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 17, 2020, 01:04:35 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 17, 2020, 09:57:02 AM
It's patently absurd and demonstrates an overall lack of awareness about the age of our stadium and the current NFL landscape for City Council members to demand a 25-year lease extension based on a $200 million contribution to an ancillary mall. A 30-second Google search should demonstrate that that's not how stadium leases work.
how about a 5-year extension?
With all of the $ handed out recently (including the Landing) the City will be hard-pressed to come up with $500 million for stadium improvements in the next decade. A lease extension would give residents some assurances from the team and give the City more time to get financing in order for major stadium upgrades.
With the upgrades and new stadiums we're seeing across the league, I just don't think TIAA Bank field is going to be a competitive NFL stadium for another 15 years without a major renovation adding protection from the elements and maybe the widened concourses that are rumored to be involved with the stadium upgrades.
I just don't think the Jags (or the NFL) would agree to a five-year lease extension that isn't tied to stadium upgrades.
What I do think is 100% fair though, however, is agreeing to cap London games at one per season through the life of the lease (2029). If local revenue struggles are the reason for the London games, and Lot J is a proposed solve for local revenue issues, then tie the two together and make the Jags promise not to try to move a second home game to London if we co-finance Lot J.
To me, it seems like the more reasonable ask.
^ better yet - no London games once the entertainment complex is open
^ I could see the city asking for that and the Jags countering with a 1-game cap that gets agreed on. That is, assuming Curry doesn't force people in line.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 17, 2020, 09:57:02 AM
The danger obviously, and the reason the negotiations have been so backward, is that we're kind of putting the cart before the horse here in terms of negotiating the ancillary stuff before we negotiate stadium improvements and subsequent lease extension. If we negotiated everything as a package, inclusive of stadium upgrades, I think we could get an extension through at least 2049 for less than $600 million as a city. In exchange for the Jags agreeing to play nice and finance half of the stadium upgrades ($500-$600 million), we'd agree to play nice and subsidize a portion of the ancillary projects up to $XXX, with any additional ask having to go through City Council. The lease extension would be signed, and we wouldn't have this looming threat in 2029 shifting the balance of future negotiations.
That seems at least in part to be the Jags' fault. I saw in an article that they started talking about the Shipyards like 5 years ago. Yet somehow Lamping said at I think the DIA meeting that they've only just completed Phase 1 of a multi-phase process to
figure out what is going to be asked for in a stadium reno. Which implies that they spent all of their time looking for money on everything
but the actual building they play games in.
Quote
To Marcus's point above, and the point everyone has been making for a long time, we do need to have a conversation as as city sometime though about whether being an NFL city is worth the huge public investment that's necessary to remain in the game. Will never happen. No City Council member or mayor is going to lose the NFL on their watch. But it would be nice.
In which case maybe someone who
isn't in City Hall should be starting that conversation, and discussing what alternatives there are to this expenditure.
JUst saw where Hazouri had some not so positive comments about the deal. Something along the lines of the developer is getting the uranium mine and the city is getting the shaft.
Quote from: edjax on November 17, 2020, 06:20:07 PM
JUst saw where Hazouri had some not so positive comments about the deal. Something along the lines of the developer is getting the uranium mine and the city is getting the shaft.
Saw this too.
The one question that I don't see anyone asking that I'd love to know the answer to is:
Who is the expected tenant for the 40,000 square feet of Class-A office space included in the project?
If you read the term sheet and ordinance closely, the $100 million Live! venue with restaurant and bars that the city is contributing half toward ($50 million) also includes that 40,000 in office space. Per the agreement, the city will actually own this office space.
(https://snipboard.io/hFBM5S.jpg)
This is 100% pure speculation, but if you've been to the Jags business offices in the stadium, you know that they're pretty damn crowded. Three, four, five, sometimes six people crammed into a single windowless room.
Would be pretty hilarious if the city fronted half the costs of the office space and the Jags turned around and moved their business operations across the parking lot into the publicly subsidized Lot J office space.
Interesting. Why would the city want to own speculative office space in this development when there's tons of empty Class A office space all over downtown? To fill this, it will likely be stealing a tenant from an existing space. So would this mean, the city would undercut a private sector entity to get it leased?
I was at the town hall in San Marco last night and I left feeling so insulted by the city. The rep for the mayor's office, Jordan Elsbury, kept talking about how the development was essential to bring in larger scale events and conventions. The mayor's office has been actively tanking our prospects as a convention destination for the past few years. I couldn't tell if he knew this and was lying to me, or he generally didn't understand the impacts of what his office has done with the Ford on Bay RFP. Additionally, calling this downtown development is a laugh. The reps from the Jaguars were at least calling this "a new neighborhood" that would provide jobs for people living in the eastside, but the city is arguing that this will help the actual CBD. He also touted the demolition of the landing as progress toward activating our waterfront. Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
I was at the town hall in San Marco last night and I left feeling so insulted by the city. The rep for the mayor's office, Jordan Elsbury, kept talking about how the development was essential to bring in larger scale events and conventions. The mayor's office has been actively tanking our prospects as a convention destination for the past few years. I couldn't tell if he knew this and was lying to me, or he generally didn't understand the impacts of what his office has done with the Ford on Bay RFP. Additionally, calling this downtown development is a laugh. The reps from the Jaguars were at least calling this "a new neighborhood" that would provide jobs for people living in the eastside, but the city is arguing that this will help the actual CBD. He also touted the demolition of the landing as progress toward activating our waterfront. Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
Such a Jacksonville story that this guy is the Mayor's Chief of Staff. He just graduated college 6 years ago with a degree in history from one of the worst colleges in the country (Southeastern Louisiana State-check their USNWR rankings). Then latched on to the Curry campaign and has worked his way up Curry's org. I'm sure he's a sharp guy with a bright future, but there is a zero percent chance he has a nuanced understanding of how cities and complex real estate projects work.
I think it's also worth noting that his current salary is $190,000 in a city where the median income is $54,000. This guy is being paid a huge salary and a part of huge decisions with very little experience.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
I was at the town hall in San Marco last night and I left feeling so insulted by the city. The rep for the mayor's office, Jordan Elsbury, kept talking about how the development was essential to bring in larger scale events and conventions. The mayor's office has been actively tanking our prospects as a convention destination for the past few years. I couldn't tell if he knew this and was lying to me, or he generally didn't understand the impacts of what his office has done with the Ford on Bay RFP. Additionally, calling this downtown development is a laugh. The reps from the Jaguars were at least calling this "a new neighborhood" that would provide jobs for people living in the eastside, but the city is arguing that this will help the actual CBD. He also touted the demolition of the landing as progress toward activating our waterfront. Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
"Try some of column A, try ALL of column B"
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
likely both
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 10:11:53 AM
I think it's also worth noting that his current salary is $190,000 in a city where the median income is $54,000. This guy is being paid a huge salary and a part of huge decisions with very little experience.
That is a reasonable salary if Curry was taking a talented attorney from Rogers Towers or someone with an MPA and years of experience, but not a guy that probably never even dreamed of making $100k at age 28 or whatever he is.
FYI, for any younger kids reading this, the best way to get ahead in the political realm in Florida is not by crushing it in school or working your way up. You simply have to work for free on the right political campaigns in your early twenties and you will get opportunities you never dreamed of. It's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party.
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 19, 2020, 10:24:42 AM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
likely both
He doesn't get it. Totally understandable that he has to align with the position of the hand that feeds him. However, if one truly got it, they'd craft a more logical argument for their position. If I'm pushing Lot J, I'm running that argument around job creation, economic development, sustaining the NFL franchise, revitalization of the Eastside and Sports District, maximizing underutilized public land, etc. I'm also acknowledging it is a separate area from the Northbank CBD and selling ways that it can compliment the downtown core.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 19, 2020, 10:49:14 AMIf I'm pushing Lot J, I'm running that argument around job creation, economic development, sustaining the NFL franchise, revitalization of the Eastside and Sports District, maximizing underutilized public land, etc. I'm also acknowledging it is a separate area from the Northbank CBD and selling ways that it can compliment the downtown core.
Could not agree with you more, here.
I think it's an easier, more honest sell framed this way, versus the current framing as a catalytic project for downtown redevelopment that's going to magically transform Jacksonville into a world class city and have citizens high-fiving in the streets out of civic pride.
I'd respect the Jags more if they just dropped the histrionics and said, "Listen. We want to stay here. But we're a small market. The salary cap is rising. Other cities are building billion dollar stadiums. We can't sell tickets to our games with the pandemic, and we can't hold events at Daily's Place. We can't even have our annual London game, which drives 15% of our local revenue each year. We feel like this project is a win-win. We boost our local revenue. We create a lot of construction and permanent service jobs. Jacksonville is in a better position to retain events like Florida-Georgia and bring in new events that will utilize the new infrastructure. The Eastside gets a boost. Riverfront land remains open for development. You guys have a place to come hang out before and after events at the Sports Complex. We'd really appreciate it if you guys worked with us on this. We think it can be a great thing for all parties involved."
We could still say no, but at least it's an honest conversation.
^^ Well stated Ken. If we could actually believe the things they said, it would help things from their perspective.
QuoteIt's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party.
I doubt this is true of the Democratic party, because they never win any elections. Hard to dole out many rewards if you don't win anything.
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:46:11 AM
FYI, for any younger kids reading this, the best way to get ahead in the political realm in Florida is not by crushing it in school or working your way up. You simply have to work for free on the right political campaigns in your early twenties and you will get opportunities you never dreamed of. It's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party.
I... I'm going to stare sullenly at the tens of thousands of dollars I'm spending at UF and the thousands more I'm about to spend at law school.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 19, 2020, 11:10:58 AM
I doubt this is true of the Democratic party, because they never win any elections. Hard to dole out many rewards if you don't win anything.
That's... not much better.
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 10:11:53 AM
I think it's also worth noting that his current salary is $190,000 in a city where the median income is $54,000. This guy is being paid a huge salary and a part of huge decisions with very little experience.
That is a reasonable salary if Curry was taking a talented attorney from Rogers Towers or someone with a MPA and years of experience, but not a guy that probably never even dreamed of making $100k at age 28 or whatever he is.
But, how much do those talented attorneys or someone with a MPA and years of experience put up on the bench press? That's a valued trait on the 4th floor of City Hall nowadays.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 19, 2020, 11:15:33 AM
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:46:11 AM
FYI, for any younger kids reading this, the best way to get ahead in the political realm in Florida is not by crushing it in school or working your way up. You simply have to work for free on the right political campaigns in your early twenties and you will get opportunities you never dreamed of. It's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party.
I... I'm going to stare sullenly at the tens of thousands of dollars I'm spending at UF and the thousands more I'm about to spend at law school.
I was probably being a bit hyperbolic on that one. You are a sharp young guy and are still much better off going to UF and a top tier law school. You'll just run across more cronyism than you would expect to see when you get into the workforce.
Quote from: fieldafm on November 19, 2020, 12:22:30 PM
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 10:11:53 AM
I think it's also worth noting that his current salary is $190,000 in a city where the median income is $54,000. This guy is being paid a huge salary and a part of huge decisions with very little experience.
That is a reasonable salary if Curry was taking a talented attorney from Rogers Towers or someone with a MPA and years of experience, but not a guy that probably never even dreamed of making $100k at age 28 or whatever he is.
But, how much do those talented attorneys or someone with a MPA and years of experience put up on the bench press? That's a valued trait on the 4th floor of City Hall nowadays.
I was wondering why Curry never brought you into his administration. Hit the gym Mike and save Jacksonville!
Some people on here are hell bent on trying to force things to happen within ear shot of the Bank of America Tower as if thats the be all and end all of Downtown Jax and never will the boundaries increase and anything else that happens outside their percieved limits is a threat and should be vehemently opposed. Its just not worked. The Landing failed, the immediate area is dead on evenings and weekends, the general public just don't care as much as some people on here do. Investors currently are more interested in other areas (i.e. Brooklyn, Lot J, San Marco) and maybe, just maybe, all the current and proposed development and regeneration in these areas might eventually spill over into "Downtown".
Quote from: fieldafm on November 19, 2020, 12:22:30 PM
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 10:11:53 AM
I think it's also worth noting that his current salary is $190,000 in a city where the median income is $54,000. This guy is being paid a huge salary and a part of huge decisions with very little experience.
That is a reasonable salary if Curry was taking a talented attorney from Rogers Towers or someone with a MPA and years of experience, but not a guy that probably never even dreamed of making $100k at age 28 or whatever he is.
But, how much do those talented attorneys or someone with a MPA and years of experience put up on the bench press? That's a valued trait on the 4th floor of City Hall nowadays.
Just follow this flow chart and you'll find yourself in the penthouse soon: https://youtu.be/OloLS5kTrVs
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:01:30 AM
He just graduated college 6 years ago with a degree in history from one of the worst colleges in the country (Southeastern Louisiana State-check their USNWR rankings).
I've been thinking about this, and feel the need to say something. There's no reason to bash where the guy (or anyone) went to school. It has nothing to do with the problems in the administration, and at any rate, a lot of the most brilliant, successful people come through schools some people look down on. And some of the biggest fuckups in the world go to the "best" schools. Never forget Aaron Zahn went to Yale.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 19, 2020, 04:35:17 PM
Quote from: CityLife on November 19, 2020, 10:01:30 AM
He just graduated college 6 years ago with a degree in history from one of the worst colleges in the country (Southeastern Louisiana State-check their USNWR rankings).
I've been thinking about this, and feel the need to say something. There's no reason to bash where the guy (or anyone) went to school. It has nothing to do with the problems in the administration, and at any rate, a lot of the most brilliant, successful people come through schools some people look down on. And some of the biggest fuckups in the world go to the "best" schools. Never forget Aaron Zahn went to Yale.
I wholeheartedly agree with you in general, but not this instance. You might have overlooked the part where I said "I'm sure he's a sharp guy with a bright future".
The point was more that he is only 6 years removed from studying history (which teaches you nothing about local government, real estate development, urban planning, etc) at a subpar school. People rise up all the time without going to good schools, but they typically do it after years of hard work and experience gained. It takes an incredibly diverse array of knowledge and experience to be able to operate operate at a high level in a role like he's in. It's not something that you can succeed at solely on charm, wit, emotional intelligence, or intuition like some other professions.
Someone that came into Curry's admin at that age and was trained in the field from a Harvard or Georgetown type law, MPA, or similar program might have come fully formed and able to succeed, but even then I would have doubts.
All that said, it seems evident that the poor guy is in over his head. He didn't even properly file the Lot J legislation and did zero independent financial analysis about the development, both of which hurt the legitimacy of the deal in the public.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/incomplete-parking-deal-holds-up-lot-j-legislation
It sounds like there's a pretty dramatic City Council meeting going on. I'm seeing some rather interesting tweets from reporters.
It's just disgraceful.
Lamping came pretty close to snapping.
Tommy Hazouri and Brian Hughes snapping at each other.
No bill to review.
Competing amendments from Carlucci and Leanna Cumber.
A run-in by Lori Boyer.
A run-in by the mayor's office to announce a surprise DIA review.
A surprise realization mid-meeting that they didn't even have Council members present to vote if they wanted to.
About as Jacksonville as you can get.
Public incentives or no public incentives, if I was the Jags and Cordish, I'd run for my life from this shitshow.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 19, 2020, 07:24:06 PM
It's just disgraceful.
Lamping came pretty close to snapping.
Tommy Hazouri and Brian Hughes snapping at each other.
No bill to review.
Competing amendments from Carlucci and Leanna Cumber.
A run-in by Lori Boyer.
A run-in by the mayor's office to announce a surprise DIA review.
A surprise realization mid-meeting that they didn't even have Council members present to vote if they wanted to.
About as Jacksonville as you can get.
Public incentives or no public incentives, if I was the Jags and Cordish, I'd run for my life from this shitshow.
This could be great for Jax though. A City Council and Mayoral 3-way civil war could stop all these crazy deals from getting done until the next election when maybe we could get a real Mayor for the people and a thoughtful City Council who would check him/her with constructive inputs instead of rubber stamps.
Hey Alexa, how far is it to San Antonio?
I don't read Twitter so this might be an unpopular opinion, but the City Council President deserves a ton of the blame for things going so badly off the rails tonight.
Even without revised legislation present, there was a set agenda for the meeting.
City Council members came in expecting to have their questions addressed by the auditor and the developer.
There was time on the schedule for everyone to speak and come to a better understanding about where things stood with the negotiations.
But it was clear from the first five minutes that Hazouri came in with the intention of pushing the Carlucci amendment forward (which he co-sponsored). The amendment is what he went straight too, other council members were ignored, and there was this big push to vote on something that couldn't even technically be voted on.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Carlucci amendment might have sent the Jags packing, and I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Cumber amendment may have stopped that from happening.
If I'm the Jags, I have patience for taxpayers wanting to get the best deal possible. But I also start to take all the unnecessarily personal insults about my intentions, committment, and abilities personally. Shad Khan has owned the team for nearly ten years, and it's just really disheartening to see how adversarial so many people still are towards the guy.
There's just nothing civil about how this is all playing out.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 19, 2020, 08:04:10 PM
I don't read Twitter so this might be an unpopular opinion, but the City Council President deserves a ton of the blame for things going so badly off the rails tonight.
Even without revised legislation present, there was a set agenda for the meeting.
City Council members came in expecting to have their questions addressed by the auditor and the developer.
There was time on the schedule for everyone to speak and come to a better understanding about where things stood with the negotiations.
But it was clear from the first five minutes that Hazouri came in with the intention of pushing the Carlucci amendment forward (which he co-sponsored). The amendment is what he went straight too, other council members were ignored, and there was this big push to vote on something that couldn't even technically be voted on.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Carlucci amendment might have sent the Jags packing, and I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Cumber amendment may have stopped that from happening.
If I'm the Jags, I have patience for taxpayers wanting to get the best deal possible. But I also start to take all the unnecessarily personal insults about my intentions, committment, and abilities personally. Shad Khan has owned the team for nearly ten years, and it's just really disheartening to see how adversarial so many people still are towards the guy.
There's just nothing civil about how this is all playing out.
Why would the Carlucci bill have sent the Jags packing? Is there some other market out there willing to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars without having their downtown folks even look at it? And regardless, why wouldn't they put the blame the mayor for making no attempt to get buy-in from the taxpayers?
Quote from: Tacachale on November 19, 2020, 10:22:21 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 19, 2020, 08:04:10 PM
I don't read Twitter so this might be an unpopular opinion, but the City Council President deserves a ton of the blame for things going so badly off the rails tonight.
Even without revised legislation present, there was a set agenda for the meeting.
City Council members came in expecting to have their questions addressed by the auditor and the developer.
There was time on the schedule for everyone to speak and come to a better understanding about where things stood with the negotiations.
But it was clear from the first five minutes that Hazouri came in with the intention of pushing the Carlucci amendment forward (which he co-sponsored). The amendment is what he went straight too, other council members were ignored, and there was this big push to vote on something that couldn't even technically be voted on.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Carlucci amendment might have sent the Jags packing, and I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the Cumber amendment may have stopped that from happening.
If I'm the Jags, I have patience for taxpayers wanting to get the best deal possible. But I also start to take all the unnecessarily personal insults about my intentions, committment, and abilities personally. Shad Khan has owned the team for nearly ten years, and it's just really disheartening to see how adversarial so many people still are towards the guy.
There's just nothing civil about how this is all playing out.
Why would the Carlucci bill have sent the Jags packing? Is there some other market out there willing to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars without having their downtown folks even look at it? And regardless, why wouldn't they put the blame the mayor for making no attempt to get buy-in from the taxpayers?
At the end of the day, everyone deserves some blame the scene at City Hall tonight. The Jags deserve some blame for their perpetually shitty optics and for ruining all goodwill by running football operations into the ground (this would be a much different conversation in 2017). City Council deserves some blame for how heated and contentious their language has become around this project. Tommy Hazouri deserves blame for railroading this meeting to try to push the Carlucci bill through. And, most of all, the mayor's office deserves an extra heap of blame for creating such a toxic environment where everything happens in secret and nobody trusts anybody else.
But when I say the Carlucci bill would have sent the Jags packing, here's what I mean:
Even though I totally believe that the mayor's office has secretly conspired with the Jags (Curry's off-the-record trip on Shad Khan's private jet to Baltimore, St. Louis, and Kansas City toppled the first domino that eventually led to the Landing's demolition, the Ford on Bay convention center being shelved, and Lot J being proposed), I'm not nearly as convinced that the Jags secretly conspired with the mayor's office.
Based on Mark Lamping's comments and frustration tonight, I am inclined to believe that the Jags genuinely feel like they went through the proper channels.
The $63 million in stadium renovations for the pools and video boards was negotiated directly with the Alvin Brown administration, and then taken to City Council for a vote. The DIA wasn't involved.
The $90 million Daily's Place/Flex Field project was negotiated directly with the Curry administration and then taken to City Council for a vote. The DIA wasn't involved.
And, when it came time to discuss Lot J, based on past precedent, the Jags have spent the last two years negotiating details directly with the mayor's office (Brian Hughes and Sam Mousa in particular) in anticipation of a City Council vote.
And they've been working
hard recently to close the deal. I see it with my own eyes. I don't know how many times I've bumped into Megha Parekh on Duval Street in the last few months, or shared an elevator with Paul Harden, or seen Mark Lamping walking into City Hall.
All efforts were to culminate in a vote from City Council where we either green light the Lot J project, or pass on it.
What Carlucci's bill proposed though is to essentially scrap the entire framework of the term sheet that's been around for two years and been interated on dozens on times and
completely start over from scratch with the DIA.
Just looking at it from the Jags' perspective, they've spent two years negotiating with the mayor's office to get to the finish line, only to be told, "We should go through the DIA instead... Let's just start over from 2017."
Totally get Lamping's frustration in saying, "We have zero interest in starting over again from ground zero."
What Leanna Cumber's amendment does - regardless of how it came to be - is let the DIA review all contracts and agreements to date and give a thumbs up, thumbs down, or thumbs up with conditions without necessitating a total reset.
In terms of what other markets would be willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a downtown project without review, I just honestly don't think a lot Lot J would be necessary in Toronto, or London, or even San Diego. They've got a population base, corporate presence, and funding mechanisms that Jax just doesn't have yet.
Not advocating for approving or rejecting Lot J either way, I just think the respectful thing to do is to see this two-year process through to a vote, rather than having City Council come in and demand a complete restart because they've got beef with how the mayor handled the negotiations.
To me, it's just embarrassing as a city.
You've got an international developer and a Forbes' billionaire on the line, along with representatives from your NFL franchise, and instead of holding a civil, professional meeting to discuss proposed changes to the development agreement, you've got the City Council President and Brian Hughes bickering over what the proper name is for the DIA, amendments being pushed to start negotiations completely over from scratch, microphones not working, run-ins from non council members, Bowman and Hazouri screaming at each other, council members being blatantly ignored, other council members with iPads trying to figure out how local ordinances work, and a rushed vote being forced because "Matt has to go," only to discover that you don't even have the number of council members necessary to legally hold a vote.
It's just insane, and so sad.
We've got every natural advantage a city could ever hope for, but we just can't shake the amateur hour nonsense.
In the meantime, we're going on two full years of dead Landing space. Assuming Lot J is approved something over the next year, full completion of phase one could take up to 2032-33.
QuoteCleaning contamination from Lot J could take up to three years
Jacksonville city officials expect it will take nearly three years at least to perform the environmental clean up necessary for Jaguars owner Shad Khan to begin construction on his proposed Lot J development, meaning the project could take at least seven years to complete.
That timeline, which was revealed in correspondence between Mayor Lenny Curry's office and the Jacksonville City Council Auditor's office, is more than twice as long as the timeline that has been publicly discussed.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/19/lot-j-jacksonville-cleaning-shad-khan/6343750002/
Ken you make a lot of excellent points. And you're well informed as certainly anyone on this blog. I think a problem not being accounted for is the public views this poorly, at least from the informal polling on Lot J that I have seen, and that may explain the pushback from City Hall.
^I think this (the general public opinion) is a result of bad transparency from city hall. Just about everything possible to erode public trust in local government, has taken place over the last few years. Again, one of those little things that pays off down the road when you have and stick to a community supported downtown master plan. At this point, we could write a book on what not to do when it comes to downtown revitalization strategy.
Quote from: MusicMan on November 20, 2020, 08:19:32 AM
Ken you make a lot of excellent points. And you're well informed as certainly anyone on this blog. I think a problem not being accounted for is the public views this poorly, at least from the informal polling on Lot J that I have seen, and that may explain the pushback from City Hall.
No, I totally agree.
We're in the middle of a global pandemic, people are sick and struggling, businesses are shuttered.
It's a really tough time to get excited about corporate welfare.
I get why there's renewed urgency from the Jags - they're taking a massive revenue hit like everyone else with capacity limits, no London game, and Daily's Place shuttered.
And I get why the majority of the public is against the project.
If we follow the process that was outlined from the beginning and City Council votes no, I think the Jags and Cordish can put on their big boy pants, live with the decision, and figure out next steps from there.
If however, after two years of negotiations, months of flying in Cordish executives, numerous presentations and meetings to City Council, we suddenly decide to change the goal posts and start over from scratch, I don't blame them for throwing their hands in the air and walking.
As a city, we've got this very, very bad habit of not having our shit together and burning the private sector.
We issued an RFP for a convention center on the river. Multiple respectable developers put a lot of resources and time into responding in good faith. We rejected all bids and wasted everyone's time. We issued an RFP for potential privatization of our public utility. Multiple suitors put a lot of resources and time into responding in good faith. We rejected all bids and wasted everyone's time. We issued an RFP for the Ford on Bay property with full knowledge that the property couldn't even be fully developed because of the Hyatt's right-of-first refusal. Surprise, it appears to have been a waste of everyone's time. We squeezed Toney Sleiman out of a 50-year lease at the Landing over petty political grudges dating back to the last mayoral election by pulling event permits, threatening to evict him, and (in my opinion) exploiting a mass shooting.
This stuff really adds up and sends a strong signal to the development and investment community that we're a bunch of clowns.
To me, the Carlucci bill would be a continuation of that same pattern of changing our minds and wasting everyone's work up to this point.
If at the end of negotiations, the City Council doesn't feel like it's a fair deal for the taxpayers, there's a simple solution - vote no.
Also:
Amazing troll by mother nature over Lot J this morning as I was driving into work.
God's promise that we'll never have to endure another City Council meeting like the one he sent last night.
(https://snipboard.io/47zWrd.jpg)
If it is going to take three years to clean up the site, and since the city does own it, and since no one is going to be able to do anything with it until it is cleaned, let me make a suggestion. The city bids out the clean up NOW and pays the full bill (after any money from the Feds/EPA they can acquire). Put Khan on notice that the expense of doing so will be considered money already contributed to whatever future investment that the city may make in the future toward the Jags.
Now we are at least making progress, dirt will be turning in just a few months and you have three years to iron out the details on what happens after the site is cleaned.
"FYI, for any younger kids reading this, the best way to get ahead in the political realm in Florida is not by crushing it in school or working your way up. You simply have to work for free on the right political campaigns in your early twenties and you will get opportunities you never dreamed of. It's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party."
Just saw this. and it's true all over America. I went to school with Trey Gowdy. He spent summers in HS working for Republican politicians in SC. I can honesty say no one who remembers him recalls him being especially bright. But there is an amazing quote in our 1981 yearbook where he responds to a question: "I'm too conservative to ever be elected..." He was probably 18 at the time.
Quote from: MusicMan on November 20, 2020, 10:29:51 AM
"FYI, for any younger kids reading this, the best way to get ahead in the political realm in Florida is not by crushing it in school or working your way up. You simply have to work for free on the right political campaigns in your early twenties and you will get opportunities you never dreamed of. It's crazy how much I see this happen around the state and it's not exclusive to any political party."
Just saw this. and it's true all over America. I went to school with Trey Gowdy. He spent summers in HS working for Republican politicians in SC. I can honesty say no one who remembers him recalls him being especially bright. But there is an amazing quote in our 1981 yearbook where he responds to a question: "I'm too conservative to ever be elected..." He was probably 18 at the time.
I had the misfortune to be his constituent while he was in Congress. Did he change his hair every week when he was in HS too?
Your point is right though. It is not what you know but who you know. Hitch your trailer to the right candidate and if he wins, you do too. If they pulled an upset, there is a good chance you won't have as much competition for a position either.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 19, 2020, 10:22:21 PM
Why would the Carlucci bill have sent the Jags packing? Is there some other market out there willing to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars without having their downtown folks even look at it? And regardless, why wouldn't they put the blame the mayor for making no attempt to get buy-in from the taxpayers?
If part of this question is are their other cities that will spend stupid amounts of money to get an NFL franchise to move to their city? Yes. A butt ton of them.
IIRC it's a little sticky in that the NFL seems to have some concept of protecting regional markets. As much sense as it may make, the NFL + the Bucs would probably oppose a move to Orlando for that reason.
But other than that, you have all sorts of folks that may be game from ones that recently lost a team like San Diego and St. Louis to San Antonio, Sacramento, Portland, Austin, etc, etc. Hell, I wouldn't rule out someone buying them to set up shop in Toronto or Mexico City.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on November 20, 2020, 11:39:08 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 19, 2020, 10:22:21 PM
Why would the Carlucci bill have sent the Jags packing? Is there some other market out there willing to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars without having their downtown folks even look at it? And regardless, why wouldn't they put the blame the mayor for making no attempt to get buy-in from the taxpayers?
If part of this question is are their other cities that will spend stupid amounts of money to get an NFL franchise to move to their city? Yes. A butt ton of them.
IIRC it's a little sticky in that the NFL seems to have some concept of protecting regional markets. As much sense as it may make, the NFL + the Bucs would probably oppose a move to Orlando for that reason.
But other than that, you have all sorts of folks that may be game from ones that recently lost a team like San Diego and St. Louis to San Antonio, Sacramento, Portland, Austin, etc, etc. Hell, I wouldn't rule out someone buying them to set up shop in Toronto or Mexico City.
I agree with you here. Yes, the Bucs would have to sign off on a move to Orlando, so that's not happening. Toronto is actually a secondary market for the Buffalo Bills, so I'm not sure if they'd sign off or not. San Diego doesn't seem to be ready to foot the bill for a stadium, though if they do I could see them luring the Chargers back as their deal in LA is....not good.
I don't see Austin or Portland or Sacramento for a few other reasons, but St. Louis or San Antonio? I could see it happening.
Quote from: MusicMan on November 20, 2020, 08:19:32 AM
Ken you make a lot of excellent points. And you're well informed as certainly anyone on this blog. I think a problem not being accounted for is the public views this poorly, at least from the informal polling on Lot J that I have seen, and that may explain the pushback from City Hall.
Agreed.
I actually have no issue with anything the Jags have done. I may not agree, but they are a private organization and have the right to ask for whatever they want. Whether they get it is another issue entirely.
Now, I get the issue with Carlucci's bill. COJ's job shouldn't be to give the Jags the runaround. Either approve it or not. In my eyes based on current law I DO think that the Jags should have been negotiating with DIA if the matter isn't directly tied to the lease....which it isn't (on paper). Everything else was a physical change to the Stadium, which DOES pertain to the lease. Apples and oranges. For example, if Khan wanted to develop the old JEA building, would he go through the Mayor's office or DIA?
At the same time, City Council isn't responsible for the Mayor's office telling the Jags the wrong thing, and neither are the Jags, if Curry's office told them otherwise. I actually think for mega deals like this the Mayor's office is the right place, no offense to Boyer or her board. But the structure needs to be there and FOLLOWED.
Curry's office shoulder's most of the blame for the awful relationship with City Council, though it's rarely 100% one way or the other. that doesn't help things.
Now with all of that said, if I were on Council I'd vote no on this. The amount of money being spent is too great considering the return. I realize the environmental adds costs, and I'm fine with that. It's our property and if someone is willing to develop we should be willing to clean the dirt.
To me, this is the ideal path forward: Do what I said from the beginning - stop putting the cart before the horse. The Jags and their facility are the big issue here. Package this with a stadium renovation (and yes, a larger check would then be written), but then it comes with a lease extension and no more than 1 game exported.
If we're going to approve this, then dump the stupid $65M "loan". Make the Jags go to the private sector for it. If you drop that, it's the $152M that we were led to believe when this first came out. I still think it's a lot, but it's makes more sense. With that said, both sides need to agree that after this, the COJ piggy bank is CLOSED for development money around the stadium until we solve the stadium - lease extension, no more than 1 home game exported. etc.
Additionally, I'd be fine starting on Environmental now on the site and (however they're doing this) moving parking to over the retention pond. This to me could show the good faith effort to partner here.
Was the council meeting from last night recorded? I'd love to watch it.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 02:18:47 PM
Was the council meeting from last night recorded? I'd love to watch it.
Buckle up, Lake ;)
https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/clip/2632?view_id=1&redirect=true
Here's the agenda so you can see what the meeting was supposed to look like:
(https://snipboard.io/S4XjED.jpg)
Thanks! Oh that's really wild if they couldn't stick to and follow the agenda.
I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 08:14:44 AM
In the meantime, we're going on two full years of dead Landing space. Assuming Lot J is approved something over the next year, full completion of phase one could take up to 2032-33.
QuoteCleaning contamination from Lot J could take up to three years
Jacksonville city officials expect it will take nearly three years at least to perform the environmental clean up necessary for Jaguars owner Shad Khan to begin construction on his proposed Lot J development, meaning the project could take at least seven years to complete.
That timeline, which was revealed in correspondence between Mayor Lenny Curry's office and the Jacksonville City Council Auditor's office, is more than twice as long as the timeline that has been publicly discussed.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/19/lot-j-jacksonville-cleaning-shad-khan/6343750002/
P.S. The remediation aspect makes this whole thing even stranger.
I wonder where the mayor's office got this 33-month minimum timeline from.
Cordish and the Jags have been going off the assumption that remediation would take a year at most.
In fact, there's only $6 million total allocated for remediation in the infrastructure budget for the project (vs. close to $40 million for the Shipyards).
Word was that late 2021/early 2022 was the target for vertical construction if Lot J was approved, with a hope of having Lot J open by the start of the Jags 2025 season. Even during the meeting last night, they were talking about wanting to get moving quickly in 2021 before construction costs skyrocket.
If the 33-month figure is true, that means Lot J couldn't even go vertical until 2024 and couldn't open until 2027/2028 in a best case scenario (with the hotel likely following a year or more behind). That's less than two years before the stadium lease expires, and the entire project has a five-year clawback.
So, Lot J would basically bind the Jaguars to Jacksonville for a couple of years beyond the length of the existing lease. If this is the case, I almost wonder why the Jags don't just throw the public a bone and extend the lease through like 2032 as a goodwill gesture.
And I also wonder why, if the above timeline is true, it isn't equally advantageous to the Jags to negotiate stadium improvements and lease extension in tandem with Lot J. If Lot J really isn't going to open until 2027 or 2028, and the lease expires in 2029, wouldn't the Jags want assurances that the city was going to invest in the stadium prior to committing themselves to a Lot J development with clawbacks stretching into the 2030s?
Nothing makes sense in 2020.
Quote from: Steve on November 20, 2020, 02:38:36 PM
I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.
Both were zany, but this one takes the cake.
Stick around until the end, Paul Harden does a pretty good job playing cleanup on Hazouri's mess.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 20, 2020, 02:54:47 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 08:14:44 AM
In the meantime, we're going on two full years of dead Landing space. Assuming Lot J is approved something over the next year, full completion of phase one could take up to 2032-33.
QuoteCleaning contamination from Lot J could take up to three years
Jacksonville city officials expect it will take nearly three years at least to perform the environmental clean up necessary for Jaguars owner Shad Khan to begin construction on his proposed Lot J development, meaning the project could take at least seven years to complete.
That timeline, which was revealed in correspondence between Mayor Lenny Curry's office and the Jacksonville City Council Auditor's office, is more than twice as long as the timeline that has been publicly discussed.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/19/lot-j-jacksonville-cleaning-shad-khan/6343750002/
P.S. The remediation aspect makes this whole thing even stranger.
I wonder where the mayor's office got this 33-month minimum timeline from.
Cordish and the Jags have been going off the assumption that remediation would take a year at most.
In fact, there's only $6 million total allocated for remediation in the infrastructure budget for the project (vs. close to $40 million for the Shipyards).
Word was that late 2021/early 2022 was the target for vertical construction if Lot J was approved, with a hope of having Lot J open by the start of the Jags 2025 season. Even during the meeting last night, they were talking about wanting to get moving quickly in 2021 before construction costs skyrocket.
If the 33-month figure is true, that means Lot J couldn't even go vertical until 2024 and couldn't open until 2027/2028 in a best case scenario (with the hotel likely following a year or more behind). That's less than two years before the stadium lease expires, and the entire project has a five-year clawback.
So, Lot J would basically bind the Jaguars to Jacksonville for a couple of years beyond the length of the existing lease. If this is the case, I almost wonder why the Jags don't just throw the public a bone and extend the lease through like 2032 as a goodwill gesture.
And I also wonder why, if the above timeline is true, it isn't equally advantageous to the Jags to negotiate stadium improvements and lease extension in tandem with Lot J. If Lot J really isn't going to open until 2027 or 2028, and the lease expires in 2029, wouldn't the Jags want assurances that the city was going to invest in the stadium prior to committing themselves to a Lot J development with clawbacks stretching into the 2030s?
Nothing makes sense in 2020.
Quote from: Steve on November 20, 2020, 02:38:36 PM
I'll file this with the first presidential debate. I've not watched either but I actually really want to.
Both were zany, but this one takes the cake.
Stick around until the end, Paul Harden does a pretty good job playing cleanup on Hazouri's mess.
If the deal was signed this afternoon the Jags could not get environmental approvals, approval to remove the broadcast tower and remediation completed/retention pond filled within 12 months.
Also, LOL at 'construction costs skyrocketing if they don't hurry'. Labor costs continue to increase, and thanks to Trump's tariff war, disruptions in supply chain thanks to pandemic and continued strong demand for construction... material costs are going in the same direction.
Quote from: fieldafm on November 20, 2020, 03:09:26 PM
If the deal was signed this afternoon the Jags could not get environmental approvals, approval to remove the broadcast tower and remediation completed/retention pond filled within 12 months.
You answered a question I had been wondering - I know the plan was to fill in the retention pond but didn't know if/what was going on with the guy wire for Channel 12's tower. Are they really removing it?
Seems like it would be WAY easier to leave it, and fence a wide enough space around the base so that it wouldn't interfere with the rest of the parking lot. The wires go up very quickly from the base so achieving 20 foot clearance for the parking lot underneath the wires should still be totally doable. I mean, the (former) Hart Expressway goes under another set of those wires.
^This might actually be changing here in the next few days.
This is the language that was in the original version of the legislation:
(https://snipboard.io/QPYDui.jpg)
The auditor was very concerned about this provision, and supposedly the Jags have agreed to remove this entire section from the agreement and leave the wire in place.
Obviously won't know for sure until the the revised agreement is finished.
Of course, the Jags would still make the city move it eventually if and when they developed the parking lot as Phase II, but it sounds like it might end up staying in place through Phase I.
Would Lot J phase II come before the Four Seasons phase? In the Four Seasons renderings, the Lot J surface parking lot is still shown.
^Phase II of Lot J would be predicated on Cordish and the Jags finding a major office tenant.
Cordish has said they wouldn't do it speculatively.
If Lot J is up to 10 years out, you've gotta think it'd be another five years on top of that before Phase II is potentially a thing.
Speaking of office tenants, and Lot J, and the 33-month minimum for environmental remediation at the Lot J site, it's interesting to note that when Cordish and the Jags pitched Lot J to the JEA for their new headquarters, they gave an estimated timeline of 12.5 months from award to vertical construction.
https://www.jea.com/About/Lot_J_Best_and_Final_Offer/
Either the mayor's confused, or those soil and groundwater samples the Jags took about a year back came back way, way worse than expected.
I'd probably fall on the side of the mayor's office being out of their league with this thing. Some of the timeline dates tossed out over the last few years sounded very suspect with any one familiar with the history of this area. I wouldn't be surprised if there's still some level of contamination at Metropolitan Park as well.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 07:23:16 PM
I'd probably fall on the side of the mayor's office being out of their league with this thing. Some of the timeline dates tossed out over the last few years sounded very suspect with any one familiar with the history of this area. I wouldn't be surprised if there's still some level of contamination at Metropolitan Park as well.
The blame for this mess starts with the Mayor's mismanagement of the entire process. He acts like he is the King of Jax and makes little to no effort to be transparent, solicit outside input, subject himself to constructive criticism or to be collaborative or build consensus. Its a replay of JEA - a prescription for disastrous results. If he didn't have the Council under his thumb at the time, the pension plan overhaul would have resulted in a similar mess.
But, I would also add Paul Harden and Mark Lamping. Harden has traditionally "owned" City Hall and should have been attuned better than anyone as to what would happen when this hit the Council. My guess is he is so used to ramming things through the Council with the Mayor's support and his contributions to Council campaigns that he failed to re-calibrate that maybe some on the Council are changed persons after JEA and might actually resist his efforts. Lamping has been to the well here enough times and hobnobbed with the Council members regularly, that he, too, should have had the sense to demand involvement of the Council, in addition to the Mayor, from the get-go. Especially after JEA and given the size of the ask.
Basically, the Mayor, Harden and Lamping seemed to have been banking on the "old way" of doing things with the Council. Post-JEA, maybe many on the Council and the voters are on a new plane. Let's hope so.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 02:28:30 PM
Thanks! Oh that's really wild if they couldn't stick to and follow the agenda.
Just finished it. What a cluster.
Waited the day to see how things were playing out after last night's meeting. Also a good article (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/11/20/strategic-errors-personality-conflicts-bad-terms-damaged-lot-j-deal/6354268002/) from Nate Monroe.
If you ask me, this new deal about remediation taking three years is somewhat of a bombshell. Suddenly this doesn't really seem all that urgent anymore. I think I'd be preaching to the choir to point out how Lenny Curry has fundamentally damaged our reputation with the amount of distrust he's sown towards both City Hall and the Jaguars, so I won't go further there. Also some good points from Ken and others on how the Jaguars failing to be more upfront about what they actually wanted and then getting upset about some opposition to the largest sum of public subsidy this city has ever considered didn't help matters.
If it were all up to me, with the information we have now, I'd propose this:
QuoteCut the current deal down to getting remediation done. But as much of it as possible. Lot J, the Shipyards, whatever in that area needs it. If that means $100m spent, then do it. Hopefully get started by early 2021 to finish in late '23/early '24.
The Jaguars need to spend the next two years getting their house in order, on and off the field. Actually have some real blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, and figure out exactly what they want from taxpayers for Stadium renovations. Ideally, the city is taking this time to get the NPS to agree to moving Metro Park, and finding the money to build the new park + museum district. Hopefully, the end result is something lovely and iconic, but at least something decent.
After a DIA review, and Council review (optional), Put a referendum on the ballot, either in 2022 or March 2023 for the combined cost of building the developments + stadium and a 30-year lease extension. Make the stakes clear, that this is about whether we want the Jags or we don't. It's going to be a gigantic number, but at least we know what that number is, and can make one yes or no decision as a city. If we say yes, contracts sign, vertical construction starts a few months later. If we say no, then I guess the next mayor could master plan the area or just offer up the parcels to whoever is willing to buy and build themselves. At that point either the Jags figure out something else or start looking for somewhere else to go.
That's just my amateur opinion, vote me in '23. (/sarcasm)
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 08:32:32 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 20, 2020, 02:28:30 PM
Thanks! Oh that's really wild if they couldn't stick to and follow the agenda.
Just finished it. What a cluster.
We need to start a reality TV show called the "Real City Council Members of Jacksonville" 8). Can't make this stuff up.
My observations:
* Brian Hughes lost his cool more than anyone so he comes off living up to his reputation for "winning by intimidation." His defensiveness appears to be derived from the perception (reality?) that the Administration hasn't delivered responsibly. I also didn't find him convincing in his explanation for why this deal didn't go to DIA from Day One. It's clear to me the Mayor wanted to handle this directly with his buddy, Khan, a major faux pas after the JEA fiasco.
* Hazouri lost control of the agenda but kept relatively calm and unfazed (appears to have upped his zen before this meeting) through the evening and even took responsibility for the meeting not meeting expectations. To be fair. most of the Council members commented on the amendments offered making them partially responsible for the meeting getting sidetracked. Anyone of them could have earlier addressed that the meeting was moving away from the agenda but didn't until near the end. But as chair, Hazouri is most responsible. Hazouri did manage to drill the point multiple times that the Administration was not being transparent or responsive enough and scored points when the Jag's/Aministration admitted they had already agreed to have DIA review the deal but no one told Hazouri or others on the Council before the meeting. That info, alone, could have rendered all the talk about the amendments, which consumed most of the meeting, moot.
* Lamping was factual in his presentation although it was clear he was frustrated with the process as evidenced by his comment (which also came across as possibly a veiled threat) about not willing to go back to the beginning of the process.
* Not at all a fan of Harden but he managed to come across as keeping his cool too. He seemed unusually contrite for him. I guess that's a good way to behave when you are asking for a $233 million gift. Would love to know what Khan pays him yearly in fees ;D.
* The poor City Council auditor! She could mostly only sit there uncomfortably but coolly amidst the crossfire in which her name/position was bandied about by all sides to suit their purpose. She gets credit for carefully selecting her words when she spoke so as not to offend anyone. She deserves whatever the City is paying her. A consummate professional. If there is a hero in all this, it is clearly her.
* Lori Boyer: Most of my comments about the Council auditor apply to her although I am concerned she may be more bending to the politics of this in the end based on some other DIA decisions to date.
* Love the public comment section. Always entertaining and refreshing to hear a citizen bluntly call out how many (most?) citizens think about how the City is run - via backroom dealing and/or to benefit major donors to campaigns.
I stand by my earlier post regarding who is most responsible for this cluster:
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on November 20, 2020, 07:57:01 PM
The blame for this mess starts with the Mayor's mismanagement of the entire process. He acts like he is the King of Jax and makes little to no effort to be transparent, solicit outside input, subject himself to constructive criticism or to be collaborative or build consensus. Its a replay of JEA - a prescription for disastrous results. If he didn't have the Council under his thumb at the time, the pension plan overhaul would have resulted in a similar mess.
But, I would also add Paul Harden and Mark Lamping. Harden has traditionally "owned" City Hall and should have been attuned better than anyone as to what would happen when this hit the Council. My guess is he is so used to ramming things through the Council with the Mayor's support and his contributions to Council campaigns that he failed to re-calibrate that maybe some on the Council are changed persons after JEA and might actually resist his efforts. Lamping has been to the well here enough times and hobnobbed with the Council members regularly, that he, too, should have had the sense to demand involvement of the Council, in addition to the Mayor, from the get-go. Especially after JEA and given the size of the ask.
Basically, the Mayor, Harden and Lamping seemed to have been banking on the "old way" of doing things with the Council. Post-JEA, maybe many on the Council and the voters are on a new plane. Let's hope so.
For more fun, here is a post mortem of the meeting with both Hazouri and Curry on WJXT's "This Week in Jacksonville": https://www.news4jax.com/this-week-in-jacksonville/2020/11/22/jacksonville-city-council-president-mayor-take-a-look-at-local-issues-us-rep-al-lawson/ (https://www.news4jax.com/this-week-in-jacksonville/2020/11/22/jacksonville-city-council-president-mayor-take-a-look-at-local-issues-us-rep-al-lawson/).
Interesting that Hazouri says Lot J must have a 2/3 vote of approval from the Council due to the source of the City's funding. That could make the vote a bit more interesting. Curry just took the position to let the process run its course and expressed confidence the Council would approve the project in the end. Laughably, Curry says he has always run the City in a "nonpartisan" way! Really?!
Notably, Hazouri straight out said he doesn't trust the Mayor's aid, Elsbury, so he aligns with the take of posters here as evidenced by the take below:
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 19, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
I was at the town hall in San Marco last night and I left feeling so insulted by the city. The rep for the mayor's office, Jordan Elsbury, kept talking about how the development was essential to bring in larger scale events and conventions. The mayor's office has been actively tanking our prospects as a convention destination for the past few years. I couldn't tell if he knew this and was lying to me, or he generally didn't understand the impacts of what his office has done with the Ford on Bay RFP. Additionally, calling this downtown development is a laugh. The reps from the Jaguars were at least calling this "a new neighborhood" that would provide jobs for people living in the eastside, but the city is arguing that this will help the actual CBD. He also touted the demolition of the landing as progress toward activating our waterfront. Again.... is he straight lying to us or does he just not get it?
^ Decent observations. Hope those speaking in public comment vote next time around.
Looking at This Week in Jax:
- Sad to see Hazouri say that we shouldn't look at the Four Seasons or stadium reno until we've "resolved" Lot J. Shame to not see support for actually getting that stuff handled together.
- TIL it takes a 2/3 vote of Council to approve Lot J. If my math is right that's at least 13 out of 19.
- Stressing the need for an equal playing field, which is true, I guess.
- Hazouri doesn't trust Jordan Elsbury. Still feels the city is getting the shaft.
- Curry accidentally said "Do we want, as a city, to do business with our owner..." referring to Khan. Tongue twist, or Freudian slip?
- Curry doesn't regret pushing back the DCPS sales tax a year. "The important thing is that we got it done."
- He's totally fine, "no issue" with the city voting to take power over JEA's board from him.
- It looks like there's a "CURRY WINS IT" headline framed on the wall of whatever room he's in, I think at his house.
- "I've always governed and led our city in a nonpartisan way." This is a joke, right?
- On crime (paraphrasing): "This is almost entirely gangs and the drug trade, this isn't the Wild West and we don't expect drive-by shootings in random neighborhoods, nonetheless we are investing in technologies to stop it and police it and arrest people. We're also investing in after school programs, to give young people tools to make the right decision vs a gang decision."
Seems to me like the priorities are a bit backwards. Investing in more "technologies" and arresting more people clearly isn't working. Especially seeing how things are going lately, maybe the
bulk of the focus needs to be on preventing criminals in the first place. Not letting people get into such a desperate position that a gang or dealing seems attractive. But what do I know.
Edit: I see you edited your comment with things I also ended up saying. All in agreement here.
QuoteJaguars president: TIAA Bank Field upgrades needed before lease extension
In an exclusive interview Monday, Lamping responded to numerous inquiries about why the Jaguars have not agreed to extend the lease during discussions with City Council on the Lot J development proposal. Any lease extension would require three-quarters majority approval of NFL owners, and Lamping said there'd be no chance of acceptance without a major stadium renovation. He added that a more vibrant downtown through the Lot J development next to TIAA Bank Field — currently being discussed and soon up for a vote by City Council — also makes that approval more appealing.
Full article: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/24/jacksonville-jaguars-stadium-upgrades-needed-lease-extension-tiaa-bank-field/6400288002/
Seems logical, as someone else mentioned previously, to bundle up all the asks, make the stakes clear, then make a decision. Otherwise, coming back to COJ in a few years, with yet another ask, this time for stadium upgrades to enable a lease extension, is going to be very difficult for the public to stomach. Bad optics.
Just rip off the bandaid.
[BTW, this is Bill Hoff. Got locked out of my account, couldn't figure out my rescue email, found access to my old account]
I'm glad we're finally discussing the elephant in the room here.
To me it's a waste of time to talk about Lot J without at least including the stadium. Personally, I feel like this is building a new shiny garage next to a house that needs renovation. Fix the house first.
If the proposal was $233M for the stadium, it would be a MUCH different conversation.
The more and more I see this, Lamping seems to have a major disconnect with perceptions among the residents here.
Well it's only been a few years since my last post here. Have still kept up reading all the forums and my goodness they are SO much better with Stephen Dare out of the picture.
That all said, a few of my thoughts as I was originally against Lot J due to the perceived financial fleecing the city was getting in addition to this whole deal looking more and more like a Shady Lenny JEA duplicate. I'm now for the development and here's a list as to why:
1) While the Jags as a football team have been the worst in the NFL the past decade, the City of Jax has been mismanaged even worse and for the last 5 decades. There is literally not a worse downtown that comes to mind.
2) The Jags came to Jax in 1995 so what sort of growth have we seen as a city since that point?
3) Less river-front dining and entertainment options in 2020 than 1995.
4) A sky-way express to nowhere is still a sky-way express to nowhere
5) A comic-book looking jail still overlooking the St Johns
6) The skeletal remains of Berkman still standing strong 14 years later
7) A $350M courthouse in exchange for demolishing the old courthouse
8) $20M to turn the Landing into a cow pasture
9) Still-contaminated shipyards
10) 3 Residential towers (4th under construction by Baptist)
11) 0 Office towers (only considering North/South Bank)
12) I lost count of the number of buildings demolished and turned into vacant concrete storage
13) North of $2.5 Billion spent since 2000 in revitalization projects and this is what we have to show for it. A DT that is literally more dead than it was 25 years ago.
I say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
QuoteI say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
You have hundreds of millions of dollars to lose. There is no guarantee than long-term Lot J will be any more successful than The Landing was. Even if it is, it won't do much for the true DT and will in fact be a competitor/impediment to DT.
No matter how bad things are, don't ever think that they can't get worse.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 24, 2020, 09:59:43 AM
QuoteI say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
You have hundreds of millions of dollars to lose. There is no guarantee than long-term Lot J will be any more successful than The Landing was. Even if it is, it won't do much for the true DT and will in fact be a competitor/impediment to DT.
No matter how bad things are, don't ever think that they can't get worse.
I'm not dismissing the numbers nor am I dismissing the risk as my final comment on that previous post was more banter than an actual question. There's never a guarantee anything you develop will be successful. History has proven that time and time again. Now perhaps I've missed it, but what sort of grand vision has the most recent DIA or City Council members laid out for Jax? The last major project proposed within the core (that I can remember) was Sleiman's proposal to completely redo the Landing. But yet, once again, city politics got in the way and now look what we have to show for it. A lawn. Yawn.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 10:16:33 AM
Now perhaps I've missed it, but what sort of grand vision has the most recent DIA or City Council members laid out for Jax?
You're not wrong here. Look at the whole MOSH thing. Conceptually I'm fine with it....but there's no cohesive plan.
Now that said, I don't really want to write Khan a giant check and say, "I trust you."
Quote from: Steve on November 24, 2020, 10:19:47 AM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 10:16:33 AM
Now perhaps I've missed it, but what sort of grand vision has the most recent DIA or City Council members laid out for Jax?
You're not wrong here. Look at the whole MOSH thing. Conceptually I'm fine with it....but there's no cohesive plan.
Now that said, I don't really want to write Khan a giant check and say, "I trust you."
Won't disagree with you there. But what are our options at this point? Stick to the same-ol-same-ol and hope that people within the COJ can do something they've never been able to accomplish and build out this city? Or, trust someone who has been TERRIBLE with his football team but seemingly quite successful in everything else he's done? New approaches are risky but I think we've given the city enough chances up to this point to prove their worth.
Quote from: Steve on November 24, 2020, 09:16:09 AM
I'm glad we're finally discussing the elephant in the room here.
To me it's a waste of time to talk about Lot J without at least including the stadium. Personally, I feel like this is building a new shiny garage next to a house that needs renovation. Fix the house first.
If the proposal was $233M for the stadium, it would be a MUCH different conversation.
The more and more I see this, Lamping seems to have a major disconnect with perceptions among the residents here.
Agreed! Just come out and say what you need. While my professional position is all teams need stadium improvements in order to generate revenue for both the owners and players, the city leaders need to be more forceful with questions and answers regarding any deal.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 09:23:15 AM
Well it's only been a few years since my last post here. Have still kept up reading all the forums and my goodness they are SO much better with Stephen Dare out of the picture.
That all said, a few of my thoughts as I was originally against Lot J due to the perceived financial fleecing the city was getting in addition to this whole deal looking more and more like a Shady Lenny JEA duplicate. I'm now for the development and here's a list as to why:
1) While the Jags as a football team have been the worst in the NFL the past decade, the City of Jax has been mismanaged even worse and for the last 5 decades. There is literally not a worse downtown that comes to mind.
2) The Jags came to Jax in 1995 so what sort of growth have we seen as a city since that point?
3) Less river-front dining and entertainment options in 2020 than 1995.
4) A sky-way express to nowhere is still a sky-way express to nowhere
5) A comic-book looking jail still overlooking the St Johns
6) The skeletal remains of Berkman still standing strong 14 years later
7) A $350M courthouse in exchange for demolishing the old courthouse
8) $20M to turn the Landing into a cow pasture
9) Still-contaminated shipyards
10) 3 Residential towers (4th under construction by Baptist)
11) 0 Office towers (only considering North/South Bank)
12) I lost count of the number of buildings demolished and turned into vacant concrete storage
13) North of $2.5 Billion spent since 2000 in revitalization projects and this is what we have to show for it. A DT that is literally more dead than it was 25 years ago.
I say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
Amen WarDam, AMEN. Agree whole heartedlly; "Landing Property turned into a cow pasture.......LOLOLOL...sad but true. Let the moustached man from Benghazi "do his thing;" yes, give him a chance. Maybe we will see office towers, more residential towers, restaurants and dining on the river, retail in and around downtown and maybe another mall/shopping center downtown that will be a prosperous success! Amen.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 24, 2020, 09:59:43 AM
QuoteI say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
You have hundreds of millions of dollars to lose. There is no guarantee than long-term Lot J will be any more successful than The Landing was. Even if it is, it won't do much for the true DT and will in fact be a competitor/impediment to DT.
No matter how bad things are, don't ever think that they can't get worse.
Pessimism? Sheesh; not disagreeing or disrespecting, but give the moustached man from La Mancha a chance.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 10:16:33 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on November 24, 2020, 09:59:43 AM
QuoteI say all that to say this. The city has had its chances over and over and over to make moves to get this town out of a rut when it comes to realizing our potential. We have a frigin river running through the middle of our downtown and you could still find more water-front entertainment in Bozeman, Montana. Let the International man of mustache mystery get to work on his vision for this visionless city. We've been trying far too long with COJ politicians executing their "plans" for growth and the results speak for themselves. At this point, it's not like we have anything to lose.
You have hundreds of millions of dollars to lose. There is no guarantee than long-term Lot J will be any more successful than The Landing was. Even if it is, it won't do much for the true DT and will in fact be a competitor/impediment to DT.
No matter how bad things are, don't ever think that they can't get worse.
I'm not dismissing the numbers nor am I dismissing the risk as my final comment on that previous post was more banter than an actual question. There's never a guarantee anything you develop will be successful. History has proven that time and time again. Now perhaps I've missed it, but what sort of grand vision has the most recent DIA or City Council members laid out for Jax? The last major project proposed within the core (that I can remember) was Sleiman's proposal to completely redo the Landing. But yet, once again, city politics got in the way and now look what we have to show for it. A lawn. Yawn.
LOLOL...agree.
Quote from: Steve on November 24, 2020, 10:19:47 AM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 10:16:33 AM
Now perhaps I've missed it, but what sort of grand vision has the most recent DIA or City Council members laid out for Jax?
You're not wrong here. Look at the whole MOSH thing. Conceptually I'm fine with it....but there's no cohesive plan.
Now that said, I don't really want to write Khan a giant check and say, "I trust you."
I don't think he's saying write Khan a giant check and go along with anything (development, etc.) that he lays out to the city or on the table, because Khan had better have a firm, workable plan for our city, and our city leaders must be smart enough not to write out that "big giant check," unless the plan is well thought out, thought through, and we're getting the big bang for the bucks.
So the other shoe drops, eh? I had no idea the other NFL owners have to approve a lease extension, but I guess it makes sense. It's almost certainly time for a package deal and a referendum, in my opinion (that was me Bill). Get remediation done now, let the people decide if they want a football team and all the ancillary development, and then either start after we approve it or just go so we can sell the land.
Hello WarDamJagFan, let's break it down:
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on November 24, 2020, 09:23:15 AM
1) While the Jags as a football team have been the worst in the NFL the past decade, the City of Jax has been mismanaged even worse and for the last 5 decades. There is literally not a worse downtown that comes to mind.
Responsibility for this falls on a lot of people. The voters, in a sense, for being swayed by slick campaigns without substance (Peyton, Curry). Parties, for having poor candidates (Brown). The people in those administrations, for not having a cohesive plan. JTA, which I'll go into later.
Quote
2) The Jags came to Jax in 1995 so what sort of growth have we seen as a city since that point?
We've seen a lot of growth! The issue is that the bulk of said growth has not been in the urban core of downtown. Brooklyn has improved greatly since 1995, St. Johns Town Center has become a regional shopping destination, plus plenty of other areas.
Quote
3) Less river-front dining and entertainment options in 2020 than 1995.
We did this to ourselves by electing and reelecting Lenny Curry after his ridiculous nonsense with Sleiman. That plus the lack of a serious master plan for downtown that directed investment in a way to attract restaurants, which has been discussed at length here.
Quote
4) A sky-way express to nowhere is still a sky-way express to nowhere
This is where JTA comes up. JTA lost out on $100m in Better Jacksonville Plan money with an insane bid to build BRT with massive stations all over town. Then spent over a decade with plans for a gigantic sprawling transit center on the books, before finally giving up for something much more reasonable, which only finished this year. They've failed to lead any charge on returning passenger rail to downtown. They've failed to actually make the Skyway an urban core transit spine, by competing with themselves and running buses down the Skyway's routes. They don't work with the city to make sure that investment happens around Skyway stations. And now they want to make the same mistake twice by, as an article said, replacing the magical tech of the '70s with the magical tech of the '10s in the form of the U2C, which for whatever reason they've decided should happen hell or high water.
Quote
5) A comic-book looking jail still overlooking the St Johns
I keep hearing people say this, but I can't help but ask: do you really feel like moving the jail is worth $300m+ in taxpayer money right now? Aren't there more worthwhile things to do with that kind of money first?
Quote
6) The skeletal remains of Berkman still standing strong 14 years later
This is fair, it's really odd how this ended up in court and then just sitting there for so long.
Quote
7) A $350M courthouse in exchange for demolishing the old courthouse
Adaptive reuse was discussed at length here, but of course, this is Lenny Curry's Jacksonville and at the end of the day he wanted it gone. It's possible the Jaguars did too in order to prevent competition at their developments out east.
Quote
8) $20M to turn the Landing into a cow pasture
See above.
Quote
9) Still-contaminated shipyards
It's expensive to remediate, although I've brought up a few times that a deal to get this done should be signed before we have a referendum on all the Jags developments
Quote
10) 3 Residential towers (4th under construction by Baptist)
11) 0 Office towers (only considering North/South Bank)
Part of this was the economy.
Quote
12) I lost count of the number of buildings demolished and turned into vacant concrete storage
13) North of $2.5 Billion spent since 2000 in revitalization projects and this is what we have to show for it. A DT that is literally more dead than it was 25 years ago.
It all comes back to the leadership we chose, and the people running our transit agency. Again, it's been discussed at length here how the city hasn't appropriately coordinated those investments in a way that encourages private investment. We've been addicted to big expensive game-changers, and obviously that hasn't changed the game.
Heights, I don't think there's any need to call Khan a "moustached man from Benghazi," that's just disrespectful. Putting that aside, almost everyone here agrees on how there has not been a coordinated master plan or vision for Downtown Jacksonville, and that our current leadership has utterly failed to offer one. The challenge is making that clear to both the current leadership and the voters who will choose future leaders. I've said before that with what we know now, this seems like the optional solution going forward:
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 20, 2020, 08:41:43 PM
Cut the current deal down to getting remediation done. But as much of it as possible. Lot J, the Shipyards, whatever in that area needs it. If that means $100m spent, then do it. Hopefully get started by early 2021 to finish in late '23/early '24.
The Jaguars need to spend the next two years getting their house in order, on and off the field. Actually have some real blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, and figure out exactly what they want from taxpayers for Stadium renovations. Ideally, the city is taking this time to get the NPS to agree to moving Metro Park, and finding the money to build the new park + museum district. Hopefully, the end result is something lovely and iconic, but at least something decent.
After a DIA review, and Council review (optional), put a referendum on the ballot, either in November 2022 or March 2023 for the combined cost of building the developments + stadium and a 30-year lease extension. Make the stakes clear, that this is about whether we want the Jags or we don't. It's going to be a gigantic number, but at least we know what that number is, and can make one yes or no decision as a city. If we say yes, contracts sign, vertical construction starts a few months later. If we say no, then I guess the next mayor could master plan the area or just offer up the parcels to whoever is willing to buy and build themselves. At that point either the Jags figure out something else or start looking for somewhere else to go.
That's just my amateur opinion, vote me in '23. (/sarcasm)
Khan doesn't have a vision for DT Jax either. He has a conceptual dream of what they'd like to see around the stadium. No matter what's spent over there, COJ/DIA will still need a vision for downtown. IMO, they should have an open discussion of what it will take to keep the Jags here long term and drop their vision of the Stadium District into what's planned for downtown as a whole. The same goes with LaVilla and the Cathedral District, both of which have had independent visions/master plans developed in recent years. How does all of this stuff go together, how much will it cost, what is the implementation plan, etc? Throw JTA's AV dream into the vision planning effort as well. We may very well find up that these things don't match up and that some overall modifications will need to be made before blowing hundreds of millions more in public money. Until we're able to do that and stick to that plan, we'll continue to struggle no matter how much money is given to the Jag's.
Really great points above, but I think the biggest point that people are missing with this new stadium story is this:
Whether we're 15-1 or 1-15, the Jags are not sustainable long-term in Jacksonville if the only investment we make as a city is in stadium upgrades. Locals take this fact really, really personally, but it's rooted in economic reality. Whether we do the stadium now or later, the other asks are not only going to come, but will need to be publicly subsidized if we wish to remain an NFL franchise.
Viability and sustainability are not terms reflective of how passionate our fanbase is.
Instead, they're reflective of our market size (30th in the NFL), our per capita income (30th in the NFL), and our local economy (29th in local GDP). We're growing as a city, but so are all of the other NFL markets as well (we're 28th in income growth, for example).
When you've got a smaller population base, you can overcome that with a larger local economy, or a larger per capita income.
When you've got a smaller per capital income, you can overcome that with a larger population base.
But when you've got one of the smallest markets, with one of the lowest per capita incomes, and one of the lowest GDPs (and subsequently, smallest corporate presence), there's only so much you can squeeze out of those 8 home games a season. You have to get creative with local revenue beyond those 8 game days to make Jacksonville work as an NFL market.
The Jags need things like the London game (up to 1.8x the ticket revenue of a Jacksonville), Daily's Place, and developments like those proposed at Lot J and the Shipyards to compensate for all of these previously noted market disadvantages, to be able to field a competitive team, and to be able to held accountable by the rest of the NFL franchises that make up the league's revenue share pool (which is why NFL owners need to approve lease extensions).
The salary cap keeps rising and rising, and Jags ticket prices haven't even kept up with inflation over the last 20 years because our market can't bear it. Yes, we've had some really shitty years, but sustainable professional sports markets need to be able to bear good stretches and bad.
It's not greed, it's not personal against the Jacksonville market, it's pure numbers on a balance sheet.
And another reason why all of this should be negotiated as a package.
A new stadium is no good to Jags without the additional revenue sources like Lot J and the Shipyards. And Lot J and the Shipyards are far less useful to the public without the new stadium.
It just genuinely bothers me though how heated and antagonistic this has all become on every level. The Jags need to be more humble, but if people out there were paying attention and really educating themselves about NFL economics, or even watching the Jags State of the Franchise events since Shad Khan bought the team where Lamping has been incredibly transparent about all of this, the conversation would be framed much better.
Do we want to throw all our eggs in one basket to make the necessary investments to help the Jags overcome our market disadvantages, or has the price tag just gotten too high?
Versus:
Greedy billionaire wants to extort passionate fanbase.
Ain't that simple.
P.S. Public meeting just started.
https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/event/1428?view_id=1&redirect=true
I hear DeFoor opposing the Cumber proposal and supporting Carlucci's because there are "still things that need to be addressed and negotiated." Carlucci also said he might not vote for the bill as-is, and we need to start over, but not necessarily from the beginning. As mad as Lamping was about it, it sounds like unless something changes we might be due for more substantial changes. In which case, someone should be bold enough to propose a referendum. Maybe I'll hop into public comment for the later meeting and bring it up.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 24, 2020, 11:13:04 AM
Really great points above, but I think the biggest point that people are missing with this new stadium story is this:
Whether we're 15-1 or 1-15, the Jags are not sustainable long-term in Jacksonville if the only investment we make as a city is in stadium upgrades. Locals take this fact really, really personally, but it's rooted in economic reality. Whether we do the stadium now or later, the other asks are not only going to come, but will need to be publicly subsidized if we wish to remain an NFL franchise.
There is no question many in Jax wanted the sex appeal of an NFL franchise for a long time. I think the question comes down to how many understood your last comment, that we need to publicly subsidize the team ad nauseam. When the NFL picked Jax, they clearly understood our demographics and felt we passed the smell test in awarding us the franchise. Further, the value of the team has increased some 10 to 15 times over what Weaver originally paid for the franchise so something must be going right for the Jags on the financial side.
I believe there is a fairness issue here. Is it fair to burden all the taxpayers in Jax with the cost of having the Jags here when many residents didn't ask for this and do not prioritize spending taxpayer dollars on the Jags given so many other pressing needs not being addressed? At what point is a line in the sand drawn. As many have noted, $233 million (about $233 for every man, woman and child in the City) would go a long way invested in other ways in Jax and likely with a much greater ROI.
I also note that Jax already had a higher-than-average growth rate (this may have helped seduce the NFL originally) before the Jags came and that many believed the Jags would have actually been far more transformational for the City than what we have seen. Downtown is a bigger bust now than ever and the rest of the City is not an exceptional standout when compared with other Sun Belt cities. As noted countless times, magic bullets here don't produce well due to our consistently poor civic leadership that has no cohesive plan for managing the City. It's just one chaotic fire drill after another.
I would feel better about these deals if we actually had our act together and had competent people negotiating in the best interests of the taxpayers. But the City's track record of making one bad deal after another and with no clear vision, as Lake aptly speaks to, doesn't inspire confidence. In this case, not only does the project seem intuitively risky from a financial standpoint but its physical separation from the core of a dead Downtown makes no sense. Without Khan, no thinking person would be prioritizing "Downtown" development around the stadium when so much remains to be done in the CBD. It's "united we stand, divided we fall" bad planning.
As a lifelong Jax resident and lover, it is sad to see so many opportunities squandered by a City with God-given attributes most any City in the world would envy.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 11:48:59 AM
I hear DeFoor opposing the Cumber proposal and supporting Carlucci's because there are "still things that need to be addressed and negotiated." Carlucci also said he might not vote for the bill as-is, and we need to start over, but not necessarily from the beginning. As mad as Lamping was about it, it sounds like unless something changes we might be due for more substantial changes. In which case, someone should be bold enough to propose a referendum. Maybe I'll hop into public comment for the later meeting and bring it up.
If I was a betting man, I'd put all on my chips on the Cumber amendment passing.
Seems like the best compromise between rocking the boat with the Jags and rocking the boat with the taxpayers.
Lori Boyer is clearly trying to steer in the Cumber direction as well without appearing too outwardly to be steering in that direction.
And it's funny, it was hard to hear, but I actually thought Carluccli said the opposite ("I've voted for all the Jags bills in the past, and I'd probably vote for this one too.")
Will need to re-listen.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on November 24, 2020, 11:58:14 AMAs a lifelong Jax resident and lover, it is sad to see so many opportunities squandered by a City with God-given attributes most any City in the world would envy.
This is the saddest part to me.
A lot of effort has gone into sabotaging what should have been an easy layup over the last 25 years.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 24, 2020, 12:31:18 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on November 24, 2020, 11:58:14 AMAs a lifelong Jax resident and lover, it is sad to see so many opportunities squandered by a City with God-given attributes most any City in the world would envy.
This is the saddest part to me.
A lot of effort has gone into sabotaging what should have been an easy layup over the last 25 years.
I second this. Born/raised here and have lived most of my 34 years in Jax. For all its faults, I still believe it's a great place to live. Hence my hesitancy to believe any city-run master plan would ever accomplish its goal. We've been trying Core growth for an eternity. So again, why not try a completely different approach and work with Shad? Just my own opinion obviously.
Not only is Jacksonville a "small market", but when compared with many other small NFL markets, our regional appeal is very small. New Orleans for instance have fans all over the Gulf South. Buffalo have fans all over Western New York and Southern Ontario. The Chiefs have fans all over the Plains. The Raiders are a West Coast brand and the Packers and Colts have a full state to themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags are not even the most popular team in Gainesville or Daytona.
Quote from: minder on November 24, 2020, 01:14:12 PM
Not only is Jacksonville a "small market", but when compared with many other small NFL markets, our regional appeal is very small. New Orleans for instance have fans all over the Gulf South. Buffalo have fans all over Western New York and Southern Ontario. The Chiefs have fans all over the Plains. The Raiders are a West Coast brand and the Packers and Colts have a full state to themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags are not even the most popular team in Gainesville or Daytona.
The most popular team between Gainesville and Daytona is in Gainesville LOL.
The Jags would be a lot more popular if they weren't a dumpster fire year after year.
At the council meeting now. Lamping has proposed changes. This was all I could see over Zoom:
(https://i.imgur.com/sp75eEv.png)
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 20, 2020, 06:14:28 PM
^Phase II of Lot J would be predicated on Cordish and the Jags finding a major office tenant.
Cordish has said they wouldn't do it speculatively.
If Lot J is up to 10 years out, you've gotta think it'd be another five years on top of that before Phase II is potentially a thing.
Speaking of office tenants, and Lot J, and the 33-month minimum for environmental remediation at the Lot J site, it's interesting to note that when Cordish and the Jags pitched Lot J to the JEA for their new headquarters, they gave an estimated timeline of 12.5 months from award to vertical construction.
https://www.jea.com/About/Lot_J_Best_and_Final_Offer/
Either the mayor's confused, or those soil and groundwater samples the Jags took about a year back came back way, way worse than expected.
So, the Jags expect actual remediation to take between 9-12 months.
The x-factor, and the reasons for the 33-month window in the development agreement, is that state approvals will be needed once the remediation is done, and no one is quite sure how long that will take.
Oh my God.
I think Paul Harden just said that there's no financial obligation to exit the lease, as it stands.
Even Rory Diamond looked shocked to hear that.
Lamping came back to say that of course Khan is totally committed, he's invested in the past, the Weavers sold based on that, but... yikes.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 02:50:56 PM
Oh my God.
I think Paul Harden just said that there's no financial obligation to exit the lease, as it stands.
Even Rory Diamond looked shocked to hear that.
Lamping came back to say that of course Khan is totally committed, he's invested in the past, the Weavers sold based on that, but... yikes.
I think COJ should check that. I don't think that's true.
What I do know is true: if they want to exit early, there are some financial metrics they have to prove. This would require them to open the books. They aren't doing that unless the team is in dire straits.
^The public reaction to this is going to be: "OMG! There's nothing stopping the Jags from leaving."
A more measured reaction would be: "There's been nothing legally keeping the Jags in Jacksonville for over a decade, and Shad Khan has not only not moved the team, but he's proposing a huge investment in the sports complex and stadium. He must have been telling Wayne Weaver the truth when he promised to keep the team in Jacksonville."
Quote from: Steve on November 24, 2020, 02:56:28 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 02:50:56 PM
Oh my God.
I think Paul Harden just said that there's no financial obligation to exit the lease, as it stands.
Even Rory Diamond looked shocked to hear that.
Lamping came back to say that of course Khan is totally committed, he's invested in the past, the Weavers sold based on that, but... yikes.
I think COJ should check that. I don't think that's true.
What I do know is true: if they want to exit early, there are some financial metrics they have to prove. This would require them to open the books. They aren't doing that unless the team is in dire straits.
We've got that same lease provision that was discussed on these boards a lot during the recession.
It's triggered if the Jags lose money on a single season.
From there, if they don't hit league median/operate at loss in one of the following two seasons, they are free to leave penalty-free.
Per Harden, this happened in 2001, and possible again in 2012.
And the city is apparently aware and has signed off on it.
Shame that this lease thing is going to overshadow everything going forward when the reality is, when you've got $8 billion, you can afford to break the lease at any time whether the clause has been triggered or not.
P.S. Looking at everything holistically, including both meetings today and who was and wasn't in attendance for each:
I think this thing passes on December 4th.
Wouldn't even be surprised if neither DIA amendment passes.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 24, 2020, 11:13:04 AM
Really great points above, but I think the biggest point that people are missing with this new stadium story is this:
Whether we're 15-1 or 1-15, the Jags are not sustainable long-term in Jacksonville if the only investment we make as a city is in stadium upgrades. Locals take this fact really, really personally, but it's rooted in economic reality. Whether we do the stadium now or later, the other asks are not only going to come, but will need to be publicly subsidized if we wish to remain an NFL franchise.
Viability and sustainability are not terms reflective of how passionate our fanbase is.
Instead, they're reflective of our market size (30th in the NFL), our per capita income (30th in the NFL), and our local economy (29th in local GDP). We're growing as a city, but so are all of the other NFL markets as well (we're 28th in income growth, for example).
When you've got a smaller population base, you can overcome that with a larger local economy, or a larger per capita income.
When you've got a smaller per capital income, you can overcome that with a larger population base.
But when you've got one of the smallest markets, with one of the lowest per capita incomes, and one of the lowest GDPs (and subsequently, smallest corporate presence), there's only so much you can squeeze out of those 8 home games a season. You have to get creative with local revenue beyond those 8 game days to make Jacksonville work as an NFL market.
The Jags need things like the London game (up to 1.8x the ticket revenue of a Jacksonville), Daily's Place, and developments like those proposed at Lot J and the Shipyards to compensate for all of these previously noted market disadvantages, to be able to field a competitive team, and to be able to held accountable by the rest of the NFL franchises that make up the league's revenue share pool (which is why NFL owners need to approve lease extensions).
The salary cap keeps rising and rising, and Jags ticket prices haven't even kept up with inflation over the last 20 years because our market can't bear it. Yes, we've had some really shitty years, but sustainable professional sports markets need to be able to bear good stretches and bad.
It's not greed, it's not personal against the Jacksonville market, it's pure numbers on a balance sheet.
And another reason why all of this should be negotiated as a package.
A new stadium is no good to Jags without the additional revenue sources like Lot J and the Shipyards. And Lot J and the Shipyards are far less useful to the public without the new stadium.
It just genuinely bothers me though how heated and antagonistic this has all become on every level. The Jags need to be more humble, but if people out there were paying attention and really educating themselves about NFL economics, or even watching the Jags State of the Franchise events since Shad Khan bought the team where Lamping has been incredibly transparent about all of this, the conversation would be framed much better.
Do we want to throw all our eggs in one basket to make the necessary investments to help the Jags overcome our market disadvantages, or has the price tag just gotten too high?
Versus:
Greedy billionaire wants to extort passionate fanbase.
Ain't that simple.
I think what Jags fans take issue with is the term "viable." The NFL is a television show, and it's "viable" whether you play it in a billion dollar stadium in the heart of football-crazed Texas, or a cow pasture on the banks of the St. Johns. If it wasn't a money making enterprise without fans in the stands then they wouldn't be playing it without fans in the stands right now.
Khan purchased the Jaguars understanding very well the "challenges" presented by a market like Jacksonville. And even as he has amassed 100 losses faster than all but one owner in NFL history, his $770 million investment is now valued at $2.45 billion. So it's pretty gotdang "viable" around here despite all these "challenges."
What isn't viable for Jacksonville is to continue to subsidize this loser franchise. So far, we have paid for half of Khan's scoreboards, half of Khan's club/pool deck renovation (a major renovation, despite what NFL owners may say), half of Khan's amphitheater, and 100% of the cost of demolishing any competition to Khan's proposed entertainment district. And now Khan wants us to pay for half of his proposed entertainment district, too. All this, but the idea of a stadium lease extension beyond 2030 is a non-starter without further public investment in a "major" stadium renovation. What a joke.
And Khan has the gall to ask us to trust him, because it's not like he can take all of this with him should he ever get the opportunity to move the team to London. Well, that's true, but since we paid for half of all this crap, Khan's financial loss in leaving it all behind accounts for a rounding error in his net worth... which would be greatly augmented by the aforementioned move. Jacksonville, meanwhile, would be left with an empty stadium that's not even properly configured for the one successful event held there each year, and an entertainment district effectively cut off from the CBD by a jail, a coffee factory, acres of contaminated shipyards, a 20-year-old, abandoned, high-rise construction site, and grass lots where our courthouse and festival marketplace once stood. In other words, Khan doesn't lose much by leaving all of his investments behind, but we lose all the value of those investments if the NFL is removed from the equation.
So that's the nut of my issue with Khan and the Jaguars, and I've come a full 180 degrees on this in the past year or two. The NFL is plenty "viable" in Jacksonville, but they're asking us to make as wildly profitable as it is in larger, richer markets without any assurance at all that they plan to stay here beyond 2030.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 24, 2020, 06:57:51 AM
QuoteJaguars president: TIAA Bank Field upgrades needed before lease extension
In an exclusive interview Monday, Lamping responded to numerous inquiries about why the Jaguars have not agreed to extend the lease during discussions with City Council on the Lot J development proposal. Any lease extension would require three-quarters majority approval of NFL owners, and Lamping said there'd be no chance of acceptance without a major stadium renovation. He added that a more vibrant downtown through the Lot J development next to TIAA Bank Field — currently being discussed and soon up for a vote by City Council — also makes that approval more appealing.
Full article: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/24/jacksonville-jaguars-stadium-upgrades-needed-lease-extension-tiaa-bank-field/6400288002/
Here we go again, and again, and again.......
Glad you brought that up heights, I wanted to point something out.
I see why Lamping kept insisting that he didn't want to bring up the stadium or the lease. Because it introduces everyone to the threat that if we don't give them enough money, it might not actually matter what Khan wants. The rest of the NFL could decide to pull out of Jacksonville. It reminds us that it's not this city against one billionaire, it's this city against thirty-two billionaires.
Made a meme for it:
(https://i.imgflip.com/4nq3oo.jpg)
Going back to JBTripper and Ken's points, the challenge at hand here is that it's unclear if we can in fact afford the cost of keeping up with the NFL. We haven't stopped to really think about whether it is worth it to drop this kind of cash in light of our other problems, and given our questionable leadership. At the end of the day, I'm not opposed to the idea of spending this money if it is worth it, but it has to be worth it. For this to be the mouth we open everyone's wallets to feed, we can't afford for it to bite us in the ass later.
Quote from: heights unknown on November 24, 2020, 03:54:26 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 24, 2020, 06:57:51 AM
QuoteJaguars president: TIAA Bank Field upgrades needed before lease extension
In an exclusive interview Monday, Lamping responded to numerous inquiries about why the Jaguars have not agreed to extend the lease during discussions with City Council on the Lot J development proposal. Any lease extension would require three-quarters majority approval of NFL owners, and Lamping said there'd be no chance of acceptance without a major stadium renovation. He added that a more vibrant downtown through the Lot J development next to TIAA Bank Field — currently being discussed and soon up for a vote by City Council — also makes that approval more appealing.
Full article: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/24/jacksonville-jaguars-stadium-upgrades-needed-lease-extension-tiaa-bank-field/6400288002/
Here we go again, and again, and again.......
Good article this morning by the T-U, but just not a fan of all the commentary and hot-takes that have come out it.
If you watched the City Council meeting, it was very respectful and informative. City Council asked some great, tough questions. Zed Smith from Cordish was extremely professional and provided great information about Cordish's portfolio, relationships with other cities, and methods for ensuring minority and small business participation. Mark Lamping and Paul Harden went into exhaustive details about the negotiation process and concessions that have been made. We also got questions answered about environmental remediation, the guy wire relocation, discussions with the Universities of Florida and Georgia about the project, construction phasing to minimize parking disruption, etc.
Just lots of good, objective, unemotional answers coming out this meeting that should help City Council members and the general public decide whether the development agreement, as proposed, should conclude with a vote of No or Yes.
Conversely though, you go on social media, and it's just this toxic shitshow rooted in finger-pointing and name calling.
I commend the fact that the Jaxson hasn't gotten involved.
Using this Lamping article as an example, because you quoted it.
The city council and the public has very rightfully been asking whether a lease extension will be included with the Lot J proposal.
Mark Lamping first responded to this question in the original town hall, but City Council members wanted more information. He responded to it again during the last City Council meeting, but the public wanted more info about why the Jags weren't willing to extend the lease based on Lot J.
So he expanded on it further in the Times-Union, and people genuinely seem to be shocked and outraged by some of his statements.
A lease extension will necessitate stadium upgrades?
The lease extension being tied to stadium upgrades has been something the Jags have been talking about publicly for years, as recently as last year's State of the Franchise that most of the local media was probably even in attendance for.
Here's a quote (source: https://www.jaguars.com/news/sotf-2019-the-stadium-has-to-be-upgraded):
QuoteLamping addressed the issue while speaking to reporters following his on-stage remarks, during which he noted that heat and seating in direct sunlight is a major issue for many fans during early-season games. He added that the issue could be a topic when the city and team begin discussing a new stadium lease, which could happen in the next five years.
Lamping noted during Thursday's presentation that only two NFL teams –Buffalo and Jacksonville – currently play in stadiums that have not been built or undergone in excess of $300 million in major renovations since TIAA Bank Field opened in 1995.
"We have looked at a number of concepts," Lamping said. "I think some of the concepts have been there. I think we have about 10 or 11 years left on our lease here, and I think as part of the lease extension we are going to determine what the stadium solution would be.
A long-term lease extension will require a majority vote from other NFL owners?
This isn't a market-specific bombshell, but rather standard NFL operating procedure that we just saw play out in Las Vegas for their new stadium lease:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-owners-approve-30-year-lease-for-raiders-las-vegas-stadium/
I don't think it's an automatic rubber stamp either. If it was, I don't think you'd see Roger Goodell turning the screws on Buffalo right now on their lease extension (https://footballstadiumdigest.com/2019/06/roger-goodell-offers-support-for-new-buffalo-bills-stadium/). The reason owners care is because 40% of the revenue that TIAA Bank Field generates goes into a pool that is split up between all 31 other owners. And, for context, the Jags-Patriots game two years ago was the highest grossing game in franchise history, but only ranked 161st on the season across the rest of the league.
This isn't hard information to find, it's the type of stuff that the Jags have been surprisingly transparent about post-Weaver, and Lamping was asked, but everyone wants to spin it as the Jags suddenly making veiled threats by dropping new info to try to get Lot J pushed through.
Watching the City Council meeting as well, it seems like the Jags have been less busy playing games, and more busy heavily engaged in one-on-one and group meetings with City Council members in an honest attempt to get their questions answered.
But while Twitter is exploding with unsubstantiated allegations and emotional worst-case takes from hundreds of people, there are a grand total of 47 people on the stream watching this innocuous, civil, constructive City Council meeting where everyone is being courteous and trying their best to figure out if this thing is a good investment for Jacksonville.
Again, I just don't think we're going down the right path attacking the players personally and publicly sowing distrust in their intentions when they're at the table putting up a ton of private investment (as is the city) in efforts to make Jacksonville a long-term home.
Vote the entire thing down if it's not the right investment, but I think the amount of hatred and distrust that the local community is showing toward the Jags right now pushes them away from the city far, far more than the size of our market.
Too much nastiness in the world already in 2020.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 05:18:24 PMGoing back to JBTripper and Ken's points, the challenge at hand here is that it's unclear if we can in fact afford the cost of keeping up with the NFL. We haven't stopped to really think about whether it is worth it to drop this kind of cash in light of our other problems, and given our questionable leadership. At the end of the day, I'm not opposed to the idea of spending this money if it is worth it, but it has to be worth it. For this to be the mouth we open everyone's wallets to feed, we can't afford for it to bite us in the ass later.
Well said, Marcus.
I just spoke at today's council meeting about a referendum. Here's what I said:
QuoteLet me start by highlighting the issue with trust, trust that has been violated by many parties here. The Jaguars haven't been completely honest about what they want. We learned today that all of the NFL's owners have to approve a stadium lease extension, and that remediation and state approvals could take several years. Mr. Lamping proved today that there is a better deal that could be reached. Mayor Curry and his administration have violated our trust with their attempts to sell our public utility out from under us, and the immense suspicion generated by their behavior on these negotiations. Council President Hazouri said himself, he can't trust that Jordan Elsbury is truly working in the interest of taxpayers. When we are talking about the largest public subsidy in this city's history, I think it's time we talk about letting the people decide. Because at the end of the day, your job on City Council is to represent the people, not Shad Khan and the Jaguars or the NFL.
So let me make a proposal. Start with a deal as soon as you can to remediate and prepare the land for all these projects. Get the surface parking lot done. Whatever that takes, get it started right now, so we can finish by late 2023.
In the meantime, the Jaguars should learn to play football. But more importantly, they need to tell us everything they actually want from us. Stadium renovation blueprints after Project Lifetime finishes, actual blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, a real go-ahead from Four Seasons for a hotel here. The COO of Cordish, Mr. Smith, said he doesn't have refined renders of this development, let's get those. We, the city, have to get approval from the National Park Service to move Metro Park, find the money for a signature urban park, because those can be expensive. And support the creation of this new museum district, anchored by MOSH with its new aquarium-style additions and the USS Orleck, I think we have to move the Fire Museum too.
When all of that is planned and public and ready, let's put a referendum on the ballot, in 2022 or 2023, for everything the Jaguars want, the hundreds of millions they want, and a minimum 30-year lease extension that satisfies the team and the NFL. Tell the truth, that this unprecedented expenditure of taxpayer dollars is about whether we can afford an NFL team or not. If the people say yes, go right ahead, get it started, get it done. If we say no, then we've made our bed and we'll have to lay in it. But the people will have decided. And that is what this city needs. Let me be clear that as a young person, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 06:22:25 PM
I just spoke at today's council meeting about a referendum. Here's what I said:
QuoteLet me start by highlighting the issue with trust, trust that has been violated by many parties here. The Jaguars haven't been completely honest about what they want. We learned today that all of the NFL's owners have to approve a stadium lease extension, and that remediation and state approvals could take several years. Mr. Lamping proved today that there is a better deal that could be reached. Mayor Curry and his administration have violated our trust with their attempts to sell our public utility out from under us, and the immense suspicion generated by their behavior on these negotiations. Council President Hazouri said himself, he can't trust that Jordan Elsbury is truly working in the interest of taxpayers. When we are talking about the largest public subsidy in this city's history, I think it's time we talk about letting the people decide. Because at the end of the day, your job on City Council is to represent the people, not Shad Khan and the Jaguars or the NFL.
So let me make a proposal. Start with a deal as soon as you can to remediate and prepare the land for all these projects. Get the surface parking lot done. Whatever that takes, get it started right now, so we can finish by late 2023.
In the meantime, the Jaguars should learn to play football. But more importantly, they need to tell us everything they actually want from us. Stadium renovation blueprints after Project Lifetime finishes, actual blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, a real go-ahead from Four Seasons for a hotel here. The COO of Cordish, Mr. Smith, said he doesn't have refined renders of this development, let's get those. We, the city, have to get approval from the National Park Service to move Metro Park, find the money for a signature urban park, because those can be expensive. And support the creation of this new museum district, anchored by MOSH with its new aquarium-style additions and the USS Orleck, I think we have to move the Fire Museum too.
When all of that is planned and public and ready, let's put a referendum on the ballot, in 2022 or 2023, for everything the Jaguars want, the hundreds of millions they want, and a minimum 30-year lease extension that satisfies the team and the NFL. Tell the truth, that this unprecedented expenditure of taxpayer dollars is about whether we can afford an NFL team or not. If the people say yes, go right ahead, get it started, get it done. If we say no, then we've made our bed and we'll have to lay in it. But the people will have decided. And that is what this city needs. Let me be clear that as a young person, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
Marcus, well said! I hope everyone was listening closely and takes you up on your suggestions as they make much sense. Unfortunately, our City leaders have a record of being adverse to things that make sense. They want to contort issues to confuse voters and diffuse their own responsibilities.
Hope you plan to run for public office soon. We need more leaders like you.
Last thing I'll say before disconnecting for the holiday, just because I feel like I've already beaten my opinion into the ground ;D
If I'm on City Council, I'm rolling the dice and voting a nervous yes.
Coming from a guy who's attended every public meeting, read the development agreement cover to cover, studied other Cordish partnerships, and closely watched everything that's happened with our city's riverfront (reverse) development over the last 15 years. Also coming from a guy with a degree in Economics, soon to be Masters in Advanced Business Analytics, and who wrote an exhaustive book on our city's relationship with professional sports over the last century (necessary disclosure that Shad Khan contributed). I also work closely with the city of driving tourism and forecasting ROI on marketing investment.
Here's why:
A city that has been struggling with riverfront development and attracting investors for over 30 years has somehow found itself in a situation where a Forbes billionaire and a successful international developer want to partner together with the city on a multi-phased Lot J and Shipyards development that will potentially bind the principals here for decades to come. Full project completion is guaranteed in the contract the second that horizontal construction begins. The Jags and Cordish cannot sell the property for at least five years after full construction is complete (which could be several years after the lease expires). Cordish has a long track record of success with similar projects. And it sets the stage for a civil stadium upgrade negotiation and long term extension.
To me, opportunities like this come around maybe once every thirty years for Jacksonville, if that. Especially with how futile our own local efforts have been, I don't want to be the City Councilor who looks back and wonders what if. The risk is large from a taxpayer incentive, but it's also a big gamble from Cordish and the Jags as well. Everyone's got skin in the game, and I personally don't believe there's a universe where a guy who took Edgewood Bakery to court over a few hundred thousand dollars is going to fund Lot J only to abandon the market.
Tough call, but the status quo hasn't worked for a long time in this city, and to me, the potential upsides of this project and this three way relationship works out far outweighs the inherent risk of trying Phase I and seeing what happens.
QuoteWhile Lamping emphasized a stadium renovation is the most critical component to earning NFL owner approval on a lease extension, the Lot J project can't be overlooked in the equation because the league wants a vibrant downtown setting for its franchises.
"NFL owners and league staff, they've been in every city and they know what the [downtown] experience is like," said Lamping. "Nashville is an awesome place. A city like Indianapolis is a great place to visit. Charlotte came into the league at the same time as Jacksonville.
"I think if you did an honest assessment of, what's the state of downtown Charlotte today versus the state of downtown Jacksonville? Which of those two communities have made significant progress over the last 25 years? I think the scales would tilt a little bit toward Charlotte, without question."
Interesting quote by Lamping in the Times-Union (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/24/jacksonville-jaguars-stadium-upgrades-needed-lease-extension-tiaa-bank-field/6400288002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/11/24/jacksonville-jaguars-stadium-upgrades-needed-lease-extension-tiaa-bank-field/6400288002/)) . He acknowledges clearly the short comings of Downtown. He tried to be diplomatic but he should have echoed Khan's more blunt comments a few years ago that Downtown is basically a dead zone. The Mayor needs to know from even his closest friends that he is has not done anything to make Downtown better (he's actually made it worse) on his watch. I wish Lamping would talk about how Khan, Cordish and the Mayor see Lot J benefiting the CBD rather than competing or detracting from it because I don't see it.
If this thing goes through, Cordish deserves the credit as they seem to be the most credible party here given their track record elsewhere. Of course, the same could have been said of Rouse... until they met Jacksonville.
Cumber's resolution passed, 15-4. Reportedly the DIA analysis will be done in time for the Committee of the Whole on December 3rd.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 06:22:25 PM
I just spoke at today's council meeting about a referendum. Here's what I said:
QuoteLet me start by highlighting the issue with trust, trust that has been violated by many parties here. The Jaguars haven't been completely honest about what they want. We learned today that all of the NFL's owners have to approve a stadium lease extension, and that remediation and state approvals could take several years. Mr. Lamping proved today that there is a better deal that could be reached. Mayor Curry and his administration have violated our trust with their attempts to sell our public utility out from under us, and the immense suspicion generated by their behavior on these negotiations. Council President Hazouri said himself, he can't trust that Jordan Elsbury is truly working in the interest of taxpayers. When we are talking about the largest public subsidy in this city's history, I think it's time we talk about letting the people decide. Because at the end of the day, your job on City Council is to represent the people, not Shad Khan and the Jaguars or the NFL.
So let me make a proposal. Start with a deal as soon as you can to remediate and prepare the land for all these projects. Get the surface parking lot done. Whatever that takes, get it started right now, so we can finish by late 2023.
In the meantime, the Jaguars should learn to play football. But more importantly, they need to tell us everything they actually want from us. Stadium renovation blueprints after Project Lifetime finishes, actual blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, a real go-ahead from Four Seasons for a hotel here. The COO of Cordish, Mr. Smith, said he doesn't have refined renders of this development, let's get those. We, the city, have to get approval from the National Park Service to move Metro Park, find the money for a signature urban park, because those can be expensive. And support the creation of this new museum district, anchored by MOSH with its new aquarium-style additions and the USS Orleck, I think we have to move the Fire Museum too.
When all of that is planned and public and ready, let's put a referendum on the ballot, in 2022 or 2023, for everything the Jaguars want, the hundreds of millions they want, and a minimum 30-year lease extension that satisfies the team and the NFL. Tell the truth, that this unprecedented expenditure of taxpayer dollars is about whether we can afford an NFL team or not. If the people say yes, go right ahead, get it started, get it done. If we say no, then we've made our bed and we'll have to lay in it. But the people will have decided. And that is what this city needs. Let me be clear that as a young person, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
What I really like about the idea of a referendum is that it gives the city to demonstrate how much they value or don't value having the Jaguars in town. In the scenario that Shad Khan or the owners decide that to divest from the Jax market, that would be a PR blow to the city. At least if the public votes against the deal and the Jags leave, we are the ones really driving the decision which would be less of a PR hit, especially if we choose to make sizable investments into our city's quality of life.
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on November 24, 2020, 10:47:09 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on November 24, 2020, 06:22:25 PM
I just spoke at today's council meeting about a referendum. Here's what I said:
QuoteLet me start by highlighting the issue with trust, trust that has been violated by many parties here. The Jaguars haven't been completely honest about what they want. We learned today that all of the NFL's owners have to approve a stadium lease extension, and that remediation and state approvals could take several years. Mr. Lamping proved today that there is a better deal that could be reached. Mayor Curry and his administration have violated our trust with their attempts to sell our public utility out from under us, and the immense suspicion generated by their behavior on these negotiations. Council President Hazouri said himself, he can't trust that Jordan Elsbury is truly working in the interest of taxpayers. When we are talking about the largest public subsidy in this city's history, I think it's time we talk about letting the people decide. Because at the end of the day, your job on City Council is to represent the people, not Shad Khan and the Jaguars or the NFL.
So let me make a proposal. Start with a deal as soon as you can to remediate and prepare the land for all these projects. Get the surface parking lot done. Whatever that takes, get it started right now, so we can finish by late 2023.
In the meantime, the Jaguars should learn to play football. But more importantly, they need to tell us everything they actually want from us. Stadium renovation blueprints after Project Lifetime finishes, actual blueprints for Lot J and the Shipyards, a real go-ahead from Four Seasons for a hotel here. The COO of Cordish, Mr. Smith, said he doesn't have refined renders of this development, let's get those. We, the city, have to get approval from the National Park Service to move Metro Park, find the money for a signature urban park, because those can be expensive. And support the creation of this new museum district, anchored by MOSH with its new aquarium-style additions and the USS Orleck, I think we have to move the Fire Museum too.
When all of that is planned and public and ready, let's put a referendum on the ballot, in 2022 or 2023, for everything the Jaguars want, the hundreds of millions they want, and a minimum 30-year lease extension that satisfies the team and the NFL. Tell the truth, that this unprecedented expenditure of taxpayer dollars is about whether we can afford an NFL team or not. If the people say yes, go right ahead, get it started, get it done. If we say no, then we've made our bed and we'll have to lay in it. But the people will have decided. And that is what this city needs. Let me be clear that as a young person, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
What I really like about the idea of a referendum is that it gives the city to demonstrate how much they value or don't value having the Jaguars in town. In the scenario that Shad Khan or the owners decide that to divest from the Jax market, that would be a PR blow to the city. At least if the public votes against the deal and the Jags leave, we are the ones really driving the decision which would be less of a PR hit, especially if we choose to make sizable investments into our city's quality of life.
Do you really think the voters of Duval County, after voting to evict the Jaguars would vote to spend Jaguar-level dollars on infrastructure, especially in the neglected parts of town?
Quote from: Ken_FSU on November 24, 2020, 06:30:56 PM
Last thing I'll say before disconnecting for the holiday, just because I feel like I've already beaten my opinion into the ground ;D
If I'm on City Council, I'm rolling the dice and voting a nervous yes.
Coming from a guy who's attended every public meeting, read the development agreement cover to cover, studied other Cordish partnerships, and closely watched everything that's happened with our city's riverfront (reverse) development over the last 15 years. Also coming from a guy with a degree in Economics, soon to be Masters in Advanced Business Analytics, and who wrote an exhaustive book on our city's relationship with professional sports over the last century (necessary disclosure that Shad Khan contributed). I also work closely with the city of driving tourism and forecasting ROI on marketing investment.
I haven't followed this over the last 24 hours as close as the rest of you. Is there a difference between a "yes" let's find a way to make it work vs. a nervous "yes" for accepting a deal at face value developed by the administration? I think the council would be fools to not dive into the dynamics of what's been proposed. Perhaps there's a better way of getting this stuff off the ground that also provides better protection for the taxpayer and ROI for COJ.
QuoteHere's why:
A city that has been struggling with riverfront development and attracting investors for over 30 years has somehow found itself in a situation where a Forbes billionaire and a successful international developer want to partner together with the city on a multi-phased Lot J and Shipyards development that will potentially bind the principals here for decades to come. Full project completion is guaranteed in the contract the second that horizontal construction begins.
I've never seen what amounts to a phased conceptual master plan being guaranteed, no matter what's in the banking account of who's behind it. Despite what the proposed agreement may or may not say, there will be no hotel if the market isn't viable enough to support it. The other side of this is for Khan's vision to be a success and the Jags to be viable long term, they'll both need a vibrant downtown (ex. the real one that's west of Hogans Creek).
I think we have to forget about Khan's worth and just evaluate the deal for what it is and for what it will take to keep the Jags in town long term (which obviously includes getting Lot J developed). However, nothing proposed to date is a downtown game changer, so we shouldn't view or sell these projects in that light. That will come back to bite the city and the Jags in the ass later down the line.
QuoteThe Jags and Cordish cannot sell the property for at least five years after full construction is complete (which could be several years after the lease expires). Cordish has a long track record of success with similar projects. And it sets the stage for a civil stadium upgrade negotiation and long term extension.
Rouse had a long track record of success as well with their retail centers when the Landing was proposed in the 1980s. As retailing and entertainment trends change with time, we don't know how the Cordish projects will shape up. Ultimately for Rouse, their centers in vibrant downtowns survived and those in smaller markets with dead downtowns did not. However, if Jax wants to be a NFL city, hundreds of millions will be coming from the public's pockets for the foreseeable future....to get a long term extension and even after that. Unless you're a market like NYC or LA, that's part of the cost of having a franchise. Jaxsons need to understand this and decide if they want to be in or out of the game.
QuoteTo me, opportunities like this come around maybe once every thirty years for Jacksonville, if that. Especially with how futile our own local efforts have been, I don't want to be the City Councilor who looks back and wonders what if. The risk is large from a taxpayer incentive, but it's also a big gamble from Cordish and the Jags as well. Everyone's got skin in the game, and I personally don't believe there's a universe where a guy who took Edgewood Bakery to court over a few hundred thousand dollars is going to fund Lot J only to abandon the market.
I'd argue we've seen this opportunity twice within the last five years. Recently in Brooklyn and it's materializing again now just west of City Hall. The difference is the two involve clustering complementing development with more developers (new construction in Brooklyn vs adaptive reuse in the Northbank) and one involves well known Khan and a loved local NFL team.
Lot J - 100,000-square-foot entertainment center with bars and restaurants
- 400 apartments,
- (1) 150- to 250-room hotel
- 75,000 square feet of street-level retail
- 40,000 square feet of Class A office space
Brooklyn (completed over the last five years, under construction and proposed)- 40,000-square-foot food hall with bars and restaurants (Brooklyn Food Hall*)
- 1,048 apartments (220 Riverside, Brooklyn Riverside, Vista Brooklyn, Lofts at Brooklyn)
- (1) 136-room hotel (Residence Inn by Marriott)
- 106,870 square feet of street-level retail (Brooklyn Station, Brooklyn Place, FIS, Vista Brooklyn, 220 Riverside, The Hub*)
- 376,414 square feet of Class A office space (FIS)
I didn't add up the Brooklyn incentives requests or project construction costs, but I'd be highly surprised if they aren't a fraction of the Lot J incentives request.
I point this out just to keep people grounded in their expectations of what Lot J is and what it will mean for downtown Jax. It's a significantly smaller infill development than what we've seen pop up in Brooklyn during the same five years we've seen changing renderings of the Shipyards and Lot J proposals. There's no telling what else will have been proposed in Brooklyn and built by the time the first person orders chicken wings in PBR Jacksonville or chocolate from the second coming of The Fudgery (pretty sure this typical Live! tenant was one of the Landing's original tenants).
Writing this, it sounds crazy that I've actually come around to the point where I'm okay with Lot J happening. It's definitely not a game changer or bringing anymore suburbanites or visitors to town than Brooklyn does today. However, minus the gimmicky gamechanger deja vu talk happening by big supporters again or claims that no one else is doing anything similar in DT (see Brooklyn example), I see true value in maximizing surface parking lots with infill development (regardless of the location in town), a potential economic anchor/job creator for the Eastside's revitalization and it being a major piece for making the Jags stay in Jax more viable in the long term. The main issue is simply making sure the deal is the best for taxpayers.
QuoteTough call, but the status quo hasn't worked for a long time in this city, and to me, the potential upsides of this project and this three way relationship works out far outweighs the inherent risk of trying Phase I and seeing what happens.
Much of the smoke coming from both pro and con positions for this project are exactly the status quo. I'm just finding it hard to believe that we haven't learned anything after the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 00s debacles with the Prime Osborn, Skyway, Landing and County Courthouse.
I don't see any more risk in putting up 400 apartments than what the 308 units going up in Vista Brooklyn for $60 million face. However, I don't think Vista Brooklyn has requested a dime in public money. I also don't believe Baywood is getting incentives for the 136-unit, $10.2 million Residence Inn project under construction. Live! is definitely risky because if we're calling the more centralized and readily accessible Landing a failure with no future other than demolition, Landing 2.0 a mile east will have more question marks of long term viability. Same goes for 40,000 square feet of Class A office space if it is speculative. Without a tenant already in hand, adding a significant amount of multi-level Class A office space in the urban core could be pretty risky in the post Covid landscape.
So hopefully, they can iron out a deal that is acceptable for all parties.
QuoteWhat I really like about the idea of a referendum is that it gives the city to demonstrate how much they value or don't value having the Jaguars in town. In the scenario that Shad Khan or the owners decide that to divest from the Jax market, that would be a PR blow to the city. At least if the public votes against the deal and the Jags leave, we are the ones really driving the decision which would be less of a PR hit, especially if we choose to make sizable investments into our city's quality of life.
This would be deja vu of another similar crossroads the City faced: The reopening of Cecil Field. The Base Closing Commission closed Cecil. (Locals had made the right case to keep it open but were ignored due to powerful politics by Virginia's reps protecting Oceana). Several years later the BCC admitted the error of their ways and backtracked. For the first and only time ever, the BCC voted to reopen Cecil.
One problem: BCC wanted Duval taxpayers to pay the estimated $1 billion to reopen the base that some claimed would bring 12,000 jobs back to Jax. Like Lot J, many balked at the prospect of local taxpayers taking on such a burden while still wanting to welcome the Navy back with all those "instant" jobs. In fairness, the Feds closed the base and the Feds should have paid to reopen it. Given the consternation of making a no-win decision, Peyton and the Council put the decision to the voters in a referendum. The voters overwhelmingly said "thanks" but "no thanks" (their pocketbooks outweighed loving the Navy 8) ) and the City moved on without the base reopening. Peyton and the Council were off the hook and avoided being caught in a crossfire they couldn't win.
Lot J appears to mirror this very situation: a no-win decision by elected officials. I will say there is risk in a referendum as the voters may not fully follow the complexities of this deal. Either side could lose big time but the politicos would be off the hook with their constituents.
A cop-out by elected officials not doing their job well? Yeah. Same reason voters are taking charge of the State constitution with amendments. Legislature doesn't do its job either. Must be something in Florida's drinking water.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on November 24, 2020, 10:09:56 PM
I wish Lamping would talk about how Khan, Cordish and the Mayor see Lot J benefiting the CBD rather than competing or detracting from it because I don't see it.
I think it will only detract if COJ and the DIA take the position of that we need Lot J first for the CBD to be worth equal public investment. Approve Lot J today and it is still six or seven years away from the first components of phase 1 being completed. There's a lot that can be up and running in the CBD by 2027 that will help make Lot J more viable if COJ abruptly throws $233 million in public assistance its way.
QuoteIf this thing goes through, Cordish deserves the credit as they seem to be the most credible party here given their track record elsewhere. Of course, the same could have been said of Rouse... until they met Jacksonville.
Cordish is a solid company and Rouse was one. Rouse was a major contributor in getting people back into the central cities back in the late 70s and 80s. The festival marketplaces that make it to fifty years of age will definitely be designated as National Register historic sites. The Cordish developments are attractive and contribute to the vibrant scenes of the cities they are located in. Alone, they aren't game changers because they are pretty cookie cutter. However, when combined with complementing uses, they help add life into the surrounding community. Now Jacksonville's city hall and it's track record is another animal altogether. Downtown Jax is what it is today, not because of the market, but 100% because of city hall over the last few mayoral administrations.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on November 24, 2020, 11:29:55 PM
QuoteWhat I really like about the idea of a referendum is that it gives the city to demonstrate how much they value or don't value having the Jaguars in town. In the scenario that Shad Khan or the owners decide that to divest from the Jax market, that would be a PR blow to the city. At least if the public votes against the deal and the Jags leave, we are the ones really driving the decision which would be less of a PR hit, especially if we choose to make sizable investments into our city's quality of life.
This would be deja vu of another similar crossroads the City faced: The reopening of Cecil Field. The Base Closing Commission closed Cecil. (Locals had made the right case to keep it open but were ignored due to powerful politics by Virginia's reps protecting Oceana). Several years later the BCC admitted the error of their ways and backtracked. For the first and only time ever, the BCC voted to reopen Cecil.
One problem: BCC wanted Duval taxpayers to pay the estimated $1 billion to reopen the base that some claimed would bring 12,000 jobs back to Jax. Like Lot J, many balked at the prospect of local taxpayers taking on such a burden while still wanting to welcome the Navy back with all those "instant" jobs. In fairness, the Feds closed the base and the Feds should have paid to reopen it. Given the consternation of making a no-win decision, Peyton and the Council put the decision to the voters in a referendum. The voters overwhelmingly said "thanks" but "no thanks" (their pocketbooks outweighed loving the Navy 8) ) and the City moved on without the base reopening. Peyton and the Council were off the hook and avoided being caught in a crossfire they couldn't win.
Lot J appears to mirror this very situation: a no-win decision by elected officials. I will say there is risk in a referendum as the voters may not fully follow the complexities of this deal. Either side could lose big time but the politicos would be off the hook with their constituents.
A cop-out by elected officials not doing their job well? Yeah. Same reason voters are taking charge of the State constitution with amendments. Legislature doesn't do its job either. Must be something in Florida's drinking water.
Speaking of the Cecil referendum, it is pretty striking how that played out racially: https://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/08027.pdf
Quote from: thelakelander on November 24, 2020, 11:23:51 PMLive! is definitely risky because if we're calling the more centralized and readily accessible Landing a failure with no future other than demolition, Landing 2.0 a mile east will have more question marks of long term viability. Same goes for 40,000 square feet of Class A office space if it is speculative. Without a tenant already in hand, adding a significant amount of multi-level Class A office space in the urban core could be pretty risky in the post Covid landscape.
Quick note on the office space specifically.
Something I had heard through the grapevine and posted about maybe a year ago was seemingly confirmed during the meeting today.
Cordish looks to be targeting coworking space for Lot J, rather than a traditional office tenant.
Would be modeled after something like KC Spark or Spark Baltimore (dramatic sizzle reels below).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu4pfxHKYg0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTRSpRtZfmA
With work from home becoming permanent for so many people and so many businesses downsizing office space, I don't hate the idea.
Interesting! 40,000 square feet of co-working space?! That's pretty large considering some of the existing co-working spaces in the area and some of the proposed projects associated nearby like Dennis + Ives. Since DT Jax has a lot more office space than needed, I can also see companies downsizing within buildings all over the place as their leases come up for renewal. I'm not too familiar with the office markets in KC and Baltimore other than they appeared to be a bit healthier when I visited both a couple of years ago. However, I have no data to back that claim. Would this be an example of where public funding is being used on a project that will compete head to head for tenants with private office building owners that aren't getting public assistance? That's another sticky area with some of these newer projects being proposed.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 25, 2020, 12:19:28 AM
Interesting! 40,000 square feet of co-working space?! That's pretty large considering some of the existing co-working spaces in the area and some of the proposed projects associated nearby like Dennis + Ives.
Definitely on the large side, even for Cordish.
Their largest coworking space is currently 30,000 square feet in Baltimore.
I still wouldn't discount Jags business or marketing operations conveniently finding their way into some of the office space either, particularly because a) they're already in cramped quarters at the stadium and b) they could potentially be displaced by construction at the stadium based on how long remediation takes and how negotiations go with everything else.
QuoteWould this be an example of where public funding is being used on a project that will compete head to head for tenants with private office building owners that aren't getting public assistance? That's another sticky area with some of these newer projects being proposed.
100%. Under the development agreement, the office space is considered a part of the "Live! Arena component," so the city would bankroll half of the cost of building the office space and ultimately own it as well (though Cordish would manage it). This is one of the areas of the development agreement that I don't think City Council has fully picked up on. There are some other weird ownership clauses in there as well that have largely flown under the radar (like the giant LED screen and sound system for Live! being considered a 100% city-funded "infrastructure" aspect of the project, rather than being split as a 50/50 line item in the Live! bucket with Cordish).
Similarly, during the meeting, the idea of using the bed tax to fund the $12.5 million completion grant for the hotel was also brought up. Could you imagine being a hotelier and being asked to collect a 6% bed tax from your guests that you would then hand over to the city to subsidize your competition?
Co-working space; old school I am...so...I don't like it.
I still wouldn't discount Jags business or marketing operations conveniently finding their way into some of the office space either, particularly because a) they're already in cramped quarters at the stadium and b) they could potentially be displaced by construction at the stadium based on how long remediation takes and how negotiations go with everything else.
I think this may be "corporate sports business offices" for all of Shads sports businesses. This would be Jags, Fulham and AEW. I think Shad wants a nice office overlooking the stadium for when he is in town to do business. Maybe this, plus I agree during a stadium rebuild the Jags and Gator Bowl will need temporary offices.
I'd prefer the Jags occupy the office as opposed to it stealing a company from an existing privately owned space.
Quote from: acme54321 on November 24, 2020, 01:52:55 PM
Quote from: minder on November 24, 2020, 01:14:12 PM
Not only is Jacksonville a "small market", but when compared with many other small NFL markets, our regional appeal is very small. New Orleans for instance have fans all over the Gulf South. Buffalo have fans all over Western New York and Southern Ontario. The Chiefs have fans all over the Plains. The Raiders are a West Coast brand and the Packers and Colts have a full state to themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags are not even the most popular team in Gainesville or Daytona.
The most popular team between Gainesville and Daytona is in Gainesville LOL.
The Jags would be a lot more popular if they weren't a dumpster fire year after year.
This is another sticking point with many Jags fans, when the organization complains about "market challenges." The most popular team in Gainesville and Daytona is in Gainesville, because that team puts a compelling product on the field more often than once every 20 years. The Raiders, Packers, Bills, Colts and Chiefs OWN their entire regions because they are a winning brands that people want to associate with (or were at some point at at least appear to be striving to that at some point in the future again).
It's not like the Jaguars can't make headway in Brunswick because it's an established Falcons hotbed. Nobody north of Ocala, south of Macon or east of Pensacola has a "home" NFL team. There's no reason a blue-collar team in a blue-collar town can't expand their market and win over fans in these places. Except by losing, consistently, more than any other team in all of professional sports.
So from a fan and Jacksonville taxpayer perspective, it looks like the Jaguars are trying absolutely everything EXCEPT winning at football to be "viable" - big scoreboards, fancy club seating, swimming pools, pet daycare, real estate development, concert series, professional wrestling, playing home games overseas... When they could just try drafting better, or at least signing their good draft picks to a second contract, or even firing the guys responsible for failures in the draft.
So, as has been said quite a few times: the Jaguars would have waaaaaay fewer problems if they weren't always losing, all the damn time.
Quote from: jaxjags on November 25, 2020, 07:03:36 PM
I still wouldn't discount Jags business or marketing operations conveniently finding their way into some of the office space either, particularly because a) they're already in cramped quarters at the stadium and b) they could potentially be displaced by construction at the stadium based on how long remediation takes and how negotiations go with everything else.
I think this may be "corporate sports business offices" for all of Shads sports businesses. This would be Jags, Fulham and AEW. I think Shad wants a nice office overlooking the stadium for when he is in town to do business. Maybe this, plus I agree during a stadium rebuild the Jags and Gator Bowl will need temporary offices.
That is definitely a possibility. Also, you could have the NFL/NFLPA media partners occupy the space. I have heard that rumor over the years.
Quote from: JBTripper on November 27, 2020, 11:51:18 AM
Quote from: acme54321 on November 24, 2020, 01:52:55 PM
Quote from: minder on November 24, 2020, 01:14:12 PM
Not only is Jacksonville a "small market", but when compared with many other small NFL markets, our regional appeal is very small. New Orleans for instance have fans all over the Gulf South. Buffalo have fans all over Western New York and Southern Ontario. The Chiefs have fans all over the Plains. The Raiders are a West Coast brand and the Packers and Colts have a full state to themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags are not even the most popular team in Gainesville or Daytona.
The most popular team between Gainesville and Daytona is in Gainesville LOL.
The Jags would be a lot more popular if they weren't a dumpster fire year after year.
This is another sticking point with many Jags fans, when the organization complains about "market challenges." The most popular team in Gainesville and Daytona is in Gainesville, because that team puts a compelling product on the field more often than once every 20 years. The Raiders, Packers, Bills, Colts and Chiefs OWN their entire regions because they are a winning brands that people want to associate with (or were at some point at at least appear to be striving to that at some point in the future again).
It's not like the Jaguars can't make headway in Brunswick because it's an established Falcons hotbed. Nobody north of Ocala, south of Macon or east of Pensacola has a "home" NFL team. There's no reason a blue-collar team in a blue-collar town can't expand their market and win over fans in these places. Except by losing, consistently, more than any other team in all of professional sports.
So from a fan and Jacksonville taxpayer perspective, it looks like the Jaguars are trying absolutely everything EXCEPT winning at football to be "viable" - big scoreboards, fancy club seating, swimming pools, pet daycare, real estate development, concert series, professional wrestling, playing home games overseas... When they could just try drafting better, or at least signing their good draft picks to a second contract, or even firing the guys responsible for failures in the draft.
UPDATE! The fired someone. Won't be surprised if they ask for public assistance to pay for a new GM.
Well, at least one member of the City Council has common sense, integrity and caring for the taxpayers they are supposed to be representing: Matt Carlucci. Here is his approach to Lot J:
Quote
City Council Finance Committee Chair Matt Carlucci's office released a statement Nov. 30 that if the city does not handle the proposed Lot J mixed-use development, possible TIAA Bank Field upgrades and the lease for the Jacksonville Jaguars correctly, "voters will never forgive us."
While the three issues may appear to be separate, "They are not," Carlucci said in a tweet, according to his office.
"They are tied tightly together and should be negotiated as one deal."....
...In the statement, Carlucci makes five recommendations the city should follow for transparency, accountability and public confidence in the Lot J negotiations:
• Pay attention to the Council Auditor's report and observations.
• Get negotiations out of the back room.
• Let the DIA do its job as mandated by city ordinance.
• Have the DIA review and conduct a market study on viability and sustainability.
• The Downtown Development Review Board should be involved with the architectural design in terms of what the development will look like and how it fits with the greater Downtown area.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/carlucci-says-lot-j-future-stadium-upgrades-and-jaguars-lease-should-be-one-deal (https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/carlucci-says-lot-j-future-stadium-upgrades-and-jaguars-lease-should-be-one-deal)
There is no rational explanation for not checking off the above boxes other than the Council majority being "owned" by the Mayor, Khan and Hardin. And, given it is going to be 3+ years with the remediation of the polluted Lot J, it certainly is questionable why this process is being rushed to completion by year end - at the urging of Mayor Curry - a false deadline clearly created to get this passed before even more questions, and associated resistance, arises. Watch for a JEA replay if it passes too quickly.
That aside, if I were Mr. Khan, knowing that it will likely be 3+ years before construction can begin, I would weigh the immense public value to following Carlucci's plan and tell the Mayor let's do this right - we have the time - and get back on track with a transparent, comprehensive, properly supported and fairly negotiated plan. A plan that covers all the bases for a successful public/private partnership that begins with support of the wider community and allays suspicions of a cram-down on the taxpayers. Note, Mr. Khan, many of those same taxpayers are your customers and, as a successful businessman, I don't need to tell you goodwill goes a long way with keeping those customers.
I certainly thought after the JEA fiasco, our Council members had turned the corner on how to handle these deals and to not be a robotic tool of the Mayor. Looks like it may have been wishful thinking.
Curry's (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1333582997828866048?s=20) screaming on Twitter for City Council to make a deal ASAP.
Interesting note on his part (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1333603238336225280?s=20):
Quote4. Don't bring another Touch Down Jax to the next administration to save the team. It won't work.They did good/ important work that got & secured the team. I was a part of the 2nd version. But those days are gone. Our decision point is now. Go on the record as a yes or a no.
Apparently Khan's going to walk if we don't approve this deal, as-is, right now. Very odd. Nate Monroe's (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1333613686775308291?s=20) wondering why our Mayor would publicly admit (and seemingly celebrate) that Khan has us over a barrel:
QuoteIt is, for sure, a significant revelation and a major reversal of their prior public statements to now know the Jaguars are willing to walk away from Jacksonville over a side deal. It should color the entire way Khan's stewardship of this civic asset is covered and talked about.
Also (https://twitter.com/vitostellino/status/1333621689079525376?s=20) a good point:
QuoteJags should confirm or deny Curry's assertion that the Jags staying is contingent on subsidizing Lot J. Even if true, it was a major PR blunder for Curry to go public. Teams usually threaten to move to get a new stadium, not to get public subsidies for owner's pet project.
Is he saying approve the exact deal his team has negotiated "as is" or not doing so means people don't want the team in Jax? Am I reading into this right? This thing is playing out in a backwards why even I never imagined. Why should any competent taxpayer blindly trust anyone in that room acting on the behalf of the public after the JEA, Berkman II, Landing, Courthouse Annex, DCPS referendum results? Also what is the rush now? It seems like they've taken five long years to get to this point. In those five years, the ask of the public has virtually remained the same but the project's components have shrunk big time. Plus it still seems that there are huge unanswered questions swirling around this thing.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 01, 2020, 12:38:40 AM
Curry's (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1333582997828866048?s=20) screaming on Twitter for City Council to make a deal ASAP.
Interesting note on his part (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1333603238336225280?s=20):
Quote4. Don't bring another Touch Down Jax to the next administration to save the team. It won't work.They did good/ important work that got & secured the team. I was a part of the 2nd version. But those days are gone. Our decision point is now. Go on the record as a yes or a no.
Apparently Khan's going to walk if we don't approve this deal, as-is, right now. Very odd. Nate Monroe's (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1333613686775308291?s=20) wondering why our Mayor would publicly admit (and seemingly celebrate) that Khan has us over a barrel:
QuoteIt is, for sure, a significant revelation and a major reversal of their prior public statements to now know the Jaguars are willing to walk away from Jacksonville over a side deal. It should color the entire way Khan's stewardship of this civic asset is covered and talked about.
Also (https://twitter.com/vitostellino/status/1333621689079525376?s=20) a good point:
QuoteJags should confirm or deny Curry's assertion that the Jags staying is contingent on subsidizing Lot J. Even if true, it was a major PR blunder for Curry to go public. Teams usually threaten to move to get a new stadium, not to get public subsidies for owner's pet project.
This reminds me of the end of the Sell JEA fiasco when Curry took to Twitter to try to speed up the timeline. It screams of desperation.
I wonder what Curry and Lamping/Khan's conversations were like recently.
Part of me wonders if this rush is due to the changes coming to the DoJ in January and potential increase in heat for the JEA scandal. A lot harder to trust a mayor on a Jags deal who may be publicly announced to be under a federal investigation.
Side note, I think the Council is stalling because they would love to find a "deal breaker" reason where no sane person would vote for this thing; something that blows the lid off of it.
So far that hasn't happened. It's a terrible deal, but that's not enough. They need something to absolutely absolve them of their vote, or they're stuck between voting for something very unpopular with taxpayers (and they know is a bad deal), or pissing of the Jags.
To me, the Cumber amendment is/was that plausible deniability for City Council.
When the DIA (presumably) signs off on Lot J tomorrow with some light commentary, City Council can say "Well, the DIA thought it was a good deal" and then wipe their hands clean.
I tell you what though, if I'm the Jags, I'm not happy with Curry this morning.
New legislation has been submitted, the DIA is nearly complete with their review, Thanksgiving was a nice distraction, and even with the public backlash, this thing sure felt like it was cruising to a supermajority vote (14-5 feels like a worst case scenario and I could even see a 16-3) in the last week or so. Caldwell's head was even offered up on a platter as a goodwill gesture.
Why rock the boat like this two days before the initial vote?
Curry's got a point - projects like Lot J are the price of remaining in bed with the NFL - but once again, like everything else involved in this project, the optics are trash and needlessy destroy trust. With the vote seemingly in the bag, why go out there and put words in Shad Khan's mouth that border on extortion?
Even if it's true, you don't Tweet it at 9 PM on a random Monday.
Won't happen, but the Jags would be wise to issue a quick statement today clarifying their stance on what happens if City Council votes no.
Someone posted earlier that the Jags would walk if the deal did not go through now, as is. Are the Jags on record with that position?
Quote from: Papa33 on December 01, 2020, 11:03:11 AM
Someone posted earlier that the Jags would walk if the deal did not go through now, as is. Are the Jags on record with that position?
Curry may be on the record as somewhat implying it, depending on how you intepret a late night barrage of tweets loosely modeled after a Coach Taylor speech from Friday Night Lights mixed with a lecture from the school principal.
I personally didn't read it as a direct threat from the Jags to walk, but I can see how others took it that way.
Jags haven't said anything themselves.
Jax keeps Jaxing.
Breaking from Nate Monroe.
Looks like the DIA review isn't going to be the formality that most assumed.
https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1333809253996523520
Certainly puts Curry's late-night rant into better context.
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/pUeXcg80cO8I8/giphy.gif)
Yep. I absolutely get it.
Here's the thing - the Jags SHOULD have been negotiating with the DIA the entire time as this agreement stands:
- It does not touch the Stadium
- It is completely separate from the Lease
(we all know there is a relationship but both the mayor and the Jags are claiming the above two points)
Suppose the Jags wanted to develop a couple blocks in LaVilla. Would they negotiate with the Mayor's office?
I think the Jags are learning more and more that Lenny Curry plays the role of Artie Piscano from Casino WAY too well.
Says a lot that part of the argument against the infrastructure payment is that DIA doesn't have construction costs or project detail information. I remember the COO of Cordish told Council that he doesn't have detailed renderings. It seems very odd that there's such an insistence on going forward right now, and how there were two years of negotiations, and yet this doesn't really seem like a very firm plan. That plus the breadbox loan says a lot.
It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.
But even then, it really is odd that the Jags even decided to work on ancillary development for the first part of their massive subsidy ask rather than the thing Lamping purportedly says they need in order to secure a lease extension anyway, being the stadium. Of course, I've been supportive of just being upfront about how much they want to stay and letting the city decide if being an NFL town is worth the price of admission, but I digress.
Uh oh (http://link:https://twitter.com/ChrisHongTU/status/1333823019886718979?s=20)?
QuoteThe DIA plans to make changes to the report that was published earlier this morning. No telling what they plan to change.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 01, 2020, 12:27:23 PM
It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.
Exactly! I thought the exact same thing. I wasn't sure at first, but I said, "This is absolutely better than the first one." Admittedly, I assumed after 5 years they'd have MUCH more detail than they do. And I assumed this was a "loan" like any typical loan - Party A gives Party B an amount of money, then Party B pays Party A back that same amount of money, plus an interest rate. Heck, assuming a reasonable term (20 years or less), I'd be fine with 0% interest.
Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2020, 11:56:02 AM
Here's the thing - the Jags SHOULD have been negotiating with the DIA the entire time as this agreement stands:
- It does not touch the Stadium
- It is completely separate from the Lease
(we all know there is a relationship but both the mayor and the Jags are claiming the above two points)
Suppose the Jags wanted to develop a couple blocks in LaVilla. Would they negotiate with the Mayor's office?
I think the Jags are learning more and more that Lenny Curry plays the role of Artie Piscano from Casino WAY too well
If you remember, when the Jags were awarded initial development rights to the Shipyards, and subsequent development rights to the Shipyards and Met Park in the second RFP, both of those negotiations did go through the DIA. They were ultimately a waste of time on everyone's behalf, and the DIA accidentially let the development agreement expire.
Where the mayor's office and Jags really started to collaberate - and where the Jags really fell in love with the idea of shifting development to Lot J and building a "new neighborhood" - was through working together on the Amazon HQ pitch. This is when the Lot J idea first took shape. And on a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if we see aspects of the movable roof from the Amazon proposal incorporated into whatever the new stadium renovations are:
(https://snipboard.io/MomWI9.jpg)
The weird thing to me though, and the reason that I have a hard time not believing that
everyone is lying about why the DIA wasn't involved from the get-go though is because the situation is less of a factor of "We didn't think we were supposed to involve the DIA," and more of a factor of the DIA being consciously cut out from the process at some point.
Here's the mayor's original Lot J announcement from about a year ago where he insisted that the deal would go through the DIA.
https://youtu.be/WWkalLnjQ60?t=56
Here's Curry again, later last year, confirming that the development agreement would go through the DIA:
https://news.wjct.org/post/q-mayor-curry-lot-j-jea-and-jacksonville-landing
Site access for environmental testing late last year had to go through the DIA:
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/10/10/first-step-on-lot-j-to-go-before-dia.html
A very obvious decision was made by someone this year to bypass the DIA on the final deal.
Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2020, 12:42:33 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 01, 2020, 12:27:23 PM
It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.
Exactly! I thought the exact same thing. I wasn't sure at first, but I said, "This is absolutely better than the first one." Admittedly, I assumed after 5 years they'd have MUCH more detail than they do. And I assumed this was a "loan" like any typical loan - Party A gives Party B an amount of money, then Party B pays Party A back that same amount of money, plus an interest rate. Heck, assuming a reasonable term (20 years or less), I'd be fine with 0% interest.
100%.
Split it three ways between the Jags/Cordish/and COJ, and everyone wins.
Everyone briefly championed the new term sheet when it appeared as though it was a three-way split, but then the reality set in that it was potentially an even worse deal for the city (the original up-front cash payout was similar, but the $12.5 million rev grant for the hotel became a cash completion bonus).
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 01, 2020, 12:50:16 PM
Split it three ways between the Jags/Cordish/and COJ, and everyone wins.
Everyone briefly championed the new term sheet when it appeared as though it was a three-way split, but then the reality set in that it was potentially an even worse deal for the city (the original up-front cash payout was similar, but the $12.5 million rev grant for the hotel became a cash completion bonus).
This may have even been the end goal all along, or at least the floor. It's not an uncommon lobbying strategy to ask for much more than you ultimately want, knowing that there will be some give and take and concessions made. The public was going to push back on virtually any major incentive ask from Khan, simply for the optics of a multi-billionaire asking for what's viewed by some as a handout. So it makes sense to ask for more and give the opposition a small win.
The Council and DIA's job at this point should be finding the sweet spot that will keep Khan/Cordish relatively happy and able to develop a decent project, while also not giving away the bank. I was recently involved in a piece of public policy where groups on both sides of a contentious issue were each disappointed with the end result, but not angry. After the meeting, a wise attorney said to me, "that's probably a sign that the right decision was made". Nobody should end up walking away from the final result of Lot J feeling like a king.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 01, 2020, 12:50:16 PM
The weird thing to me though, and the reason that I have a hard time not believing that everyone is lying about why the DIA wasn't involved from the get-go though is because the situation is less of a factor of "We didn't think we were supposed to involve the DIA," and more of a factor of the DIA being consciously cut out from the process at some point.
I mean the fact of the matter is though, the DIA staff could issue the worst report on earth. That doesn't mean that the DIA board (who is appointed by Curry) has to follow it. The Staff could recommend denial, and the board is still within their power to approve it.
Typical Curry heavy handedness with lead by notorious button pusher and bully, Brian Hughes, and support by an aid that is way in over his head and has a history of increasing mistrust. The parallels to JEA just can't be ignored. No transparency, backroom dealing, overbearing pressure, playing favorites, twisting arms, misplaying the cards and, mostly, screwing the taxpayers who elected him to "win" at all costs.
Khan is a smart man, I hope he realizes, now, that Curry is not a reliable partner. He should change how he manages his relationship with our community. While he is a hard nosed businessman, I know he also has heart. He needs to show more of the latter and not totally rely on his minions (Curry, Hardin, Lamping) to always speak for him. Everyone likes to meet the "wizard" behind the curtain once in a while and it would serve Khan well to be a bit more out front in our community. He doesn't need to "move" here, but with a few hours of his income, he could buy a downtown condo and "hit the town" once every few months to show his humanity.
It's never too late to turn the ship around unless you wait until it sinks. Despite Curry's Twitter pronouncements, Khan controls his own fate and he needs to be front and center at this point. He would be far better off following Carlucci's advice and plan than anything Curry tells him to do. Not smart tying your fortunes to a mayor with his less-than-stellar popularity ratings (City Council members should also take note of this!). If Lot J is really good for Jacksonville then Khan should be proud to put all his cards on the table to convince us. Anything less will continue to feed suspicion.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20418593/dia-staff-report_lot-j-comprehensive-development-proposal.pdf
I've skimmed the DIA staff report a bit and they've done a really thorough and high quality analysis in a short time frame, even though they were missing many relevant pieces of info from the developer (that they normally would have requested early in the process). It's obvious that they should have been reviewing this from the start.
Then there's this interesting tidbit in the report:
"Until very recently, we had been advised by legal counsel that property used by the City for other City purposes but within the boundaries of Downtown, did not meet that definition and was not subject to our disposition procedures and review. For several years, the Mayor's office moved forward with negotiations on Lot J, also with that understanding. We have now been advised that several case law interpretations now lead to the conclusion that City-owned and utilized property comes under DIA jurisdiction when it is made available for redevelopment. It is for this reason that 2020-648 contains numerous waivers of Chapter 55 and Chapter 500. Nevertheless, we will provide our estimate of the fair value of land to be donated in lieu of the appraisal required by Ordinance."
A few other interesting pieces in the staff report:
-The minimum office space has been reduced from 40k to 35k square feet, the minimum number of multi-family units has been lowered from 400 units to 350 units, the hotel has been reduced from 150-250 rooms to 120 rooms, surface parking has been reduced from 700 to 600 spaces (likely to reflect decreased demand from a less intense development).
-The development is not going to be required to pay any mobility fees. Those fees being waived, along with the city foregoing future property taxes by keeping the LIVE! land under city ownership are silent incentives not being included in the total incentive package. My hunch is they would have tried to keep the entire development under city ownership for this purpose, but there are plans to ultimately sell off the apartment and hotel uses to separate operators (common move in a large master planned project). The DIA has a nice solution to this "DIA staff would recommend that the office portion of the Live!, other than the office space used for management of the Project, be structured as a separate taxable condominium interest. The City's contribution to the construction cost offsets any feasibility gap for the speculative office space. While the City's contribution will still allow lower than market rents to be charged, the tax revenue generated will narrow the competitive advantage and return some revenue to the City for their investment." This was one of my biggest gripes with the incentive package earlier in the thread. Well done DIA.
-The DIA also believes the construction estimates for the LIVE! Component are on the high end and that Khan/Cordish will be using incentive money for tenant buildouts, "Based on the $100 million budget for this facility, we assume tenant improvements are included and have concern that this will adversely impact the market for other retail space."
-The DIA does not think the developer needs the breadbox loan to develop a viable project based on its financial analysis, "Recommendation: Our analysis of financial feasibility and construction costs, based on the information provided, does not reveal a need for this additional incentive as currently structured. Nevertheless, we understand that this may be non-negotiable from the Developer's perspective, and actual construction and operating numbers might justify this incentive."
-The report calls out the fact that no mention has been made of the financial impacts associated with the project being in the Opportunity Zone (something I harped on earlier in the thread). "No mention is made of value attributed to the fact that the Property is located in Downtown's only Qualified Opportunity Zone. Elsewhere in the City, this designation has been factored into financial feasibility as the sheltered capital gains provide capital at a lower cost for the development."
-I didn't have time to fully go through all of it, but the DIA has a substantial list of protections it recommends adding to the Development Agreement. It would have been absolutely insane for the City to move forward with the Development Agreement without a review by the DIA.
The people of Jacksonville should feel much better about the direction of the project after a professional review by the DIA. Hopefully the DIA board and City Council stand behind them.
Would the Jags still want to do this project if it were approved with the recommendations made by the DIA? From Curry's Twitter fingers, it appears that he's under the opinion that it's approve the deal his administration came up with or no Lot J or Jags in the future.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 01, 2020, 08:57:13 PM
Would the Jags still want to do this project if it were approved with the recommendations made by the DIA? From Curry's Twitter fingers, it appears that he's under the opinion that it's approve the deal his administration came up with or no Lot J or Jags in the future.
Prediction on how the next few days will go, based purely on how things have played out in the last two days and this latest document from the DIA:
The Jags buckle to some (but not all) of the DIA's recommendations, allowing all parties to save face (The DIA, the Jags, City Council, and the mayor).
Upfront public subsidies decrease by, I don't know, $15 to $30 million dollars.
Everyone celebrates having struck a hard deal.
Meanwhile, if you look closely at the document from the DIA, you'll see that sometime here in the last few days, the entire project scope seems to have quietly decreased by around 15%.
Residential -> 400 units to 350 (-13%)
Hotel -> 150 rooms to 120 (-20%)
Office Space -> 40,000 sf to 35,000 (-13%)
Parking -> 700 spots to 600 (-14%)
So we kind of end in the same spot that we started in terms of the city fronting half of the project, only at a slightly smaller number for a slightly less impressive project. The city blows off fireworks to celebrate having stood up for itself and wrestled back tens of millions of dollars, but the reality is, the project scope just shrank and the RF* is virtually identical.
*Relative fleecingQuote-The DIA also believes the construction estimates for the LIVE! Component are on the high end and that Khan/Cordish will be using incentive money for tenant buildouts, "Based on the $100 million budget for this facility, we assume tenant improvements are included and have concern that this will adversely impact the market for other retail space."
What the DIA got wrong here, and what
everyone seems to be confused by (perhaps intentionally by the developer) is that the Live! Component isn't a "facility" by letter of the development agreement.
When we talk about splitting the $100 million cost to build the Live! Component, most people logically conclude that we're talking about the Live! arena pictured in the top right of the project map.
(https://i.postimg.cc/nhGnVPRD/image.png)
When we talk about the Live! Arena and the Live! Component, however, the terms are used interchangeably even though we're actually talking about two totally different things.
What we're
actually splitting the $100 millon tab with Cordish to build is the
entire Live! Component, which is legalese for the above referenced Live! Arena, plus what seems to be all office space and street-level retail
throughout the entire development.
Here's the language in the development agreement.
It's subtle, but also pretty clear.
(https://i.postimg.cc/43PqjC8W/image.png)
Further, based on the above (I don't have Exhibit I to be sure), it sounds like the city may technically own and play landlord for most of the retail space in the development, even at the residential buildings and hotel.
The DIA mentioned the office space not being a separate taxable interest, but based on my reading of the document, I wouldn't be surprised if none of the retail spaces are taxable either.
Personally I think the DIA Board approves it as-is, with no changes. I can't see any of Curry's appointees bucking him.
The report from DIA is good, but it has some soft statements in there to give the DIA board an "out" for approving it anyway.
Would there be any reason to begin environmental remediation of Lot J without a guarantee that something is going to be built?
...the hope of selling it to any other interested master developer?
I imagine there'd be someone interested in the site if it was marketed. That's why I've been suggesting starting that now and giving everyone time to get their houses in order before a vote on the entire package. That way even if people decide to throw in the towel there's at least some kind of out.
Quote from: Steve on December 02, 2020, 08:53:16 AM
Personally I think the DIA Board approves it as-is, with no changes. I can't see any of Curry's appointees bucking him.
The report from DIA is good, but it has some soft statements in there to give the DIA board an "out" for approving it anyway.
The DIA board is only issuing a recommendation to City Council. Even if the DIA board completely ignores the DIA staff recommendations, the City Council can ignore the board's recommendations and back some or all of staff's recommendations.
The beauty of the DIA getting a look at the project, is that Council now has a professional level review of the proposal and development agreement by the DIA staff to evaluate and factor into their decision making process. I'm sure the DIA staff (and City Council) wishes they had more time to do a more in depth analysis, but Council should be able to make a more informed decision than they would have if it hadn't gone to the DIA.
Quote from: Papa33 on December 02, 2020, 08:55:46 AM
Would there be any reason to begin environmental remediation of Lot J without a guarantee that something is going to be built?
While expensive, if the city desires to see development on Lot J and the Shipyards, etc., we'll need to bite the bullet and spend the money to clean them. That part won't change regardless of who ultimately develops these properties.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 02, 2020, 10:00:22 AM
Quote from: Papa33 on December 02, 2020, 08:55:46 AM
Would there be any reason to begin environmental remediation of Lot J without a guarantee that something is going to be built?
While expensive, if the city desires to see development on Lot J and the Shipyards, etc., we'll need to bite the bullet and spend the money to clean them. That part won't change regardless of who ultimately develops these properties.
I agree. Also, if the entire city owned properties are cleaned, then the Live! element would probably move back to the Shipyards property (or at least closer to it) which it where it was originally IIRC. That would be a good thing IMO.
Just philosophically, I have a much easier time justifying cleaning up contaminated property and if still necessary, selling it cheap or at no cost than writing a $233 million check to a multi-billionaire with no means at all to recover very much of that money back. If the project still isn't profitable with no clean up cost and free land, then it probably wouldn't survive anyway.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 02, 2020, 10:00:22 AM
Quote from: Papa33 on December 02, 2020, 08:55:46 AM
Would there be any reason to begin environmental remediation of Lot J without a guarantee that something is going to be built?
While expensive, if the city desires to see development on Lot J and the Shipyards, etc., we'll need to bite the bullet and spend the money to clean them. That part won't change regardless of who ultimately develops these properties.
Perhaps the city could agree to begin remediation immediately while terms are (re)negotiated (assuming Iguana/Cordish are willing. If it will take, by some estimates, 3 years to clean up the site, then theoretically, no development time would be lost?
^ That's what I've been saying. Sign a deal now for remediation and the surface lot work. Get the actual final plans and negotiations for Lot J, the Shipyards, and stadium renovations done, and then hold a final vote (preferably a referendum) to build + lease extensions.
Very good thread (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334162644299898882?s=20) from Nate Monroe and Matt Flowers about something that's been mentioned here before, the near certainty that Curry expected the JEA sale to be a slush fund for the Jaguars, the jail, and a convention center, among whatever projects his buddies wanted.
What was that old adage about not spending money before you have it?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 02, 2020, 10:55:25 AM
^ That's what I've been saying. Sign a deal now for remediation and the surface lot work. Get the actual final plans and negotiations for Lot J, the Shipyards, and stadium renovations done, and then hold a final vote (preferably a referendum) to build + lease extensions.
My apologies marcusnelson.
Maybe Curry realizes (once again) that he's promised something that the City cannot deliver and now needs someone other than himself and his administration when things go south (i.e. Carlucci, Hazouri, DIA)
Yeah, marcuscnelson is right on. They should go ahead and clean the property up. There's more than enough time to review the details of the development deal itself when that part is removed from the equation.
Of COURSE the most important DIA meeting in city history starts with Noone rambling about waterways ;D
It was said that Lot J is estimated to attract an additional 2 to 3 million visitors to the sports district annually. To put that number in context with something that people can better understand locally, the 2009 DVI State of Downtown report estimated that the Landing attracted 4 to 4.5 million visitors annually between 2005 and 2009.
See page 14 in the link: https://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-jun-state-of-downtown-2009-progress-report
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 02, 2020, 11:12:18 AM
Very good thread (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334162644299898882?s=20) from Nate Monroe and Matt Flowers about something that's been mentioned here before, the near certainty that Curry expected the JEA sale to be a slush fund for the Jaguars, the jail, and a convention center, among whatever projects his buddies wanted.
Agree and made this point hundreds of posts back somewhere. Curry should never commit a crime as he would leave enough clues that even Barney Fife would nail him.
Tonight, Nate Monroe dropped one of his best columns ever (that's saying a lot since so many are so good) regarding the immorality and irresponsibility that the City Council will be engaging in if they approve this project as is. Every word has the sharpness of a razor blade. Check it out:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/02/city-councils-lot-j-dilemma/3798022001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/02/city-councils-lot-j-dilemma/3798022001/)
I will say it again: Khan should be big enough to withdraw his request and offer to resubmit it under a new and appropriately transparent process. The ill will created, if he gets his way, will be on par with feelings toward JEA's Zahn (LOL that the names rhyme!). He will win the battle but lose the war.
^Fantastic piece that will go down in the history books if Lot J turns into an anchor around the city's neck.
Just some killer commentary on this thing from all perspectives in the last week from Monroe, Mark Woods, and even Gene Frenette.
Sincerely hope that everyone who appreciates what the Times-Union has done here in the last year is paying attention to the newsroom cuts and voting with their wallets to support quality local journalism.
You can usually tell how close to home it hits by counting how many times the coverage comes up during these City Council and DIA meetings.
On today's meeting, it's hilarious to me that the end result of kicking this thing to the DIA is a deal coming back to Council that's actually WORSE for the city than the deal that was on the table two weeks ago.
The project has quietly shrunken by 15% across almost all components, while the city's contribution has remained exactly the same.
Was fully expecting some small concessions from the Jags in terms of infrastructure or a slight reduction in the breadbox loan, but they held their ground on the major line items, and Mark Lamping repeated his "we're not starting over" bit again for the back row.
A couple things were revealed:
1) The office space will, per Lamping, be primarily occupied by the Jags or their affiliates (Iguana was mentioned, and I've heard that Bold Events will likely expand into the new space as well). The DIA was concerned that the office could cannibalize other office tenants from elsewhere downtown, but seemed entirely unconcerned that taxpayers would be paying half to build out new office space for the folks who were already being given $200 million+ in cash.
2) As Ennis noted above, the developer claims that Lot J will drive up to 3 million additional visitor to the sports complex each year. For context, that's more people than Wrigley Field drew in 2019, and about 75% of Sea World's annual attendance. Thank God for the clown cars, as Lot J is about 8,000 daily parking spots too light to handle that type of a surge. By my math, if these numbers are correct, visitors cannot expect a roughly 19 hour wait to be seated at one of the restaurants.
The whole thing felt like a big charade where the DIA was clearly being forced into something against their will, essentially being asked to greenlight a project without the necessary information to make such a decision. They openly admitted that they had no fucking clue whether the breadbox loan was a good idea or a bad idea.
The giant elephant in the room was the revisions the DIA made mid-day yesterday to soften their recommendations.
Good-faith suggestions from people like Oliver Bakarat were almost unanimously shut down.
Lamping was cranky, red-faced, and more smug than usual.
The DIA at one point was in a loop where they were actively voting to remove their own recommendations.
Drink every time someone gives a new ROI calculation for the project. Drink every time Mark Lamping references the "magic of compounding interest." Drink every time someone says the world "transformational." Drink every time 50 units are lopped off the residential component. Drink every time someone is dismissed from the podium, returns to their seat, and is immediately called back to the podium. Drink every time Matt Carlucci gets caught on an open mic discussing his Thankgiving turkey.
And the whole time, you've got poor Zed Smith from Cordish - clearly a brilliant guy, and for my money, one of the most professional, well-spoken, rational human beings of these proceedings over the last few weeks - sitting there with a polite smile on his face but this look in his eyes like "what have I gotten myself into." But he just keeps smiling, and answering questions about the Eastside, and minority-business involvement, while all around him, numerous local government bodies are infighting, trying to figure out their own rules of operation, and repeatedly referencing him as "Jed."
I'm kinda ready for this thing to be over one way or the other.
And I still think the vote falls somewhere between 14-5 and 16-3.
Whole thing has really demonstrated how badly we need to hit the reset button as a city though.
Pure Mayberry....and we have the audacity to wonder how things have gotten to where they're at with downtown. 100% self sabotage. We can't get out of our own way consistently enough to let the market handle things appropriately.
^ Great take, Ken. I also expect it to pass in the end, but those voting in favor shouldn't win reelection for it. Their job was to defend the citizens who voted for them, and they failed. The fact that it happened amongst a sea of lies and a mysterious rush to wrap things up is an even greater insult.
As for Curry, there's always this... (https://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,36040.msg498816.html#msg498816) assuming someone (or a group of someones) is ready to capitalize on the anger and can afford to verify signatures. I think you could find ~35k people mad enough about this to sign something. You could call his actions any combination of misfeasance, neglect of duty, or incompetence.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 02, 2020, 11:23:33 PM
The whole thing felt like a big charade where the DIA was clearly being forced into something against their will, essentially being asked to greenlight a project without the necessary information to make such a decision. They openly admitted that they had no fucking clue whether the breadbox loan was a good idea or a bad idea.
The giant elephant in the room was the revisions the DIA made mid-day yesterday to soften their recommendations.
Good-faith suggestions from people like Oliver Bakarat were almost unanimously shut down.
Lamping was cranky, red-faced, and more smug than usual.
The DIA at one point was in a loop where they were actively voting to remove their own recommendations.
Drink every time someone gives a new ROI calculation for the project. Drink every time Mark Lamping references the "magic of compounding interest." Drink every time someone says the world "transformational." Drink every time 50 units are lopped off the residential component. Drink every time someone is dismissed from the podium, returns to their seat, and is immediately called back to the podium. Drink every time Matt Carlucci gets caught on an open mic discussing his Thankgiving turkey.
I suppose that's what we get for approving the Cumber bill and rushing a review instead of Carlucci's bill to actually demand negotiations from people who might [gasp] defend the interests of taxpayers.
Quote
And the whole time, you've got poor Zed Smith from Cordish - clearly a brilliant guy, and for my money, one of the most professional, well-spoken, rational human beings of these proceedings over the last few weeks - sitting there with a polite smile on his face but this look in his eyes like "what have I gotten myself into." But he just keeps smiling, and answering questions about the Eastside, and minority-business involvement, while all around him, numerous local government bodies are infighting, trying to figure out their own rules of operation, and repeatedly referencing him as "Jed."
It really is one of the most unfortunate parts of this project. I don't think anyone has any real qualms about Cordish, and they seem to be trying their best. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place watching Curry and the Jaguars rush this mess, while Council squabbles and citizens are enraged by how hundreds of millions seemingly appeared out of thin air for this project. In an alternate reality, perhaps whoever replaced Curry last year would have offered the Landing to Cordish for adaptive reuse or something, while actual professionals talk a Lot J+Stadium+Shipyards deal.
At the end of the day, I imagine Lot J might be successful, but we'll have overspent on a project built on lies that it seems might ultimately harm the rest of downtown, before overspending even more on stadium renovations. Generations of Jaxsons will be saddled with the debt, and even though it might keep the team here, people will look back and ask "we spent nearly a billion dollars, why does Downtown still suck?"
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-recommends-lot-j-approval-as-jaguars-agree-to-changes
QuoteWhole thing has really demonstrated how badly we need to hit the reset button as a city though.
Indeed. If you want to change this city you are going to have to change its leaders. That will be a difficult task that would need to start NOW. Find good people that can't be bought and run get them to run for city council and mayor. Raise money for their campaigns and get other respected leaders in the community to endorse them. Have them run as a team with a written plan for the changes they want to make and the principles that will guide them if elected (transparency, openness, etc.).
Jacksonville is one of the most poorly run cities in the country and that won't change all by itself.
UNF (https://www.unf.edu/uploadedFiles/aa/coas/porl/UNF%20LotJ%20Press%20Release.pdf) put out a poll today. It's... not looking especially good.
Lot J (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334495081253007362?s=20) is getting unpopular. Curry's (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334495081253007362?s=20) approval ratings are sinking. Even stadium renovations are apparently unpopular (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334496846568448000?s=20), which I guess isn't that surprising with how negotiations have gone. Nearly half (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334497782443495434?s=20) are unhappy with previous stadium upgrades. People are mixed (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334499499436355585?s=20) on the importance of an NFL team.
People do seem to like my idea, putting the Jags before a referendum (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334497781646585857?s=20). But all in all, this isn't going well.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 03, 2020, 08:26:52 AM
QuoteWhole thing has really demonstrated how badly we need to hit the reset button as a city though.
Indeed. If you want to change this city you are going to have to change its leaders. That will be a difficult task that would need to start NOW. Find good people that can't be bought and run get them to run for city council and mayor. Raise money for their campaigns and get other respected leaders in the community to endorse them. Have them run as a team with a written plan for the changes they want to make and the principles that will guide them if elected (transparency, openness, etc.).
Jacksonville is one of the most poorly run cities in the country and that won't change all by itself.
I've thought a lot about that, the challenge of recruiting candidates willing to put themselves out in front of everyone, especially for a job that involves taking on big reforms, while maintaining high-minded principles.
Money is really the biggest obstacle, because there's no such thing as altruism in campaign finance. You either need a lot of small donors or a few big donors, and it's hard to find a lot of small donors during an economic downturn (stock market aside). If you sit down with big donors like Rummell or Peyton, you're getting the money because they expect certain results politically.
These are partisan races, so you either have to be in Lenny Curry's party and try to reform things from the inside (doubt) or you're in the other party, which at the state level is a complete disaster and requires a truly immense effort to get enough voters out of bed for an election in March (and possibly also May). It's no small matter.
The city auditor is back (https://twitter.com/DavidJonesTV/status/1334520955222241280?s=20), with more bad news. But it gets even better.
Apparently (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334510993427337219?s=20), by the time you account for having to borrow, and the resulting interest, we're not paying ~$240 million.
We're paying $390 million (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1334511279961235456?s=20).
^The Magic of Compounding Interest®
The council's Lot J special meeting is now taking place. Council members are bickering and insulting each other again:
https://www.news4jax.com/video/news/local/2020/12/03/watch-live-special-jacksonville-city-council-meeting-discussing-lot-j-funding/
Seems that some want to go ahead and vote and not discuss the DIA's recommendations. Others want to discuss more.
Garrett Dennis asked Mark Lamping point-blank whether the Jaguars would leave if Lot J isn't approved this month, and Lamping avoided the question.
However, he did repeat that the full assessment for the stadium ask won't be ready until 2023. Which to me introduces the possibility that they didn't want those negotiations to happen under Curry.
This meeting is just... such a mess.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 03, 2020, 12:09:22 PM
However, he did repeat that the full assessment for the stadium ask won't be ready until 2023. Which to me introduces the possibility that they didn't want those negotiations to happen under Curry.
Not sure I have that same take. Curry hasn't exactly been a shrewd negotiator here. Why WOULDN'T you want them to be under Curry?
What's the deal with Hazouri and Bowman?
Quote from: thelakelander on December 03, 2020, 01:12:57 PM
What's the deal with Hazouri and Bowman?
Bowman works for the Chamber (and future mayoral candidate and Curry friend, Daniel Davis) so you can take it from there.
Looks like Hardin/Lamping are backing up some on more concessions and possibly the timeline for approval. Hazouri is deferring any action today.
If this passes, it will be quite a bit different than what Curry and team negotiated if still not a good deal for taxpayers. Shows that Curry's posture that this was best and a well negotiated deal that was fair to taxpayers and had to be rushed through was way off the mark just like his JEA pronouncements.
As a CPA, Curry is an embarrassment both to his profession and as our mayor.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 03, 2020, 01:48:31 PM
As a CPA, Curry is an embarrassment both to his profession and as our mayor.
What's the CPA equivalent of being disbarred?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 03, 2020, 01:51:43 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 03, 2020, 01:48:31 PM
As a CPA, Curry is an embarrassment both to his profession and as our mayor.
What's the CPA equivalent of being disbarred?
I believe the State Board of Accountancy pulls your license 8).
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 03, 2020, 01:48:31 PM
Looks like Hardin/Lamping are backing up some on more concessions and possibly the timeline for approval. Hazouri is deferring any action today.
If this passes, it will be quite a bit different than what Curry and team negotiated if still not a good deal for taxpayers. Shows that Curry's posture that this was best and a well negotiated deal that was fair to taxpayers and had to be rushed through was way off the mark just like his JEA pronouncements.
As a CPA, Curry is an embarrassment both to his profession and as our mayor.
Even if additional concessions are made, I still think what we're left with is ultimately a worse deal for taxpayers that what we started with.
As one member of the DIA best put it, the project denominator has decreased, but the public numerator hasn't. We're still putting up the same $208 million+ in cash as we were in the beginning, but we're getting a significantly smaller project than what first came to City Council in terms of hotel rooms, residential units, office space, surface parking, and structured parking.
And most of the "concessions" have played out like a children's shell game.
The $65 million grant turned into a $65 million broadbox loan where the Jags heroically agreed to put up the $13 million initial deposit. But the cash remained the same, as the hotel's $12.5 million rev grant was then quietly switched to a $12.5 cash completion bonus.
The Jags agree to parking concessions, but quietly, insfrastructure savings are shifted from being returned to the city to being put in a capital maintenance fund for the developer.
Adding a $1.50 surcharge to hotel rooms doesn't cost the Jags a dime.
Meeting was largely a disgrace AGAIN today, and was almost a mirror image of the meeting two weeks ago that went so badly off the rails. Hazouri and Bowman screaming at each other. Hazouri going wildly off agenda. No one quite sure how procedure was supposed to work.
Whole thing was punctuated by Tommy Hazouri (with the help of Carlucci) blatantly stalling out the clock and making a unilateral decision to defer a vote.
As a resident of this city, the Mayberry act is just embarrassing.
We know where the major pieces of the deal are going to fall.
And we know the consequences of voting either way.
Put on your bigboy pants as a City Council, and vote yes or no, rather than potentially stalling this misery into 2021. If the breadbox loan is a deal-breaker, vote the entire bill down and let the cards fall where they may.
I tell you what though, Tuesday should be one of the most fascinating meetings in City history.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 03, 2020, 02:24:57 PM
Put on your bigboy pants as a City Council, and vote yes or no, rather than potentially stalling this misery into 2021. If the breadbox loan is a deal-breaker, vote the entire bill down and let the cards fall where they may.
I tell you what though, Tuesday should be one of the most fascinating meetings in City history.
Agreed. If that stupid "loan" were to go away, I bet this would pass 19-0. But that's a significant concession by the Jags.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 03, 2020, 01:51:43 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 03, 2020, 01:48:31 PM
As a CPA, Curry is an embarrassment both to his profession and as our mayor.
What's the CPA equivalent of being disbarred?
Unaccounted For.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 03, 2020, 01:12:57 PM
What's the deal with Hazouri and Bowman?
Bowman's a "company man" and kind of prickly, especially when he's not getting his way. Hazouri is one of the few who has both the will and the juice to buck him, so it's not surprising they clash. I have a hard time telling what Bowman's even complaining about, let alone what he's trying to do with these outbursts.
Today, Nate Monroe riffs on the fallacies of the "breadbox loan," which in reality is a grant based on the analysis presented. Another misleading characterization by the Lot J team. Add a new twist, a 6 figure annual management fee paid by the City for a trust account owned by the City but negotiated by the Jags. Go figure.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/04/mayor-lenny-curry-and-jacksonville-jaguars-mislead-lot-j-loan/3825257001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/04/mayor-lenny-curry-and-jacksonville-jaguars-mislead-lot-j-loan/3825257001/)
Just thinking, "The Banks" in Cincinnati looks pretty much almost to a tee what I'd expect for this "game changer." A half-finished cookie cutter project on the cusp of Downtown Cincinnati near the sports/events venues anchored by two large apartment blocks, a mid-upper end hotel and some chain bars/restaurants and a small number of convenience amenities. That looks a lot more like what I am expecting of this than Ballpark Village or Power and Light. A lot for not a lot. Still, beggars cannot be choosers, or something like that....
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 04, 2020, 05:46:02 PM
Today, Nate Monroe rifts on the fallacies of the "breadbox loan," which in reality is a grant based on the analysis presented. Another misleading characterization by the Lot J team. Add a new twist, a 6 figure annual management fee paid by the City for a trust account owned by the City but negotiated by the Jags. Go figure.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/04/mayor-lenny-curry-and-jacksonville-jaguars-mislead-lot-j-loan/3825257001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/04/mayor-lenny-curry-and-jacksonville-jaguars-mislead-lot-j-loan/3825257001/)
Really good stuff.
The more people know about what this project actually comprises and how the deal is actually structured, the better suited they are to make up their mind whether they think it's a good idea.
City Council included.
And going back to the unnecessary doublespeak and bad optics, I almost think the Jags were better off angling the $65 million as a grant from the get go, rather than pretending it's a loan. A $65 million grant to make the project viable for the developer is
probably an easier sell to the public than giving a 50-year, interest-free, faux loan to a Forbes billionaire.
Quote from: landfall on December 04, 2020, 06:39:49 PM
Just thinking, "The Banks" in Cincinnati looks pretty much almost to a tee what I'd expect for this "game changer." A half-finished cookie cutter project on the cusp of Downtown Cincinnati near the sports/events venues anchored by two large apartment blocks, a mid-upper end hotel and some chain bars/restaurants and a small number of convenience amenities. That looks a lot more like what I am expecting of this than Ballpark Village or Power and Light. A lot for not a lot. Still, beggars cannot be choosers, or something like that....
Although closer to the heart of Downtown Cincinnati, The Banks is a good larger example of the Lot J vision. Does anyone consider it to be a game changer?
^Similar vision, but gone about in a much better way.
Master planned with an enormous amount of input from the public, urban designers, and city government.
Funded through a tax increase approved via voter referendum, and tied to a larger plan to replace the football and baseball stadiums.
Executed in multiple phases, driven by market demand, in cooperation with multiple private developers chosen through a consistent RFP process.
Even this more realistic example is multiple times the scale of the latest proposal at Lot J.
Here's the master development plan for the Banks. What's built so far is larger than Lot J:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Miscellaneous/Miscellaneous/i-XpMrHZH/0/8b202bb8/XL/the-banks-master-plan-XL.jpg)
Pictures of the Banks from a 2012 trip I took to Cincinnati:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-nnVZsdZ/1/X2/i-nnVZsdZ-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-6zMxSpT/1/X2/i-6zMxSpT-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-PBhp7Pd/1/X2/i-PBhp7Pd-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-7vr4shj/1/X2/i-7vr4shj-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-vWkHD3P/1/X2/i-vWkHD3P-X2.jpg)
We've not written about Lot J, but a few things I've noticed that I don't think are getting the coverage they deserve:
- The Jags negotiated this deal with the Mayor and his staff. If it's a bad deal (it is) it's because Curry and Brian Hughes were totally outnegotiated by the Jags.
- The rollout of this thing is a disaster, and should be a bigger story than it is. It's been a master class in what not to do. The mayor and Hughes made absolutely no effort to get buy-in from taxpayers, and they evidently didn't put sufficient work in with much of City Council. Now it's biting them in the ass, and even still the mayor's promotion of his own deal has been largely limited to a few apocalyptic comments and tweets. Hughes and co brand themselves as the world's greatest pollsters, PR gurus and spinmeisters who never stop winning. It's interesting that they have continued to fair so poorly with this.
- As unfortunate as it is, City Council doesn't really have a way to go back and renegotiate this bum deal. They can demand some changes, but at the end of the day, they're just voting up or down on a version of a deal that will at most be modestly altered.
- Let's be real: if City Council shoots this down, it's very likely that the Jaguars start looking elsewhere. It sucks to say it, but that's what this deal really is: a step toward keeping the Jags.
- IThe Jags should have known such an obviously lopsided deal would get pushback, but at the end of the day, it was the mayor who negotiated our side of it. Buck stops there.
Would it be in the Jaguars' long-term interest for them to request the current deal be pulled, and the City proceed with remediation of Lot J while the deal is renegotiated, including Metro Park and Stadium Renovations? By treating this horrible Lot J deal as a stand-alone, are they poisoning the water for seeking City funds for Metro Park / Four Seasons and the Stadium as future separate deals?
Or, do they think they have the City over such a barrel that they can get away with anything?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 04, 2020, 11:05:16 PM
Would it be in the Jaguars' long-term interest for them to request the current deal be pulled, and the City proceed with remediation of Lot J while the deal is renegotiated, including Metro Park and Stadium Renovations? By treating this horrible Lot J deal as a stand-alone, are they poisoning the water for seeking City funds for Metro Park / Four Seasons and the Stadium as future separate deals?
Or, do they think they have the City over such a barrel that they can get away with anything?
I mean, there's a lot that goes into developing these deals, and they'd have to throw it away and start from scratch. I wouldn't want to do that if I were them. What I would do, though, is start negotiating all the future deals in a package, and do it transparently.
Quote from: Tacachale on December 04, 2020, 10:49:52 PM
We've not written about Lot J, but a few things I've noticed that I don't think are getting the coverage they deserve:
- The Jags negotiated this deal with the Mayor and his staff. If it's a bad deal (it is) it's because Curry and Brian Hughes were totally outnegotiated by the Jags.
- The rollout of this thing is a disaster, and should be a bigger story than it is. It's been a master class in what not to do. The mayor and Hughes made absolutely no effort to get buy-in from taxpayers, and they evidently didn't put sufficient work in with much of City Council. Now it's biting them in the ass, and even still the mayor's promotion of his own deal has been largely limited to a few apocalyptic comments and tweets. Hughes and co brand themselves as the world's greatest pollsters, PR gurus and spinmeisters who never stop winning. It's interesting that they have continued to fair so poorly with this.
- As unfortunate as it is, City Council doesn't really have a way to go back and renegotiate this bum deal. They can demand some changes, but at the end of the day, they're just voting up or down on a version of a deal that will at most be modestly altered.
- Let's be real: if City Council shoots this down, it's very likely that the Jaguars start looking elsewhere. It sucks to say it, but that's what this deal really is: a step toward keeping the Jags.
- IThe Jags should have known such an obviously lopsided deal would get pushback, but at the end of the day, it was the mayor who negotiated our side of it. Buck stops there.
Totally agree with all of the above, Bill.
It's why I support Lot J, even though I absolutely hate almost everything about the way it's gone down.
With the power and wealth of the NFL and Shad Khan, we're not going to win a game of chicken.
The Jags have poured years into this deal, and unfortunately, the mayor has been negotiating in their interests, rather than the taxpayers. I just don't see a universe where we can ask the Jags and Cordish to restart the deal from ground zero and not have them say thanks but no thanks and walk.
It's a classic prisoner's dilemna situation. And it's also why I just want to see this damn thing voted on. We all know we're getting fucked. We all seem to know there's no real way around getting fucked if we want to remain in the NFL game because Curry has already dragged the Jags along for two years. Might as well just get it over with and move on to figuring out what we can learn to prevent us from ending up in the same situation again next time.
If for no other reason than witnessing how this all went down, I like to think that the Jags will make every effort possible to go through the proper channels next time, in a much more transparent way. And I think they realize they're not going to get the same sweetheart deal on future non-stadium development agreements.
I will also say that our stadium lease doesn't expire for almost a decade, and I don't necessarily agree with some people's assertions that we should be in a rush to pour $350 million in public money instead into stadium enhancements when that spend can be kicked down the road to nearly the end of the decade. Particularly when it's the ancillary local-revenue drivers like Daily's Place and Lot J that the Jags are most concerned about right now.
All much-warranted commentary about how bad the deal is for the city aside, if we HAVE to spend $200 million in cash now as the price of remaining the Jags' long-term choice for host cities, I'd rather it go into a 365-day a year use like Lot J than prematurely breaking the bank on stadium improvements that are probably gonna have a worse ROI than Lot J.
Here's my BIGGEST concern though right now.
Those with commercial real estate backgrounds feel free to correct me, but I just do not know where the $460 million for this development is going. If we're going to put such an insane amount of money up as a city, I'd love to see us make sure we're getting the absolute most for that spend that we can.
Just looking at the renders, the price seems pretty crazy for what we're actually walking away with.
Let's do a little tale of the tape.
Here's the 8-acre project, which is estimated by the developer to cost $457 million, and comprises a minimum of 350 residential units, 120 hotel rooms, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of Live! retail (plus the event space).
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/310838_standard.jpeg)
For comparison, let's look at something like Midtown Tampa which is currently under development.
The project is about 10% more expensive ($500 million), almost three times as large (22 acres), and comprises 10 buildings, inclusive of 400 apartments, two office towers, a 52,000 square foot Whole Foods, a 230 room hotel, a 22,000 square foot REI, tons of restaurants, a 1,200 space parking garage, green space and recreational trails, etc.
How is it possible that Tampa is building a 2-million square foot development that's three times as large, with six more buildings, two office towers, a high-end grocery story, twice the hotel rooms, twice the restaurtants, and twice the parking garage for 10% more?
(https://www.wdgarch.com/resources/projectsImages/1545847539Tamp-Midtown-2.jpg)
Another random example that I see when I'm in Nashville is Fifth+Broadway.
It's made up of a 34-story apartment tower, 200,000 square feet of retail space, nine restaurants, a massive food hall, a 372,000 square foot office tower, the new National Museum of African American Music, and three parking garages comprising 2,140 spots. And the entire development is $30 million cheaper than the 350 mid-rise apartments, 120 room hotel, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of retail at Lot J?
(https://www.greshamsmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Image1-web-1.jpg)
It just doesn't really compute.
Even if you assume that $20 million in remediation costs (on the very highest end) are exclusive to our development, I just do not see why this thing can't be done for $300 million, OR why we're not getting a lot more bang for our buck here.
Feels like the Phase II office tower + garage, or the Phase III residential being discussed for the Fairgrounds should be able to fit within a nearly half-billion dollar spend.
What am I missing here?
Is it ALL tenant build out driving this cost?
Is there an example of a similar project in another city costing $457 million dollars?
Should four residential, hotel, and retail buildings cost the same as 9 Daily's Places?
Give them the check to save the team, but with a subsequent $100 million ask coming for whatever happens at Met Park, I really hope we make sure that we get our money's worth for this Lot J spend.
^
QuoteHere's the 8-acre project, which is estimated by the developer to cost $457 million, and comprises a minimum of 350 residential units, 120 hotel rooms, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of Live! retail (plus the event space).
Here is another way to approach the costs the Jags are asking for:
Based on recent apartment sales, if you figure a luxury apartment in Jax cost at the higher end (sans land) $200,000/unit x 350 units, that's $70 million. Figure the same for the 120 hotel rooms just to be generous. That's another $24 million. Figure a generous $200/sf for the office space, that's $7 million. Figure another generous $500/sf for the LIVE! and you get another $37.5 million. Add it up and you have $138.5 million, sans land. Pile on another 25% of the total (about anther $35 million) for outdoor amenities and some bells and whistles I might be overlooking. That brings you to $173.5 million in construction costs. Round it up another $27 million for garages and some more fantasy add-ons and you are at $200 million. Add the land which DIA valued at $12 million. This, $212 million, is the absolute most this project should be worth. It's not even half of the number the Jags are putting out there.
Go on and add $75 +/- million for the maximum clean up and infrastructure estimates (per DIA report and after subtracting the garages included above), and you are at $287 million, $170 million or so less than the Jag's ask. And this is with some numbers per above that appear to be far more generous than even DIA's cost estimates.
Split the $287 million 50/50 with the City and the City would be in for $144 million tops vs. $245 million from the City now being thrown around with the addition of the land - nets a $101 million over-ask!
Tell me what I am missing.
You're missing that they're likely pocketing millions in cash straight up. That's the biggest revenue driver here, not a little Landing, Jr. with the next PBR [insert name] or Yard House. There's a public dollar figure here that hasn't changed but all the flashy tower renderings (many here said were fool's gold) have been replaced with a smaller Landing next to other uses that are more equivalent to a Doro and Residence Inn by Marriott in Brooklyn. This isn't about a vibrant downtown either, because you can get more bang for your vibrancy buck spreading that around the actual downtown. However, that means that cash goes to different pockets. I really wish they could be transparent with this.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 04, 2020, 11:59:54 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on December 04, 2020, 10:49:52 PM
We've not written about Lot J, but a few things I've noticed that I don't think are getting the coverage they deserve:
- The Jags negotiated this deal with the Mayor and his staff. If it's a bad deal (it is) it's because Curry and Brian Hughes were totally outnegotiated by the Jags.
- The rollout of this thing is a disaster, and should be a bigger story than it is. It's been a master class in what not to do. The mayor and Hughes made absolutely no effort to get buy-in from taxpayers, and they evidently didn't put sufficient work in with much of City Council. Now it's biting them in the ass, and even still the mayor's promotion of his own deal has been largely limited to a few apocalyptic comments and tweets. Hughes and co brand themselves as the world's greatest pollsters, PR gurus and spinmeisters who never stop winning. It's interesting that they have continued to fair so poorly with this.
- As unfortunate as it is, City Council doesn't really have a way to go back and renegotiate this bum deal. They can demand some changes, but at the end of the day, they're just voting up or down on a version of a deal that will at most be modestly altered.
- Let's be real: if City Council shoots this down, it's very likely that the Jaguars start looking elsewhere. It sucks to say it, but that's what this deal really is: a step toward keeping the Jags.
- IThe Jags should have known such an obviously lopsided deal would get pushback, but at the end of the day, it was the mayor who negotiated our side of it. Buck stops there.
Totally agree with all of the above, Bill.
It's why I support Lot J, even though I absolutely hate almost everything about the way it's gone down.
With the power and wealth of the NFL and Shad Khan, we're not going to win a game of chicken.
The Jags have poured years into this deal, and unfortunately, the mayor has been negotiating in their interests, rather than the taxpayers. I just don't see a universe where we can ask the Jags and Cordish to restart the deal from ground zero and not have them say thanks but no thanks and walk.
It's a classic prisoner's dilemna situation. And it's also why I just want to see this damn thing voted on. We all know we're getting fucked. We all seem to know there's no real way around getting fucked if we want to remain in the NFL game because Curry has already dragged the Jags along for two years. Might as well just get it over with and move on to figuring out what we can learn to prevent us from ending up in the same situation again next time.
If for no other reason than witnessing how this all went down, I like to think that the Jags will make every effort possible to go through the proper channels next time, in a much more transparent way. And I think they realize they're not going to get the same sweetheart deal on future non-stadium development agreements.
I will also say that our stadium lease doesn't expire for almost a decade, and I don't necessarily agree with some people's assertions that we should be in a rush to pour $350 million in public money instead into stadium enhancements when that spend can be kicked down the road to nearly the end of the decade. Particularly when it's the ancillary local-revenue drivers like Daily's Place and Lot J that the Jags are most concerned about right now.
All much-warranted commentary about how bad the deal is for the city aside, if we HAVE to spend $200 million in cash now as the price of remaining the Jags' long-term choice for host cities, I'd rather it go into a 365-day a year use like Lot J than prematurely breaking the bank on stadium improvements that are probably gonna have a worse ROI than Lot J.
Here's my BIGGEST concern though right now.
Those with commercial real estate backgrounds feel free to correct me, but I just do not know where the $460 million for this development is going. If we're going to put such an insane amount of money up as a city, I'd love to see us make sure we're getting the absolute most for that spend that we can.
Just looking at the renders, the price seems pretty crazy for what we're actually walking away with.
Let's do a little tale of the tape.
Here's the 8-acre project, which is estimated by the developer to cost $457 million, and comprises a minimum of 350 residential units, 120 hotel rooms, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of Live! retail (plus the event space).
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/310838_standard.jpeg)
For comparison, let's look at something like Midtown Tampa which is currently under development.
The project is about 10% more expensive ($500 million), almost three times as large (22 acres), and comprises 10 buildings, inclusive of 400 apartments, two office towers, a 52,000 square foot Whole Foods, a 230 room hotel, a 22,000 square foot REI, tons of restaurants, a 1,200 space parking garage, green space and recreational trails, etc.
How is it possible that Tampa is building a 2-million square foot development that's three times as large, with six more buildings, two office towers, a high-end grocery story, twice the hotel rooms, twice the restaurtants, and twice the parking garage for 10% more?
(https://www.wdgarch.com/resources/projectsImages/1545847539Tamp-Midtown-2.jpg)
Another random example that I see when I'm in Nashville is Fifth+Broadway.
It's made up of a 34-story apartment tower, 200,000 square feet of retail space, nine restaurants, a massive food hall, a 372,000 square foot office tower, the new National Museum of African American Music, and three parking garages comprising 2,140 spots. And the entire development is $30 million cheaper than the 350 mid-rise apartments, 120 room hotel, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of retail at Lot J?
(https://www.greshamsmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Image1-web-1.jpg)
It just doesn't really compute.
Even if you assume that $20 million in remediation costs (on the very highest end) are exclusive to our development, I just do not see why this thing can't be done for $300 million, OR why we're not getting a lot more bang for our buck here.
Feels like the Phase II office tower + garage, or the Phase III residential being discussed for the Fairgrounds should be able to fit within a nearly half-billion dollar spend.
What am I missing here?
Is it ALL tenant build out driving this cost?
Is there an example of a similar project in another city costing $457 million dollars?
Should four residential, hotel, and retail buildings cost the same as 9 Daily's Places?
Give them the check to save the team, but with a subsequent $100 million ask coming for whatever happens at Met Park, I really hope we make sure that we get our money's worth for this Lot J spend.
Some good analysis there. Not only do those projects get way more value for money, I'd also be very surprised the Lot J tenant mix remotely matches up. They have Shake Shack and Whole Foods. Where as I'm expecting Lot J to be more along the lines of Miller's Ale House and Jimmy John's, businesses which line just about every suburban strip mall and retail center in North East Florida. Of course the point Lamping will make is that these venues will provide dining and entertainment options for people attending events or living in this area. I'm hardly confident though in their ability to attract eye opening tenants given its going to be the Jags and Khans other various ops filling the office space now and they failed to attract an employer from the suburbs or elsewhere to move, hence the continual downsizing of the project to what it is amounting to currently.
QuoteIt's made up of a 34-story apartment tower, 200,000 square feet of retail space, nine restaurants, a massive food hall, a 372,000 square foot office tower, the new National Museum of African American Music, and three parking garages comprising 2,140 spots. And the entire development is $30 million cheaper than the 350 mid-rise apartments, 120 room hotel, 35,000 square feet of office space, and 75,000 of retail at Lot J?
I bet they had to pay something for the land as well, most likely a very large sum.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 04:57:32 AM
You're missing that they're likely pocketing millions in cash straight up. That's the biggest revenue driver here, not a little Landing, Jr. with the next PBR [insert name] or Yard House. There's a public dollar figure here that hasn't changed but all the flashy tower renderings (many here said were fool's gold) have been replaced with a smaller Landing next to other uses that are more equivalent to a Doro and Residence Inn by Marriott in Brooklyn. This isn't about a vibrant downtown either, because you can get more bang for your vibrancy buck spreading that around the actual downtown. However, that means that cash goes to different pockets. I really wish they could be transparent with this.
I agree 100% but the reason they can't be more transparent is because then more people would see the numbers don't add up and the taxpayers are paying the full tab for this project. Khan and Lamping are con men pure and simple, and Curry and his henchmen are carrying their water.
Quote from: landfall on December 05, 2020, 08:17:06 AM
Some good analysis there. Not only do those projects get way more value for money, I'd also be very surprised the Lot J tenant mix remotely matches up. They have Shake Shack and Whole Foods. Where as I'm expecting Lot J to be more along the lines of Miller's Ale House and Jimmy John's, businesses which line just about every suburban strip mall and retail center in North East Florida. Of course the point Lamping will make is that these venues will provide dining and entertainment options for people attending events or living in this area. I'm hardly confident though in their ability to attract eye opening tenants given its going to be the Jags and Khans other various ops filling the office space now and they failed to attract an employer from the suburbs or elsewhere to move, hence the continual downsizing of the project to what it is amounting to currently.
Lot J's tenants will very well likely be largely made of chains, restaurants, nightclub and bar concepts featured in most other Cordish Live! projects. Live!'s don't have Shake Shack and Whole Foods. Supermarkets aren't a part of the concept. Here are the type of tenants likely headed to Lot J:
- Some sort of tavern and beer garden (probably Miller's)
- PBR [insert local name]
- Sports & Social [insert name]
- [insert name] Backyard
You can see the list of tenants in several other Live! venues here:
https://www.powerplantlive.com/eat-and-drink
https://texas-live.com/eat-and-drink
https://www.xfinitylive.com/eat-and-drink
https://www.stlballparkvillage.com/eat-and-drink
https://www.4thstlive.com/eat-and-drink
It's just really interesting to see everything unfold in this manner. It really reeks of incompetence on the city's part to see this is where we started out, with the mayor all smug in the news talking all about getting tower cranes up and changing the skyline....
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-tswqKcg/0/bcb317fc/L/Lot%20J%20-%201-L.png)
to this, a smaller version of what immediately surrounds Unity Plaza......but for more public subsidies than originally anticipated for what was pushed in the rendering above. So this is clearly a desire to funnel millions into the Jag's pockets to help sustain them. When this all breaks down, the public investment probably pays 100% to build what's proposed at Lot J.
(https://news.wjct.org/sites/wjct/files/styles/x_large/public/202010/newLotJrendering.jpg)
I agree with the other posts that it would likely be easier to stomach if rolled out in a different manner and if the team working on the city's behalf were qualified to negotiate these types of deals. It's a tough pill to swallow but this is why local elections are really important. Hopefully, the general public can learn from the last couple of years from the clownsmanship surrounding the JEA sale, the DCPS referendum, and this Lot J thing and apply the lessons learned to the next local election.
So it sounds like we're coming around to the final stage of grief here, which I guess is fair. The fact that it feels like we can't really do much for a better deal is absolutely infuriating, especially when we're proving that taxpayers are just getting absolutely screwed on it. It's just... what a shame.
Under no circumstance have I ever believed this project would not be approved by council. I always thought that the market could not support what they were showing in the early renderings. I am surprised at the unravelling of how bad taxpayers are blatantly getting screwed on this one though. Value engineering generally happens much later down the road. It's shrunk tremendously in the conceptual stage, yet the incentives requested have not. That part is very shocking at this stage in the game.
Anytime you are dealing with the NFL, you KNOW you are dealing with very experienced and tough negotiators. When you think you have a deal, they ask for still more or agree to provide less than before. It was no different when Ed Austin was negotiating to get the team in the '90s. Even so, I can't help but fully believe that the NFL never had bigger pushovers to deal with than Curry and co.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 04:57:32 AM
You're missing that they're likely pocketing millions in cash straight up.
As a positive, optimistic guy who likes to assume the best of people and give the benefit of the doubt wherever possible, I have a hard time believing that a billionaire would knowingly fleece a cash-strapped small market out of tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars during a global pandemic. Drive a hard bargain and demand a 50/50 split on a private development? Sure. But falsely sell a $460 million project to the public, with the intent to build for $300 million and pocket the difference? I have a harder time with that.
That said, it's really hard to ignore the fact that the numbers just don't seem to add up.
Even the giant, flashy renders includes in the original expanded scope didn't add up.
Here's the project description from the ORIGINAL term sheet, before the project was dramatically scaled down:
(https://snipboard.io/te05Sy.jpg)
Looking at each component and comparing it with a comparable Cordish development, here's what we get:
- Live Entertainment District, similar to Philadelphia, St. Louis, or Arlington (Xfinity Live in Philadelphia, cost $60 million)*
- Luxury 300-Unit Hight Rise Residential similar to Kansas City and St. Louis (OneLight in Kansas City and One Cardinal Way in St. Louis both cost $105 million)**
- 200-Room Boutique Hotel ($65 million for Live by Loews in St. Louis)***
- 120k of Class A Office Space ($80 million for Cordish's 200k square foot office tower in Philadelphia, so let's generously say $65 million)****
*https://www.designcollective.com/portfolio/project/the-cordish-companies--xfinity-live/
**https://www.kansascity.com/news/business/development/article48607905.html
***https://ballparkdigest.com/2018/07/12/work-begins-on-live-by-loews-at-st-louiss-ballpark-village-expansion
****https://cordish.com/portfolio/pattison-place
So, looking at the original development, and assuming the residential component is a glass high-rise residential tower ($105 million), the office is a glass, 120k tower ($65 million), the hotel is an upscale 200 room Live by Loews ($65 million), and the Live! component is similar to Xfinity Live! in Philadelphia ($60 million), that puts us at a total of $295 million for the fully pimped out shiny glass renders presented back in 2018.
And that still leaves $155 million unaccounted for in the $450 million project cost.
All of the above projects have parking elements included in their cost, so I'm not adding that in. but even if we factored in worst case scenarios for other remediation and infrastructure, we're still $100 million light for the flashy renders.
But now, the scope has been reduced even further, and we're now down to a minimum of 350 mid-rise residential units (e.g. no shiny high-rise tower), 40,000k of office space built into the other buildings (e.g. axe the 120,000 k glass office tower), and 120 hotel rooms (compared to 200 in the above estimate).
To Lake's point, and to something that Mike pointed out a while back, Cordish has set retail and restaurant partners they work with, and build-out of their spaces is included in construction costs, so the numbers are going to look a bit larger than other non-Cordish developments. But that should have been included with the above costs from similar developments in other cities as well.
When you factor in the recent reduction in scope though, really does feel like a good $150 million of that $450 million project is falling into a hole somewhere. Even if you account for increases in construction costs in the last few years.
And it is rather interesting that one of the last 7 remaining non-negotiables between the Jags and the City is paying out the public cash incentives as the private investment is made, and having overall visibility into what the developer is actually spending on the project.
See section 8.3 from a letter that Megha Parekh sent out yesterday following meetings with the Auditor:
(https://snipboard.io/XKqCf6.jpg)
I don't think we're ever really going to know what the true cost of this project is/was.
So that's it? We're just going to get robbed of over a hundred million dollars, and then watch them ask for even more?
What are the odds that we're going to come back from the holidays to find the $100m ask for Four Seasons sitting there? After watching groundbreaking followed by six months of silence because they actually have to make blueprints now?
I hope keeping this NFL team is somehow worth it, even if it doesn't add up to do so.
I think we all know that this isn't a $450 million investment. That number is just as inaccurate as much of the other claims the mayor's office initially said about this deal. It leaves me no choice but to believe this is very much about funneling a certain amount of funds their way.
If not, issue a RFP for the same project scope and offer to pay 50% of the development costs. I'm sure lots of developers would take that deal and deliver a similar product for a fraction of the cost mentioned when we were being sold office, hotel and residential towers. However, that doesn't help the Jags out directly because that profit would go into another entity's pocket. We'll be back here again with similar requests for Lot J Phase II, Metropolitan Park, a new stadium and whatever else is dreamed up before then. It's imperative that if we're going to play the NFL game we need better negotiators on behalf of the public.
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
Given all we've seen, I fully believe that Brian Hughes could be sold a $295 million deal for $450 million.
Quote from: fsu813 on December 05, 2020, 04:52:39 PM
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
With the interest in some quarters, including C/m Carlucci, over "resilience" you would think they would mention that in their fancy slide shows.
Quote from: fsu813 on December 05, 2020, 04:52:39 PM
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
If it was that simple, why wouldn't they just admit it?
Surely it can't be that hard for Mark Lamping or Paul Harden to stand up at one of these City Council meetings and say "we expect a substantial portion of the cost to be for resiliency and flood mitigation" or anything of that nature.
And even then,
$100 million for flood resiliency? Really?
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 04:15:40 PM
I think we all know that this isn't a $450 million investment. That number is just as inaccurate as much of the other claims the mayor's office initially said about this deal. It leaves me no choice but to believe this is very much about funneling a certain amount of funds their way.
If not, issue a RFP for the same project scope and offer to pay 50% of the development costs. I'm sure lots of developers would take that deal and deliver a similar product for a fraction of the cost mentioned when we were being sold office, hotel and residential towers. However, that doesn't help the Jags out directly because that profit would go into another entity's pocket. We'll be back here again with similar requests for Lot J Phase II, Metropolitan Park, a new stadium and whatever else is dreamed up before then. It's imperative that if we're going to play the NFL game we need better negotiators on behalf of the public.
If nothing else, this is presidential-level grift. Good on them for having us by the balls so tightly that they can just guilt us into handing them free money. And remember, this is the
backup plan. Imagine if they'd actually pulled off the JEA sale, and gotten their hands on
billions.
I think it's reasonable to say that Curry is still in office by the next round of negotiations (because he's not recalled for the level of misfeasance and incompetence in this deal), taxpayers are going to get
screwed. Now that we know $240 million actually means $390 million, by the time the Four Seasons and stadium reno deals go through, it's almost certain that we'll have spent a billion dollars to keep the Jaguars.
When we didn't actually have to.
Seriously doubt it would take an extra $100 million to make that parcel more resilient. Plus this thing is still at the conceptual phase. Really have no idea how these numbers were plugged out of thin air and why they haven't been truly questioned publicly.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 05, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Quote from: fsu813 on December 05, 2020, 04:52:39 PM
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
With the interest in some quarters, including C/m Carlucci, over "resilience" you would think they would mention that in their fancy slide shows.
This!
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 05, 2020, 05:23:24 PM
I think it's reasonable to say that Curry is still in office by the next round of negotiations (because he's not recalled for the level of misfeasance and incompetence in this deal), taxpayers are going to get screwed. Now that we know $240 million actually means $390 million, by the time the Four Seasons and stadium reno deals go through, it's almost certain that we'll have spent a billion dollars to keep the Jaguars. When we didn't actually have to.
$1 billion by 2030 is child's play. I suspect we're going to be in way over that if we don't change the way we negotiate. We're around $500 million of nickel and diming now if we count the cost spent on related projects that have gotten us to this point.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 05:23:55 PM
Seriously doubt it would take an extra $100 million to make that parcel more resilient. Plus this thing is still at the conceptual phase. Really have no idea how these numbers were plugged out of thin air and why they haven't been truly questioned publicly.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 05, 2020, 05:11:52 PM
Quote from: fsu813 on December 05, 2020, 04:52:39 PM
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
With the interest in some quarters, including C/m Carlucci, over "resilience" you would think they would mention that in their fancy slide shows.
This!
The vast, vast, vast majority of any resiliency efforts for this project will be covered by the city out of that $77-$93 million infrastructure contribution already identified. Jags ain't paying a dime to get the site ready for long-term development. We're even paying for the building pads for Lot J. The missing money is all on the private side. I'm sure they'll slightly raise the ground floors of their buildings and maybe locate the utilities on the second floors, but nothing that's going to eat up a huge amount of budget.
For our further reference, below are some relevant quotes and numbers from DIA. When you read the detailed report, it looks like they have even more concerns than what the (diluted for politics) summary represents.
I also find it interesting that the Jags are asking for payments to cover furniture, fixtures and equipemnt that will be mostly worthless after 5 to 10 years. No collateral there for a long term "investment." And, what does included "reserves" and "costs beyond hard and soft costs related to construction" refer to? Really?
Note this too: Infrastructure: Horizontal and vertical infrastructure includes residential garages thus $77.7M less $18M for garages = 59.7$ million for clean up, etc.
DIA'S analysis shows they also cannot come anywhere close to the proposed construction costs with this conclusion: Costs "significantly exceed those seen in the Jacksonville market..."
Bold highlights added.Quote
A. Current Terms
The City and DIA are providing the following financial participation to the project in a total, or rather maximum, obligation of $233,300,000 together with a donation of land valued at $12,000,000.Additionally, the DIA has allocated development rights sufficient to accommodate the development. These development rights were provided free of mobility fees. Further, it should be noted that of the $233,300,000 in public funds, $65,500,000 is in the form of a zero-interest loan, paid back over 50-years.
• $50,000,000 for the Live! component. The City will contribute 50% of the construction costs of the Live! Component paid pari passu, up to a maximum of $50,000,000.
• $12,500,000 REV GrantThe REV Grant is paid over a 20-year period at 75% of the tax increment, the base year of which is 2020 and the land value base is $9 per square foot. The REV Grant only applies to the residential portion of the mixed-use component. The REV Grant is conditioned upon a minimum private capital investment of $95,000,000 (for the Mixed-Use component inclusive of the parking garage and Live), noting that any amount less than $111,000,000 results in a proportionate reduction of REV Grant value. In other words, a private capital investment of $111,000,000 or greater entitles the developer to 100% of the maximum value of the REV Grant, noting that the actual annual payment and ultimate value of the REV Grant is based on the incremental ad valorem taxes paid.
• $77,700,000 for Horizontal and Vertical Infrastructure plus $15,100,000 for additional costs over $77,700,000 for a total of $92,800,000 towards infrastructure.
• $65,500,000 50-year loan, zero interestThe City loan is for the Hotel Component and Mixed-Use Component up-to a maximum amount of $65,500,000. The loan is paid back over 50-years at zero percent interest. The Developer must deposit into a trust account, 20% of the amount of the loan drawn, which trust fund will provide the source of loan repayment.
• $12,500,000 hotel completion grantThe $12,500,000 is paid upon completion of the hotel component, payable in five (5) equal installments as follows: first payment upon completion, then one payment per anniversary of the substantial completion date over the next four years.
Total potential Direct COJ Incentives are estimated at $245,300,000 which includes the following:
REV for the Mixed-use Residential Component $12,500,000
Completion Grant for the Hotel $12,500,000
Property for development of Mixed-use properties $9,000,000
Property for development of the Hotel property $3,000,000
COJ contribution towards Infrastructure improvements $77,700,000
COJ contribution towards Add'l Infrastructure improvements $15,100,000
COJ contribution towards Live! Component $50,000,000
COJ Loan for Mixed-use and Hotel Components $65,500,000
TOTAL $245,300,00
....While the exercise above reduces costs to square foot for each component, it should be noted that the budgets also include related costs such as equipment, FF&E, reserves and costs beyond hard and soft costs related to construction. Estimates per square foot in the table above are inclusive of those amounts as detailed development or construction budgets were not provided to make eliminations for analytical purposes. A cursory review would confirm that these costs, even including FF&E and soft costs, significantly exceed those seen in the Jacksonville market, especially with respect to the hotel and Live! Recent multi-family construction budgets (net of land and garage but including landscape, lighting, sidewalks, etc. and first floor retail) for Doro, Related, Ford on Bay and Vista Brooklyn range from $206-$290/psf.
On a per residential unit basis, $200,000 per unit is typical of a Class AA multi-family product without incentives or cost reductions. Taking into consideration the land and garage incentive and the additional signage, landscape and hardscape costs included in the Vertical Infrastructure, a reasonable assumption for vertical construction of a Class AAA luxury product in the Mixed-Use Component would be in the range of $150,000 per unit. Based on the developer provided budget of $111,000,000 for vertical construction of the MF units only, divided by 400 units, the resulting per unit cost provided is $277,500 per unit. The Downtown Jacksonville market is characterized by a gap of approximately $40,000/unit between construction costs and stabilized value with a reasonable (1.2x) return on equity. The difference between the construction cost contained in the Developer's budget and what we would expect to be a realistic cost substantially exceeds that delta.
As to the Hotel, taking into consideration the donation of a development ready pad, the Vertical Infrastructure, and the City contribution for Live! Components which would include restaurant and venue space, a generous per key construction cost for a luxury boutique hotel is estimated to be $275,000/key. While one national survey prepared by HVS identifies luxury hotel development costs approaching $700,000/key, that figure includes substantial value (several hundred thousand) in land and site costs. The study further reveals that the increased cost for full-service vs limited service was approximately $140,000/key. We have been advised by the Developer that the restaurant and event space within the Hotel will not be Live! Elements. The budget of $118,500,000 for the hotel, even if the full 250 keys are developed, yields a per key cost of $474,000.
It's funny, I ended up in a conversation on Twitter with a lobbyist for Southern Group. The guy was insisting (https://twitter.com/MattBrockelman/status/1334307818074206208?s=20) that Jacksonville needs "significant P3s" to jump start underserved portions. And yet, wouldn't you know that the deal he's so strongly supportive of is laughably out of line with the market or any sense of sustainability.
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
I mean, they stuck around before the Jags came, when there was plenty of opportunity to move to Atlanta or a permanent stadium swap between the schools.
Although they no longer have the Landing to celebrate at...
...which Curry may have demoed in favor of Live. Dammit.
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
Have there been any studies showing the economic impact of the NFL leaving St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland in recent years?
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 05, 2020, 06:51:45 PMAs to the Hotel, taking into consideration the donation of a development ready pad, the Vertical Infrastructure, and the City contribution for Live! Components which would include restaurant and venue space, a generous per key construction cost for a luxury boutique hotel is estimated to be $275,000/key. While one national survey prepared by HVS identifies luxury hotel development costs approaching $700,000/key, that figure includes substantial value (several hundred thousand) in land and site costs. The study further reveals that the increased cost for full-service vs limited service was approximately $140,000/key. We have been advised by the Developer that the restaurant and event space within the Hotel will not be Live! Elements. The budget of $118,500,000 for the hotel, even if the full 250 keys are developed, yields a per key cost of $474,000.
So, if the hotel comprises 120 rooms, we're looking at ONE MILLION DOLLARS per key.
Nothing to see here...
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 05, 2020, 05:23:24 PMI think it's reasonable to say that Curry is still in office by the next round of negotiations (because he's not recalled for the level of misfeasance and incompetence in this deal), taxpayers are going to get screwed. Now that we know $240 million actually means $390 million, by the time the Four Seasons and stadium reno deals go through, it's almost certain that we'll have spent a billion dollars to keep the Jaguars. When we didn't actually have to.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 04:15:40 PMWe'll be back here again with similar requests for Lot J Phase II, Metropolitan Park, a new stadium and whatever else is dreamed up before then. It's imperative that if we're going to play the NFL game we need better negotiators on behalf of the public.
It's worth pointing out that, as things currently stand, there's really no way we're going to be able to fund these future projects (stadium renovations, Met Park, Lot J Phase II) without raising property taxes, or instituing a new sales tax.
Our borrowing capacity is finite, and if Lot J passes, from my understanding, we've only got about $100 million in borrowing capacity left as a city.
Also worth pointing out that when Curry first announced this deal, it wasn't supposed to be fully debt-financed.
Here's his quote (source: https://news.wjct.org/post/q-mayor-curry-lot-j-jea-and-jacksonville-landing):
QuotePhase one, in the beginning of this, I should say, some of this will be paygo [pay as you go]. We are financially stable, the city has cash. And at some point, we'll use debt wisely. But at this point, we are fiscally sound, we can handle this project.
If this is going to be a seven year project, it's a shame we can't find a way to carve some of this out of the general fund each year without having to bond and pay interest on the full $208 city investment.
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
That's the other half that probably doesn't get enough attention.
Florida/Georgia ain't staying here long-term either without infrastructure improvements.
Not when Mercedes Benz stadium and Atlanta are breathing down our necks.
Lot J and stadium improvements WILL secure that century-long Jax tradition, and will also hopefully bring in more college football games as well.
Both Florida and Georgia are fully on board with the Lot J proposal, have assured the city that they're ok with whatever disruptions come during construction as they think it's the right move for the game long-term, and based on the Lot J negotiations, we're likely going to see an extension of the existing contract here in the next few months.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 10:49:18 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
Have there been any studies showing the economic impact of the NFL leaving St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland in recent years?
^San Diego estimated 1,600 jobs lost equating to $67 million in annual labor income, with small businesses most directly tied to the Chargers (bars, restaurants, memorabilia and merch retailers, etc.) taking the brunt of the damage.
I do think Jax is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison however, as Oakland, San Diego, and St. Louis all have Major League Baseball franchises as well, and St. Louis also has an NHL team. I think the economic impact would be more severe in Jacksonville, but more importantly, I think the quality of life impact would be even greated in an only-game-in-town type city like Jacksonville.
Someone might be able to correct me, but I don't know if there's a market in the United States over the last 30 years that's lost it's ONLY major league sports franchise. We're in a relatively small club with cities like San Antonio, Salt Lake City, and Sacramento that only have one big-five sport.
P.S. Tuesday is shaping up to be pretty nuts.
Tommy Hazouri is refusing to put Lot J on the ballot for discussion at the City Council meeting.
But there's tentatively another meeting scheduled earlier in the day to discuss changes to the development agreement.
Hazouri wants a vote no earlier than January 7th.
The Jags and Curry want the vote on Tuesday.
Will take a super majority to make the vote happen, and a super majority again to pass it.
Ready the popcorn.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 05, 2020, 09:57:28 PM
I mean, they stuck around before the Jags came, when there was plenty of opportunity to move to Atlanta or a permanent stadium swap between the schools.
Although they no longer have the Landing to celebrate at...
...which Curry may have demoed in favor of Live. Dammit.
They almost left in the early 90s because of the old stadium and strong armed the city into major renovations. That was before the days of the modern NFL palace too.
If the Jags leave and the stadium goes stagnant that game will go to Atlanta before long.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 05, 2020, 11:53:33 PM
Someone might be able to correct me, but I don't know if there's a market in the United States over the last 30 years that's lost it's ONLY major league sports franchise. We're in a relatively small club with cities like San Antonio, Salt Lake City, and Sacramento that only have one big-five sport.
The only one that comes to my mind is Hartford. They lost their NHL team back in the late 1990s. If including Canada, Vancouver lost their NBA team to Memphis in 2001.
^Good call!
On Vancouver, it's hard to put a dollar figure on losing Bryant "Big Country" Reeves.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 05, 2020, 11:19:32 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 05, 2020, 06:51:45 PMAs to the Hotel, taking into consideration the donation of a development ready pad, the Vertical Infrastructure, and the City contribution for Live! Components which would include restaurant and venue space, a generous per key construction cost for a luxury boutique hotel is estimated to be $275,000/key. While one national survey prepared by HVS identifies luxury hotel development costs approaching $700,000/key, that figure includes substantial value (several hundred thousand) in land and site costs. The study further reveals that the increased cost for full-service vs limited service was approximately $140,000/key. We have been advised by the Developer that the restaurant and event space within the Hotel will not be Live! Elements. The budget of $118,500,000 for the hotel, even if the full 250 keys are developed, yields a per key cost of $474,000.
So, if the hotel comprises 120 rooms, we're looking at ONE MILLION DOLLARS per key.
Nothing to see here...
Shad Khan on Tuesday night:
(https://i.imgur.com/Ogr2oAc.gif)
Quote from: thelakelander on December 06, 2020, 12:13:52 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 05, 2020, 11:53:33 PM
Someone might be able to correct me, but I don't know if there's a market in the United States over the last 30 years that's lost it's ONLY major league sports franchise. We're in a relatively small club with cities like San Antonio, Salt Lake City, and Sacramento that only have one big-five sport.
The only one that comes to my mind is Hartford. They lost their NHL team back in the late 1990s. If including Canada, Vancouver lost their NBA team to Memphis in 2001.
Vancouver's got hockey. Winnipeg and Quebec City also lost their NHL teams just before Hartford did, though Winnipeg has gotten one back. Much longer ago, Louisville and Norfolk had ABA teams. A few others like SLC and Memphis had ABA teams they lost before they got their NBA teams. Before that, you have to go back to when the leagues were much smaller.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 10:49:18 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
Have there been any studies showing the economic impact of the NFL leaving St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland in recent years?
Over the years, numerous studies have concluded that pro sports teams do not contribute a net economic gain for the cities they are located in. One article I read equated pro sports teams to "getting a present" rather than seeing them as an investment with an economic ROI.
So it comes down to entertainment and civic pride. Losing a team is unlikely to have a negative economic impact and is more likely to be economically positive as taxpayer dollars get reinvested in the broader community and patrons of the team spend their money in other ways with local stores, restaurants, entertainment venues, etc. or in some other locally beneficial way.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 05, 2020, 11:53:33 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on December 05, 2020, 10:49:18 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
Have there been any studies showing the economic impact of the NFL leaving St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland in recent years?
^San Diego estimated 1,600 jobs lost equating to $67 million in annual labor income, with small businesses most directly tied to the Chargers (bars, restaurants, memorabilia and merch retailers, etc.) taking the brunt of the damage.
I do think Jax is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison however, as Oakland, San Diego, and St. Louis all have Major League Baseball franchises as well, and St. Louis also has an NHL team. I think the economic impact would be more severe in Jacksonville, but more importantly, I think the quality of life impact would be even greated in an only-game-in-town type city like Jacksonville.
Someone might be able to correct me, but I don't know if there's a market in the United States over the last 30 years that's lost it's ONLY major league sports franchise. We're in a relatively small club with cities like San Antonio, Salt Lake City, and Sacramento that only have one big-five sport.
St Louis/NFL lawsuit:
"The lawsuit alleges that while the league has enriched itself and its teams with the move, St. Louis has lost an estimated $1.85m to $3.5m each year in amusement and ticket tax collections, as well as roughly $7.5m in property taxes. In total, the city will have lost more than $100m in net proceeds, the suit alleges."
Aside from losing the team, I think it would be a tall order to regain a team from any of the big five, as its not like the days of the 80s/90s of regular expansion. The only way I could ever see the stadium being used again with regularity if a move occurred is if say UNF launched a football program and used it which has virtually no chance of ever happening. It would very quickly become a white elephant, like the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis funnily enough.
Quote from: landfall on December 06, 2020, 10:01:05 AMAside from losing the team, I think it would be a tall order to regain a team from any of the big five, as its not like the days of the 80s/90s of regular expansion. The only way I could ever see the stadium being used again with regularity if a move occurred is if say UNF launched a football program and used it which has virtually no chance of ever happening. It would very quickly become a white elephant, like the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis funnily enough.
Agree.
There's literally zero chance we'd land a Major League Baseball team in the next 30 years. Our market is way too small to support 81 home games, and it'd be a cold day in hell before MLB puts another team in Florida after seeing how poorly the Rays and Marlins have drawn.
Ditto NBA and NHL. We would need to build a brand new arena or completely overhaul VyStar with expanded seating and all the bells, whistles, and corporate amenities of the modern NBA. Seattle, Pittsburg, Kansas City, Vancouver, and numerous other cities would be in a stronger position to land an NBA team, and the league just isn't expanding.
MLS would be our only hope, and I just don't see that one happening any time soon either. They're already at 30 teams I believe, and landing an MLS team would likely necessitate the construction of a soccer specific stadium. All in, we'd be looking at a $200 million+ spend to even have a prayer of landing MLS.
If we want to remain a city with a Big 5 team, unfortunately, as the old saying guys, it's cheaper and easier to maintain what you've got than it is to find a replacement.
QuoteFlorida/Georgia ain't staying here long-term either without infrastructure improvements.
Not when Mercedes Benz stadium and Atlanta are breathing down our necks.
I don't follow the politics around this game too much especially lately but would Florida really go for this?
Quote from: vicupstate on December 06, 2020, 11:12:09 AM
QuoteFlorida/Georgia ain't staying here long-term either without infrastructure improvements.
Not when Mercedes Benz stadium and Atlanta are breathing down our necks.
I don't follow the politics around this game too much especially lately but would Florida really go for this?
As it stands neither team is going for that. Our top capacity is thousands of seats bigger and we offer a payout that Atlanta has no reason to compete with. But down the road, if we don't continue to maintain the stadium or don't have the money to offer the payout, it certainly could happen.
Quote from: Tacachale on December 06, 2020, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on December 06, 2020, 11:12:09 AM
QuoteFlorida/Georgia ain't staying here long-term either without infrastructure improvements.
Not when Mercedes Benz stadium and Atlanta are breathing down our necks.
I don't follow the politics around this game too much especially lately but would Florida really go for this?
As it stands neither team is going for that. Our top capacity is thousands of seats bigger and we offer a payout that Atlanta has no reason to compete with. But down the road, if we don't continue to maintain the stadium or don't have the money to offer the payout, it certainly could happen.
To me Florida would be giving GA permanent home field advantage.
Quote from: acme54321 on December 05, 2020, 09:18:08 PM
One thing I haven't seen discussed here are other reprocussions of the Jaguars leaving. For one, I don't think FL-GA would stick around without a modern stadium and the city isn't going to (and shouldn't) maintain the stadium to that level without the Jags.
I agree. It is already a way above average stadium. It is a once a year game. It is ridiculous to think it has to be the best stadium in the country when it is ligth years ahead of either schools own stadium.
^Question for you Bill! I know UNF is probably still a decade+ away from launching a football program because of the insane cost (half a Lot J!) that would need to be passed on to a student population that is still growing. Curious though why the draft plans center around building a 25,000 seat football stadium at UNF rather than leveraging our NFL stadium. Is TIAA Bank too big/expensive for an upstart program? Does the school just prefer a more intimate stadium directly on campus? Can see benefits of both approaches. Might be a ways out, but will be really fun when it happens.
Speaking from my own experience (UF), there's really a big advantage in being able to just walk to the stadium for a game. Student organizations often hold tailgates around campus, as well as fraternities at their houses. The entire campus is transformed for a day into this really exciting atmosphere. I don't know how UNF students would feel about having to drive or find some form of transit to get all the way from Southside to TIAA Bank. Not to mention being able to drag themselves and their friends home afterwards.
If they're only talking about 25k seats, that to me implies that they expect things to be small for some time. The Swamp holds over 90k some games, between students and alumni. At TIAA, I imagine UNF would only fill the lower bowl maybe, and I don't know how a half-full stadium feels in terms of atmosphere.
No vote until next year. Hazouri has made his move. I guess we'll see how the Jags and Mayors Office responds:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/12/06/city-council-president-tommy-hazouri-pushes-lot-j-vote-january/3829163001/
Good. Props to Hazouri for standing up for taxpayers. Surely we can wait a month to get some more details. Hopefully the Jags try to win... anything? before the season ends and start putting together some actual blueprints for what exactly they need so much of our money to build. If they'd just be honest with people over the next month, they could probably pull together enough support.
A man can dream, but I'd still like to see Council just approve the initial remediation and infrastructure cost (~$100m) and then put the actual construction + stadium reno up to a referendum.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 06, 2020, 12:47:43 PM
^Question for you Bill! I know UNF is probably still a decade+ away from launching a football program because of the insane cost (half a Lot J!) that would need to be passed on to a student population that is still growing. Curious though why the draft plans center around building a 25,000 seat football stadium at UNF rather than leveraging our NFL stadium. Is TIAA Bank too big/expensive for an upstart program? Does the school just prefer a more intimate stadium directly on campus? Can see benefits of both approaches. Might be a ways out, but will be really fun when it happens.
I don't think there was ever consideration given to using the Bank. The cost of renting it is one thing but there's also controlling concessions and the risk of losing attendance if the stadium is across town. UCF had that issue when they were at the Citrus Bowl.
Quote from: Tacachale on December 06, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 06, 2020, 12:47:43 PM
^Question for you Bill! I know UNF is probably still a decade+ away from launching a football program because of the insane cost (half a Lot J!) that would need to be passed on to a student population that is still growing. Curious though why the draft plans center around building a 25,000 seat football stadium at UNF rather than leveraging our NFL stadium. Is TIAA Bank too big/expensive for an upstart program? Does the school just prefer a more intimate stadium directly on campus? Can see benefits of both approaches. Might be a ways out, but will be really fun when it happens.
I don't think there was ever consideration given to using the Bank. The cost of renting it is one thing but there's also controlling concessions and the risk of losing attendance if the stadium is across town. UCF had that issue when they were at the Citrus Bowl.
Good info, thanks Bill.
I could really see the community rallying around a UNF football team.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 06, 2020, 01:25:29 PM
Speaking from my own experience (UF), there's really a big advantage in being able to just walk to the stadium for a game. Student organizations often hold tailgates around campus, as well as fraternities at their houses. The entire campus is transformed for a day into this really exciting atmosphere. I don't know how UNF students would feel about having to drive or find some form of transit to get all the way from Southside to TIAA Bank. Not to mention being able to drag themselves and their friends home afterwards.
If they're only talking about 25k seats, that to me implies that they expect things to be small for some time. The Swamp holds over 90k some games, between students and alumni. At TIAA, I imagine UNF would only fill the lower bowl maybe, and I don't know how a half-full stadium feels in terms of atmosphere.
Florida State was the same way. Loved having the stadium on-campus. Other state schools like USF and UM share facilities with their respective NFL teams. Nicer facilities, but missing some of that intimacy.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 06, 2020, 02:06:49 PM
No vote until next year. Hazouri has made his move. I guess we'll see how the Jags and Mayors Office responds:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/12/06/city-council-president-tommy-hazouri-pushes-lot-j-vote-january/3829163001/
The mayor's office and the Jags are still pushing for a vote next week.
Would require a super-majority to override Hazouri, which could conceivably happen if there's already a super-majority ready to vote yes.
Bad deal or good deal, I personally don't like how Hazouri is handling this at all.
He's acting unilaterally when this is a Council of the Whole issue, and - in my opinion - a big part of the reason the vote is potentially slipping into 2021 is because he railroaded the first Council workshop that spun out of control without anyone getting their questions answered, he skipped the Gaffney workshop entirely that 14 or 15 other Council members attended to pose their questions, and then he stalled out last week's Council meeting by not following the agenda and spending half an hour talking in circles at Paul Harden before throwing it to Carlucci to finish out the stall.
Megha and Paul Harden sent Hazouri a letter on Friday with the final non-negotiables and proposed a special meeting on the 11th for a vote. As far as I know, Hazouri never even bothered to respond.
Feels like he's intentionally blocking a vote when it should have been the Council's decision (not Hazouri's) on Thursday whether or not they wanted to move it to a final vote on Tuesday.
The deal is the deal, I really do think it's time to either vote it up or vote it down.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 06, 2020, 04:22:54 PM
The deal is the deal, I really do think it's time to either vote it up or vote it down.
I disagree. Clearly the public outrage has led to at least some movement on the Jaguars' part. I don't see why we can't keep pushing to improve the deal in any way that's less blatantly tilted against taxpayers. More importantly, it's not clear what the rush is at this point. Is there any indication that they're shovel ready right now? What exactly was supposed to happen between this week and January that makes it so incredibly important to send this vote through immediately without further discussion? If the Jags are seriously prepared to walk just because we're not big fans of this ancillary development offer as-is, why don't they tell us that instead of dancing around it with "fatigue"?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 06, 2020, 04:49:34 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 06, 2020, 04:22:54 PM
The deal is the deal, I really do think it's time to either vote it up or vote it down.
I disagree. Clearly the public outrage has led to at least some movement on the Jaguars' part. I don't see why we can't keep pushing to improve the deal in any way that's less blatantly tilted against taxpayers. More importantly, it's not clear what the rush is at this point. Is there any indication that they're shovel ready right now? What exactly was supposed to happen between this week and January that makes it so incredibly important to send this vote through immediately without further discussion? If the Jags are seriously prepared to walk just because we're not big fans of this ancillary development offer as-is, why don't they tell us that instead of dancing around it with "fatigue"?
I'm all for pushing negotiations as far as they can possibly go.
And if the City Council decides as a group that they want to push a decision until 2025, that's their choice to make.
I'm just not a fan of Hazouri taking that choice out of City Council's hands and deciding unilaterally to block a vote.
Not his place to decide for the rest of the Council.
There was a motion to vote to discharge on Thursday, and he shut it down before it even began.
I totally get his point, and I think it comes from a good place, but we've got 18 other Council Members as well.
Well, if 13 Council Members agree with you and Curry that The World As We Know It Shall Endeth[TM] if they don't pass The Deal[TM] by the Ides of December, they have the power to get it out of committee. If, as marcusnelson said, not getting this deal approved this week will be the impetus for the Jaguars to move, let them say so, that is important information to have.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 06, 2020, 05:49:35 PM
Well, if 13 Council Members agree with you and Curry that The World As We Know It Shall Endeth[TM] if they don't pass The Deal[TM] by the Ides of December, they have the power to get it out of committee. If, as marcusnelson said, not getting this deal approved this week will be the impetus for the Jaguars to move, let them say so, that is important information to have.
I don't think either one of these things is true.
The world doesn't end if we don't pass this deal next week.
Nor do the Jags leave if the deal isn't approved before holiday recess.
BUT, if the City and the Jags are at the finish line, and there are only seven items left that there is no agreement on and will not be agreement on, I'm all for getting the vote over with, whether it's a yes or a no.
Or at least giving City Council the option to vote.
After all the hard work from the DIA, City Council, the Auditor, the OGC, the Jags, and Cordish over the last six weeks, it's not Hazouri's place to unilaterally say, "You know what, let's put this all on ice for the next five weeks and then pick back up in 2021."
When I say "The Deal is the deal," the remaining changes aren't substantive and the final development agreement is expected by Monday.
Everyone should know exactly what they're voting on.
And again, if they don't, and they're not comfortable voting yet, they should have the right to decide as a Council body to not discharge the bill.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 06, 2020, 05:49:35 PM
Well, if 13 Council Members agree with you and Curry that The World As We Know It Shall Endeth[TM] if they don't pass The Deal[TM] by the Ides of December, they have the power to get it out of committee. If, as marcusnelson said, not getting this deal approved this week will be the impetus for the Jaguars to move, let them say so, that is important information to have.
Reading the article, I think Hazouri can make this decision with a lot of confidence the Council isn't going to override him for an earlier vote. Although, with the City Council, you never know who will blow with the wind and change their mind.
It appears to me that Hazouri is actually doing most of his fellow council members a big favor by delaying the vote as many are admitting they are getting quite a bit of push back on this deal from their constituents. Unless Council members can show a long list of material last minute concessions by the Jags they are straddling the edge of a knife politically.
By the way, "Chamber" Bowman and Mayor's "you-can-always-count-on-me to support whatever you ask for" Gaffney seem to be the most vocal I have seen for pushing this through before the end of the year. Discount their unfettered loyalty to the Mayor and I don't see much stomach by the Council for rushing this. It's striking that some of the Mayor's other "reliables" are, at least publicly, still hemming and hawing.
Lot J is in Gaffney's district, so I'd suspect that he'd definitely be in favor of it.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 06, 2020, 08:58:20 PM
Lot J is in Gaffney's district, so I'd suspect that he'd definitely be in favor of it.
I don't see that it will do much for the voters in his district. Has he demanded a slice of this project to benefit his constituents directly? Many may actually be cynical about or otherwise opposed to Lot J. How much has the Eastside benefited from the Jags so far? I bet Eastside residents are wondering where their millions in City infrastructure and other investments are.
A big fallacy of Trump's Opportunity Zones (Lot J is in one) is it's another huge giveaway (this time from the Feds who waive 100% of income taxes on gains) to Khan (and other developers like Trump and his son-in-law, Kurshner) , that the City should also be taking into account as a major incentive. There are no requirements (such as minority or small business set-asides, area hiring, reinvesting increases in property taxes in the Zones, etc.) for investors to do anything for the residents of said census tracts. Many residents may actually be losers as the Zones will accelerate gentrification for areas already primed for redevelopment.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 06, 2020, 09:26:56 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on December 06, 2020, 08:58:20 PM
Lot J is in Gaffney's district, so I'd suspect that he'd definitely be in favor of it.
I don't see that it will do much for the voters in his district. Has he demanded a slice of this project to benefit his constituents directly? Many may actually be cynical about or otherwise opposed to Lot J. How much has the Eastside benefited from the Jags so far? I bet Eastside residents are wondering where their millions in City infrastructure and other investments are.
A big fallacy of Trump's Opportunity Zones (Lot J is in one) is it's another huge giveaway (this time from the Feds who waive 100% of income taxes on gains) to Khan (and other developers like Trump and his son-in-law, Kurshner) , that the City should also be taking into account as a major incentive. There are no requirements (such as minority or small business set-asides, area hiring, reinvesting increases in property taxes in the Zones, etc.) for investors to do anything for the residents of said census tracts. Many residents may actually be losers as the Zones will accelerate gentrification for areas already primed for redevelopment.
I'm assisting a group of Eastsiders that want to withintrify as opposed to gentrify. A big part of that revolves around community organizing and getting in front of development opportunities before they swallow your community up. A major goal of the Eastside is to see A. Philip Randolph be able to develop as a pedestrian friendly commercial district where those seeking an authentic Black Jacksonville cultural experience can find one. More events and people in the Sports District (and assuming a Soccer stadium is built north of the expressway) provides that strip with a solid anchor on the south end.
The vision there, also complements the stuff being proposed in the Sports District. For those who get tired of chain restaurants and food at Lot J, an APR with local businesses offering authentic BBQ, soul food, seafood, etc. could position itself well as a nearby complementary alternative. The more businesses can flourish there, the more likely they'll create jobs and hire from within the community. The more the dollar can begin to recycle in the community before leaving it, the higher the opportunity for inclusive economic prosperity for residents will become. As the area becomes more economically sustainable, its influence with politicians at city hall will increase.
As for Gaffney, Lot J being in his district is probably enough for him to support it. How it may or may not benefit people living north of the expressway is another discussion altogether.
^ Lake, are you getting any support from the Jags? the City? Gaffney?
I wouldn't call any of them the leaders but none of them are objecting. I would say the mayor's office and council must be in support. They've approved deals to bring the armory back online, a soccer stadium north of the expressway, and a plan to retrofit the Union Terminal Warehouse into a mixed use development. All three of those projects can help the community with coordinated planning or gentrify it without coordination.
With that said, I'm not leading the effort either. I'm just helping a larger coalition of people in the corporate, nonprofit, planning, and public government volunteering to work with the community to ensure inclusive revitalization and preservation of the neighborhood's historic sense of place. With LaVilla and Brooklyn as prime examples, we know what can happen when there's no effort to get in front of the development push. Hopefully being proactive pays off for Historic Eastside.
Gaffney has been talking to Zed Smith (COO of Cordish) quite a bit about the Eastside.
They were supposed to take a tour together late last week, though I have no clue if it actually happened.
What Lake is describing is exactly what Cordish told Gaffney. That their projects tended to have positive spillover into surrounding neighborhoods when people start looking for a less big-box experience in the area.
If this Cordish relationship does turn into a multi-phase ordeal, would love to see us do what Kansas City has started doing.
They're basically requiring that Cordish take on affordable housing projects in the area in exchange for subsidizing the luxury stuff:
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2018/03/23/cordish-three-light-subsidy-affordable-housing.html
In terms of the Eastside, I see projects like The Doro, Union Terminal Warehouse, Made at Armory and the Armada soccer stadium having a bigger impact than Cordish and Lot J. Basically because of their proximity and likeliness to be completed well before Lot J comes online in 2027. When I think about it, the sum of their parts are also much larger than Lot J in terms of residential, office and commercial space.
However, whatever happens at Lot J and east of Hogans Creek is a positive by bringing in more people to the area on a consistent basis, Most of these projects are being proposed on sites that were either surface parking, empty or underutilized. In the long run, everything will begin to cluster together and as that happens, the neighborhood has an economic opportunity to benefit from better utilizing its complementary assets (ex. architecture, history, culture, streetscape, residents, etc.). This is something I think the Mayor's Office and Jags have failed to understand in a manner to where they could use it to sell Lot J a bit better.
^ I thought a lot of these types of benefits for the Eastside were hoped for when we landed the Jags and rebuilt the stadium (and the arena and the baseball grounds). What's the addition of Dailey's done for the area? To add, the Jags and the Landing were supposed to boost Downtown - more misses.
This is Jacksonville and nothing has really changed. And, with the Mayor we have, I believe everything is promised to seduce, not to deliver. So, I guess I am very skeptical that you will find what you are looking for here. Especially when the whole Lot J proposal is vague and specious. Not off to a very good start. The vision is great/amazing and deserving but I hope Eastsiders aren't getting taken for a ride.
I might see this as possible if Khan/Cordish and the Mayor had a public event/action that specifically said $x million are going to be spent to implement the Eastside vision. How about starting with a City approved master plan for the entire Eastside? Only thing I have seen is millions to move MOSH to the Shipyards which seems to be much more of interest to Curry and Khan than the Eastside.
One has to also consider that Kahn (and, vicariously, the Eastside) is soaking up $245 million of limited City resources. Eastsiders will be competing with other parts of town for a share of the leftover scraps.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 06, 2020, 11:28:15 PM
^ I thought a lot of these types of benefits for the Eastside were hoped for when we landed the Jags and rebuilt the stadium (and the arena and the baseball grounds). What's the addition of Dailey's done for the area? To add, the Jags and the Landing were supposed to boost Downtown - more misses.
This is Jacksonville and nothing has really changed. And, with the Mayor we have, I believe everything is promised to seduce, not to deliver. So, I guess I am very skeptical that you will find what you are looking for here. Especially when the whole Lot J proposal is vague and specious. Not off to a very good start. The vision is great/amazing and deserving but I hope Eastsiders aren't getting taken for a ride.
Biggest difference I see is that four of these five projects (with 575 residential units) are actually in the Eastside:
- The Doro (2023 completion date) - 247 residential units
- Union Terminal Warehouse (2023 completion date) - 228 residential units
- The Armory Flats (? completion date) - 100 residential units
- Made at the Armory - Food Hall
- Jacksonville Armada FC (2025 completion date) - 10,000 seat stadium and 175,000 SF of commercial space
There's a possibility of at least 1,000 people living along East Union and APR before the Lot J site is even close to being clean. The Union Terminal Warehouse project is so big that it is expected to create 200 permanent jobs. In addition, the expressway that cut it off from the waterfront is also a blessing in a weird way, in that APR and the Eastside have prime frontage and an interchange on the busiest east/west corridor in the urban core. So the Eastside's vision and timeline to respond to infill development isn't dependent on the Jags, Mayor Curry or Lot J.
QuoteI might see this as possible if Khan/Cordish and the Mayor had a public event/action that specifically said $x million are going to be spent to implement the Eastside vision. How about starting with a City approved master plan for the entire Eastside? Only thing I have seen is millions to move MOSH to the Shipyards which seems to be much more of interest to Curry and Khan than the Eastside.
The Eastside has had several master plans over the last 30 years. There's a general vision already in place. Now it just needs to be implemented.
QuoteOne has to also consider that Kahn (and, vicariously, the Eastside) is soaking up $245 million of limited City resources. Eastsiders will be competing with other parts of town for a share of the leftover scraps.
Regardless of Lot J, there's already enough going on in the Eastside that it needs to organize and take advantage of the existing opportunities it has. If it does not, it will be well on its way to gentrifying before the first overpriced freezer burnt chicken wing is served at Lot J. Yet, if Lot J happens, I'm sure there will be a push to include job opportunities for local JSEBs and residents during the construction phase and at the businesses that will be located there. In the meantime, the community should focus on what's at hand, preserving its landmarks, supporting its existing business base and perhaps pursuing a zoning overlay to protect itself from being overrun with incompatible Brooklyn-style infill development.
So the NAACP is out.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2020/12/04/jacksonville-naacp-says-it-cant-back-lot-j-development-deal/
Here's their letter (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20420049/lot-j-redevelopment-project.pdf).
I imagine they could care less what the NAACP thinks about the project. I wonder if they also sent a letter to Gaffney and what he'd say to them in response.
Midtown Tampa has been mentioned in this discussion - here's an update
https://www.83degreesmedia.com/devnews/mixed-use-development-project-transforms-midtown-Tampa-111720.aspx
^ Apparently that extra $50 million is giving a lot more bang. ;)
Hmm...you just gave me an easy idea for a front page story tomorrow....
Midtown: What $500 million will get you in Tampa
(according to Jax Daily Record's Mike Mendenhall)
Jaguars President Mark Lamping said the Jaguars have been, "a free agent team" since he purchased the team in 2012.
Wow.
^Spoiler: The Jags are putting the $65 million towards renting an actual breadbox.
Another City Council meeting on Lot J just ended.
Not a lot coming out of it, besides the final seven items starting to take shape that there's no agreement on.
Lamping conceded that the Jags are fine waiting until January 7th for a vote and support the City Council taking their time to vet the deal, though I think a lot of this might stem from a realization (voiced from several of the fence-sitters at the last public meeting) that a rushed vote probably isn't advantageous to the Jags.
It's interesting to try to read into these meetings, particularly in terms of who attends and who doesn't, but right now, a couple of council members seem to be probable no votes at this point:
1) Carlucci (still beating the same drum about an independent market study and about not fleecing season ticket holders (I'd personally be more upset about the underprivileged/underserved community than NFL season ticket holders struggling to get by)
2) DeFoor (she hasn't been able to hide her bad attitude/disapproval about this thing since that first workshop she hosted with Carlucci; requested a $150 million clawback provision today, which went over with an already cranky Mark Lamping about as well as you'd expect)
The following Council members I've got as definite yes votes on my Lot J bracket:
1) Gaffney (would vote yes twice if he could)
2) Cumber
3) Bowman
4) Diamond
5) Newby
6) Freeman
7) White
8 ) Pittman
Fence-sitters feel like:
1) Becton (who's been very vocal but hard to read about which way he'll ultimately vote)
2) Salem (he seemed like more of a yes coming out of this meeting than he's been yet)
3) Dennis (he's worried about the size of the spend and where it's going to leave our borrowing capacity going into other asks)
4) Hazouri (for a guy who's constantly complaining about City Council not getting their questions answered, he's now showed up at exactly 0 of these Q&A workshops; I think he ultimately votes yes)
The other five council members, I've got no clue, but judging from the fact that most haven't attended many meetings, I'd be more inclined to think that they've been yes votes from the beginning than no votes.
IF Becton and Salem swing yes, or Becton and Hazouri vote yes, I have a hard time thinking there's much of a chance that this thing gets voted down.
Also, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
QuoteAlso, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
Too bad no one is providing lubrication for the taxpayers that have to pay for this charade.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 08, 2020, 04:27:42 PM
QuoteAlso, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
Too bad no one is providing lubrication for the taxpayers that have to pay for this charade.
Don't be foolish.
The lube is included in the $77 million infrastructure cost.
Good Analysis. Based on what you're saying (assuming you're correct about the yes votes) here's my take (in parenthesis):
District 1 (Old Arlington): Joyce Morgan (no read)
District 2 (East Arlington/Northside West of Main St): Al Ferraro (I think will end up being a yes)
District 3 (Intracoastal West): Aaron L. Bowman (yes)
District 4 (Town Center/UNF/Glynlea): Kevin Carrico (no read, too new)
District 5 (Southbank/San Marco/San Jose/St. Nicholas): LeAnna Cumber (yes)
District 6 (Mandarin): Michael Boylan (no read)
District 7 (Downtown Northbank/Northside West of Main St): Reggie Gaffney (yes)
District 8 (Moncrief Area): Ju'Coby Pittman (yes)
District 9 (Mixon Town/Woodstock/Cedar Hills/: Garrett L. Dennis (does he stick it to Curry just to do so? I actually don't think so but not sure)
District 10 (Ribault/Pickettville/Normandy): Brenda Priestly Jackson (no read)
District 11 (Far Southside): Danny Becton (I think ends up voting yes)
District 12 (Baldwin/Far Westside/Cecil): Randy White (yes)
District 13 (Beaches): Rory Diamond (yes)
District 14 (Riverside/Avondale/Ortega/Argyle): Randy DeFoor (no read, but I think she's leaning no)
At-Large Group 1: Terrance Freeman (yes)
At-Large Group 2: Ronald B. Salem (I think eventually this is a yes)
At-Large Group 3: Tommy Hazouri (I think if he wanted to sink it he would have arranged for a vote when he knew the support wasn't there. He's a yes)
At-Large Group 4: Matt Carlucci (no read)
At-Large Group 5: Samuel Newby (yes)
That's 12 right there. You'd think he's got one more but something caused Hazouri to delay.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 08, 2020, 04:27:42 PM
QuoteAlso, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
Too bad no one is providing lubrication for the taxpayers that have to pay for this charade.
No issue with Paul Harden - he's an attorney doing what's he's paid to do; advocate for his client.
And yes Ken.....he is AMAZING in action. Lamping would be best to shut up and let Harden talk.
Side note....I think almost all of the 19 know this is a terrible financial deal. I think they'd love to have something insurmountable evidence to either vote yes or vote no. Absent that, I think most vote yes anyway but don't sleep particularly well.
Strangely, I actually feel for many of the council members (not all of them). This is a tough situation. Curry (purposely) put them in an awful position on this, framing this as a "no" vote is a no vote on the Jaguars. Who actually wants to be in that position?
The person who since this term started (2019) that I've really learned to appreciate is Randy DeFoor. I thought she's be a Curry "yes-person". How wrong I was. She's very intelligent and asks excellent questions. That was a tough battle with Sunny Gettinger in that election, but District 14 should be extremely happy with her representing them.
Anytime you are not in a position to walk away from a deal, you are not going to get a good deal. The only question is how bad of a deal will it be. In this case it is really, really bad. The city is literally building this project 100% while shielding the city from any means of recouping its investment.
The very person that should be looking out for the taxpayer, is actually looking out for the Jags. That he has any credibility at all after the JEA fiasco is testament to how gullible the council and the city as a whole are.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 05, 2020, 11:53:33 PM
^San Diego estimated 1,600 jobs lost equating to $67 million in annual labor income, with small businesses most directly tied to the Chargers (bars, restaurants, memorabilia and merch retailers, etc.) taking the brunt of the damage.
I do think Jax is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison however, as Oakland, San Diego, and St. Louis all have Major League Baseball franchises as well, and St. Louis also has an NHL team. I think the economic impact would be more severe in Jacksonville, but more importantly, I think the quality of life impact would be even greated in an only-game-in-town type city like Jacksonville.
The damage to the quality of life argument is weak imo. A relatively small segment of Jax currently enjoys any boost to their quality of life as a result of the Jags (i.e. - Those with the disposable income to attend games.) Even for those who do attend games, there are only a few game days a year where they get to enjoy this asset.
We have several better options for investing in our quality of life in Jacksonville that actually affect the day-to-day experiences of the general public. Just off the top of my head, schools, sidewalks, parks, public art, libraries, transit, and public utilities come to mind.
People will find other ways to entertain themselves if the Jags leave. For most of Jax, it just means that they turn on a different game on Sundays. We absolutely should be willing to walk away if the deal doesn't get better.
Spoke at public comment tonight:
QuoteLet's cut to the chase. The results of the DIA's rushed review of Lot J have been damning. It demonstrates a lack of detail of what would be built, puts an immense burden on taxpayers for reasons they can't discern, and will adversely affect any free market for downtown development. The scope of the project has shrunk repeatedly, and yet the demands of taxpayers has remained the same. Meanwhile other cities are building equivalent or larger developments for the same reported price of Lot J. It's time to admit that Lenny Curry made a bad deal for Jacksonville taxpayers, and wasted our hometown team's time in the process. His neglect of his duty to be responsible for the conduct of his administration has been irresponsible. And sorry to Mr. Lamping, but this deal, in its current form, is clearly and simply unacceptable for Jacksonville taxpayers.
I'm wearing this shirt because I do love this team. I want them to stay. But I love this city more. An object of city pride is worthless if we can no longer afford anything to have pride in. Tonight or January do not have to be the end of this project. You on City Council have the power to make this work. You can sign off solely to undertake the remediation and site work at Lot J, as well as constructing the new surface lot. Perhaps do the same at the Shipyards.
In the meantime, the Jaguars can build a great team and bring home some big wins next season. Or they can talk about free agency and offers from St. Louis. The city can master plan a dense and active museum district with MOSH, the USS Orleck, and the Fire Museum. And we can build an iconic urban park at the Shipyards and Hogan Creek.
So that once negotiations conclude with an equitable agreement between the city and the Jaguars for construction of Lot J and the Shipyards, and we have more blueprints to renovate and improve TIAA Bank Field so that we know exactly what this city must do in order to remain an NFL city, we can let the people decide. Remember that we are already talking about the largest public subsidy in the history of this city. Without your action, without your leadership, all you will do is prepare to spend even more. You do not have to reject any possibility of developing this new neighborhood, but you can not and should not approve a deal that is unfair for taxpayers, local businesses, and the future of Jacksonville. As I've said before, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation, or any future generation, to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
Quote from: Steve on December 08, 2020, 04:41:12 PM
Side note....I think almost all of the 19 know this is a terrible financial deal. I think they'd love to have something insurmountable evidence to either vote yes or vote no. Absent that, I think most vote yes anyway but don't sleep particularly well.
Strangely, I actually feel for many of the council members (not all of them). This is a tough situation. Curry (purposely) put them in an awful position on this, framing this as a "no" vote is a no vote on the Jaguars. Who actually wants to be in that position?
The person who since this term started (2019) that I've really learned to appreciate is Randy DeFoor. I thought she's be a Curry "yes-person". How wrong I was. She's very intelligent and asks excellent questions. That was a tough battle with Sunny Gettinger in that election, but District 14 should be extremely happy with her representing them.
Agree 100% with the comments about DeFoor. I leaned to Gettinger with the same concern that DeFoor would be in Curry's camp. What a pleasant surprise to see her stand up for the citizens of Jacksonville against a no-good Mayor and his henchmen. Along with Carlucci and Dennis, we have a few diamonds in the rough. Unfortunately, we need at least 7 more to control the Council. Not sure they are there or where will they come from? This vote may show us some truer colors.
One thing is for sure: Any council member voting for this deal as is will be having to live it down in their next election if they draw opposition. They can thank Curry for hanging them out to dry. Like Trump, he only cares about his own ambitions and doesn't hesitate to trounce others to get what he wants.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 08, 2020, 06:02:36 PM
Spoke at public comment tonight:
QuoteLet's cut to the chase. The results of the DIA's rushed review of Lot J have been damning. It demonstrates a lack of detail of what would be built, puts an immense burden on taxpayers for reasons they can't discern, and will adversely affect any free market for downtown development. The scope of the project has shrunk repeatedly, and yet the demands of taxpayers has remained the same. Meanwhile other cities are building equivalent or larger developments for the same reported price of Lot J. It's time to admit that Lenny Curry made a bad deal for Jacksonville taxpayers, and wasted our hometown team's time in the process. His neglect of his duty to be responsible for the conduct of his administration has been irresponsible. And sorry to Mr. Lamping, but this deal, in its current form, is clearly and simply unacceptable for Jacksonville taxpayers.
I'm wearing this shirt because I do love this team. I want them to stay. But I love this city more. An object of city pride is worthless if we can no longer afford anything to have pride in. Tonight or January do not have to be the end of this project. You on City Council have the power to make this work. You can sign off solely to undertake the remediation and site work at Lot J, as well as constructing the new surface lot. Perhaps do the same at the Shipyards.
In the meantime, the Jaguars can build a great team and bring home some big wins next season. Or they can talk about free agency and offers from St. Louis. The city can master plan a dense and active museum district with MOSH, the USS Orleck, and the Fire Museum. And we can build an iconic urban park at the Shipyards and Hogan Creek.
So that once negotiations conclude with an equitable agreement between the city and the Jaguars for construction of Lot J and the Shipyards, and we have more blueprints to renovate and improve TIAA Bank Field so that we know exactly what this city must do in order to remain an NFL city, we can let the people decide. Remember that we are already talking about the largest public subsidy in the history of this city. Without your action, without your leadership, all you will do is prepare to spend even more. You do not have to reject any possibility of developing this new neighborhood, but you can not and should not approve a deal that is unfair for taxpayers, local businesses, and the future of Jacksonville. As I've said before, I do want to see development like this, I want to see it succeed. But I don't want my generation, or any future generation, to be left with the burden of paying for bad deals and bad decisions. So let the people decide. Thank you.
Well put, Marcus. You were eloquent, spoke truth to power, offered a dignified and appropriate way to move forward and bottom lined it succinctly. I hope the Council took your comments to heart as they should.
Quote from: Steve on December 08, 2020, 04:41:12 PM
Side note....I think almost all of the 19 know this is a terrible financial deal. I think they'd love to have something insurmountable evidence to either vote yes or vote no. Absent that, I think most vote yes anyway but don't sleep particularly well.
Strangely, I actually feel for many of the council members (not all of them). This is a tough situation. Curry (purposely) put them in an awful position on this, framing this as a "no" vote is a no vote on the Jaguars. Who actually wants to be in that position?
100% agree, Steve.
Total rock and a hard place situation here.
Seems to be a misconception that City Council is responsible for renegotiating this deal with the Jags when at the end of the day, what they're really tasked with is voting the deal that Hughes, Curry, and Mousa made up or down.
I think they're doing their best to get whatever concessions they can, but this deal ultimately falls on the mayor's office, not on Council.
I do feel slightly less awful, however, for the Council Members that appeared at the initial press conference in support of the project (and Hazouri who sent a letter of support for the legislation). I know for a fact that at least one of them (and I'd imagine most) bought the Curry yarn that the deal was $65 million more favorable to the taxpayers than the 2019 term sheet without fully understanding the terms of the "loan," but probably not a great idea to essentially come out as a yes before the development agreement is even available.
QuoteThe person who since this term started (2019) that I've really learned to appreciate is Randy DeFoor. I thought she's be a Curry "yes-person". How wrong I was. She's very intelligent and asks excellent questions. That was a tough battle with Sunny Gettinger in that election, but District 14 should be extremely happy with her representing them.
I've actually got mixed feelings on Randy DeFoor. She's a tough negotiator, but I also think her bedside manner leaves a bit to be desired, so to speak. To me, she come across as disrespectful and not debating in good faith at times. I'm all for questioning the deal, and Lord knows we need that balance on Council, but I'm not a fan of the repeated accusations at every meeting that the team is going to leave Jacksonville. Most of these dire comments from Paul Harden and Lamping about the status of the lease and other suitors have come from a somewhat defensive position after DeFoor has, in my opinion, insinuated that the Jags were operating under some evil plan to build a Buffalo Wild Wings and then move the franchise. Some of her requests have been a little outlandish too (particularly the demand for a lease extension through 2065 for Lot J and the demands yesterday for a $150 million cash payment from the Jags if they left Jacksonville).
To be fair though, could say the same thing about Lamping during some of these debates.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 09, 2020, 09:21:10 AM
Quote from: Steve on December 08, 2020, 04:41:12 PM
Side note....I think almost all of the 19 know this is a terrible financial deal. I think they'd love to have something insurmountable evidence to either vote yes or vote no. Absent that, I think most vote yes anyway but don't sleep particularly well.
Strangely, I actually feel for many of the council members (not all of them). This is a tough situation. Curry (purposely) put them in an awful position on this, framing this as a "no" vote is a no vote on the Jaguars. Who actually wants to be in that position?
100% agree, Steve.
Total rock and a hard place situation here.
Seems to be a misconception that City Council is responsible for renegotiating this deal with the Jags when at the end of the day, what they're really tasked with is voting the deal that Hughes, Curry, and Mousa made up or down.
I think they're doing their best to get whatever concessions they can, but this deal ultimately falls on the mayor's office, not on Council.
I do feel slightly less awful, however, for the Council Members that appeared at the initial press conference in support of the project (and Hazouri who sent a letter of support for the legislation). I know for a fact that at least one of them (and I'd imagine most) bought the Curry yarn that the deal was $65 million more favorable to the taxpayers than the 2019 term sheet without fully understanding the terms of the "loan," but probably not a great idea to essentially come out as a yes before the development agreement is even available.
QuoteThe person who since this term started (2019) that I've really learned to appreciate is Randy DeFoor. I thought she's be a Curry "yes-person". How wrong I was. She's very intelligent and asks excellent questions. That was a tough battle with Sunny Gettinger in that election, but District 14 should be extremely happy with her representing them.
I've actually got mixed feelings on Randy DeFoor. She's a tough negotiator, but I also think her bedside manner leaves a bit to be desired, so to speak. To me, she come across as disrespectful and not debating in good faith at times. I'm all for questioning the deal, and Lord knows we need that balance on Council, but I'm not a fan of the repeated accusations at every meeting that the team is going to leave Jacksonville. Most of these dire comments from Paul Harden and Lamping about the status of the lease and other suitors have come from a somewhat defensive position after DeFoor has, in my opinion, insinuated that the Jags were operating under some evil plan to build a Buffalo Wild Wings and then move the franchise. Some of her requests have been a little outlandish too (particularly the demand for a lease extension through 2065 for Lot J and the demands yesterday for a $150 million cash payment from the Jags if they left Jacksonville).
To be fair though, could say the same thing about Lamping during some of these debates.
DeFoor isn't always the most polished, I'll give you that. And, while I think she understands financials (clearly demonstrated through the JEA deal), I do agree that she's stretched herself when it comes to NFL economics. It's crazy to think the Jaguars would extend the lease based on Lot J. That will never happen and that's why I wasn't in love with this to begin with. Do the stadium first, because THAT would be tied to a lease extension.
I'll darn sure take her over Curry though.
Now, I think to your point the person that's come across as WAY worse is Mark Lamping. He's been way too frustrated with council here, when his frustration should be with Curry. Let Harden do his thing - I don't know of anyone in the city that can work with the council better than Paul Harden.
I may have missed it but how did we settle on Lot J being Phase 1 for the site of the proposed project? Plus, since things are still so conceptual, would the Jags be open to considering switching the site to an adjacent parking lot?
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-q5Hc4bh/0/63c5b60c/X3/Dlc4k9SX0AEhvi4-X3.jpg)
Knowing the history of land uses south of Adams Street, would it have made any sense to put the Lot J project on Lots P, N & M? Some benefits would be:
1. Development has greater visibility to Arlington Expressway (51,500 AADT vs 16,600 AADT for Hart Bridge Expressway/Gator Bowl Boulevard) while still maintaining visibility and direct access to Gator Bowl Boulevard.
2. Leaving Lot J capped, the pond and antenna in place, significantly reducing environmental clean up/infrastructure costs ($92.7 million). This gives council a big public win and speeds up the project's completion date by three years.
3. We're turning Gator Bowl Boulevard into a race track. Adams and Duval Streets are more pedestrian friendly and infilling between them would create more cohesive synergy with the Eastside, arena, baseball grounds, Cathedral District and proposed soccer stadium, without sacrificing connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and Daily's Place. In other words, a shift north creates an opportunity for immediate clustering within the Sports District and potentially more economic spinoff in the surrounding area.
4. Allows more time to figure out the proper way to deal with Lot J in the future. Given what we know now, perhaps the practice fields should be built on top of Lot J since their present site is more suitable for infill development? Or perhaps its cleanup should be included as a part of negotiations to update the stadium and extend the lease a couple of years down the road?
Quoteand the demands yesterday for a $150 million cash payment from the Jags if they left Jacksonville
Many economic development deals with COJ have clawback language like this (whether they are enforced or not, is an entirely different question). So, its not so outlandish to raise the possibility of clawback language in the single biggest capital expense the City has undertaken in the last couple of decades.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 09, 2020, 10:54:19 AM
I may have missed it but how did we settle on Lot J being Phase 1 for the site of the proposed project? Plus, since things are still so conceptual, would the Jags be open to considering switching the site to an adjacent parking lot?
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-q5Hc4bh/0/63c5b60c/X3/Dlc4k9SX0AEhvi4-X3.jpg)
Knowing the history of land uses south of Adams Street, would it have made any sense to put the Lot J project on Lots P, N & M? Some benefits would be:
1. Development has greater visibility to Arlington Expressway (51,500 AADT vs 16,600 AADT for Hart Bridge Expressway/Gator Bowl Boulevard) while still maintaining visibility and direct access to Gator Bowl Boulevard.
2. Leaving Lot J capped, the pond and antenna in place, significantly reducing environmental clean up/infrastructure costs ($92.7 million). This gives council a big public win and speeds up the project's completion date by three years.
3. We're turning Gator Bowl Boulevard into a race track. Adams and Duval Streets are more pedestrian friendly and infilling between them would create more cohesive synergy with the Eastside, arena, baseball grounds, Cathedral District and proposed soccer stadium, without sacrificing connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and Daily's Place. In other words, a shift north creates an opportunity for immediate clustering within the Sports District and potentially more economic spinoff in the surrounding area.
4. Allows more time to figure out the proper way to deal with Lot J in the future. Given what we know now, perhaps the practice fields should be built on top of Lot J since their present site is more suitable for infill development? Or perhaps its cleanup should be included as a part of negotiations to update the stadium and extend the lease a couple of years down the road?
I'll try to find it but as I understood, there's a specific clause that allows the Jags to develop Lot J specifically. Like, if they wanted to take this project on 100% privately, including the environmental cleanup, they could. I don't remember the specifics though.
That said, to your point if Khan is able to exert this much leverage over the Mayor's office, then switching the parking lot should be feasible if they and the mayor wanted to.
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on December 08, 2020, 05:54:00 PM
The damage to the quality of life argument is weak imo. A relatively small segment of Jax currently enjoys any boost to their quality of life as a result of the Jags (i.e. - Those with the disposable income to attend games.) Even for those who do attend games, there are only a few game days a year where they get to enjoy this asset.
To me, the quality of life argument is less about going to 8 football games a year, and more about having something that genuinely ties the region together and gives the community something to rally around collectively. Particularly for a city with Jacksonville's characteristics - 800 square miles without the regional identity of a Miami, Orlando, or even St. Augustine.
In the absence of collective cultural institutions like the Jags, what really makes us a community as opposed to a loose collection of sprawling neighborhoods?
Just personally speaking (and to your point, coming from someone who lives in a ZIP code that the city hasn't neglected for decades), having the Jags in Jacksonville has made me closer to my family, friends, and neighbors (going to games together or having cookouts on Sunday). It's brought my coworkers together (both sharing in the excitement of the 2017 run and bitching about the bad times on Mondays). It gives me a common bond to talk to strangers about here in the city.
One of my favorite quotes, and I wish I had it in front of me, was from John Delaney.
It was from after the Jags' first home game, and he basically said that, for the first time in his life, he saw the Jacksonville community, regardless of race, age, or political differences, standing proudly side-by-side to support something.
One of my fondest memories of working downtown was watching a construction worker in a Blake Bortles jersey standing on top of the Barnett working to restore the roof. People would randomly shout Duval at him, and he'd shout it back every time.
Hard to put a price on little things like that, but I think they serve a higher purpose to a community than a balance sheet can show.
And it's hard to argue the fact there aren't many great cities in this country, or major world cities, that don't have a major league professional sports presence.
We should never negotiate from a place of fear, but the fact remains that if we did lose the Jags, we wouldn't be in line for another big four franchise for DECADES.
Another splendid column in the Times Union re: Lot J. This time by Mark Woods:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/mark-woods/2020/12/09/beyond-lot-j-its-worth-asking-what-nfl-team-worth-city/6480228002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/mark-woods/2020/12/09/beyond-lot-j-its-worth-asking-what-nfl-team-worth-city/6480228002/)
It concludes with:
QuoteSo, while it's important to get into the weeds of each deal, we also need to step back and ask: What is an NFL team worth to a city?
I don't know the answer to that question. Just that it isn't nothing. And it also isn't everything.
On a national level, nothing has brought more visibility to Jacksonville than the Jaguars. Just a Thursday night football game once a year brings 10 million viewers. Nearly 70 million Americans watched the AFC Championship between the Jaguars and Patriots. We will have to figure out the future, but losing this team cannot be part of the future.
That said, I know St. Louis has been mentioned, but it is clear the NFL isn't going to London anytime soon with a full time squad. There aren't many larger markets willing to spend much money on building a stadium like St. Louis or San Diego. They also poured lots of money into other franchises like the Cardinals and Padres. San Antonio is possibly a real threat but the Cowboys and Texans would try to block anything there. Portland seems to have its eyes set on baseball as well in the future. OKC spent a lot of money to get the Thunder there. Orlando may also be a threat at some point in the next decade but they have also spent a lot on the Magic and even revamping th Citrus Bowl.
The Jaguars have a captive audience in Jax and own the market. It is a growing market as well unlike St. Louis. Long term, the biggest threats are a third team in Texas and London. I think the Chargers are such a mess that they would eventually be targeted to return to San Diego if San Diego were ever willing to build a stadium.
Every other metro in the top 40 metros except Va Beach, Providence, and Austin have an NFL, NHL, NBA or MLB franchise. Of the 10 metros smaller than us, New Orleans, OKC, Raleigh, Salt Lake City, Memphis, and Buffalo have a franchise. With the NBA struggling in smaller markets, don't expect that to ever happen. NHL isn't coming to Jax. MLB is definitely not coming to a smaller market in FL with the Rays and Marlins struggling as they have. Jax would be without a franchise for decades in the best case scenario. NFL is king as well without even a real challenger at this point in American professional sports.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 09, 2020, 12:27:39 PM
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on December 08, 2020, 05:54:00 PM
The damage to the quality of life argument is weak imo. A relatively small segment of Jax currently enjoys any boost to their quality of life as a result of the Jags (i.e. - Those with the disposable income to attend games.) Even for those who do attend games, there are only a few game days a year where they get to enjoy this asset.
To me, the quality of life argument is less about going to 8 football games a year, and more about having something that genuinely ties the region together and gives the community something to rally around collectively. Particularly for a city with Jacksonville's characteristics - 800 square miles without the regional identity of a Miami, Orlando, or even St. Augustine.
In the absence of collective cultural institutions like the Jags, what really makes us a community as opposed to a loose collection of sprawling neighborhoods?
Just personally speaking (and to your point, coming from someone who lives in a ZIP code that the city hasn't neglected for decades), having the Jags in Jacksonville has made me closer to my family, friends, and neighbors (going to games together or having cookouts on Sunday). It's brought my coworkers together (both sharing in the excitement of the 2017 run and bitching about the bad times on Mondays). It gives me a common bond to talk to strangers about here in the city.
One of my favorite quotes, and I wish I had it in front of me, was from John Delaney.
It was from after the Jags' first home game, and he basically said that, for the first time in his life, he saw the Jacksonville community, regardless of race, age, or political differences, standing proudly side-by-side to support something.
One of my fondest memories of working downtown was watching a construction worker in a Blake Bortles jersey standing on top of the Barnett working to restore the roof. People would randomly shout Duval at him, and he'd shout it back every time.
Hard to put a price on little things like that, but I think they serve a higher purpose to a community than a balance sheet can show.
Ken, I strongly agree with this. The Jaguars give the region and the city a common experience and elevate its national identity. Yes, it's been a frustrating and disillusioning common experience in recent years. But I think about Jake Godbold breaking down in tears the day the expansion team was awarded - my doing pretty much the same thing on watching from afar as a diverse Jacksonville audience filled the stands for a Jaguar game on TV - the ecstatic shared experiences of the first Monday night game in Jacksonville, or fans filling the stadium during and after the 1996 playoff win in Denver - even the national awareness of the Duval chant as you mentioned. It all underscores how much a pro sports team is intertwined in the fabric of a community, especially in an often overlooked, often unfairly reviled, one-pro-sports-team city like this one. Many of my childhood memories revolve around Jacksonville's long quest for pro football and how it galvanized the city and brought people together. The wooing of Bud Adams and the Oilers, the USFL Bulls, the big attendance figures and petitions to the NFL for attention for 80s preseason games between the Falcons and Bucs.
I'm also aware that there are quite a few sports commentators who have been outright vindictive in ridiculing Jacksonville, during its quest for a team and now, who would do a collective end-zone dance if the Jaguars left that I think would do significant damage to the city's psyche and national profile.
And while we can cite detached economic studies of what pro sports teams are really worth, and I understand why, I can't discount the intangible benefits that a pro team can bring, and has brought, to Jacksonville. I think we can't too easily dismiss the tourism benefit with people who travel to Jacksonville for the primary purpose of seeing Jaguar games, as well as the benefit of retaining Florida-Georgia and potentially adding additional events that comes with maintaining the stadium at NFL level. There's also factors like the tremendous amount of charitable funding that the Weavers and the Jaguars Foundation have pumped into the community. Yes, it comes with substantial retention costs, and yes, Khan hasn't been nearly as generous as the Weavers. But without the Weavers' having had an NFL team in town, who would've provided that level of support for numerous civic institutions and restoration projects?
My love is for the city first and the team second, and I don't particularly want to see the city accept a bad deal or sacrifice other services and amenities to prostrate itself before the Jaguars. But I don't want to see them given up either. I know how much value the experience of following them has added to my life over the years, even in the many bad seasons, not because it's about the football but because it's about the city
I've mentioned this before, but I very much doubt San Antonio has any real interest in the NFL or opportunity to land a team. (I lived in Austin for three years)
1) It's not a particularly wealthy market. San Antonio and Austin COMBINED are a formidable market, but...
2) The Spurs own the city
3) The Alamodome is 20+ years old and would need substantial renovations to be on par with other NFL stadia. Darrell K. Royal isn't NFL grade either (and is oversized for a mid-size market in the NFL)
4) Virtually everyone there is heavily committed to long-term Cowboys fandom or, to a much lesser extent, the Texans
5) San Antonio was an early dismissal in the 1993 expansion derby (largely because the Alamodome even then was considered substandard in terms other than its capacity) and its USFL attendance could be measured by the occasional show of hands
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 09, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 09, 2020, 12:27:39 PM
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on December 08, 2020, 05:54:00 PM
The damage to the quality of life argument is weak imo. A relatively small segment of Jax currently enjoys any boost to their quality of life as a result of the Jags (i.e. - Those with the disposable income to attend games.) Even for those who do attend games, there are only a few game days a year where they get to enjoy this asset.
To me, the quality of life argument is less about going to 8 football games a year, and more about having something that genuinely ties the region together and gives the community something to rally around collectively. Particularly for a city with Jacksonville's characteristics - 800 square miles without the regional identity of a Miami, Orlando, or even St. Augustine.
In the absence of collective cultural institutions like the Jags, what really makes us a community as opposed to a loose collection of sprawling neighborhoods?
Just personally speaking (and to your point, coming from someone who lives in a ZIP code that the city hasn't neglected for decades), having the Jags in Jacksonville has made me closer to my family, friends, and neighbors (going to games together or having cookouts on Sunday). It's brought my coworkers together (both sharing in the excitement of the 2017 run and bitching about the bad times on Mondays). It gives me a common bond to talk to strangers about here in the city.
One of my favorite quotes, and I wish I had it in front of me, was from John Delaney.
It was from after the Jags' first home game, and he basically said that, for the first time in his life, he saw the Jacksonville community, regardless of race, age, or political differences, standing proudly side-by-side to support something.
One of my fondest memories of working downtown was watching a construction worker in a Blake Bortles jersey standing on top of the Barnett working to restore the roof. People would randomly shout Duval at him, and he'd shout it back every time.
Hard to put a price on little things like that, but I think they serve a higher purpose to a community than a balance sheet can show.
Ken, I strongly agree with this. The Jaguars give the region and the city a common experience and elevate its national identity. Yes, it's been a frustrating and disillusioning common experience in recent years. But I think about Jake Godbold breaking down in tears the day the expansion team was awarded - my doing pretty much the same thing on watching from afar as a diverse Jacksonville audience filled the stands for a Jaguar game on TV - the ecstatic shared experiences of the first Monday night game in Jacksonville, or fans filling the stadium during and after the 1996 playoff win in Denver - even the national awareness of the Duval chant as you mentioned. It all underscores how much a pro sports team is intertwined in the fabric of a community, especially in an often overlooked, often unfairly reviled, one-pro-sports-team city like this one. Many of my childhood memories revolve around Jacksonville's long quest for pro football and how it galvanized the city and brought people together. The wooing of Bud Adams and the Oilers, the USFL Bulls, the big attendance figures and petitions to the NFL for attention for 80s preseason games between the Falcons and Bucs.
I'm also aware that there are quite a few sports commentators who have been outright vindictive in ridiculing Jacksonville, during its quest for a team and now, who would do a collective end-zone dance if the Jaguars left that I think would do significant damage to the city's psyche and national profile.
And while we can cite detached economic studies of what pro sports teams are really worth, and I understand why, I can't discount the intangible benefits that a pro team can bring, and has brought, to Jacksonville. I think we can't too easily dismiss the tourism benefit with people who travel to Jacksonville for the primary purpose of seeing Jaguar games, as well as the benefit of retaining Florida-Georgia and potentially adding additional events that comes with maintaining the stadium at NFL level. There's also factors like the tremendous amount of charitable funding that the Weavers and the Jaguars Foundation have pumped into the community. Yes, it comes with substantial retention costs, and yes, Khan hasn't been nearly as generous as the Weavers. But without the Weavers' having had an NFL team in town, who would've provided that level of support for numerous civic institutions and restoration projects?
My love is for the city first and the team second, and I don't particularly want to see the city accept a bad deal or sacrifice other services and amenities to prostrate itself before the Jaguars. But I don't want to see them given up either. I know how much value the experience of following them has added to my life over the years, even in the many bad seasons, not because it's about the football but because it's about the city
Having grown up here, knowing what the city was like before the Jaguars... and watching City Council meetings on WJCT when the stadium renovations were being debated (many of those Council reps are working for COJ or are still elected officials all these decades later).. and watching the posturing back and forth then... I don't get all worked up when Paul Harden (who was the chief negotiator then as well) or Mark Lamping threaten moving the team. Wayne Weaver was a sharp guy, and walked away from City Council, twice.
I also know that this city and community are tremendously better since the Jags came here. Economic development deals back then centered on bringing in call center jobs (that are all gone now) and industries that dumped pollution everywhere. Jacksonville is a much better city now, has much more of a sense of community now, and economic development deals focus on industries of the future instead of the past. I do not want to go back to those days. The city LITERALLY stunk back then, as the smells from industry wafted through the city (I lived in between two such factories).
For some old curmudgeons that say Jacksonville was better in the late 80's and early 90's... they are telling lies. The people that say Jacksonville is better without the Jaguars, are mostly the same NIMBYs that complain that a Mellow Mushroom is going to cause an entire neighborhood to sink into a black hole.
Believing wholeheartedly that Jacksonville is better with the Jaguars, isn't some denial that the Lot J deal isn't tilted HEAVILY towards the Jaguars and Cordish. Believing in being an NFL city also doesn't mean that one suspends their belief that the Mayor and his administration hasn't acted in the best interests of the people who he was elected to serve... nor does it mean that you also need to believe that its in Jacksonville's best interest to follow this piecemeal approach of breaking up all these real estate development deals into their own separate deals and public asks... until a stadium renovation is even begun to be discussed. Saying yes to a heavily skewed Lot J and then a heavily skewed luxury hotel resort, and then large amounts of money to create some smaller and broken-up parks along the Shipyards site.... puts Jacksonville into a corner where they are so pot-committed, that any stadium deal can be nothing but a rubber-stamp approval. The Jaguars are not putting Jacksonville in an envious position. The Jaguars aren't even putting long-time season ticket members like myself in an envious position by continuing to put a pathetic product on the field. No relationship doesn't have challenges, ebbs and flows and sometimes really tough times when the only way forward is by getting there together.
Nevertheless, anyone arguing for the Jags to take a hike... are the most delusional people in the world. After over 40 years of calling this place home, I'm not going back to a pre-Jaguars life. That city was going nowhere, fast.
The Super Bowl was supposed to do great things for Jacksonville, but can anyone say there is anything lasting that came from it? I remember at the time that many businesses that were suppose to make big profits from it didn't, in fact they suffered.
To me saying Jacksonville is nothing without the Jags is just more of the inferiority complex that the city is famous for. I think JAX needs to invest in itself and stop expecting a 'gamechanger' project or benefactor to do the heavy lifting to making JAX the city it can and wants to be.
JAX is at a turning point. It has invested heavily in the Jags for decades. If it choses to proceed down this path, the entirety of the investment will be too much to walk away from and they will have no choice but to pay vastly more money to give them everything they want.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2020, 03:09:04 PM
The Super Bowl was supposed to do great things for Jacksonville, but can anyone say there is anything lasting that came from it? I remember at the time that many businesses that were suppose to make big profits from it didn't, in fact they suffered.
To me saying Jacksonville is nothing without the Jags is just more of the inferiority complex that the city is famous for. I think JAX needs to invest in itself and stop expecting a 'gamechanger' project or benefactor to do the heavy lifting to making JAX the city it can and wants to be.
JAX is at a turning point. It has invested heavily in the Jags for decades. If it choses to proceed down this path, the entirety of the investment will be too much to walk away from and they will have no choice but to pay vastly more money to give them everything they want.
Agree that the 'gamechanger' mentality has doomed Downtown for some time. Lot J isn't going to be a gamechanger, and trying to create a new 'neighborhood' near the stadium isn't going to somehow spur development over a mile away in the Northbank.
But claiming that the City has 'invested heavily in the Jags for decades'? No, I don't buy that. The stadium has been really, really, really affordable for the City for what has now essentially been 3 decades. Modest improvements have been made since just before the 2005 Super Bowl, and Khan was a '50/50' partner (if you believe the Jags actually spent all that money on the amphitheater and practice facility... because I don't) in building a quality outdoor ampitheater that the City has been looking at ways to build since 4 Mayors ago, and some other stadium improvements like the scoreboards and luxury seating on the South and North endzones.
It is verifiably accurate to say that stadium spends haven't put a strain on the municipal budget (very little money comes from the General Fund, and are instead paid back from various user fees), and COJ hasn't at any times over the last 30 years had to face the choice of continuing to pay for the stadium, or else cut some essential City service.
I will also add that Florida-Georgia and any stadium concerts in Jacksonville will become a thing of the past if the Jags leave town.
Playing in an NFL stadium has been one of the things that has kept Florida-Georgia from leaving and going onto campus like Auburn-Alabama.
Quote from: FlaBoy on December 09, 2020, 03:46:50 PM
I will also add that Florida-Georgia and any stadium concerts in Jacksonville will become a thing of the past if the Jags leave town.
Playing in an NFL stadium has been one of the things that has kept Florida-Georgia from leaving and going onto campus like Auburn-Alabama.
Actually, not having to program around the Jags at all would open up dates for more concerts. Why would GA/FL go to their own stadiums that are not at the same level as Jacksonville's?
Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2020, 04:03:22 PM
Quote from: FlaBoy on December 09, 2020, 03:46:50 PM
I will also add that Florida-Georgia and any stadium concerts in Jacksonville will become a thing of the past if the Jags leave town.
Playing in an NFL stadium has been one of the things that has kept Florida-Georgia from leaving and going onto campus like Auburn-Alabama.
Actually, not having to program around the Jags at all would open up dates for more concerts. Why would GA/FL go to their own stadiums that are not at the same level as Jacksonville's?
I can count on my hands how many concerts were held at the Gator Bowl in my lifetime before the Jags. The only one I ever went to was the Rolling Stones in 1989- was too young (and we were too broke anyway) for the Michael Jackson concert. The Jags, via Bold Events, have put on more concerts at TIAA Bank Field (excluding the amphitheater) in the last three years... then COJ put on during the combined administrations of Godbold, Hazzouri, Austin and Delaney.
Hell, the Jags have even been responsible for most of the exhibition soccer matches that have come through over the last decade. COJ basically eliminated its Sports dept, and even the Gator Bowl Association (who took over most of those duties) couldn't fill the void... and has become another aging relic of the past, all but merging itself with the Jaguars (who now sell sponsorships and luxury travel packages for, and split revenue with the GBA).
The Gator Bowl was in pretty poor shape in the years leading up to being awarded the Jags franchise in 1993. The former Mayor Austin admitted even then that events like FL/GA were on their way out the door without significant capital improvements to the stadium... which taxpayers wouldn't have supported for only FL/GA and the Gator Bowl. If the Jags leave, TIAA Bank Field becomes an obsolete relic like Legions Field in Birmingham.
I believe the only shows ever held at the old Gator Bowl are:
Elvis-1955 and 1956
Jerry Lee Lewis-1961
The Beatles-1964
Chicago-1971
Boots Randolph-1973
Stones/Eagles-1975
Marshall Tucker/Charlie Daniels/38 Special-1976
The Who-1976
Bo Diddley-1981
The Jacksons-1984
The Stones-1989
CityLife, thanks for the research. Even independent of the topic at hand, that's historically interesting to know.
Quote from: fieldafm on December 09, 2020, 02:35:46 PM
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 09, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 09, 2020, 12:27:39 PM
Quote from: Fallen Buckeye on December 08, 2020, 05:54:00 PM
The damage to the quality of life argument is weak imo. A relatively small segment of Jax currently enjoys any boost to their quality of life as a result of the Jags (i.e. - Those with the disposable income to attend games.) Even for those who do attend games, there are only a few game days a year where they get to enjoy this asset.
To me, the quality of life argument is less about going to 8 football games a year, and more about having something that genuinely ties the region together and gives the community something to rally around collectively. Particularly for a city with Jacksonville's characteristics - 800 square miles without the regional identity of a Miami, Orlando, or even St. Augustine.
In the absence of collective cultural institutions like the Jags, what really makes us a community as opposed to a loose collection of sprawling neighborhoods?
Just personally speaking (and to your point, coming from someone who lives in a ZIP code that the city hasn't neglected for decades), having the Jags in Jacksonville has made me closer to my family, friends, and neighbors (going to games together or having cookouts on Sunday). It's brought my coworkers together (both sharing in the excitement of the 2017 run and bitching about the bad times on Mondays). It gives me a common bond to talk to strangers about here in the city.
One of my favorite quotes, and I wish I had it in front of me, was from John Delaney.
It was from after the Jags' first home game, and he basically said that, for the first time in his life, he saw the Jacksonville community, regardless of race, age, or political differences, standing proudly side-by-side to support something.
One of my fondest memories of working downtown was watching a construction worker in a Blake Bortles jersey standing on top of the Barnett working to restore the roof. People would randomly shout Duval at him, and he'd shout it back every time.
Hard to put a price on little things like that, but I think they serve a higher purpose to a community than a balance sheet can show.
Ken, I strongly agree with this. The Jaguars give the region and the city a common experience and elevate its national identity. Yes, it's been a frustrating and disillusioning common experience in recent years. But I think about Jake Godbold breaking down in tears the day the expansion team was awarded - my doing pretty much the same thing on watching from afar as a diverse Jacksonville audience filled the stands for a Jaguar game on TV - the ecstatic shared experiences of the first Monday night game in Jacksonville, or fans filling the stadium during and after the 1996 playoff win in Denver - even the national awareness of the Duval chant as you mentioned. It all underscores how much a pro sports team is intertwined in the fabric of a community, especially in an often overlooked, often unfairly reviled, one-pro-sports-team city like this one. Many of my childhood memories revolve around Jacksonville's long quest for pro football and how it galvanized the city and brought people together. The wooing of Bud Adams and the Oilers, the USFL Bulls, the big attendance figures and petitions to the NFL for attention for 80s preseason games between the Falcons and Bucs.
I'm also aware that there are quite a few sports commentators who have been outright vindictive in ridiculing Jacksonville, during its quest for a team and now, who would do a collective end-zone dance if the Jaguars left that I think would do significant damage to the city's psyche and national profile.
And while we can cite detached economic studies of what pro sports teams are really worth, and I understand why, I can't discount the intangible benefits that a pro team can bring, and has brought, to Jacksonville. I think we can't too easily dismiss the tourism benefit with people who travel to Jacksonville for the primary purpose of seeing Jaguar games, as well as the benefit of retaining Florida-Georgia and potentially adding additional events that comes with maintaining the stadium at NFL level. There's also factors like the tremendous amount of charitable funding that the Weavers and the Jaguars Foundation have pumped into the community. Yes, it comes with substantial retention costs, and yes, Khan hasn't been nearly as generous as the Weavers. But without the Weavers' having had an NFL team in town, who would've provided that level of support for numerous civic institutions and restoration projects?
My love is for the city first and the team second, and I don't particularly want to see the city accept a bad deal or sacrifice other services and amenities to prostrate itself before the Jaguars. But I don't want to see them given up either. I know how much value the experience of following them has added to my life over the years, even in the many bad seasons, not because it's about the football but because it's about the city
Having grown up here, knowing what the city was like before the Jaguars... and watching City Council meetings on WJCT when the stadium renovations were being debated (many of those Council reps are working for COJ or are still elected officials all these decades later).. and watching the posturing back and forth then... I don't get all worked up when Paul Harden (who was the chief negotiator then as well) or Mark Lamping threaten moving the team. Wayne Weaver was a sharp guy, and walked away from City Council, twice.
I also know that this city and community are tremendously better since the Jags came here. Economic development deals back then centered on bringing in call center jobs (that are all gone now) and industries that dumped pollution everywhere. Jacksonville is a much better city now, has much more of a sense of community now, and economic development deals focus on industries of the future instead of the past. I do not want to go back to those days. The city LITERALLY stunk back then, as the smells from industry wafted through the city (I lived in between two such factories).
For some old curmudgeons that say Jacksonville was better in the late 80's and early 90's... they are telling lies. The people that say Jacksonville is better without the Jaguars, are mostly the same NIMBYs that complain that a Mellow Mushroom is going to cause an entire neighborhood to sink into a black hole.
Believing wholeheartedly that Jacksonville is better with the Jaguars, isn't some denial that the Lot J deal isn't tilted HEAVILY towards the Jaguars and Cordish. Believing in being an NFL city also doesn't mean that one suspends their belief that the Mayor and his administration hasn't acted in the best interests of the people who he was elected to serve... nor does it mean that you also need to believe that its in Jacksonville's best interest to follow this piecemeal approach of breaking up all these real estate development deals into their own separate deals and public asks... until a stadium renovation is even begun to be discussed. Saying yes to a heavily skewed Lot J and then a heavily skewed luxury hotel resort, and then large amounts of money to create some smaller and broken-up parks along the Shipyards site.... puts Jacksonville into a corner where they are so pot-committed, that any stadium deal can be nothing but a rubber-stamp approval. The Jaguars are not putting Jacksonville in an envious position. The Jaguars aren't even putting long-time season ticket members like myself in an envious position by continuing to put a pathetic product on the field. No relationship doesn't have challenges, ebbs and flows and sometimes really tough times when the only way forward is by getting there together.
Nevertheless, anyone arguing for the Jags to take a hike... are the most delusional people in the world. After over 40 years of calling this place home, I'm not going back to a pre-Jaguars life. That city was going nowhere, fast.
+ 1000% I think some of the people arguing Jax will be better without the Jags didn't live here in the 80's or 90's. When I moved to Jax the first time in 1988 it was an unknown "backwater" town. I had lived in OH, WI, MD and MA and no one had ever heard of Jacksonville FL, including me. It was a great unknown beach town, but definitely not growing. Examples of the city changing based on the Jags include FIS (and the multiple associated companies, all moving from CA), St. John Town Center, and even a place like Beachwalk with Crystal Lagoon. Non of those exists without Jags. Kind of like "It's a Wonderful Life" without George.
If people want to see Jax as then (and I agree with your statement about never going back), then be the city to lose your NFL team.
Great posts in this thread today, really enjoyed reading them all!
As a transplant who's only known post-Jags Jacksonville, it's really interesting to read the takes on the city before the NFL arrived.
Quote from: fieldafm on December 09, 2020, 04:09:29 PMThe Gator Bowl was in pretty poor shape in the years leading up to being awarded the Jags franchise in 1993. The former Mayor Austin admitted even then that events like FL/GA were on their way out the door without significant capital improvements to the stadium... which taxpayers wouldn't have supported for only FL/GA and the Gator Bowl. If the Jags leave, TIAA Bank Field becomes an obsolete relic like Legions Field in Birmingham.
Preach.
The Citrus Bowl made a pretty serious play for the game in 1993.
Stadium wasn't great and it was further for Georgia, but they offered a huge payout to both schools.
The only way Austin was able to keep the game in the city was through promising $45 million in stadium renovations (it was in the contract that the schools could bail if the renovations weren't complete by 1996), which wouldn't have happened without the Jags.
Also, stumbled upon this 27-year old article from the Chicago Tribune from when Jacksonville was awarded the Jags.
Really interesting to read in light of where we find ourselves with these Lot J negotiations.
Quotehttps://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1993-12-01-9312010110-story.html
SURPRISE! IT'S JACKSONVILLE IN NFL LANDSLIDE!
By Don Pierson, Tribune Pro Football Writer
CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Dec 1, 1993
Jacksonville won't need a Florida behind it anymore to identify its location. The National Football League made the smallest expansion candidate home of the Jacksonville Jaguars in a surprising landslide vote of owners in Rosemont Tuesday.
Jacksonville joined the previously named Carolina Panthers of Charlotte as the two teams to begin play in 1995 in divisions yet to be determined. The Southeast rose again as former NFL cities St. Louis and Baltimore and 25-year suitor Memphis were spurned.
It was one of the greatest come-from-behind victories in NFL history for Jacksonville and owner J. Wayne Weaver, a women's shoe manufacturer who pulled out of the expansion race July 21 in a dispute with the city over renovation of the Gator Bowl.
The city scrambled to get back in and fans bought 10,000 club seats in 10 days. It was exactly the kind of hard-line approach NFL owners admire, and Jacksonville's selection at the expense of the tradition in St. Louis and Baltimore sent an unmistakable message to other NFL cities: Don't mess with your teams and risk losing them.
The vote was 26-2 after a committee recommendation of 10-2, Jacksonville over Baltimore. St. Louis, once the odds-on favorite, didn't get a vote, not even from Bears President Michael McCaskey, a member of the joint committee on expansion and finance that made the recommendation.
McCaskey said he never had pledged a vote to St. Louis despite the involvement of Bears great Walter Payton.
"I pledged my support to Walter," McCaskey explained. "It became an open question which city would have the best presentation."
Payton's role wavered when St. Louis switched ownership groups in midstream. Although he appeared Tuesday with new prospective owner Stan Kroenke and was going to get a 2 percent share, Payton was an example of the confusion over ownership and the new stadium lease that tumbled St. Louis from front-runner to also-ran.
At the last minute, the Kroenke group tried to calm owners' concerns over potential lawsuits by offering to stay in old Busch Stadium and make up the money difference until lease issues could be resolved in the new domed stadium, now under construction.
"Jacksonville just had a much stronger package to offer," McCaskey said.
Eagles owner Norman Braman and Giants co-owner Bob Tisch voted for Baltimore in committee. The two no votes from the full membership came from Braman and Patriots owner James Orthwein, a St. Louis resident who was a key player in the St. Louis expansion effort.
Commissioner Paul Tagliabue dispelled the notion that Orthwein now will move the Patriots to St. Louis, saying the league has an agreement he won't move as long as he owns them.
Realignment will be addressed in March, and Tagliabue has the power to slot the two teams if consensus isn't reached.
Jacksonville, population 844,000, is the nation's 55th television market, lowest of all candidates and NFL cities. But other small markets such as Buffalo, New Orleans and Green Bay have proven that football fervor has no direct relationship to population, especially in a league that shares television revenue. Jacksonville led the old United States Football League in attendance, and the NFL is the only sport in town.
"There was a strong feeling that Jacksonville is a hotbed of football interest, a feeling that the Southeast is the fastest-growing part of the country and that the NFL, even with a team in Charlotte, is under-represented in the Southeast," said Tagliabue, chairman of the expansion committee.
Jacksonville's single-minded devotion to football and its ability to align the business, banking and government community proved decisive. Weaver's negotiations with the city over stadium renovation and his low-rent agreement enabled him to promise fellow owners a huge visitors' share ranging from $1.1 million the first year to $1.39 by the fifth.
The former CEO of Nine West Inc., and owner of Shoe Carnival lives in Connecticut and was criticized as a carpetbagger when he pulled out of the race in July, but Weaver was a hero in Florida and in Rosemont on Tuesday.
"I think our group was very optimistic from the beginning," Weaver said.
Prospective Memphis owner Billy Dunavant said the visitor payout was "a big factor." Dunavant said he would pursue other NFL teams.
McCaskey admitted the shifting St. Louis ownership picture "didn't help them. I don't want to say it hurt them, but stack them up against Wayne Weaver and his group and you say, `These guys have their act together and they look strong.' "
Since Jacksonville has pursued an NFL team the last 15 years, five owners have used the city to improve their own stadium deals-the Colts' Bob Irsay, the Falcons' Rankin Smith, the Oilers' Bud Adams, former Saints owner John Mecom and the Cardinals' Bill Bidwill.
Jacksonville's media donated $500,000 of free advertising during the club-seat ticket drive in late August that Weaver demanded before he would return. One ad promised: "It will be like having the Florida-Georgia game in Jacksonville 10 times a year!"
Dallas owner Jerry Jones summed up the prevailing sentiment: "I think it would be remiss of any city to not step up and do everything they can to keep an NFL team from moving."
Tom Pettway, former owner of the Jaguars, personally recruited Bill Foley to relocate Fidelity from California to Jacksonville. Fidelity was looking to escape California's high cost of living and high tax environment... and Pettway put on the full-court press to ensure Jacksonville (who had a small Fidelity presence with the acquisition of Alltel's title business) was where Fidelity would choose its next home. Pettway even hosted Foley at his personal house for weeks, and later sold him that same property. Foley directly credited the Jaguars ownership (see above) and the growing nature of the city since the birth of the Jaguars as major reasons as to why Jacksonville was the right place to relocate his suite of companies. There were many states and cities that had as good of business-friendly taxation policies and cost of living profiles, that would have gladly given modest incentives to lure two Fortune 500 companies to setup shop.
Fidelity, for its scale, relatively inexpensive public incentives required to get and keep them here expanding, and the huge payrolls they've created... is probably the City's best economic development success story, ever.
This has been some really interesting conversation today. Obviously (or maybe not, I don't know if my birthday is visible), the Jags have been around longer than I've been alive, so I don't have the personal experience of knowing the city prior to that.
The question at the center of my thinking on this topic has always come down to whether it's worth the cost. It's been said (multiple times in this thread alone, including by myself) that keeping the Jaguars in Jacksonville will likely cost at least $1 billion in public subsidy/investment. Obviously, Jacksonville being as large as it is, there are a lot of other issues and causes that would benefit from even a portion of such a sum. And it's hard, really hard, to imagine looking working or desperate or impoverished people in the face and asking them to be okay with taking even a single cent of their money in taxes or fees to pay one of the world's richest men in hopes that there may, possibly, potentially, be some kind of return one day (and definitely not from Lot J itself). Not to mention how it's incredibly difficult to put a price on whatever civic pride and/or national attention the NFL has given Jacksonville.
At the end of the day, that's why I've come around to the idea of a referendum. I'm sick and tired (I think many people are) of feeling lied to and belittled by the team and by Curry about what this project is, what it means, or what it will do. Especially when the team is performing so poorly (even for them), and at a time when all of the other problems in this city are so incredibly visible. I told City Council that I do love the team, but it's hard to feel that love when it just feels like people are being shaken down at the worst possible time. Starting the infrastructure & remediation now and letting there be a vote when it's time for construction is a chance to make some meaningful progress on the project now, while also giving a chance for things to get better out there, and for everyone to get their house in order to make this happen. There doesn't have to be a complete reset on any progress of the project, but coming up with something more cohesive and equitable should be possible.
Putting the entire city over a barrel isn't necessary, and it would never have been if they'd put in the effort to be more honest and gracious from the start. Offering a realistic and authentic vision for the future of the city, that normal people could feel invested in would have helped enormously, and I don't get why they don't seem interested in that.
Quote from: fieldafm on December 09, 2020, 05:18:37 PM
Tom Pettway, former owner of the Jaguars, personally recruited Bill Foley to relocate Fidelity from California to Jacksonville. Fidelity was looking to escape California's high cost of living and high tax environment... and Pettway put on the full-court press to ensure Jacksonville (who had a small Fidelity presence with the acquisition of Alltel's title business) was where Fidelity would choose its next home. Pettway even hosted Foley at his personal house for weeks, and later sold him that same property. Foley directly credited the Jaguars ownership (see above) and the growing nature of the city since the birth of the Jaguars as major reasons as to why Jacksonville was the right place to relocate his suite of companies. There were many states and cities that had as good of business-friendly taxation policies and cost of living profiles, that would have gladly given modest incentives to lure two Fortune 500 companies to setup shop.
Fidelity, for its scale, relatively inexpensive public incentives required to get and keep them here expanding, and the huge payrolls they've created... is probably the City's best economic development success story, ever.
Fidelity's initial connection in Jacksonville was acquiring Alltel's mortgage servicing business (formerly Computer Power) which was much more than a "small presence" as, even then, it serviced over 50% of the nation's mortgages as I recall. They may have had a title business but I have never heard that before. Alltel's business eventually evolved into FIS and Black Knight under Foley's domain as they grew it and expanded it through acquisitions. It's come a long way from starting out as the IT department for Stockton, Whatley & Davin's mortage banking business, itself a top 10 company in that industry in its heyday.
Agree, Fidelity coming to Jacksonville was probably our biggest success story since landing Atlantic Coast Line (now CSX) and Prudential (now only a sliver - on the Southbank - of its former Southeastern hub in the One Call building they built) in the 1950's.
Does Petway, the man, get credit or do the Jags, the team, get the credit? Based on your comments, I am not so sure it doesn't come down mostly to Petway probably selling the far lower costs of doing business here than in Santa Barbara (which I have heard was the main attraction). I can't imagine relocating a Fortune 500 company based mostly on having an NFL franchise. Regardless, I think many people expected the Jags to do much more for us economically speaking. Obviously, many today are not convinced yet that they have.
Foley was the "billionaire who got away." He could have easily bought the Jags but instead moved to Las Vegas and bought an NHL franchise.
I think, like the Navy reopening Cecil field, most of the populace likes the idea of having the Jags here. But, as Mark Woods noted in his column, at what cost? Everything has a limit and the question is how close is Jacksonville to its limit. Other cities have drawn lines in the sand with the NFL. Sometimes it costs them a team. But, is it the end of the world as we know it? Lots of cities are thriving that are not NFL cities so I don't think it is a prerequisite to economic success. Does it give a city that intangible extra - sure - but is it a deciding factor for most people and businesses looking to relocate? I am not so certain. I believe the quality of our educational opportunities would rank way over having a team in attracting new businesses and entrepreneurs to our area. As such, the half cent sales tax just passed for our schools will have an ROI far greater than Lot J or the stadium. It's disappointing to the mayor and much of the council hold up that investment over details and not give a hoot about Lot J's.
Quote from: CityLife on December 09, 2020, 04:39:31 PM
I believe the only shows ever held at the old Gator Bowl are:
Elvis-1955 and 1956
Jerry Lee Lewis-1961
The Beatles-1964
Chicago-1971
Boots Randolph-1973
Stones/Eagles-1975
Marshall Tucker/Charlie Daniels/38 Special-1976
The Who-1976
Bo Diddley-1981
The Jacksons-1984
The Stones-1989
For concerts since, I am wonder if the Jag's could take full credit for all of them. I took my daughter to the stadium to see NSync led by Justin Timberlake who brought along his girlfriend at the time, Brittany Spears (who, herself, recorded a TV special at our Coliseum once). The Jags were here then but I don't recall that they had anything to do with staging the concert. Does anyone know otherwise?
Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2020, 03:09:04 PM
To me saying Jacksonville is nothing without the Jags is just more of the inferiority complex that the city is famous for. I think JAX needs to invest in itself and stop expecting a 'gamechanger' project or benefactor to do the heavy lifting to making JAX the city it can and wants to be.
I listened to a real estate investment presentation last night put on by a group out of Las Vegas. They were trying to sell out of town investors on the Jacksonville market (and JWB). They did mention the Jags early on to say "you know, that place with the jags", but after that they never came up again. Instead, they spent 2 slides on the job market.
Ranked #1 for talent attaction, 3rd largest military presence in US with over 50,000 jobs, 60,000 banking and finance employees, world class healthcare system employing 90,000 people, 3 marine terminals, logistics hub, 5,500 Amazon jobs created since 2017, etc etc....
Then they moved on to quality of life, low cost of living, park system, beach, river, dining, small business community, and on and on and on....
It was honestly refreshing to hear those reasons why Jax is great rather than pony up $200M or our future is lost. Jax has a lot going for it and a bright future. We need to build up our downtown and bring jobs and housing back to the core, but a gamechanger mentality isn't the right way to do it. That said, is 400 apartments, a 120 room hotel, and a medium sized entertainment complex really a gamechanger at all? That's less than Brooklyn Station, 220 Riverside, 200 Riverside, and the new Hilton Garden Inn and about 250% more expensive. It's a start, but it won't make our downtown and it's not even in our current downtown. $200M within 3 blocks of Laura and Forsyth would fundamentally change our downtown and the effects may spill out east to the stadium. It won't happen the other way around.
Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2020, 04:03:22 PM
Quote from: FlaBoy on December 09, 2020, 03:46:50 PM
I will also add that Florida-Georgia and any stadium concerts in Jacksonville will become a thing of the past if the Jags leave town.
Playing in an NFL stadium has been one of the things that has kept Florida-Georgia from leaving and going onto campus like Auburn-Alabama.
Actually, not having to program around the Jags at all would open up dates for more concerts. Why would GA/FL go to their own stadiums that are not at the same level as Jacksonville's?
I have been told by decision makers that the Jags saved FL-GA because of the stadium upgrade. The game was likely gone without the new stadium. Kirby Smart has been pushing to end the game here anyway but it is such a great environment. In a decade, with no great updates to an aging stadium, FL-GA is likely going to campus. It may last a few years if the Jags were to move in 2031 but you will start seeing headlines, "Gator Bowl Stadium need $100 million worth of updates to keep FL-GA Game and High Level Bowl Game".
Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2020, 04:03:22 PM
Quote from: FlaBoy on December 09, 2020, 03:46:50 PM
I will also add that Florida-Georgia and any stadium concerts in Jacksonville will become a thing of the past if the Jags leave town.
Playing in an NFL stadium has been one of the things that has kept Florida-Georgia from leaving and going onto campus like Auburn-Alabama.
Actually, not having to program around the Jags at all would open up dates for more concerts. Why would GA/FL go to their own stadiums that are not at the same level as Jacksonville's?
Here's the thing - there's a large investment to be made by the teams to play the game here, instead of hosting this as a "home and home" so to speak. Additionally, there are "soft costs", like losing a home recruiting weekend (this is an NCAA rule on neutral site games). Finally, both teams home stadiums are WAY larger than Jacksonville's....even with the seats they add for the game.
So...why do they do it? MONEY! TIAA has additional amenities that drive revenue, and the city makes a ton of money though the game itself and things like bed taxes, etc. In exchange, COJ gives the team a very large payout ($2.7M I believe). Additionally, they throw extra money Georgia's way for travel, as they have to fly vs. Florida who packs into buses.
This is why you're seeing neutral site games at a lot of the newer NFL stadiums such as Arlington and Atlanta.
With the stadium in the condition it was in just before the rebuild for the Jaguars, it wasn't in great shape. With the money that's in college football today (compared to the mid 1990's), that game was gone and the Gator Bowl likely would still be here, but it would be one of those December 22nd bowls that competes with Myrtle Beach and Frisco Bowls
QuoteFidelity's initial connection in Jacksonville was acquiring Alltel's mortgage servicing business (formerly Computer Power) which was much more than a "small presence" as, even then, it serviced over 50% of the nation's mortgages as I recall.
CPI is a nice story, and it made a handful of locals here wealthy.
Alltel's presence in Jax was still relatively small potatoes. There were around 200 local employees, and about the same number within that particular division at the company's corporate HQ in Little Rock. Alltel had about 45% of the nation's mortgage servicing business, but that was about to be cut well in half before Fidelity bought that division. That portion of Alltel's business was about to die, as most of the big banks' business were being lost to Fiserv. Alltel hadn't invested in that business, and they were losing clients fast.
QuoteAlltel's business eventually evolved into FIS and Black Knight under Foley's domain as they grew it and expanded it through acquisitions.
Other way around. Alltel's portion of that business was toast if not for Fidelity. The Fidelity suite of companies made huge investments in IT, acquiring other companies and eventually has become a dominant world leader in title services, credit insurance, payment processing services, mortgage servicing and a host of other IT-related services. Fidelity gets credit for their own success.
QuoteThey may have had a title business but I have never heard that before.
Sorry, that was my dyslexia kicking in.
QuotePrudential (now only a sliver - on the Southbank - of its former Southeastern hub in the One Call building they built) in the 1950's.
Prudential's HQ was never located in Jacksonville. Ironically, Fidelity has more employees in that building now then Prudential has.
QuoteDoes Petway, the man, get credit or do the Jags, the team, get the credit? Based on your comments, I am not so sure it doesn't come down mostly to Petway probably selling the far lower costs of doing business here than in Santa Barbara (which I have heard was the main attraction). I can't imagine relocating a Fortune 500 company based mostly on having an NFL franchise. Regardless, I think many people expected the Jags to do much more for us economically speaking. Obviously, many today are not convinced yet that they have.
I don't want to surmise... that's why I am repeating the same basic story that I have personally heard Wayne Weaver, Tom Pettway, Ceree Harden, Ernie Smith (who headed the division) and Bill Foley himself all repeat at various times over the last 15 years about how Fidelity came to Jax.
A CEO of a huge F500 company doesn't get frustrated in the morning while walking on the treadmill and say 'gosh darnit, I'm really tired of these taxes... I just need to find somewhere that is cheap and won't tax me to death'... and two weeks later, goes to the Board and says 'we're moving to Albequerque, NM'. Economic development deals like this are contingent on multiple things- incentives, workforce considerations, taxation policies and above all- relationships with business leaders and government officials. No one is moving a business to a place where the business community doesn't return their phone calls and the Mayor's office is only interested in how much fees they can stick you with. The Jaguars ownership group was the lynchpin in the Fidelity deal here in Jax. The Delaney administration rolled out the red carpet for them, deals were put together to ensure that workforce needs could be met (still in place today), airplane hangers were constructed at JIA to support the corporate travel demands needed for what was at one point three F500 companies, etc, etc. If all it took to get F500 companies to relocate somewhere were low cost of living and low taxes... then Mobile, Alabama would have a dozen of them.
Sorry, but you can't say 'well the Jaguars had nothing to do with that... it was the owners of the Jaguars who helped make that happen'. Like, it only counts if the head coach and punter were involved? You also can't claim 'oh, well the Jaguars haven't done enough for economic development' while simultaneously conceding that Fidelity was the best economic development deal the City has ever done. You can't have it both ways.
Although Downtown still sucks, Jacksonville is a growing Sunbelt city. Without the Jags, we are Birmingham, Mobile, Little Rock, Fresno or Tulsa. I ain't living in any of those places.
QuoteI believe the quality of our educational opportunities would rank way over having a team in attracting new businesses and entrepreneurs to our area.
That's such a false narrative and strawman argument. One is not taking away from the other. One is not being invested in at the expense of the other. You can have an NFL team and a quality school system. At no time in the last 27 years, has a school been unfunded because the municipal budget was saddled with the burden of directing funds instead to the Jaguars. That's like claiming that the frozen burrito from 7-11 tastes bad because someone in Saudi Arabia doesn't eat pork.
QuoteFoley was the "billionaire who got away." He could have easily bought the Jags but instead moved to Las Vegas and bought an NHL franchise.
Foley had the chance to buy the Jags for sure, but by that point had already moved to Vegas to be closer to his vineyards. He has started quite a few more acquisition-based companies in Vegas... along with the NHL team. Fun fact: the old fire station along Riverside Ave was at one point a storage facility for some of his personal wine collection for when he would spend time in Jax.
QuoteBut, as Mark Woods noted in his column, at what cost? Everything has a limit and the question is how close is Jacksonville to its limit.
Yes, it is reasonable to accept that there is a finite limit about what type of public support can be tolerated. Since 1993, the Jaguars have not even come close to that point. No essential City service has been cut or not funded.... because we've instead redirected money to an NFL franchise. Don't have the info on MSA right in front of me, but Jax was the 55th largest TV market in 1993. Its now the 41st. Jax is a Sunbelt city with many great features. I love it here more than many residents can even fathom. Sure, Jax would have continued modest growth without an NFL franchise... but living here before and after the Jags.... this city is objectively night and day better than it was in the late 80's/early 90's. To deny the Jaguars had nothing to do with leapfrogging from being a city where you can dump chemicals to a city where you can move an operations center to employ 500 FinTech professionals... is detached from reality. You have to have a nefarious agenda to argue otherwise. For nearly 30 years, the Jaguars have been an absolute BARGAIN for the city of Jacksonville in relation to public spending versus what the city has become since the NFL came.
Should the Lot J deal be better? Absolutely, yes. Does that mean that its an all-or-nothing thing? No. I don't buy the 'Jags are moving' implications over Lot J. This is all negotiating bravo. Is it consternating as a fan and as a taxpayer? It can be, if you look at it from purely an emotional standpoint instead of being a bit more rational about it. Is Lot J ONE of the things the Jags need to stay in Jax? Probably yes, which is why both sides have to work on making the deal more palatable and not so one-sided. Reason should prevail once the bravado dies down.
QuoteFor concerts since, I am wonder if the Jag's could take full credit for all of them.
The Jaguars have been the promoters for 4 of the last 5 concerts that came to the stadium (Country Music Fest, was an outside promoter, but the Jags had some revenue sharing deals working with that promoter).
As to the U2 and NSync concerts of the early 2000's.... no, the previous Jags ownership group didn't bring those concerts to town (under Khan's ownership, concerts have been a growing part of the team's revenue strategy). But in the same token.. like the FL/GA game, those concerts wouldn't have been held here if the old Gator Bowl with its rusting and leaking structure hanging out in the wind was still standing at One TIAA Bank Plaza.
Good comments, I think the City's taxpayers have to get a better deal on Lot J, when we know there are two more bigs 'asks' coming - Metro Park/Four Seasons and Stadium Upgrades.
One minor nit to pick
Quote
Quote
Prudential (now only a sliver - on the Southbank - of its former Southeastern hub in the One Call building they built) in the 1950's.
Prudential's HQ was never located in Jacksonville. Ironically, Fidelity has more employees in that building now then Prudential has.
You are correct that Prudential's MAIN HQ was not in Jacksonville, I think it was in Newark. But Pru had REGIONAL HQ's in a half-dozen cities around the country, and the South Central Home Office (SCHO) was in Jacksonville, serving several states in the Southeast US.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 10, 2020, 11:53:24 AM
Good comments, I think the City's taxpayers have to get a better deal on Lot J, when we know there are two more bigs 'asks' coming - Metro Park/Four Seasons and Stadium Upgrades.
One minor nit to pick
Quote
Quote
Prudential (now only a sliver - on the Southbank - of its former Southeastern hub in the One Call building they built) in the 1950's.
Prudential's HQ was never located in Jacksonville. Ironically, Fidelity has more employees in that building now then Prudential has.
You are correct that Prudential's MAIN HQ was not in Jacksonville, I think it was in Newark. But Pru had REGIONAL HQ's in a half-dozen cities around the country, and the South Central Home Office (SCHO) was in Jacksonville, serving several states in the Southeast US.
I'm well aware. I have two family members who retired as executives from Prudential.
A regional operations center, and a corporate HQ for a F500 company are worlds apart in terms of economic impact. Prudential was a nice employer for some time in Jacksonville. About half of those jobs locally were administrative and call center reps, with the other half being mainly the better paid jobs like underwriters, middle management and (some) actuarial business. That's not remotely comparable to a F500 HQ.
^To that point, Prudential was never a serious candidate to sponsor naming rights on the Jaguars Stadium. However the NHL Arena in Downtown Newark is....the Prudential Center.
Quote from: fieldafm on December 10, 2020, 12:01:59 PM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 10, 2020, 11:53:24 AM
Good comments, I think the City's taxpayers have to get a better deal on Lot J, when we know there are two more bigs 'asks' coming - Metro Park/Four Seasons and Stadium Upgrades.
One minor nit to pick
Quote
Quote
Prudential (now only a sliver - on the Southbank - of its former Southeastern hub in the One Call building they built) in the 1950's.
Prudential's HQ was never located in Jacksonville. Ironically, Fidelity has more employees in that building now then Prudential has.
You are correct that Prudential's MAIN HQ was not in Jacksonville, I think it was in Newark. But Pru had REGIONAL HQ's in a half-dozen cities around the country, and the South Central Home Office (SCHO) was in Jacksonville, serving several states in the Southeast US.
I'm well aware. I have two family members who retired as executives from Prudential.
A regional operations center, and a corporate HQ for a F500 company are worlds apart in terms of economic impact. Prudential was a nice employer for some time in Jacksonville. About half of those jobs locally were administrative and call center reps, with the other half being mainly the better paid jobs like underwriters, middle management and (some) actuarial business. That's not remotely comparable to a F500 HQ.
If the GOP holds the Senate, and the ridiculously high level of taxes continue in NY without deductions for the state taxes, I think you will continue to see an exodus out of NY and IL, even some out of CA. Now, Texas has been the great beneficiary of the tech company exodus out of CA. Nashville is also now the hot place to go with Tennessee's lack of income tax. However, it looks like the big finance folks are eyeing South Florida at this point. Miami is an international brand with low taxes. It will be interesting to see if we can get some of those jobs with our lower cost of living to consider putting some of their rank and file workforce in a place like Jax even if the executives are in Miami.
QuoteHowever, it looks like the big finance folks are eyeing South Florida at this point. Miami is an international brand with low taxes. It will be interesting to see if we can get some of those jobs with our lower cost of living to consider putting some of their rank and file workforce in a place like Jax even if the executives are in Miami.
^ FlaBoy, I recently started a thread on this very subject, "New York Financials Looking to Move to Florida," if you would like to add to that conversation: https://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,36707.msg507486.html#msg507486 (https://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,36707.msg507486.html#msg507486)
QuoteA regional operations center, and a corporate HQ for a F500 company are worlds apart in terms of economic impact. Prudential was a nice employer for some time in Jacksonville. About half of those jobs locally were administrative and call center reps, with the other half being mainly the better paid jobs like underwriters, middle management and (some) actuarial business. That's not remotely comparable to a F500 HQ.
My understanding was Jacksonville gained a lot of cache from Prudential, a blue chip Fortune 500 company, setting up shop here. Plus, the symbolism of their building, which I recall was the tallest building in Florida when it was built, put a lot of eyes on the City. Too young to recall those times, just repeating what I have gleaned over the years from others and what I have read. Jacksonville at one time was known as the "Hartford of the South" so Prudential adding to that was significant too.
I believe that our 100+ year history as a mecca for insurance, banking and mortgage banking has much to do with laying the foundation for our FinTech orientation today so every company historically operating here gets some credit for that even if they are now gone or otherwise diminished.
Trivia question: Prudential's slogan used to be "own a piece of the rock" referring to its logo, the Rock of Gibraltar. It seems to me they actually had a piece of said rock mounted in their entry plaza (now mostly a parking garage for One Call) in front of the building. What happened to that?
One thing that I think gets lost sometimes when talking about how the subsidies that Jacksonville offers compares to what other markets offer is that $250 million in Jacksonville isn't the same as $250 million somewhere like Kansas City with larger populations, larger economies, and state income taxes to draw from. For better or worse, the same $250 million Lot J is going to put more strain on a taxypayer in Jacksonville than it would put on a taxpayer in most other markets.
Hopefully someone in the city is doing more in-depth research than a guy sitting in Bellwether on his lunch break, but here's some back-of-the-napkin numbers that I pulled together breaking down NFL market sizes, city growth rates, ticket prices, per capita ticket buying burden, and relative impact to taxpayers of a $208 million investment at Lot vs. other NFL markets.
Looking at the numbers, it's definitely more of a chips-all-in move for Jacksonville than it would be for just about any other NFL market, particularly when you consider that we've already got the third highest market strain to fill the stadium each season (second, if you consider Toronto to be part of the Buffalo market).
I know it's a wildly unpopular opinion, but when you see the relative strain that the Jags put on the local economy, I actually don't hate the idea of sending that one home game a year to London in perpetuity to loosen the burden a little bit and spread that money elsewhere into our local economy.
We're growing, but lots of other cities are growing as well, and I don't know if we've ever going to "catch up" to the point where a lot of sacrifices don't have to be made to keep up with the NFL Jones'.
Strongly believe the intangibles outweigh the ante to play, even if the economic studies show negligible impact.
Copying and pasting the numbers because I think they're interesting and I think they put the ask in a little more context than "what are other cities paying?"
And I also think they refute the stupid arguments that Jacksonville isn't a strong NFL market. Our city has over-performed from day one.
(https://snipboard.io/ysTquL.jpg)
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 10, 2020, 12:54:22 PM
Trivia question: Prudential's slogan used to be "own a piece of the rock" referring to its logo, the Rock of Gibraltar. It seems to me they actually had a piece of said rock mounted in their entry plaza (now mostly a parking garage for One Call) in front of the building. What happened to that?
My understanding is that this is now in an outdoor plaza on the riverfront by the OneCall building.
I read anecdotally (I believe in Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil) that Prudential wanted to open their regional HQ in Savannah, but Savannah said no because it was too big. So they opened it in here instead.
I'd love to see Jacksonville and Charlotte's 1995 GDP.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 10, 2020, 01:07:31 PM
One thing that I think gets lost sometimes when talking about how the subsidies that Jacksonville offers compares to what other markets offer is that $250 million in Jacksonville isn't the same as $250 million somewhere like Kansas City with larger populations, larger economies, and state income taxes to draw from. For better or worse, the same $250 million Lot J is going to put more strain on a taxypayer in Jacksonville than it would put on a taxpayer in most other markets.
Hopefully someone in the city is doing more in-depth research than a guy sitting in Bellwether on his lunch break, but here's some back-of-the-napkin numbers that I pulled together breaking down NFL market sizes, city growth rates, ticket prices, per capita ticket buying burden, and relative impact to taxpayers of a $208 million investment at Lot vs. other NFL markets.
Looking at the numbers, it's definitely more of a chips-all-in move for Jacksonville than it would be for just about any other NFL market, particularly when you consider that we've already got the third highest market strain to fill the stadium each season (second, if you consider Toronto to be part of the Buffalo market).
I know it's a wildly unpopular opinion, but when you see the relative strain that the Jags put on the local economy, I actually don't hate the idea of sending that one home game a year to London in perpetuity to loosen the burden a little bit and spread that money elsewhere into our local economy.
We're growing, but lots of other cities are growing as well, and I don't know if we've ever going to "catch up" to the point where a lot of sacrifices don't have to be made to keep up with the NFL Jones'.
Strongly believe the intangibles outweigh the ante to play, even if the economic studies show negligible impact.
Copying and pasting the numbers because I think they're interesting and I think they put the ask in a little more context than "what are other cities paying?"
And I also think they refute the stupid arguments that Jacksonville isn't a strong NFL market. Our city has over-performed from day one.
(https://snipboard.io/ysTquL.jpg)
Green Bay must be counting Milwaukee with it. That's a two hour trip.
Buffalo most definitely does not have Toronto.
The amount of growth here is encouraging, but also in the Daytona-Palm Coast metro and Gainesville metro. These are growing metros within 90 minutes of the stadium. Not to mention the booming northern suburbs of Orlando in Sanford/Seminole. The Jaguars just need to win and they have the potential for a regional reach. Also, the NFL is a national brand and each franchise can be a national brand. Kansas City is not a big market, but its national reach is insane right now because they won a Super Bowl, they are favorites for another, and they have a name brand at QB. There are little kids in Oregon, Virginia, and South Carolina growing up as Chiefs fans because of Mahomes and the success.
^Green Bay pulls in Milwaukee + Madison.
And data for New York & Los Angeles includes 2 teams/16 regular season home games per market.
Quote from: FlaBoy on December 10, 2020, 03:19:21 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 10, 2020, 01:07:31 PM
One thing that I think gets lost sometimes when talking about how the subsidies that Jacksonville offers compares to what other markets offer is that $250 million in Jacksonville isn't the same as $250 million somewhere like Kansas City with larger populations, larger economies, and state income taxes to draw from. For better or worse, the same $250 million Lot J is going to put more strain on a taxypayer in Jacksonville than it would put on a taxpayer in most other markets.
Hopefully someone in the city is doing more in-depth research than a guy sitting in Bellwether on his lunch break, but here's some back-of-the-napkin numbers that I pulled together breaking down NFL market sizes, city growth rates, ticket prices, per capita ticket buying burden, and relative impact to taxpayers of a $208 million investment at Lot vs. other NFL markets.
Looking at the numbers, it's definitely more of a chips-all-in move for Jacksonville than it would be for just about any other NFL market, particularly when you consider that we've already got the third highest market strain to fill the stadium each season (second, if you consider Toronto to be part of the Buffalo market).
I know it's a wildly unpopular opinion, but when you see the relative strain that the Jags put on the local economy, I actually don't hate the idea of sending that one home game a year to London in perpetuity to loosen the burden a little bit and spread that money elsewhere into our local economy.
We're growing, but lots of other cities are growing as well, and I don't know if we've ever going to "catch up" to the point where a lot of sacrifices don't have to be made to keep up with the NFL Jones'.
Strongly believe the intangibles outweigh the ante to play, even if the economic studies show negligible impact.
Copying and pasting the numbers because I think they're interesting and I think they put the ask in a little more context than "what are other cities paying?"
And I also think they refute the stupid arguments that Jacksonville isn't a strong NFL market. Our city has over-performed from day one.
(https://snipboard.io/ysTquL.jpg)
Green Bay must be counting Milwaukee with it. That's a two hour trip.
Buffalo most definitely does not have Toronto.
The amount of growth here is encouraging, but also in the Daytona-Palm Coast metro and Gainesville metro. These are growing metros within 90 minutes of the stadium. Not to mention the booming northern suburbs of Orlando in Sanford/Seminole. The Jaguars just need to win and they have the potential for a regional reach. Also, the NFL is a national brand and each franchise can be a national brand. Kansas City is not a big market, but its national reach is insane right now because they won a Super Bowl, they are favorites for another, and they have a name brand at QB. There are little kids in Oregon, Virginia, and South Carolina growing up as Chiefs fans because of Mahomes and the success.
One of the biggest Jags disappointments since day one IMO is the complete failure to build a regionally strong fanbase. You look at the two teams below us on that list. The Bills have the most Canadian season ticket holders by a mile in the league and a big hold through Rochester and as far as Syracuse. The Saints control virtually all of LA, MS and other decent secondary markets like Mobile and right out to Pensacola.
I'd like to think that one of the benefits of Lot J might be that its much more appealing to spend a day out/weekend in Jacksonville if you are coming from Gainesville, Savannah, Tallahassee, Daytona all decent sized markets that the Jags should be strong in, but we are no more stronger than the Dolphins, Bucs, Falcons, Saints and the usual bandwagon teams like the Steelers and the Cowboys. Winning would help as well of course. The Saints for instance were pretty stagnant pre Katrina if I remember right and didn't have the regional appeal they do in the Gulf South now as they did then. Their fanbase was largely confined to New Orleans and Baton Rouge.
Excellent points, Landfall and FlaBoy. You're right about the Saints, who were at significant risk of being moved in 2005. The signing of Brees that offseason was historically transformative to their fortunes.
I think the Jags have been a bit unlucky in terms of talent to record ratio - I mean, compare this roster to the almost completely talent-free roster that managed to win 4 games in 2013 - but that's probably a blessing in disguise in that now, finally, comes the opportunity to take a franchise QB and build an enduring regional fan base. Better to win 1 or 2 and get your long-term guy rather than win 5 and draft at #7 or #8 again.
I always thought it odd that the Weaver-era Jaguars essentially gave up on building a regional media network too. Look at the list of radio affiliates the Jaguars had in 1995 vs. in the mid-to-late 2000s. The Jags probably didn't fully take advantage of building regional appeal with their initial 1995-2000 success because the Dolphins and Bucs were good at the same time, and the Falcons made a Super Bowl in that time frame too.
"I'd like to think that one of the benefits of Lot J might be that its much more appealing to spend a day out/weekend in Jacksonville if you are coming from Gainesville, Savannah, Tallahassee, Daytona all decent sized markets that the Jags should be strong in,"
This is already true for St. John's Town Center. Jags need to capitalize on this for a combined visit. Really need to have stadium tours on weekends that start at the practice field and ends at LIVE!
Quote from: landfall on December 10, 2020, 04:16:55 PM
One of the biggest Jags disappointments since day one IMO is the complete failure to build a regionally strong fanbase. You look at the two teams below us on that list. The Bills have the most Canadian season ticket holders by a mile in the league and a big hold through Rochester and as far as Syracuse. The Saints control virtually all of LA, MS and other decent secondary markets like Mobile and right out to Pensacola.
I'd like to think that one of the benefits of Lot J might be that its much more appealing to spend a day out/weekend in Jacksonville if you are coming from Gainesville, Savannah, Tallahassee, Daytona all decent sized markets that the Jags should be strong in, but we are no more stronger than the Dolphins, Bucs, Falcons, Saints and the usual bandwagon teams like the Steelers and the Cowboys. Winning would help as well of course. The Saints for instance were pretty stagnant pre Katrina if I remember right and didn't have the regional appeal they do in the Gulf South now as they did then. Their fanbase was largely confined to New Orleans and Baton Rouge.
Someone pointed out in this thread how the Jaguars might not even be North Florida's favorite football team. That would be the Gators, who are on the way to win a championship again. It really is worth pointing out how much on-field performance matters, because after seasons as bad as we've had, people start feeling like suckers.
I wonder if/how the idea of Lot J making Jax more of a day trip place will be helped once Brightline or perhaps improved Amtrak service come to Jacksonville.
Imagine being able to get on a train in Daytona and get off downtown, and ride the Skyway (well, the way things are looking, more likely an Uber) to Lot J to hang out for the day, hopping between some of the museums and restaurants before you catch a game at TIAA Bank (or hell, even the Jumbo Shrimp or an event at the Arena). And at the end of the night, you hop back on a train home. If we ever get leadership with heads out of the gutter, imagine doing the same on an Amtrak from Tallahassee or Savannah or even Gainesville. The Game Day Express, anyone?
QuoteSomeone pointed out in this thread how the Jaguars might not even be North Florida's favorite football team. That would be the Gators
Not according to TV ratings over the last 26 years.
Quote from: jaxjags on December 10, 2020, 05:21:14 PM
"I'd like to think that one of the benefits of Lot J might be that its much more appealing to spend a day out/weekend in Jacksonville if you are coming from Gainesville, Savannah, Tallahassee, Daytona all decent sized markets that the Jags should be strong in,"
This is already true for St. John's Town Center. Jags need to capitalize on this for a combined visit. Really need to have stadium tours on weekends that start at the practice field and ends at LIVE!
Has there been any talk about Lot J having some sort of Jags oriented attraction, like a hall of fame or retail store included?
Quote from: thelakelander on December 10, 2020, 08:27:36 PM
Quote from: jaxjags on December 10, 2020, 05:21:14 PM
"I'd like to think that one of the benefits of Lot J might be that its much more appealing to spend a day out/weekend in Jacksonville if you are coming from Gainesville, Savannah, Tallahassee, Daytona all decent sized markets that the Jags should be strong in,"
This is already true for St. John's Town Center. Jags need to capitalize on this for a combined visit. Really need to have stadium tours on weekends that start at the practice field and ends at LIVE!
Has there been any talk about Lot J having some sort of Jags oriented attraction, like a hall of fame or retail store included?
The FL-GA Hall of Fame would be nice have open to the public and maybe combine with a Jaguars oriented hall of fame. Maybe get Fanatics involved?
The Southern Rock/Music Hall of Fame will be close.
Depictions of Lot J have included a Jaguars store.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 09, 2020, 10:54:19 AM
I may have missed it but how did we settle on Lot J being Phase 1 for the site of the proposed project? Plus, since things are still so conceptual, would the Jags be open to considering switching the site to an adjacent parking lot?
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-q5Hc4bh/0/63c5b60c/X3/Dlc4k9SX0AEhvi4-X3.jpg)
Knowing the history of land uses south of Adams Street, would it have made any sense to put the Lot J project on Lots P, N & M? Some benefits would be:
1. Development has greater visibility to Arlington Expressway (51,500 AADT vs 16,600 AADT for Hart Bridge Expressway/Gator Bowl Boulevard) while still maintaining visibility and direct access to Gator Bowl Boulevard.
2. Leaving Lot J capped, the pond and antenna in place, significantly reducing environmental clean up/infrastructure costs ($92.7 million). This gives council a big public win and speeds up the project's completion date by three years.
3. We're turning Gator Bowl Boulevard into a race track. Adams and Duval Streets are more pedestrian friendly and infilling between them would create more cohesive synergy with the Eastside, arena, baseball grounds, Cathedral District and proposed soccer stadium, without sacrificing connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and Daily's Place. In other words, a shift north creates an opportunity for immediate clustering within the Sports District and potentially more economic spinoff in the surrounding area.
4. Allows more time to figure out the proper way to deal with Lot J in the future. Given what we know now, perhaps the practice fields should be built on top of Lot J since their present site is more suitable for infill development? Or perhaps its cleanup should be included as a part of negotiations to update the stadium and extend the lease a couple of years down the road?
This all just makes too much sense, Lake.
Was looking for the post and couldn't find it, but way, way back when the idea first came up about moving development off the Shipyards property and onto the parking lots in conjunction with Cordish, I had heard that Lot P was the initial idea, with a portion of the development overlooking the Baseball Grounds like Ballpark Village.
Somewhere along the way (specifically when brainstorming with the city and Cordish on the Amazon proposal, which necessitated giving the Shipyards to Amazon), the Jags/Cordish fell in love with the idea of building the four block "new neighborhood" on Lot J instead.
Even the current three-or-four phase plan touches all of the surrounding lots (and the Fairgrounds), but leaves both sections of Lot P as surface parking.
On remediation for J, take it for what it's worth, but a friend mentioned to me today that the Jags honestly do think that Lot J can be fully remediated for $5-$6 million, and that Cordish is looking for a minority-owned business to do the job. Also said that they're more worried about subsurface debris than pollutants, and a part of the reason that the development turned mid-rise rather than higher-rise with the high-rise elements potentially pushed to Phase II is because their testing found a ton of shit in the ground from the site's past (literal train equipment and concrete anchors for removing ships from the water) that would make it a challenge/cost-prohibitive to build high on Lot J.
If this is true though, you'd think the Jags would just come out and say it.
Also if it's true, you'd think Phase I's price tag would have dropped considerably after it went mid-rise.
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 10, 2020, 09:37:34 PM
Depictions of Lot J have included a Jaguars store.
Jags gym (these typically have around a $1 million buildout for Cordish) and Jags store.
Plus a street-level Daily's (take that, Whole Foods!)
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 10, 2020, 06:13:26 PMSomeone pointed out in this thread how the Jaguars might not even be North Florida's favorite football team. That would be the Gators.
That's a weird way to spell "Seminoles," Marcus 8)
So many loud-mouthed Gator fans in this city, so few degrees ;D
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 10, 2020, 04:38:25 PMI always thought it odd that the Weaver-era Jaguars essentially gave up on building a regional media network too. Look at the list of radio affiliates the Jaguars had in 1995 vs. in the mid-to-late 2000s. The Jags probably didn't fully take advantage of building regional appeal with their initial 1995-2000 success because the Dolphins and Bucs were good at the same time, and the Falcons made a Super Bowl in that time frame too.
Wayne Weaver considers this one of his biggest regrets as owner of the Jags.
The lack of regional marketing outside.
His rationale was that there was so much excitement in the early years, he basically didn't have to market the team.
Admits that rather than being proactive about marketing throughout his run as owner, he only really focused on it when he had to (e.g. when attendance was down).
When Shad Khan bought the team, this was one of the first changes that was made. Chad Johnson in particular over at the Jags was really instrumental in actually getting the Jags on a bus to do outreach in places like Gainesville, Tallahassee, Brunswick, and even places like St. Cloud, Oviedo, and Lake City.
I'd be really curious to hear Wayne Weaver's thoughts on Lot J.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 10, 2020, 11:40:39 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on December 09, 2020, 10:54:19 AM
I may have missed it but how did we settle on Lot J being Phase 1 for the site of the proposed project? Plus, since things are still so conceptual, would the Jags be open to considering switching the site to an adjacent parking lot?
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-q5Hc4bh/0/63c5b60c/X3/Dlc4k9SX0AEhvi4-X3.jpg)
Knowing the history of land uses south of Adams Street, would it have made any sense to put the Lot J project on Lots P, N & M? Some benefits would be:
1. Development has greater visibility to Arlington Expressway (51,500 AADT vs 16,600 AADT for Hart Bridge Expressway/Gator Bowl Boulevard) while still maintaining visibility and direct access to Gator Bowl Boulevard.
2. Leaving Lot J capped, the pond and antenna in place, significantly reducing environmental clean up/infrastructure costs ($92.7 million). This gives council a big public win and speeds up the project's completion date by three years.
3. We're turning Gator Bowl Boulevard into a race track. Adams and Duval Streets are more pedestrian friendly and infilling between them would create more cohesive synergy with the Eastside, arena, baseball grounds, Cathedral District and proposed soccer stadium, without sacrificing connectivity with TIAA Bank Field and Daily's Place. In other words, a shift north creates an opportunity for immediate clustering within the Sports District and potentially more economic spinoff in the surrounding area.
4. Allows more time to figure out the proper way to deal with Lot J in the future. Given what we know now, perhaps the practice fields should be built on top of Lot J since their present site is more suitable for infill development? Or perhaps its cleanup should be included as a part of negotiations to update the stadium and extend the lease a couple of years down the road?
This all just makes too much sense, Lake.
Was looking for the post and couldn't find it, but way, way back when the idea first came up about moving development off the Shipyards property and onto the parking lots in conjunction with Cordish, I had heard that Lot P was the initial idea, with a portion of the development overlooking the Baseball Grounds like Ballpark Village.
Somewhere along the way (specifically when brainstorming with the city and Cordish on the Amazon proposal, which necessitated giving the Shipyards to Amazon), the Jags/Cordish fell in love with the idea of building the four block "new neighborhood" on Lot J instead.
Even the current three-or-four phase plan touches all of the surrounding lots (and the Fairgrounds), but leaves both sections of Lot P as surface parking.
On remediation for J, take it for what it's worth, but a friend mentioned to me today that the Jags honestly do think that Lot J can be fully remediated for $5-$6 million, and that Cordish is looking for a minority-owned business to do the job. Also said that they're more worried about subsurface debris than pollutants, and a part of the reason that the development turned mid-rise rather than higher-rise with the high-rise elements potentially pushed to Phase II is because their testing found a ton of shit in the ground from the site's past (literal train equipment and concrete anchors for removing ships from the water) that would make it a challenge/cost-prohibitive to build high on Lot J.
If this is true though, you'd think the Jags would just come out and say it.
Also if it's true, you'd think Phase I's price tag would have dropped considerably after it went mid-rise.
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 10, 2020, 09:37:34 PM
Depictions of Lot J have included a Jaguars store.
Jags gym (these typically have around a $1 million buildout for Cordish) and Jags store.
Plus a street-level Daily's (take that, Whole Foods!)
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 10, 2020, 06:13:26 PMSomeone pointed out in this thread how the Jaguars might not even be North Florida's favorite football team. That would be the Gators.
That's a weird way to spell "Seminoles," Marcus 8)
So many loud-mouthed Gator fans in this city, so few degrees ;D
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on December 10, 2020, 04:38:25 PMI always thought it odd that the Weaver-era Jaguars essentially gave up on building a regional media network too. Look at the list of radio affiliates the Jaguars had in 1995 vs. in the mid-to-late 2000s. The Jags probably didn't fully take advantage of building regional appeal with their initial 1995-2000 success because the Dolphins and Bucs were good at the same time, and the Falcons made a Super Bowl in that time frame too.
Wayne Weaver considers this one of his biggest regrets as owner of the Jags.
The lack of regional marketing outside.
His rationale was that there was so much excitement in the early years, he basically didn't have to market the team.
Admits that rather than being proactive about marketing throughout his run as owner, he only really focused on it when he had to (e.g. when attendance was down).
When Shad Khan bought the team, this was one of the first changes that was made. Chad Johnson in particular over at the Jags was really instrumental in actually getting the Jags on a bus to do outreach in places like Gainesville, Tallahassee, Brunswick, and even places like St. Cloud, Oviedo, and Lake City.
I'd be really curious to hear Wayne Weaver's thoughts on Lot J.
In a perfect world to me, we would be clustering this around A Philip Randolph more which already has entertainment uses and is closer to Downtown. I think the site of the Doro or First Coast News/Building on Corner of Adams would be great locations for the Jax Live concept. Cordish could even keep some of the Doro like it did in Louisville with their version of a Cordish development. Baseball and events at the arena occur more frequently anyway. The current plan for the Doro could be put on Lot P along Adams. Put another development on Lot J at the top of the retention pond (office building) that can make use of the parking in Lot J as well.
This could create synergy for several blocks of development. Jags fans would go to that area, and already do with Intuition, for the 8-9 games a year. But it would be more convenient to the Baseball Ground and Arena. This also leaves Lot J to park for games and to tailgate.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 10, 2020, 11:40:39 PM
On remediation for J, take it for what it's worth, but a friend mentioned to me today that the Jags honestly do think that Lot J can be fully remediated for $5-$6 million, and that Cordish is looking for a minority-owned business to do the job. Also said that they're more worried about subsurface debris than pollutants, and a part of the reason that the development turned mid-rise rather than higher-rise with the high-rise elements potentially pushed to Phase II is because their testing found a ton of shit in the ground from the site's past (literal train equipment and concrete anchors for removing ships from the water) that would make it a challenge/cost-prohibitive to build high on Lot J.
If this is true though, you'd think the Jags would just come out and say it.
Also if it's true, you'd think Phase I's price tag would have dropped considerably after it went mid-rise.
It sucks that we're stuck to Lot J. Just switching to a cleaner adjacent parking lot, changes so many dynamics of this deal by saving time, the taxpayers millions and making the entire sports district cohesive between the stadium and arena. It also gives the Eastside more of a permanent economic boost.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 08, 2020, 03:53:18 PM
^Spoiler: The Jags are putting the $65 million towards renting an actual breadbox.
Another City Council meeting on Lot J just ended.
Not a lot coming out of it, besides the final seven items starting to take shape that there's no agreement on.
Lamping conceded that the Jags are fine waiting until January 7th for a vote and support the City Council taking their time to vet the deal, though I think a lot of this might stem from a realization (voiced from several of the fence-sitters at the last public meeting) that a rushed vote probably isn't advantageous to the Jags.
It's interesting to try to read into these meetings, particularly in terms of who attends and who doesn't, but right now, a couple of council members seem to be probable no votes at this point:
1) Carlucci (still beating the same drum about an independent market study and about not fleecing season ticket holders (I'd personally be more upset about the underprivileged/underserved community than NFL season ticket holders struggling to get by)
2) DeFoor (she hasn't been able to hide her bad attitude/disapproval about this thing since that first workshop she hosted with Carlucci; requested a $150 million clawback provision today, which went over with an already cranky Mark Lamping about as well as you'd expect)
The following Council members I've got as definite yes votes on my Lot J bracket:
1) Gaffney (would vote yes twice if he could)
2) Cumber
3) Bowman
4) Diamond
5) Newby
6) Freeman
7) White
8 ) Pittman
Fence-sitters feel like:
1) Becton (who's been very vocal but hard to read about which way he'll ultimately vote)
2) Salem (he seemed like more of a yes coming out of this meeting than he's been yet)
3) Dennis (he's worried about the size of the spend and where it's going to leave our borrowing capacity going into other asks)
4) Hazouri (for a guy who's constantly complaining about City Council not getting their questions answered, he's now showed up at exactly 0 of these Q&A workshops; I think he ultimately votes yes)
The other five council members, I've got no clue, but judging from the fact that most haven't attended many meetings, I'd be more inclined to think that they've been yes votes from the beginning than no votes.
IF Becton and Salem swing yes, or Becton and Hazouri vote yes, I have a hard time thinking there's much of a chance that this thing gets voted down.
Also, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
Another Council meeting today.
Another no-show by Hazouri (making the most outspoken guy about unanswered questions a perfect 0% in workshop attendance).
Moving Boylan into the definite yes category, and Salem into the very probable yes category.
I also get the sense that there's a real chance that Dennis could vote no as well.
If I'm Vegas, the over-under on no votes is looking like 4.5 right now.
If DeFoor and Hazouri's new proposed clawback amendment passes (which I don't think it will), I think it'd be close to unanimous.
I actually like the clawback idea. Perhaps with a timeframe, something like "20 years after the Money is disbursed" or something like that.
It offers the taxpayers SOME protection.
According to Chris Hong @ the T-U, Gaffney stated, "God has communicated there are 13 votes to pass Lot J"
I guess we don't need to vote now.
Quote from: Steve on December 11, 2020, 10:31:11 AM
According to Chris Hong @ the T-U, Gaffney stated, "God has communicated there are 13 votes to pass Lot J"
THAT'S MY COUNCILMAN! ❤ DISTRICT 7 HAS BEEN ANOINTED!
Quote from: Steve on December 11, 2020, 10:31:11 AM
According to Chris Hong @ the T-U, Gaffney stated, "God has communicated there are 13 votes to pass Lot J"
I guess we don't need to vote now.
The most jacksonville thing i've seen in a while.
Lol, how about also sending a few winning seasons the Jags way?!
I've seen politicians use some clever ways around Sunshine Law, but using God is next level.
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/4b/4b29a5ad6929e348b71a6ff56702d4901042e1d8be40c4d87ab40f54a607e1d2.jpg)
Quote from: Steve on December 11, 2020, 10:31:11 AM
According to Chris Hong @ the T-U, Gaffney stated, "God has communicated there are 13 votes to pass Lot J"
I guess we don't need to vote now.
I speculated on this in an earlier post. Gaffney may be representing the Eastside but, first and foremost, he is representing Curry. When I observed his comments in meetings, early on, it was clear he was supporting Lot J, facts be damned. My perception is this is his SOP for anything the mayor puts in front of the council. The question is why?
Trying to get a sense of the number of people that will visit this. Lamping's estimate on numbers felt generous IMO.
I was thinking how many events at the Sports Complex draw 5k plus. 8/9/10? Jags games games. 36 Icemen games, 72 Jumbo Shrimp. Plus theres also the Florida Georgia game, the Gator Bowl and the Florida Florida State baseball game. I think they estimated 35-40 annual events in Daily's place when it opened. Does anyone know if you can find an event history or have any idea how many concerts/events Daily's Place and the Arena do? Do the Sharks still draw decent attendances?
I suppose you have other things like the Fairgrounds and other misc Jags events, i.e. training camp and draft night. I am guessing the Jags hope that Lot J will also provide a "hub" for fans to congregate at on Sundays for road games, likewise college football saturdays. Looking at Power and Light and Ballpark Village, their atrium type venues seem to hold a lot of concerts and events as well, i.e country bands and then big events planned around major sporting events i.e Superbowls and USANT soccer games. I expect they'll make a big push for the "weekend crowd". People wanting to drink, dine and/or party on friday and saturday nights.
^It's a smaller Landing. The Landing drew more than 4 million annually before 2010, according to DVI.
^Might check with Visit Jacksonville on event attendance. I know at one time they use to publicize in the newspaper the number of attendees at conventions and events in town but haven't seen it in years. I am guessing it is still around, just have to ask for it.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 10, 2020, 11:40:39 PM
So many loud-mouthed Gator fans in this city, so few degrees ;D
Hey now. I got my Masters from UF! May need to revise those math courses in Tallahassee to add a review in basic counting skills. ;)
I love the idea of shifting the project to the adjacent lots, but I don't think they'd be keen on that. After all, Shad wants the 4 Seasons in Metro Park. Leaving a parking lot between that hotel and one of the main attractions might be a hard sell.
^That's what people say but the reality is there will be no 4 Seasons or anything else on Metropolitan Park before Lot J opens (ex 2026 or 2027) or negotiations involving the stadium begin. So there's no reason why figuring out and paying for the Lot J parcel can't take place and be included within the stadium improvement figure. Only in Jax do we drop an insane amount of money on things that could be completely avoidable if we were willing to view things from a higher and longer term level and then plan and implement accordingly.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 11, 2020, 09:58:35 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 08, 2020, 03:53:18 PM
^Spoiler: The Jags are putting the $65 million towards renting an actual breadbox.
Another City Council meeting on Lot J just ended.
Not a lot coming out of it, besides the final seven items starting to take shape that there's no agreement on.
Lamping conceded that the Jags are fine waiting until January 7th for a vote and support the City Council taking their time to vet the deal, though I think a lot of this might stem from a realization (voiced from several of the fence-sitters at the last public meeting) that a rushed vote probably isn't advantageous to the Jags.
It's interesting to try to read into these meetings, particularly in terms of who attends and who doesn't, but right now, a couple of council members seem to be probable no votes at this point:
1) Carlucci (still beating the same drum about an independent market study and about not fleecing season ticket holders (I'd personally be more upset about the underprivileged/underserved community than NFL season ticket holders struggling to get by)
2) DeFoor (she hasn't been able to hide her bad attitude/disapproval about this thing since that first workshop she hosted with Carlucci; requested a $150 million clawback provision today, which went over with an already cranky Mark Lamping about as well as you'd expect)
The following Council members I've got as definite yes votes on my Lot J bracket:
1) Gaffney (would vote yes twice if he could)
2) Cumber
3) Bowman
4) Diamond
5) Newby
6) Freeman
7) White
8 ) Pittman
Fence-sitters feel like:
1) Becton (who's been very vocal but hard to read about which way he'll ultimately vote)
2) Salem (he seemed like more of a yes coming out of this meeting than he's been yet)
3) Dennis (he's worried about the size of the spend and where it's going to leave our borrowing capacity going into other asks)
4) Hazouri (for a guy who's constantly complaining about City Council not getting their questions answered, he's now showed up at exactly 0 of these Q&A workshops; I think he ultimately votes yes)
The other five council members, I've got no clue, but judging from the fact that most haven't attended many meetings, I'd be more inclined to think that they've been yes votes from the beginning than no votes.
IF Becton and Salem swing yes, or Becton and Hazouri vote yes, I have a hard time thinking there's much of a chance that this thing gets voted down.
Also, I know he's got his rep, but watching Paul Harden in action gives me new respect for how good this guy is at doing his thing and greasing the wheels.
Another Council meeting today.
Another no-show by Hazouri (making the most outspoken guy about unanswered questions a perfect 0% in workshop attendance).
Moving Boylan into the definite yes category, and Salem into the very probable yes category.
I also get the sense that there's a real chance that Dennis could vote no as well.
If I'm Vegas, the over-under on no votes is looking like 4.5 right now.
If DeFoor and Hazouri's new proposed clawback amendment passes (which I don't think it will), I think it'd be close to unanimous.
Despite the vocal anti-Curry sentiment, Dennis told News4Jax that he's leaning yes on the project.
15-4 is my final prediction.
Carlucci, DeFoor, Hazouri, and one other random no.
Maybe Becton, maybe one of the other council members who's been absent/silent on the proceedings.
Interesting info re: economic impact of NFL teams cited by Parvez Ahmed, professor of finance at University of North Florida, in his column in the Florida Times-Union:
Quote
Data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis shows that among the top 20 metro areas, ranked by personal income of its citizens, only nine have an NFL team. Many do not have any major league sports teams. Despite boasting an NFL franchise for nearly three decades, Jacksonville ranks 122 out of 384 metro areas in terms of per capita personal income.
Full column at: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2020/12/12/guest-column-subsidies-pro-sports-teams-make-little-economic-sense/6512672002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2020/12/12/guest-column-subsidies-pro-sports-teams-make-little-economic-sense/6512672002/)
Nate Monroe lays another log on the Lot J fire. This time, the twisted game over Metropolitan Park to accommodate a Four Seasons for Khan. A few pertinent quotes:
QuoteSo now, the city would be taking on the expense, the administrative burden and all the manpower required in undoing an eternal promise to maintain one park, only to have to clean up a nearby piece of land and convert it to a park (a multi-million dollar project), just so Khan's Four Seasons can be a few thousand feet closer to the stadium. The entire plan almost seems designed to be as inefficient, costly to taxpayers and complicated to figure out as any possible alternative...
...The irony is that if Lot J actually turned out to be what the Jaguars claim it will be — a new urban "neighborhood" that catalyzes all sorts of future development in the area — it would become a residential magnet in need of a park in rough proximity and size to Met Park, which itself could use more foot traffic. The dilemma simply speaks to the tortured and scattershot approach the city is taking to downtown development. All its hopes are pinned on the whims of one man, who seems to change his mind pretty often and happens to not have taxpayers' best interests front of mind all the time (that's what city officials are supposed to protect).
Full article at: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/17/jaguars-land-swap-done-deal/3929334001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/17/jaguars-land-swap-done-deal/3929334001/)
^As a guy who fully supports the Lot J project - even though Curry negotiated a bum deal - I'm a hard pass on the Four Seasons project as it's currently been presented.
Even with the wild price tag of Lot J, an argument can be made that it's something that the average Jacksonville citizen can enjoy, it will improve quality of life in the city, and it'll help give the Jags some complimentary business to boost their local revenue and keep them competitive in Jax.
There's just no way, however, that the City Council can justify giving our riverfront public park and up to $126 million in incentives to a billionare to build a mega-luxury playground for the wealthiest out-of-towners.
It's obscene in this economic climate.
Ditto subsidizing a 52,000 square feet orthopedic medical center to help "boost medical tourism" (spoiler: it's the same fad cookie-cutter orthopedic center primariily intended to serve the NFL team that you're seeing pop up in other NFL developments around the country (see: the 52,000 sf orthopedic center at Title Town in Green Bay, the orthopedic center in Viking Village in Minneapolis, etc.).
Monroe's got a great point that we're actively trying to de-park our park when - if Lot J is actually built - it's about to have its best chance to succeed. It's the equivalent of subsidizing all this work on Laura Street and demoing the Landing because it hasn't worked yet.
The ONLY way I'd be in favor of public subsidies for the Four Seasons project would be if:
1) Shad Khan personally paid for a new Veteran's Park to replace our waterfront park that we're presumably giving him either free or deeply discounted (building the park feels like the lowest hanging fruit for Khan too in terms of earning goodwill)
2) The vast majority of subsidies were in the form of rev grants paid out on the back end over several decades
3) The only cash given would be for minor (<$30 million) infrastructure work (extending the riverwalk, building the promenade connecting Lot J to Met Park, etc.).
I'd rather provide incentives for Kahn to move the headquarters of Flex-N-Gate to anchor these proposals. At the very least, Talleyrand should be considered for a plant. There's 54 of those globally. That type of investment with job opportunities to residents would be more valuable to Jax taxpayers.
Agree Lake, and quite frankly, if the team doesn't improve in a major way no body is gonna want to associate with them anyway. Watching today, I would not blame any QB who we draft for flat out not signing a contract. A QB (or any other player for that matter) has to SURVIVE the first 4 years in the league and especially must avoid a major injury to make it into the promised land of hundred million dollar contracts. No guarantee any QB we draft will get that far......
Kinda silly to see how sentiment toward the Jags swings so wildly back and forth depending on circumstance.
Would be really interesting to see how the results of the UNF poll might change if the Jags land Trevor Lawrence.
Also, looks like Nashville is on the list to get NFL'd next.
Why does this sound familiar?
QuoteLast week, the Titans and Mayor John Cooper announced that Metro and the team are engaged in formal discussion regarding the stadium's future. The discussions are said to be aimed at securing the Titans' future in Nashville and to "facilitate the creation of a new Nashville neighborhood surrounding the facility," according to a news release.
The vision for the East Bank neighborhood project is expected to create thousands of jobs and generate millions in new tax revenue annually that would be used to mitigate the city's direct financial burden outlined in the present lease.
"Our biggest priority throughout this process has been to envision a space that Nashvillians would be proud of, built with the community in mind," Titans controlling owner Amy Adams Strunk said in a statement last week. "The idea of our stadium in a neighborhood where locals can live, work and enjoy, is something we've been focused on for a long time.
https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2020/12/21/titans-nissan-stadium-renovations-east-bank.html
^One thing is certain. They won't be the last.
I had no idea that Nissan had the naming rights for the stadium the Titans play in.
Nissan Stadium, Tennessee Titans
Nissan Titan
That's pretty clever
Yeah, never understood why Jaguar (manufacturer) didn't jump all over naming rights here way back. Guess they got off to a rocky start with the threat of lawsuit tied to the original logo....
Nissan's North American headquarters, along with two factories, are all located in the Nashville area. Generally, corporate sponsorships of that size usually have a local HQ tie-in.
That being said, many of the Lot J renderings hint at a Toyota sponsorship... which would make sense given that Jacksonville is home to Southeast Toyota Distributors. The other large yacht usually docked Downtown around Florida/Georgia weekend and during a small window in the summer months is that of the Jim Moran/JM Family Enterprises corporate ilk. Toyota was previously a long-time sponsor of the Gator Bowl, via the SET/JMFE corporate relationship.
^ If I recall correctly, Southeast Toyota was one of Khan's initial Flex-N-Gate customers as well.
Quote from: blizz01 on December 22, 2020, 05:31:01 PM
Yeah, never understood why Jaguar (manufacturer) didn't jump all over naming righted here way back. Guess they got off to a rocky start with the threat of lawsuit tied to the original logo....
Jaguar was owned by Ford when we got the Jags. They dumped the company in 2008 (along with Land Rover after buying Jaguar in 1990 and Land Rover in 2000) so it doesn't appear that Jaguar cars were ever front and center for Ford (per Wikipedia, Ford never made a profit on Jaguar which might also add to no interest in naming rights).
I don't think they sell enough Jags to justify the cost of naming a stadium. Seems stadium names go with more mass/larger market brands or brands trying to break into larger markets. After almost 100 years, I don't see Jaguar cars ever going there.
Flex-n-Gate Stadium?
Quote from: MusicMan on December 22, 2020, 09:47:59 PM
Flex-n-Gate Stadium?
Perfect for that annual college game around New Year's - The Flex-n-Gator Bowl
Covid is reeking havoc on 4th Street Live! in Downtown Louisville.....
QuoteHard Rock Cafe to close Louisville location permanently
It's another blow for Fourth Street Live!, Louisville's publicly subsidized downtown entertainment district catering tourists and convention-goers.
Bourbon giant Beam Suntory said earlier this month that it would permanently close the Jim Beam Urban Stillhouse, a micro-distillery visitors attraction opened at Fourth Street Live! only five years earlier.
In June, Eddie Merlot's steakhouse, another Fourth Street Live! fixture, closed permanently.
Full article: https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/hard-rock-cafe-to-close-louisville-location-permanently/article_8bcef180-448e-11eb-bb69-77877f99f319.html?fbclid=IwAR2Kgprl23fY-_mhH1a_rBqOiPFAS9xJ0U6q75duStq9MnnIHl0ad0Bpa-g
I have a Flex-n-Gate roadside tire change jack in the back of my Nissan Frontier. It was the OEM jack that came with the truck. Thanks, Shad! :P
Quote from: Peter Griffin on December 23, 2020, 08:04:07 AM
I have a Flex-n-Gate roadside tire change jack in the back of my Nissan Frontier. It was the OEM jack that came with the truck. Thanks, Shad! :P
I'm sure it wasn't gratis.
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/sports/mayor-curry-calls-newspaper-column-an-embarrassment-says-city-should-support-jaguars-ownership/77-073ad9b2-d3cb-4f68-9c36-e4992320d00f
^ Thanks, Mayor, for bringing more attention to Nate Monroe's columns. The more people understand Monroe's perspectives and facts not offered up by the Mayor, the better.
The comment below is another argument I have trouble buying into. Khan paid the Weavers a purchase price well below other NFL team valuations precisely because the Jags play in a small market. As such, he can't reasonably demand that he needs help to keep the franchise afloat as he doesn't require the same dollar returns that would be appropriate if he invested more in a higher priced team.
As a sophisticated investor, he knew the lay of the land when he bought the team. He also found some "hidden" gold by playing games in London. If it hasn't done better financially, it may have more to do with the teams performance under his ownership and that's on him. Despite all that, reports indicate he has tripled his investment. So, what is there to complain about?
Quote
Curry was asked during the 1010 interview about what role the planned development is in helping the team remain financially viable.
"The team has said since they've been here that this is a small market and they have to be economically viable and we as outsiders can debate what that means," Curry said. "That's not up to us, that's not our business decision. The business decision is with the owner and those that advise the owner. They tell us and I believe them, that this is how we build an economically viable franchise."
^ all good points. However, it's also worth pointing out, what the hell does he mean about that's not our business decision? When it requires hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars it becomes our business decision, because it's our damned money!
Quote from: jaxlongtimer link=topic=35949.msg508035#msg508035 date=quote author=jaxlongtimer link=topic=35949.msg508035#msg508035 date=1609200712]
The comment below is another argument I have trouble buying into. Khan paid the Weavers a purchase price well below other NFL team valuations precisely because the Jags play in a small market. As such, he can't reasonably demand that he needs help to keep the franchise afloat as he doesn't require the same dollar returns that would be appropriate if he invested more in a higher priced team.
Not entirely true. They paid the exact same entry fee the Carolina Panthers paid. Putting the NFL hat on for a second, they certainly expected more from Jacksonville in 25 years. I mean, while the Charlotte market isn't amazing, Charlotte has grown its corporate base much more then we have (and kept more during M&A). If they had to do it again, I'm sure they would have awarded the franchise to Oakland, St. Louis, or Baltimore.
Now with all of that said, I agree that Monroe's article nailed it.
While there's a lot more to consider, this pretty much sums it up on what's taken place in these communities since the era of them being awarded an NFL franchise:
Charlotte MSA:
1990 - 1,024,643
2019 - 2,636,883
Jacksonville MSA:
1990 - 925,213
2019 - 1,559,514
Back in those days, we were essentially the same size. 30 years later, we're not in the same league anymore.
So what's the over/under on how all the excitement around Trevor Lawrence is going to affect this deal? The time seems ripe for a "rally around the team, costs be damned" spirit. Curry's certainly trying to make that happen.
^I think Lot J was going to pass either way, Lawrence or no Lawrence.
But if he turns out to be as good of a pro as he was in college and the team suddenly gets good in, I think the talk of "are the Jags worth keeping in Jacksonville" largely disappears and the average citizen is more likely to support the future asks regarding the stadium.
Gaffney and several council members are apparently holding a press conference in front of City Hall re: Lot J tomorrow morning.
Seems premature to announce that the project has the necessary votes to move forward.
Unless something has changed over the holidays, it also seems unnecessary to hold a pep rally to try to sway fencesitters.
Doubt the Jags have made a major concession over the holidays either.
Wild, disconnected for the holidays guess is that it's got something to do with minority business involvement with the project or something having to do with the Eastside.
Gaffney has a meeting with Eastsiders tonight. I suspect the meeting and the announcement may be linked.
Article about Lawrence and what that could mean for the city and NFL:
https://sports.yahoo.com/trevor-lawrence-landing-in-jacksonville-could-impact-nfl-and-london-to-tune-of-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-021942615.html
Here's Nate Monroe's (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1343914734056329219) take:
QuoteA lot of this column reads like bullshit spin fed to the writer by NFL sources hoping to leverage city officials. But it's worth noting in the three scenarios laid out here — all of which include Lawrence as a successful QB — the Jags leave Jacksonville in two of them.
^Dumb, slapdick article that just regurgitates the Jags' and NFL's talking points. Sad!
^^Agree. Pure, speculative garbage written by someone who doesn't have a firm grasp on the market.
RE: The London game - Wildy unpopular opinion, but I think the London game is a good thing for Jacksonville.
While we're waiting for the market to grow, the fanbase to mature across multiple generations, and the team to win consistently, 8 home games a season stretches the local economy reallllly thin.
I think we can fill the stadium 8 times a season (with the help of opposing fans, if we're being honest) when the economy is good and the product on the field is competitive and exciting, but it's pretty damn tough during a downturn (as we saw during the recession when our opener only got 38,000 throught the gate) or during consistently bad seasons.
It's only going to get tougher next season when we move to 9 home games a year every other season with the expansion to a 17-game regular season. I don't even know if I'd be mad having 7 home games a year in Jacksonvile for the next few years, 1 home game a year in London during our seasons with 8 home games, and 2 home games a year in London only during the years that we add that extra bonus home game.
I'm fine with letting London have a non-marquee game a year to prop up the Jags' bottom line at someone else's expense and allowing that discretionary spending to find its way to other local businesses instead.
I'd be even more fine with the arrangement if the city actually made something of all the delegates it sends over to London each year to trump up business for Jacksonville. We're how many years into this arrangement, and how many London businesses have opened up shop in the 904?
And I'd be even more fine with it if the arrangement was with Orlando instead (people forget that Wayne Weaver explored this possibility at one point), allowing us to build up a strong regional fanbase by fielding one game a year (or the preseason) over there to drum up some new fans who would in turn travel to Jacksonville for home games and return that money to our local economy.
And I'd be even MORE fine with it if we worked out an arrangement with Orlando that shipped us a couple of Magic games to Jax in return :D
All that said, whether Trevor Lawrence is our savior or a bust, the team's long term future in Jacksonville is ultimately going to come down to one question:
Are we willing to invest $X00 million into the stadium or not?
If we're willing to pay half for whatever the Jags' determine will be necessary to modernize TIAA Bank Field to the new NFL standard, I think the franchise stays put through 2050.
If we're not, they find a city willing to build them a new stadium.
With Lot J appearing to be a foregone conclusion, I think it really is that simple.
Nate Monroe responds to Lenny https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2020/12/29/jaguars-biggest-fan/4072701001/
Meanwhile, can some of the smart people here help me with some math?
The reports say that the London game represents 11% of the team's revenue. Assuming, for simplicity, this is only talking about the 'gate' at home games (which, I concede, is probably a hugely over simplistic). Ignoring the pre-season games, there are 8 home games. So, each home game should be 12.5% of the revenue, which means the London game is underperforming?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 29, 2020, 09:56:23 PM
Meanwhile, can some of the smart people here help me with some math?
The reports say that the London game represents 11% of the team's revenue. Assuming, for simplicity, this is only talking about the 'gate' at home games (which, I concede, is probably a hugely over simplistic). Ignoring the pre-season games, there are 8 home games. So, each home game should be 12.5% of the revenue, which means the London game is underperforming?
^The London game has historically yielded about 1.5 to 2 times the revenue for the Jags as a game in Jacksonville.
Some seasons, that one game has contributed up to 17% of local revenue for the Jags.
The reason it's not a clean percentage of total home games as described above is because other things gets lumped in to our local revenue, in addition to just the home games (most significantly, Bold Events concerts at Daily's Place and the stadium).
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 29, 2020, 09:40:42 PM
^^Agree. Pure, speculative garbage written by someone who doesn't have a firm grasp on the market.
RE: The London game - Wildy unpopular opinion, but I think the London game is a good thing for Jacksonville.
The London game is only a good thing for Jacksonville if it actually keeps the other games in Jacksonville. If it ultimately serves as a pretense to ship more games over and contribute to a move somewhere else later, then it isn't a good thing.
Quote
While we're waiting for the market to grow, the fanbase to mature across multiple generations, and the team to win consistently, 8 home games a season stretches the local economy reallllly thin.
Only the first is in any way Jacksonville's responsibility as a city. The team just hasn't been around as long as many others, and we don't control the on-field product.
This is just my crackpot theory here, but I think intercity rail, whether through Brightline or state-funded Amtrak could be a lucrative way of expanding the market. Imagine in 2030 being able to hop on a train in Daytona, get off in LaVilla, Uber to the stadium for the game, drinks, food, all that, and still end the night in your own bed. Making it easy to experience the team without having to get in your car and drive 3 hours roundtrip, and someone has to be DD, and traffic, ugh. The prospect of a "Gameday Express" is strangely alluring, at least to me.
Quote
It's only going to get tougher next season when we move to 9 home games a year every other season with the expansion to a 17-game regular season. I don't even know if I'd be mad having 7 home games a year in Jacksonvile for the next few years, 1 home game a year in London during our seasons with 8 home games, and 2 home games a year in London only during the years that we add that extra bonus home game.
I'm fine with letting London have a non-marquee game a year to prop up the Jags' bottom line at someone else's expense and allowing that discretionary spending to find its way to other local businesses instead.
I'd be even more fine with the arrangement if the city actually made something of all the delegates it sends over to London each year to trump up business for Jacksonville. We're how many years into this arrangement, and how many London businesses have opened up shop in the 904?
Again, I think it's a matter of what the actual motive is. Whether it's just making the team a little extra cash to keep things working, or it's a pretense for eventually exiting the market.
It's worth noting that we're now going to be seeing a post-Brexit UK, and I have no idea how desperate they might be to build an economy independent of the EU. If the game can somehow serve as an avenue to directing some of that desperation our way, then that's a big win for us. I imagine the biggest test of that would be if a direct UK-JAX flight ever comes to fruition. Plus, we don't know how well or poorly our city's leadership is managing that effort.
Quote
And I'd be even more fine with it if the arrangement was with Orlando instead (people forget that Wayne Weaver explored this possibility at one point), allowing us to build up a strong regional fanbase by fielding one game a year (or the preseason) over there to drum up some new fans who would in turn travel to Jacksonville for home games and return that money to our local economy.
And I'd be even MORE fine with it if we worked out an arrangement with Orlando that shipped us a couple of Magic games to Jax in return :D
I didn't know that. And yeah, assuming such a deal would actually lend itself to building a regional fanbase (not sure how many people would ignore it and head to Tampa for Brady instead), it'd be pretty cool. Not sure how inter-sport deals would work though, since IDK what leverage the city has on the Magic to do a Jax game.
Quote
All that said, whether Trevor Lawrence is our savior or a bust, the team's long term future in Jacksonville is ultimately going to come down to one question:
Are we willing to invest $X00 million into the stadium or not?
If we're willing to pay half for whatever the Jags' determine will be necessary to modernize TIAA Bank Field to the new NFL standard, I think the franchise stays put through 2050.
If we're not, they find a city willing to build them a new stadium.
With Lot J appearing to be a foregone conclusion, I think it really is that simple.
It's going to be a matter of what everyone's stomachs are for that kind of spending as the dust clears from COVID and the new Mayor is settling in (assuming Project Lifetime really does take until late 2023).
Given no JEA sale, and the likely lack of a BJP-style sales tax, that's all debt, which means $X00 million on top of that cost in interest.
Now, since we'd be talking about the actual stadium and not ancillary development, I would expect there to be a substantially better attitude about it. If DIA (hopefully them and not just the next Mayor's office) negotiates a reasonable-ish deal vs putting us over a barrel again, I think it'd pass easily enough, even moreso if Trevor Lawrence is winning lots of games for us.
There'd still be a ton of frustration from marginalized communities about how we're all too happy to open everyone's wallets for a billionaire and his millionaires while their sidewalks and sewers don't exist, but I imagine we'd do what we always do to them, either empty promises or outright vitriol for threatening the team.
The biggest problem we have with the Jags is that we have no one trustworthy negotiating on the behalf of the public's interest. The mayor's office has proven itself time and time again that their interests don't align with taxpayers. Hopefully this dynamic changes with the next administration.
The last 2 posts put hopes on "the next mayor/administration" negotiating with the taxpayer's interests first, and not the Jaguars' We still have to get past the current Mayor's Lot J sweetheart deal. How much will the City be able to borrow for Stadium Upgrades and Four Seasons Metro Park after borrowing one-quarter billion dollars for an ever-shrinking Lot J? And this is just for the football team. What about the things the City is supposed to be responsible for, like infrastructure, especially in long-ignored areas, and dealing with rising river and sea levels, and so on?
I don't see a way the current deal doesn't pass in the next few weeks in some form. You heard Gaffney....God even told him they had the votes to pass lol. I have no idea about everything else, outside of raising taxes.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 29, 2020, 11:24:09 PMHow much will the City be able to borrow for Stadium Upgrades and Four Seasons Metro Park after borrowing one-quarter billion dollars for an ever-shrinking Lot J?
Easy answer:
Not enough.
Garrett Dennis might be the only member of City Council who's rightly pointed out that our borrowing capacity isn't going to allow for all of these big ticket projects to be debt-financed.
Stadium improvements feel like they're going to end up on a referendum tied to a tax increase.
Which is what makes this Trevor Lawrence thing fascinating.
People are so fickle when it comes to sports.
Lot J would have FLOWN through City Council with much less public opposition had legislation been introduced in late 2017 or early 2018.
A year and change later, it's a totally different story.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 29, 2020, 10:50:35 PM
The London game is only a good thing for Jacksonville if it actually keeps the other games in Jacksonville. If it ultimately serves as a pretense to ship more games over and contribute to a move somewhere else later, then it isn't a good thing.
That, my friend, is the billion dollar question.
I've
never bought the conspiracy that Shad Khan has a secret agenda to move the team to London.
It just doesn't pass the smell test.
This is a guy who came to America with like $50 to his name and is so tight with money that he foreclosed on an organic farm in Orange Park for like $250k. I just don't see a universe where he's spent years paying half for stadium renovations, designed and co-financed Daily's Place, engaged high-priced firms like Beyer Blinder Belle, Populous, and Cordish on massive development plans, etc. if his motiviation was to move the team to London.
Say what you want about Lot J and how much of a sweetheart deal it is, but again, I just don't see the leap in logic between "Shad Khan wants to pump $100-$200 million of his personal money into Lot J (depending on the split with Cordish)" and "Shad Khan has secret plans to move the team to London."
If it was his desire to move the Jags away from Jacksonville, all he would have needed to do is nothing. No proactive stadium improvements. No ancillary development to boost local revenue. No Bold Events and stadium shows to pad the team's finances. No proactively engaging the city on stadium talks aimed to secure a long-term lease agreement with corresponding stadium upgrades. Just quietly allow the revenue streams to fall to last place relative the rest of the league, throw your hands up in the air, and vacate the lease and move to another market.
There's just a mountain of evidence since Shad Khan bought the Jags that the franchise wants to be in this market long-term and is actively working to make that happen, and almost no evidence whatsoever that the team wants to move to London (and almost no evidence that the NFL even wants a team in London). But people have been talking about it for years as though it's a foregone conclusion and using it as ammunition against the Jags.
Totally get why people hate losing games to London, but the Jags have been super transparent since the beginning about why they play a game in London each year. Every single year at the State of the Franchise they present the very real numbers about the financial impact those games have on the organization. The optics can be trash, but I genuinely do think it's far, far, far less a shady secretive plan to relocate the team, and far, far more a means to an end for the Jags in their obsessive goal of moving out of the bottom quartile of teams in terms of revenue.
Is it possible that Khan is kicking the tires in case things don't work out in Jax long-term? Sure. But I firmly think the franchise has it better here than people think (and that the Jags let on). It's a great long-term home for the franchise.
P.S. Brenda Priestly Jackson is appearing with Gaffney tomorrow (along with Newby and Pittman).
Going to assume it's safe to move her to the Yes column now as well.
15-4 seems like a good betting line going into the New Year.
Last thing - Curry has become a true embarrassment to the city these last few months.
From the Twitter behavior.
To the weird call to arms against the Times-Union.
To backing out of the Christmas Tree lighting (I was in Hemming that night; pathetic to be scared off by that small protest; protip - you don't want protestors to use your kids' names, don't post personal info about your kids on the same account that you use to shout down Council members, troll the general public, and trying to get @'d by your favorite hip-hop artists).
To the odd sports-radio appearances.
Dude needs to go.
I'm not saying it'd be London, there are plenty of other cities in America that have been talked about. But when even Lamping is bringing up that he's been given advice about it, and this article is mentioning it, and they call themselves a "free-agent team" and put taxpayers over a barrel like this with no clear interest in serious compromises to make it work, it begs the question.
Assuming Khan knows the market, he should also be able to reasonably estimate how much taxpayers are willing to bear before the NFL breaks their backs. Half the issue we've discussed about Lot J is that the product we're being shown doesn't look like what it should if he's putting in as much money as he claims.
As far as Curry, the burden falls on quite a few people (including Duval Dems and assorted advocacy groups) for not making enough of a case to get him out in 2019 when we had the chance. Unless people are ready to make the case for a recall, he's here until 2023, save him running for something else before then.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 30, 2020, 12:22:39 AM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 29, 2020, 10:50:35 PM
The London game is only a good thing for Jacksonville if it actually keeps the other games in Jacksonville. If it ultimately serves as a pretense to ship more games over and contribute to a move somewhere else later, then it isn't a good thing.
That, my friend, is the billion dollar question.
I've never bought the conspiracy that Shad Khan has a secret agenda to move the team to London.
It just doesn't pass the smell test.
This is a guy who came to America with like $50 to his name and is so tight with money that he foreclosed on an organic farm in Orange Park for like $250k. I just don't see a universe where he's spent years paying half for stadium renovations, designed and co-financed Daily's Place, engaged high-priced firms like Beyer Blinder Belle, Populous, and Cordish on massive development plans, etc. if his motiviation was to move the team to London.
Say what you want about Lot J and how much of a sweetheart deal it is, but again, I just don't see the leap in logic between "Shad Khan wants to pump $100-$200 million of his personal money into Lot J (depending on the split with Cordish)" and "Shad Khan has secret plans to move the team to London."
If it was his desire to move the Jags away from Jacksonville, all he would have needed to do is nothing. No proactive stadium improvements. No ancillary development to boost local revenue. No Bold Events and stadium shows to pad the team's finances. No proactively engaging the city on stadium talks aimed to secure a long-term lease agreement with corresponding stadium upgrades. Just quietly allow the revenue streams to fall to last place relative the rest of the league, throw your hands up in the air, and vacate the lease and move to another market.
There's just a mountain of evidence since Shad Khan bought the Jags that the franchise wants to be in this market long-term and is actively working to make that happen, and almost no evidence whatsoever that the team wants to move to London (and almost no evidence that the NFL even wants a team in London). But people have been talking about it for years as though it's a foregone conclusion and using it as ammunition against the Jags.
Totally get why people hate losing games to London, but the Jags have been super transparent since the beginning about why they play a game in London each year. Every single year at the State of the Franchise they present the very real numbers about the financial impact those games have on the organization. The optics can be trash, but I genuinely do think it's far, far, far less a shady secretive plan to relocate the team, and far, far more a means to an end for the Jags in their obsessive goal of moving out of the bottom quartile of teams in terms of revenue.
Is it possible that Khan is kicking the tires in case things don't work out in Jax long-term? Sure. But I firmly think the franchise has it better here than people think (and that the Jags let on). It's a great long-term home for the franchise.
I'm not saying there is any 'conspiracy' to move the team to London. But keep in mind that Khan made a serious attempt to buy Wembley stadium from the FA (and would've succeeded if there hadn't been a massive public backlash). He clearly has demonstrated an interest in increasing his presence in London (in terms of sports). Maybe he isn't planning on moving the team to London - but I personally think he would if he was given the opportunity (and the terms were favourable).
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 30, 2020, 12:22:39 AM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 29, 2020, 10:50:35 PM
The London game is only a good thing for Jacksonville if it actually keeps the other games in Jacksonville. If it ultimately serves as a pretense to ship more games over and contribute to a move somewhere else later, then it isn't a good thing.
That, my friend, is the billion dollar question.
I've never bought the conspiracy that Shad Khan has a secret agenda to move the team to London.
It just doesn't pass the smell test.
This is a guy who came to America with like $50 to his name and is so tight with money that he foreclosed on an organic farm in Orange Park for like $250k. I just don't see a universe where he's spent years paying half for stadium renovations, designed and co-financed Daily's Place, engaged high-priced firms like Beyer Blinder Belle, Populous, and Cordish on massive development plans, etc. if his motiviation was to move the team to London.
Say what you want about Lot J and how much of a sweetheart deal it is, but again, I just don't see the leap in logic between "Shad Khan wants to pump $100-$200 million of his personal money into Lot J (depending on the split with Cordish)" and "Shad Khan has secret plans to move the team to London."
If it was his desire to move the Jags away from Jacksonville, all he would have needed to do is nothing. No proactive stadium improvements. No ancillary development to boost local revenue. No Bold Events and stadium shows to pad the team's finances. No proactively engaging the city on stadium talks aimed to secure a long-term lease agreement with corresponding stadium upgrades. Just quietly allow the revenue streams to fall to last place relative the rest of the league, throw your hands up in the air, and vacate the lease and move to another market.
There's just a mountain of evidence since Shad Khan bought the Jags that the franchise wants to be in this market long-term and is actively working to make that happen, and almost no evidence whatsoever that the team wants to move to London (and almost no evidence that the NFL even wants a team in London). But people have been talking about it for years as though it's a foregone conclusion and using it as ammunition against the Jags.
Totally get why people hate losing games to London, but the Jags have been super transparent since the beginning about why they play a game in London each year. Every single year at the State of the Franchise they present the very real numbers about the financial impact those games have on the organization. The optics can be trash, but I genuinely do think it's far, far, far less a shady secretive plan to relocate the team, and far, far more a means to an end for the Jags in their obsessive goal of moving out of the bottom quartile of teams in terms of revenue.
Is it possible that Khan is kicking the tires in case things don't work out in Jax long-term? Sure. But I firmly think the franchise has it better here than people think (and that the Jags let on). It's a great long-term home for the franchise.
When Weaver sold the Jags to Khan, didn't he say that one of the permanent stipulations would be that the Jags remain in Jacksonville and never be moved? Is it possible that the contractual or sales agreement to Khan from Weaver, made have stipulated or iterated that the Jags forever remain in Jacksonville and never be sold? I believe that could be possible and I agree with all that you have said; maybe Khan can never move the team from Jax; maybe sell it yes, but it must remain in Jax.
^ No. According to Mark Lamping, the only thing obligating Khan to stay at this point is the existing lease at TIAA Bank. He described themselves as a "free-agent team" based on that.
I remember Sam Kovaris interviewing Wayne Weaver after the announcement that he sold the team. Weaver said there was no way to put anything in the sale agreement about moving the team, but that he was convinced that Kahn was not interested in moving the team and was committed to keeping the team in Jacksonville. Weaver also said other buyers had approached him, but would not sell because those buyers did not have the commitment to Jacksonville.
Quote from: Steve on December 29, 2020, 08:01:48 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer link=topic=35949.msg508035#msg508035 date=quote author=jaxlongtimer link=topic=35949.msg508035#msg508035 date=1609200712]
The comment below is another argument I have trouble buying into. Khan paid the Weavers a purchase price well below other NFL team valuations precisely because the Jags play in a small market. As such, he can't reasonably demand that he needs help to keep the franchise afloat as he doesn't require the same dollar returns that would be appropriate if he invested more in a higher priced team.
Not entirely true. They paid the exact same entry fee the Carolina Panthers paid. Putting the NFL hat on for a second, they certainly expected more from Jacksonville in 25 years. I mean, while the Charlotte market isn't amazing, Charlotte has grown its corporate base much more then we have (and kept more during M&A). If they had to do it again, I'm sure they would have awarded the franchise to Oakland, St. Louis, or Baltimore.
Now with all of that said, I agree that Monroe's article nailed it.
You are referring to the fee paid by Weaver & Co. at the Jags inception. I am referring to the later purchase price paid by Khan to Weaver. That price was well below the value of other NFL teams, no doubt, because of the Jags lesser potential in our smaller market.
Khan is aiming for a financial windfall by holding the Jags financial performance to the same standards of larger markets, hence the London games, Daily's, Lot J, etc. to get us there. The fact that he has already roughly tripled the team's value is not, apparently, enough to satisfy his greed. This is unfair to the citizens of Jacksonville and we must draw a line in the sand and say enough is enough.
If the NFL has issues with Jacksonville not living up to larger market returns, then they should have (a) never awarded us a franchise to begin with and (b) we, the citizens of Jacksonville, are fighting a losing battle as we can't change our demographics fast enough to satisfy their financial interests and we should just go on and throw in the towel now given the inevitable desire of the NFL to move the franchise no matter what sacrifices we make locally.
Also, I found the letter below to the Times Union of interest, especially the comment I bolded about fastest growing cities.
Quote
Jacksonville doesn't need the NFL
First Lenny Curry hoodwinked the people of Jacksonville into approving a future sales tax to fund the looming pension fund debt whose impact won't be felt until he's long gone and forgotten. Then Lenny Curry appointed the JEA Board and CEO who conspired to sell off one of the City's most valuable assets. Now Lenny Curry is in cahoots with Shad Kjan, a political supporter, to hand over hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to a billionaire with a history of losing sports teams and ho-hum design concepts. And behind the scenes, Lenny Curry is scurrying to offer even more of our riverfront property--our urban jewel Metropolitan Park--to Khan in a shady land swap deal. What will it take for our City Council to stand up to this lame duck mayor and stop giving our money to slick developers?
Business Insider recently ranked the best and fastest growing cities in the U.S. Of the top 25, NOT ONE is home to an NFL team. We don't need Khan and we don't need the Jaguars and their endless demands for more money. What we do need are leaders who put the citizens of Jacksonville first, who understand Jacksonville's identity is inexorably tied to the St. Johns River, and who realize great cities are defined by clean and safe streets, excellent schools, modern, sustainable infrastructure, a diverse pool of employable citizens; grand public gathering spaces (Met Park!), art and architecture, and most importantly, the people they were elected to serve.
Helen Urban, Atlantic Beach
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/2020/12/28/letters-readers-jacksonville-doesnt-need-nfl/4037132001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/2020/12/28/letters-readers-jacksonville-doesnt-need-nfl/4037132001/)
QuoteI just don't see a universe where he's spent years paying half for stadium renovations, designed and co-financed Daily's Place, engaged high-priced firms like Beyer Blinder Belle, Populous, and Cordish on massive development plans, etc. if his motiviation was to move the team to London.
Say what you want about Lot J and how much of a sweetheart deal it is, but again, I just don't see the leap in logic between "Shad Khan wants to pump $100-$200 million of his personal money into Lot J (depending on the split with Cordish)" and "Shad Khan has secret plans to move the team to London."
I seriously doubt that Khan has any money invested in the stadium district or even will once Lot J is completed. Given the size and quality of the projects, the taxpayer funding was/is fully sufficient for what was built.
QuoteBusiness Insider recently ranked the best and fastest growing cities in the U.S. Of the top 25, NOT ONE is home to an NFL team.
It's a good talking point, but is ultimately as much bullshit as the claim that Lot J will create 2,000 permanent jobs.
Here's the actual Business Insider story.
https://www.businessinsider.com/fastest-growing-us-cities-best-growing-economies-ranked?amp
Even discounting the methodology that favors cities with fewer than 100,000 residents (e.g. too small for the NFL to begin with), if you read the actual article, you'll see that the majority of these cities are, in fact, suburbs and exurbs of existing NFL markets (Phoenix, Charlotte, Tampa, Miami, Las Vegas, Dallas, Houston, etc.)
Patently silly for that letter writer to say that a collection of suburbs 15 miles outside of these cities are NOT NFL CITIES~!
There's better ways to prove their point.
For the record, Jacksonville (along with Nashville and Austin) have been some of the fastest growing major cities in the country in 2020.
P.S. As a good Christian boy, it's absolutely appalling to hear the "God wants Lot J!" rhetoric from Gaffney and other faith leaders, as if it's some kind of religious crusade.
EXCEEDINGLY patronizing, condescending, and tone deaf in our current climate.
12 years of Catholic school and I never once heard anything about God preaching the virtues of luxury hotels and residential at the expense of the poor.
To me, might be the most disgraceful, insulting to the populace declaration of this entire ordeal.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 30, 2020, 12:35:30 AM
Last thing - Curry has become a true embarrassment to the city these last few months.
From the Twitter behavior.
To the weird call to arms against the Times-Union.
To backing out of the Christmas Tree lighting (I was in Hemming that night; pathetic to be scared off by that small protest; protip - you don't want protestors to use your kids' names, don't post personal info about your kids on the same account that you use to shout down Council members, troll the general public, and trying to get @'d by your favorite hip-hop artists).
To the odd sports-radio appearances.
Dude needs to go.
Does this sound like anyone else in government....? He's just following the trump playbook. That was his base that got him elected, but even they are tiring of his antics. I know his hope was to use this job as a springboard further into the GOP, but he may not be welcome anymore. Kahn definitely wouldn't take him. Kahn may want what he believes is best for Jacksonville, but if Curry wasn't holding the purse strings kahn would never go into business with him. Curry is just the man in position, so Kahn is being chummy to get at the money. I hope everyone has taken a good hard luck at curry's true colors.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 30, 2020, 02:22:00 PM
P.S. As a good Christian boy, it's absolutely appalling to hear the "God wants Lot J!" rhetoric from Gaffney and other faith leaders, as if it's some kind of religious crusade.
EXCEEDINGLY patronizing, condescending, and tone deaf in our current climate.
12 years of Catholic school and I never once heard anything about God preaching the virtues of luxury hotels and residential at the expense of the poor.
To me, might be the most disgraceful, insulting to the populace declaration of this entire ordeal.
I'm really confused how most of our politicians fail to make common sense arguments to support their position on Lot J. Overall, it's a bad deal and there's no way around it (outside of moving the project from Lot J itself to save millions and speed up its development) but it doesn't take a lot of hard work to spin potential real life benefits from the idea of infill development in the sports district in general. People make way too much money to not be able to figure this out, this deep into the process.
^It's baffling, right?
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 30, 2020, 02:22:00 PM
P.S. As a good Christian boy, it's absolutely appalling to hear the "God wants Lot J!" rhetoric from Gaffney and other faith leaders, as if it's some kind of religious crusade.
EXCEEDINGLY patronizing, condescending, and tone deaf in our current climate.
12 years of Catholic school and I never once heard anything about God preaching the virtues of luxury hotels and residential at the expense of the poor.
To me, might be the most disgraceful, insulting to the populace declaration of this entire ordeal.
The Mayor and Khan "own" Gaffney. He will do and say anything to appease them. If he can squeeze out any benefits for Eastsiders it will be merely collateral in nature and more likely a response by the Jags to the community push back to Lot J than anything Gafffney advocated for. Gaffney should realize he is just being used for the optics.
Meanwhile, (per below) Newby thinks Khan will spend $100 million with minority contractors. Given the hyper-inflated costs estimates, and backing out the remediation expenses, this would likely be 40% to 50+% of construction dollars in my estimate. Based on typical City contracting targets, I don't see that happening unless said contractors act more as fronts for others.
Interestingly, Brenda Priestly Jackson said she is still not on board and made a notable comment about additional concessions regarding legal liabilities related to the clean up. And, Pittman apparently didn't say anything quotable. Sounds like 2 out of 4 may still be on the fence.
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla — City leaders are throwing their support behind plans to develop Lot J in Downtown Jacksonville.
Council Member Reginald Gaffney was joined by several colleagues in front of City Hall for a press conference Wednesday morning regarding the development.
Gaffney said a large number of people who live on the Eastside support the plans to redevelop Lot J.
Ultra slo-mo camera records light bouncing!
featured by
"When you look at Lot J, it would not only benefit my district but Northeast Florida as a whole," Gaffney said. "For small businesses struggling during this pandemic, it's going to be a boost to small businesses."
The proposed Lot J development would entail a public-private partnership with Shad Khan and the Cordish Companies to bring a live entertainment district, 350 apartments in two mid-rise buildings, and at least 120 boutique hotel rooms to the land currently used as a parking lot in the Downtown sports complex.
Gaffney was joined by three city council members including Brenda Priestly Jackson, JuCoby Pittman and Sam Newby. Several local business and faith leaders also joined in the press conference on the steps of City Hall.
Gaffney says the Jaguars, owner Shad Khan and the Cordish companies are showing a commitment to invest in the city with the proposed $450 million development.
"The Jaguars are committed to Jacksonville, that's why Lot J is so important. You wouldn't have to take your team somewhere else to meet your financial needs if you had it in Jacksonville," Gaffney said.
Brenda Priestly Jackson, who says she was supporting Gaffney in solidarity at the press conference says she is not on board with the Lot J deal yet.
"I will not support Lot J or any other development that precludes the ability of us to take care of the everyday needs of our neighbors with the quality of life," Priestly Jackson said.
Priestly Jackson suggested at least one change to the deal.
"If you can offload the liability for the mitigation and cleanup of Lot J to the developer if you can have future indemnification for any future litigation brought on Lot J to the developer, that's a return on investment that's incalculable because you can bet your bottom dollar that folks will always sue the city because we have the deep pockets," Priestly Jackson said.
"To have indemnification and development going forward, with that, I'm very encouraged by that, again, if first, the numbers show we are able to take care of the needs were charged to do first, infrastructure, first responders and quality of life," Priestly Jackson added.
The return on investment could fall below projections according to Matt Carlucci, the City Council's Finance Committee Chair.
"We'll be lucky to get it up to 50 cents to the dollar in my opinion, after speaking with our council auditors," Carlucci said.
Carlucci believes a market study and feasibility study should've been done on the front end.
"It's a backwards way of economic development if you ask me, and that's my struggle, this a $200 million, actually closer to 400 million when you put in the interest that the taxpayers will be paying. And we don't even know what it's going to look like," Carlucci added.
Councilman Sam Newby, in support of Gaffney remains optimistic over the deal, which was screened and approved by the Downtown Investment Authority last month.
"If this goes through, $100 million is going to go to minority businesses, and guess who minority businesses hire? Minority people, so let's just keep that in mind," Newby said.
Newby says he believes the deal should be voted up or down on Jan. 7.
Gaffney believes that regardless of the dollar amount, Khan has shown and will show he wants to invest in the city with the proposed development.
"I'm grateful as a city leader he's willing to invest in my community, to help me grow my community, regardless of how many dollars he gave us," Gaffney said.
The project is expected to be voted on by Jacksonville City Council in early January. It would commit taxpayers footing roughly half the bill of $450 to $482 million.
The deal has drawn criticism over its cost, the largest of any development project in city history.
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/city-leaders-to-discuss-lot-j-development-in-downtown-jacksonville/77-df9700f3-6339-458b-9a82-69439aa8e9cf (https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/city-leaders-to-discuss-lot-j-development-in-downtown-jacksonville/77-df9700f3-6339-458b-9a82-69439aa8e9cf)
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 30, 2020, 05:25:52 PM
Meanwhile, (per below) Newby thinks Khan will spend $100 million with minority contractors. Given the hyper-inflated costs estimates, and backing out the remediation expenses, this would likely be 40% to 50+% of construction dollars in my estimate. Based on typical City contracting targets, I don't see that happening unless said contractors act more as fronts for others.
Khan is a minority. So giving the Jags incentives money technically is giving money to a minority for this project. How does that play into that $100 million? Anyway, while it's cool to have some short term construction jobs, it would be good to hear more about the long term benefits to the Eastside....outside of the footprint of Lot J. How can this be used to pull more traffic up on A. Philip Randolph so small businesses in the actual neighborhood can benefit from their proximity to the stadium and sports district?
QuoteInterestingly, Brenda Priestly Jackson said she is still not on board and made a notable comment about additional concessions regarding legal liabilities related to the clean up. And, Pittman apparently didn't say anything quotable. Sounds like 2 out of 4 may still be on the fence.
Anytime you're pulling from the general fund, it's going to be at the expense of the things that Priestly Jackson is fighting for. It is, what it is. We can't squeeze blood out of a turnip and money doesn't grow on trees. So we have choices and sacrifices to make.
Interesting article on resiliency measures.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/2020/12/31/guest-column-lot-j-project-includes-resiliency-plan/4059204001/
Good letter. One question I would have is what are the infrastructure costs for Lot J, in comparison to what the costs would be for a property that may not have the same needs, contamination and resiliency requirements? I ask because I wonder at what point do the infrastructure costs rise to a level to where it makes more long term financial sense to have more development density on Lot J than what it has been reduced to now? Should the low rise, strip mallish style stuff be shifted to another location and the Lot J site be used for more urban development to help justify the higher site development costs?
The Lot J infrastructure is listed at $77 million(Dailey Record article October 8,2020). The District infrastructure is listed at $58 million (Dailey Record article Dec. 22,2020). Similar projects both on the river. It would be interesting to compare the details of these plans to see if some of this difference is due to resiliency plans.
Quote from: fsu813 on December 05, 2020, 04:52:39 PM
I preface this with saying I'm definitely not a development expert, but could the apparent discrepancy in cost be resiliency related?
Ie) the extra money would be used for (likely) flooding infrastructure in the coming decades.
Bump.
Quote from: jaxjags on December 31, 2020, 02:51:45 PM
The Lot J infrastructure is listed at $77 million(Dailey Record article October 8,2020). The District infrastructure is listed at $58 million (Dailey Record article Dec. 22,2020). Similar projects both on the river. It would be interesting to compare the details of these plans to see if some of this difference is due to resiliency plans.
What's classified as "infrastructure" for both projects is very, very different, so it's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison.
The District's $58 million figure includes all the roadways and utilities (around $30 million that is being funded by the bonds that Preston Hollow recently closed on), plus a $26 million contribution from the DIA for riverfront parks totaling 3.5 acres, a 1-acre pocket park, a 1,900-foot expansion of the Southbank Riverwalk and bulkhead construction, a walking trail around the development, a 100-space parking lot and the expansion of three roads for public access.
Lot J's $77 million infrastructure figure is inclusive of environmental remediation, filling the retention pond and re-routing the stormwater management system, structured parking garages, roadways, wayfairing signage, building the pads, and even the giant LED screen for the development.
If a large portion of the infrastructure investment
is going toward resiliency efforts and making sure that the development is sustainable long-term, you'd think that SOMEONE on the developer or city side would be smart enough to be shouting this from the rooftops. It would certainly better help explain that large infrastructure investement to taxpayers.
To Lake's point, a lot more of the public investment for the District appears to be going toward net new public amenities and uses, rather than simply preparing a site with a lot of problems for construction.
P.S. Re: That Times-Union letter about resiliency.
QuoteThe proposed plan includes raising all of Lot J to an elevation of +8 feet (NAVD) with minimum first-floor building elevations of +11 to +12 feet.
Would be interested to know, just strictly for the sake of my own curiosity and ignorance, how the resiliency efforts interplay with the remediation requirements.
For instance, if you'd need to install a three-foot soil cap to build at grade, would remediation be simpler with the resiliency efforts described above that essentialy "lift" the entire project 8-12 feet above the existing Lot J?
Would be cool if the cost of resiliency efforts at sites like Lot J and the Shipyards somehow mitigated some of the expense of the at-grade contamination, if that makes sense.
From my perspective, I doubt this is a $450 million project, in terms of development cost. What's proposed probably adds up to $200-$250 million at best. To this point, I still have not seen the estimated cost breakdown by component and how that compares to actual products that Cordish has developed recently. Only line items where a lot of fluff and unknowns can be tossed into it.
It's interesting to note that even if Lot J is lifted 8 to 12 feet for resiliency, the adjacent stadium has substantial resiliency issues. Does this indicate that when the time comes, we need to look at leveling the existing stadium and starting all over or do we take our chances and invest up to 1/2 to 1 billion dollars in the existing structure that will likely have a very limited future?
I would think, regardless of the future needs of the Jags, the above question should be answered now as Lot J means nothing without the stadium. Another ass-backwards issue on the table.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on December 31, 2020, 03:52:49 PM
Quote from: jaxjags on December 31, 2020, 02:51:45 PM
The Lot J infrastructure is listed at $77 million(Dailey Record article October 8,2020). The District infrastructure is listed at $58 million (Dailey Record article Dec. 22,2020). Similar projects both on the river. It would be interesting to compare the details of these plans to see if some of this difference is due to resiliency plans.
What's classified as "infrastructure" for both projects is very, very different, so it's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison.
The District's $58 million figure includes all the roadways and utilities (around $30 million that is being funded by the bonds that Preston Hollow recently closed on), plus a $26 million contribution from the DIA for riverfront parks totaling 3.5 acres, a 1-acre pocket park, a 1,900-foot expansion of the Southbank Riverwalk and bulkhead construction, a walking trail around the development, a 100-space parking lot and the expansion of three roads for public access.
Lot J's $77 million infrastructure figure is inclusive of environmental remediation, filling the retention pond and re-routing the stormwater management system, structured parking garages, roadways, wayfairing signage, building the pads, and even the giant LED screen for the development.
If a large portion of the infrastructure investment is going toward resiliency efforts and making sure that the development is sustainable long-term, you'd think that SOMEONE on the developer or city side would be smart enough to be shouting this from the rooftops. It would certainly better help explain that large infrastructure investement to taxpayers.
To Lake's point, a lot more of the public investment for the District appears to be going toward net new public amenities and uses, rather than simply preparing a site with a lot of problems for construction.
Thanks Ken. That's the point Lake is making. City is spending 50% higher "infrastructure costs" for resiliency for a total development costs of a low density suburban type development. If the city spends $25 million or more on infrastructure because of the site, then I expect a high rise hotel, high rise residences and office tower as originally proposed. To me $77 million deserves density. If the market won't support that density today, then find a new site or change your approach. Instead of raising site 10 feet, only allow bottom floors to be retail or parking (in general as it is proposed). For the near future (probably as long as the stadium remains in the area) that will help minimize losses for a once in 20 year occurrence.
To me, what's proposed should be shifted to another site that doesn't require the millions that Lot J does in infrastructure. If we're sticking with Lot J, then we need some real density, not a baby Town Center Parkway. Either way, more transparency is needed. You can't go from a $450 million project with multiple highrises to something significantly smaller and claim the development cost are still the same.
As much as Jax is growing how much of that is just more and more sprawl out the way, especially south?
I don't know that more cookie cutter apartments or office complexes or chain restaurants and strip malls built miles from the core of the city (basically post annexation Jax) represents the healthy growth of a city. Within the historical limits of the city it takes years just to get a frickin Publix built.
So yes its growing in a statistical sense, but in the bigger picture its really just suburban dormitory car centric communities 15-20 miles plus from the city. Many of these are places so disconnected from the city itself that it barely even feels like Jacksonville. It always makes me laugh when people consider St. Augustine a suburb of Jacksonville. Its like 40 miles away! Maybe in NYC or Chicago or even Atlanta that might be fair but we're talking Jacksonville...
Someone with more knowledge of the history of the site might be able to weigh in, but I heard from someone a while back that part of the reason that the development shifted any potential high rise off of Lot J proper and onto that Phase II parcel where the retention pond is located is because preliminary subsurface investigation turned up a shit load of very large debris under the Lot J parking lot that would have been difficult/cost prohibitive (insert LOL here) to work around.
Specifically, some kind of a large train or pulley system of sorts used to be under Lot J to drag ships out of the water.
Begs the obvious question though as to why the subsequent cost of said high-rises wasn't also shifted out of Phase I when the project scope radically shrunk.
To me, the glaring red flag on the project sheet is the boutique hotel, which the developer claims will cost around $120 million.
That's a A MILLION DOLLARS PER KEY.
For context, the new Margaritaville in Jax Beach is about a fourth of that number ($250k-ish per key).
The Lot J hotel is also just over twice the cost-per-key as the most recent Live by Loews opened by Cordish in Texas last year ($500k per room for a 14-story, 300 room high-rise with five restaurants, a market, and a swim-up bar, event space, and a rooftop terrace).
Does anyone know of a single boutique hotel buit in the last couple of years that cost $1 million per key? Bear in mind this is purely construction cost too, as they aren't paying for the land.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 01, 2021, 12:29:56 PM
Someone with more knowledge of the history of the site might be able to weigh in, but I heard from someone a while back that part of the reason that the development shifted any potential high rise off of Lot J proper and onto that Phase II parcel where the retention pond is located is because preliminary subsurface investigation turned up a shit load of very large debris under the Lot J parking lot that would have been difficult/cost prohibitive (insert LOL here) to work around.
Specifically, some kind of a large train or pulley system of sorts used to be under Lot J to drag ships out of the water.
Begs the obvious question though as to why the subsequent cost of said high-rises wasn't also shifted out of Phase I when the project scope radically shrunk.
There hasn't been any real mention of Phase II, since the Four Seasons thing across the street came out. What's the schedule and public request on that in comparison with the Four Seasons parcel and lease negotiation timeline? The proper way to handle Lot J would be to use it for whatever we agreed to as the solution years ago. Perhaps the cap should remain in place and that lot be greened. Perhaps the pond should remain and another parking lot for infill development makes more financial sense for taxpayers. Anyway, if no towers are being built for whatever reason, it would make sense to adjust the development costs and overall deal to reflect what is actually being built.
QuoteTo me, the glaring red flag on the project sheet is the boutique hotel, which the developer claims will cost around $120 million.
That's a A MILLION DOLLARS PER KEY.
For context, the new Margaritaville in Jax Beach is about a fourth of that number ($250k-ish per key).
The Lot J hotel is also just over twice the cost-per-key as the most recent Live by Loews opened by Cordish in Texas last year ($500k per room for a 14-story, 300 room high-rise with five restaurants, a market, and a swim-up bar, event space, and a rooftop terrace).
Does anyone know of a single boutique hotel buit in the last couple of years that cost $1 million per key? Bear in mind this is purely construction cost too, as they aren't paying for the land.
Have any council members or the DIA asked how these numbers compare with Cordish's other projects? Why does the Jax hotel cost far more than the hotel at Texas Live, yet the Texas Live hotel has 180 more rooms and is 14 stories? Breadbox or not, this makes no sense.
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-CSMcLxX/0/3b3c716a/L/20190606_182449_HDR-L.jpg)
Live by Loews by Cordish in Texas
It really is just ludicrous how much we're getting screwed on this deal, isn't it?
Times Union editorial now out calling for Lamping to pull the Lot J proposal for the good of the community and the Jaguars. I agree. If this passes the City Council, they may win the battle but lose the war. It is clear the Jags will suffer a huge black eye. If the project fails or doesn't live up to the Jags hype, it will be even worse. Given the risks, it just doesn't make sense to push forward with the lousy deal Curry "negotiated" (gave them on a silver platter).
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/2021/01/03/opinion/4085497001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/opinion/2021/01/03/opinion/4085497001/)
Quote
Mark Lamping, we are asking you to take the Lot J proposal off the table. Mayor Lenny Curry won't because he is too politically invested. But you can. You can because you want the Lot J project to succeed. As it currently stands, it won't.
You might be able to get the project through the City Council. Plenty of time has been spent behind the scenes conferring, cajoling, assuring and promising. And the proposal has been repeatedly tweaked.
But you have a problem that has not been addressed. The Lenders...
...Mr. Lamping, your Lenders want to see a feasibility study and market and cost-benefit analyses. They have questions, lots of questions. The questions have been articulated by Times-Union reporters and columnists, civic groups and numerous citizens at every public meeting. We won't go into them here.
If you love Jacksonville, take Lot J off the table. Lot J is tearing the city apart. Promises have been made by the mayor that the taxpayers do not want to keep...
...It's in your own best interests to take this off the table. The blowback is affecting Shad Khan's standing in the city and can only be demoralizing to an already dejected team. It will hurt the negotiations over the Shipyards and Metropolitan Park. And then there's the stadium...
...Take Lot J off the table. Have a do-over.
Knowing what you know now, come back to the table with a deal that everyone can buy into.
Give The Lenders the respect they deserve.
Mr. Lamping, you're the only one who can make this happen. The Return on Investment will be priceless.
R.e future development, if Trevor Lawrence pans out, no one will care. Sports fans are fickle. They'll roll the red carpet out if anything. Public opinion on this team will very quickly change over the summer IMO if they draft Trevor Lawrence and bring in Urban Meyer as the Head Coach.
Truly embarrassing Twitter war going on between Garrett Dennis and Lenny Curry right now, with each accusing the other of cheating on their wife (Curry with a Clay County hooker, Dennis with Anne Broche's assistant).
Originally stems from Curry wanting to meet up and fight a random citizen who insulted his wife on Twitter.
We gotta do better than this in 2021.
https://twitter.com/BenBeckerANjax/status/1345870388924973057
Curry and Dennis should delete their social media profiles, show up in the Myrtle Avenue Subway in midnight and fight it out bare knuckle one good time, winner take all, lol.
Another pre-adolescent, like his hero the Orange Seditionist.
I'm surprised he just won't stay off it or at least stop posting his personal and family business or going back and forth with social media trolls.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 03, 2021, 05:55:31 PM
Truly embarrassing Twitter war going on between Garrett Dennis and Lenny Curry right now, with each accusing the other of cheating on their wife (Curry with a Clay County hooker, Dennis with Anne Broche's assistant).
Originally stems from Curry wanting to meet up and fight a random citizen who insulted his wife on Twitter.
We gotta do better than this in 2021.
Here is an update including some of the conversation. Doesn't speak well of any of the participants but Curry kicked it off responding to a poster. Having the head of the police union defending the Mayor tells you everything about what the Mayor did for the police when he "eliminated" their pension fund. He clearly gave them far more than they gave up. Just like he will do for Khan with Lot J, Metro Park, etc.
Give Dennis credit. He joins Nate Monroe in expertly pulling the Mayor's chain :).
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/mayor-lenny-curry-gets-in-twitter-skirmish-with-threat-to-fight-and-allegations-of-affairs/77-cdacf8f0-17bf-47da-afd5-57acc05ba56d (https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/mayor-lenny-curry-gets-in-twitter-skirmish-with-threat-to-fight-and-allegations-of-affairs/77-cdacf8f0-17bf-47da-afd5-57acc05ba56d)
QuoteJACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Fighting words, literally, from Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry as he participated in a recent Twitter skirmish.
The mayor spent part of his New Year's weekend engaging in heated Twitter exchanges with City Councilman Garrett Dennis and Fraternal Order of Police President Steve Zona, as well as relatively anonymous Twitter users.
It started when the mayor posted a photo of him and his wife celebrating New Year's Eve.
Twitter user @davec36411362, who also goes by ImpeachLennyCurry, responded by blasting the mayor's wife.
Curry's response was a challenge. "Name the place. Show your face. I'll be there."
That's when Dennis got involved, Tweeting he'd been the recipient of similar "tough guy talk" from Curry.
Zona then joined the thread, firing off a Tweet accusing Dennis of inappropriate behavior with another woman.
"Wasn't it you council member who was making thousands of phone calls to another woman or who were those calls made to ? Was it work related ? At least the mayor sticks by his wife."
Curry retweeted Zona's accusation, and added his own observation: "She knows. Everybody knows."
He has since deleted that Tweet.
Dennis retorted by saying Curry had skeletons in his own closet -- an allegation without apparent merit.
Reaction to the Twitter skirmish was mixed. Many defended Curry, but many others chastised the mayor for acting inappropriately, given his position.
Florida Times-Union reporter Christopher Hong Tweeted, "Let's hope all the out-of-town companies and professionals city officials talk endlessly about bringing to Jacksonville aren't on Twitter."
First Coast News reached out to the Mayor's Office for comment.
I just got this random robot text:
"First JEA, now...A BAD Lot J deal is about to pass. Contact your Councilwoman @ 9042555205 or LCumber@coj.net & tell her to scrap Lot J! bit.ly/38Hhv1z
Stop2End"
Someone is putting their money where their mouth is
It'll be very interesting if they actually manage to push this hard enough to scuttle the deal. I suppose it's a matter of whether enough people do in fact call their council-members demanding they vote against it. Not saying it'll happen...
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 04, 2021, 06:25:25 PM
It'll be very interesting if they actually manage to push this hard enough to scuttle the deal. I suppose it's a matter of whether enough people do in fact call their council-members demanding they vote against it. Not saying it'll happen...
Cm Newby attended the Urban Core CPAC meeting this evening. He said he supports the LOT J deal, mentioned the new deal is far better than the original deal proposed, and that the final deal is still being negotiated. He thought it would get out of committee-of-whole this week.
Three people spoke about it at the meeting, all not in favor of the terms as reported.
Did anyone ask him if the same city subsidy for a smaller project is a "better deal"?
Quote from: acme54321 on January 04, 2021, 01:09:13 PM
I just got this random robot text:
"First JEA, now...A BAD Lot J deal is about to pass. Contact your Councilwoman @ 9042555205 or LCumber@coj.net & tell her to scrap Lot J! bit.ly/38Hhv1z
Stop2End"
Someone is putting their money where their mouth is
got one too - likely from the Our Jax group
The quote below from the owner of the closing Zodiac Bar & Grill is a precursor to the ultimate negative impact a Lot J project will have on the downtown core. It will hurt it, not help it. Curry is living a pipe dream and we are totally wasting a ridiculous amount of taxpayer dollars on further holding back our urban core. Shooting ourselves in the foot. Totally outrageous.
Quote...Small downtown businesses like their restaurant, he said, generally have been forgotten and overlooked by city leaders over the past few years as the focus is on major development projects such as Lot J.
"The city will care more about the big apples. They care about Lot J, JEA, etc. so we [small downtown businesses] have been failed," Ewais said.
He also said big projects like Lot J will benefit some areas of the city but it shouldn't be done at the expense of downtown small businesses.
Ewais said he and his wife don't think downtown will recover soon. So, the couple is hoping to possibly reopen Zodiac or open a new eatery in a neighborhood outside of downtown but not in the suburbs....
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/entertainment/dining/2021/01/06/covid-19-zodiac-bar-grill-closes-20-years-downtown-jacksonville/4137067001/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/entertainment/dining/2021/01/06/covid-19-zodiac-bar-grill-closes-20-years-downtown-jacksonville/4137067001/)
I can't find it on their website, but during the noon news, WJXT-4 had a clip of Mayor Curry saying that if the Council pulls the plug on Lot J, the project is dead, won't happen. WJXT said they tried to contact the Jaguars, but did not receive a response to Curry's comment.
I find that hard to believe, unless they are hiding the fact that the project isn't a $450 million project and that the city contribution will literally build most of it. With that in mind, if the project is a viable one, cleaning up the mess of his administration won't kill it. If not giving them a buttload of cash for something that clearly isn't a $450 million project happens to kill it, so what. Kill it and move on.
City Council meeting tomorrow at 10 AM that should determine* whether Lot J advances to a final vote next week.
*If Hazouri doesn't derail the meeting, which I'm honestly expecting.
Per the T-U, three amendments will be brought forward:
1) An amendment by Hazouri to nix the $65 million breadbox loan entirely
2) An amendment by Hazouri and Randy DeFoor to include $150 million in clawback protections in the event that the Jags leave
3) An amendment by Ron Salem to - in lieu of a five year lease extension - guarantee the city half of all proceeds from a Lot J sale if the developer sells it before 2034 (five years after the stadium lease expires).
I think there's literally no chance that Hazouri's amendment passes, but it'll be interesting to see who bites on it, because those would likely be the no votes (Carlucci and DeFoor seem like the only locks). In the same way that Cumber's DIA amendment was meant to circumvent Carlucci's more extreme DIA amendment, I think Salem's 2034 amendment (which the Jags have agreed to) will effectively kill/supplant the DeFoor clawback amendment.
The JEA report certainly didn't help the vote, but the Trevor Lawrence excitement probably cancels out the negativity.
15-4 is still what I'm thinking in terms of support.
Is the Salem amendment meaningful? Surely Khan and Cordish have smart accountants that can make the "proceeds" appear to be minuscule. After deducting "costs" and such.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 06, 2021, 11:55:21 PM
Is the Salem amendment meaningful? Surely Khan and Cordish have smart accountants that can make the "proceeds" appear to be minuscule. After deducting "costs" and such.
Proceeds means gross receipts, not net income.
^After seeing the actual amendment, it is in fact net sales, not proceeds.
Hazouri also has four other amendments he plans to introduce.
City Council meeting ongoing:
https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/event/1478?view_id=1&redirect=true
Hughes comes off as very disrespectful in these things. Also find it crazy that we're comparing Landing door revenue during the FL GA game with what it could be at Lot J. So a business owner made money on a weekend and didn't share it with the city. So what. This is a horrible way to make urban development decisions.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 07, 2021, 11:23:08 AM
Hughes comes off as very disrespectful in these things.
He's even worse outside of public meetings.
For the first time in this entire proceedings, Zed Smith seems to be losing his cool a little after Boylan brought in Tarik Bateh from the Urban Land Institute to suggest a major restructuring of the deal.
While Bateh brought up some really good points, I'm not entirely sure why he was here and given the floor for 20 minutes when all parties have been working so hard to finalize legislation of the existing deal to either be voted up or down (obviously Hazouri approved Bateh's presentation to steer things a certain way).
This Lot J thing has dragged on for long enough.
If any one on City Council opposes the deal or wants it significantly restructured at this point, there's an easy solution: Vote No.
The deal is what it is at this point.
I liked Bateh's presentation. He made some salient points on why the deal should be either radically modified, or scrapped and started over. His estimate of this project actually being worth about $290mm really made me think that this budget is bloated on purpose to get the city to essentially foot the whole bill while "only paying half"
I REALLY liked Councilwoman DeFoor's question about whether or not Cordish would share the Pro Forma. "No, we are not willing to share that"... That stunned me. That's a soundbyte if ever I head one come out of a city council meeting.
QuoteHis estimate of this project actually being worth about $290mm really made me think that this budget is bloated on purpose to get the city to essentially foot the whole bill while "only paying half"
WINNER, WINNER, Chicken Dinner !!
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 07, 2021, 02:37:06 PM
I liked Bateh's presentation. He made some salient points on why the deal should be either radically modified, or scrapped and started over. His estimate of this project actually being worth about $290mm really made me think that this budget is bloated on purpose to get the city to essentially foot the whole bill while "only paying half"
I REALLY liked Councilwoman DeFoor's question about whether or not Cordish would share the Pro Forma. "No, we are not willing to share that"... That stunned me. That's a soundbyte if ever I head one come out of a city council meeting.
I liked Bateh's presentation and it should have taken place way before now. We have a project that's close to 50% less of the cost than what's being sold publicly. You can't really get to talking breadbox loans and how much the city should pay when you don't even know what the proforma is.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 07, 2021, 02:19:04 PM
If any one on City Council opposes the deal or wants it significantly restructured at this point, there's an easy solution: Vote No.
The deal is what it is at this point.
Based on what I know at this point, I'd vote no. The numbers should be based on the actual cost of what's proposed. This is a $200-$250 million project. Not a $450 million one.
Quote from: Peter Griffin on January 07, 2021, 02:37:06 PM
I liked Bateh's presentation. He made some salient points on why the deal should be either radically modified, or scrapped and started over. His estimate of this project actually being worth about $290mm really made me think that this budget is bloated on purpose to get the city to essentially foot the whole bill while "only paying half"
I REALLY liked Councilwoman DeFoor's question about whether or not Cordish would share the Pro Forma. "No, we are not willing to share that"... That stunned me. That's a soundbyte if ever I head one come out of a city council meeting.
Hmmm, its like this website hasn't raised this question before. This is about as best you could get with calling the $450mm price tag a lie, without actually saying it's a flat, bloated scame :)
https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/midtown-tampa-what-500-million-gets-you-in-tampa/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/midtown-tampa-what-500-million-gets-you-in-tampa/)
QuoteQuote from: fieldafm on December 11, 2020, 12:20:54 PM
Quote from: vicupstate on December 11, 2020, 12:11:29 PM
$191 per SF. Plug $200 per SF into the Lot J numbers and you get .....
Apartments, hotel rooms and retail spaces cost more to construct than what are basically blank floorplates with some inexpensive partitions, different sprinkler and plubming requirements and one or two restroom banks per floor. JEA's building is pretty significantly value-engineered. Mixed use residential/retail/structured parking is more like $260-375 per sq ft (depending on how high end you get) at today's construction prices.
That said, I'm the first one to admit that the Lot J and the previous ampitheater/practice field numbers look inflated... even given that Lot J numbers likely include retail fit out costs as the Jags/Cordish will be joint operators in some way of at least the larger retail uses.
Quote from: fieldafm on December 11, 2020, 02:41:42 PM
Quote from: vicupstate on December 11, 2020, 02:30:43 PM
^^ Mid-rise apartments are mostly stick-built, not steel and concrete are they not? Lower ceilings too.
The mixed use building (residential and retail) w/ structured parking that will replace the Doro building, one block away from Lot J, is going to pencil out around $265/sq ft. That's a pretty basic structure architecturally (not a complaint, just reality). If finishes were nicer, that could balloon to $270+/sq ft. Better facade treatments, then more cost is added. Some of the nicer (speaking to architecture and amenities) buildings in West Palm Beach or Midtown Atlanta are certainly eclipsing the $300/sq ft mark. If the developer paid for fit out of the operating businesses (likely to occur at Lot J) within the project, that is easily another $50/sq ft. Add in some kind of fancy outdoor amenities, stage, sound and lighting systems... figure another $20-30/sq ft.
^I'll rehash the post I made in that thread to provide further examples of the cost not adding up (though many aren't as apples to apples as the Tampa project). I was able to find all these examples of projects in Atlanta and their costs during part of a lunch break.
-Phase 1 of Midtown Union has an estimated construction cost of $410 million. Construction is currently underway for a 26 story, 600k square foot office building, an 18 story residential building with 355 units, a 12-story 205-room hotel, and 30k square feet of retail space, and 1,909 parking spaces. Architecture is substantially better than Lot J.
https://www.coopercarry.com/projects/midtown-union/
(https://1v1ulb40yc772j8uk01kozpe-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/20170324_01_renderings_new_large-2550x1440.jpg)
-1105 West Peachtree Plaza in Midtown Atlanta has an estimated cost of $530 million for a 32-story, 675k square foot Class A office building, 178 room hotel, and 64 condo's. Substantially more expensive architectural and structural costs.
http://1105westpeachtree.com/
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/2U2_UuRCmx5b2tyUZt6Aj7sCqik=/0x0:4000x6300/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:4000x6300):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13643508/0211_Hero_Email.jpg)
-Next lets look at the redevelopment of Phipps Plaza at an estimated cost of $300 million. It includes a 150 room Nobu hotel with rooftop pool, and conference center and Nobu restaurant. As well as a 13-story 350k square foot office building and 3-story parking garage, along with a 90k square foot Life Time Fitness with rooftop pool and beach club. Architecture exceeds Lot J quality. Construction costs are more expensive being built on a raised podium.
https://19ecc05a05d7c6bd5508-fe453cfe00977a743e98d480a2f68fee.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/One%20Phipps%20Plaza%2010-15-20%20with%20web%20link%20E.pdf
(https://19ecc05a05d7c6bd5508-fe453cfe00977a743e98d480a2f68fee.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/layoutimgs/hero/1398m.jpg)
-Norfolk Southern's new headquarters is estimated at $575 million. This includes 750k square foot of class A office space in two towers. Architecture is on a completely different level than Lot J and cost includes full interior buildout.
https://atlanta.curbed.com/2019/3/27/18283406/norfolk-southerns-hq-midtown-cousins-properties
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XYvXh8WJIhQa9-6gD2651FTfeY0=/0x0:4000x2731/920x613/filters:focal(1680x1046:2320x1686):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63309070/Fusion_Skyline_1.0.jpg)
-The Interlock Atlanta is a $450 million mixed-use complex with 200k square feet of office, 105k square feet of retail, 145 room hotel, and 367 multi-family units.
(https://theinterlockatl.com/assets/images/_1200x675_crop_center-center_none/01_Interlock_Home.jpg)
The amendment to remove the $65 million breadbox loan fails 14-5.
I think this gives us our first real indication of where the votes may be.
Any idea who the No votes were?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 07, 2021, 04:58:43 PM
Any idea who the No votes were?
Hazouri, Carlucci, DeFoor, Garrett Dennis, and Al Ferraro.
Some excerpts from the Times Union's live blog on the City Coucil Lot J meeting:
QuoteNate Monroe
@NateMonroeTU
Council member Ju'Coby Pittman is deploying an insulting argument that people are against this because they simply don't have all the information the council does (not mentioning she heard from a well-informed expert just a few hours ago who raised major issues over the deal).
It's clear that most members of the Council are in over their heads on understanding the deal as is and what it should be. At a minimum, they really should be vetting this with the assistance of experts whispering in their ears as this moves forward. Also working against the Council is the pressure to vote now instead of later. Carlucci and DeFoor are right, this whole thing should be taken offline and professionally renegotiated by City (hired) experts.
The Jags have Harden and Lamping, the long term principal negotiators for the Jags. As such, they are intimately familiar with the issues and details giving them an upper hand over the Johnny-come-lately City Council members who are months or years behind in understanding this agreement. You can see that the Council members are partially relying on Harden and team for guidance on the issues. Let me just say, Harden doesn't always lay all his cards on the table so they should be careful doing this. This is why the Council should punt for now.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErKP_vbXMAUQD0R?format=jpg&name=small)
Most of the council is in over their heads. Everyone is worried about lease extensions and breadbox loans. However, they are missing or totally overlooking that its not a $450 million project anymore. So this really isn't a 50-50 partnership. The development number is seriously bloated to make the appearance of this still being a $450 million project when its closer to $250 million. So the city's contribution should be in the range of $125 million. They could really use that proforma that everyone else has to submit, that Cordish refuses to share.
19 member Council now negotiating legal details. Finding potential loopholes and unprotected scenarios as they delve into the agreement. Harden is offering on-the-spot legal advice. Shows how poorly this process is proceeding.
Only thing I agree with the Jags on is this is no way to negotiate an agreement. The Council is not going to get what they think they are getting this way.
Unbelievable what the Curry administration has done. Definitely gross incompetence and/or favored treatment to the Jags. Only sure thing is, even with all the amendments to this agreement, the taxpayers will be taken to the cleaners in the current deal. Just like the pension plan and the failed JEA deal.
Need a 2 for 1 deal: Remove Curry and Trump from office at the same time!
Sigh... what a mess. Just a corrupt, disgusting fraud of a mess.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 07, 2021, 06:23:49 PM
Unbelievable what the Curry administration has done. Definitely gross incompetence and/or favored treatment to the Jags. Only sure thing is, even with all the amendments to this agreement, the taxpayers will be taken to the cleaners in the current deal. Just like the pension plan and the failed JEA deal.
Need a 2 for 1 deal: Remove Curry and Trump from office at the same time!
The difference is that Trump has less than two weeks. Curry has more than two
years.
An amendment by CM Dennis just passed 19-0. $12 million will be provided to the Eastside. $2 million in 2021 by the Jags. $500k a year for 20 years, starting in 2025 that will be split 50/50 by the Jags and Cordish. A 7 member board, with 4 members from the Eastside will be establish to determine how the funds will be invested within the community.
Does this $5 million from the City come from the existing (proposed) Lot J amount, or is it additional City funds?
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 07, 2021, 05:06:03 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 07, 2021, 04:58:43 PM
Any idea who the No votes were?
Hazouri, Carlucci, DeFoor, Garrett Dennis, and Al Ferraro.
Becton just said that he's a no vote if nothing changes by Tuesday night.
What a slog.
10.5 hours.
Passed for a final vote on Tuesday.
No's are looking to be Carlucci, DeFoor (she passed it to a final vote, but I have a hard time believing she's going to support it), Ferraro, now Becton, and possibly Hazouri.
Dennis seems to be leaning yes, Jackson seems like she's on the fence pending more details on debt capacity.
Feels like it's got the votes, but it's gonna be closer than I thought.
If I'm Vegas, I'm shifting the over/under on yes votes to 13.5.
P.S. If the Jags do skim $200 million off the top, Paul Harden deserves half. Almost comical to see half of City Council openly asking him by name how they should vote on each amendment.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 07, 2021, 05:26:16 PM
Some excerpts from the Times Union's live blog on the City Coucil Lot J meeting:
QuoteNate Monroe
@NateMonroeTU
Council member Ju'Coby Pittman is deploying an insulting argument that people are against this because they simply don't have all the information the council does (not mentioning she heard from a well-informed expert just a few hours ago who raised major issues over the deal).
Maybe the information Council has that we don't is the arm-twisting Curry and others are doing behind the scenes. 2023 is closer than you might think for many of these people, sooner if they have any aspirations outside of Council.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 07, 2021, 08:41:27 PM
P.S. If the Jags do skim $200 million off the top, Paul Harden deserves half. Almost comical to see half of City Council openly asking him by name how they should vote on each amendment.
Yeah, it came off as Paul Harden owning council.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 07, 2021, 09:05:57 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 07, 2021, 08:41:27 PM
P.S. If the Jags do skim $200 million off the top, Paul Harden deserves half. Almost comical to see half of City Council openly asking him by name how they should vote on each amendment.
Yeah, it came off as Paul Harden owning council.
No surprise. He does seem to functionally own the City Council and has for years (I have heard people reference him as the "20th member" of the Council), regardless of who serves on it. I don't know his batting ratio, but it is likely over 90%. It's outrageous how otherwise "independent" council persons fall under his spell. I would suggest that since we got the Jags, he has leveraged his influence over the Council even more. Wouldn't be surprised if he directs Shad on how to distribute his campaign contributions. For whatever reason, most members seem to cower to him. I have observed some that beat Harden-backed opponents in their elections but once on the Council, seemed to bend to Harden's wishes. Would be worthy of an investigative story.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 07, 2021, 09:05:57 PM
Yeah, it came off as Paul Harden owning council.
In breaking news .... water is wet.
QuoteI have heard people reference him as the "20th member" of the Council
He has a lot more influence than that. 2nd Mayor seems more appropriate.
New York had Robert Moses. We have Paul Harden.
Final prediction:
14-5
No's:
Carlucci
DeFoor
Becton
Ferraro
Hazouri
Moving Dennis to a solid yes after getting his amendments included (the developers put $2 million for Eastside businesses into a trust, and add $500k each year for the next 12 years; the minimum participation for small and emerging businesses and contractors upped to 30%).
I also think these amendments, plus supplemental information that's going to come out involving Jacksonville's debt capacity (and what that really means in terms of our ideal borrowing potential vs. actual borrowing ability) are going to put Jackson into the yes category as well.
I can't see any other yes's flipping.
More likely seems to be that one of the no's would flip yes.
Won't be Becton. Won't be Carlucci. Won't be Ferraro. Defoor seems unlikely. But I could see Hazouri voting yes even though he's fought and nail to strike down the breadbox loan.
I think the silver lining coming out of this, which Lamping acknoweldged numerous times yesterday, and is that the Jags are going to take a much, much, much different approach with any future negotiations going forward. You best believe they're going to be going through the DIA and vetted by City Council before any development agreements are drafted.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 08, 2021, 08:19:00 PM
I think the silver lining coming out of this, which Lamping acknoweldged numerous times yesterday, and is that the Jags are going to take a much, much, much different approach with any future negotiations going forward. You best believe they're going to be going through the DIA and vetted by City Council before any development agreements are drafted.
I wouldn't bet on it. This deal's success proves that they literally can't lose. As long as they fight for it, and buy off enough Council members with minor concessions that don't fundamentally alter the deal, there's nothing they can't get. Paul Harden deserves a big bonus for delivering, and especially if Trevor Lawrence and whoever gets put in charge pans out, they can only slant things further in their favor. Imagine the size of the subsidies for Four Seasons or once stadium talks start up. If a bad team can wring this much money from taxpayers, a good team will be unstoppable.
If this thing passes, the next best thing is it just squeaks by with the bare number of 13 votes to send a message to the Jags and the Mayor not to take the taxpayers for granted. It would take 6 to come to their senses and do the right thing by the citizens of Jacksonville. Get 7 "no's" and its a real victory for the taxpayers. A "no" vote doesn't necessarily prevent the project, it can just send them back to the negotiating table for a fairer deal.
Those voting "yes" will be a great example of politicos doing the bidding of their donors, not their constituents. Hope people are reminded of this at the next election.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2021/01/11/votes-falling-place-council-approval-lot-j-deal-khan/6600211002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2021/01/11/votes-falling-place-council-approval-lot-j-deal-khan/6600211002/)
QuoteLot J deal on verge of winning Jacksonville City Council approval
The Lot J development deal with Jaguars owner Shad Khan is poised to win City Council approval Tuesday with a super-majority of council members in favor of legislation committing up to $233 million in city money for a cluster of buildings anchored by a year-round Live! entertainment district.
The deal, which ranks as one of the most expensive for taxpayers in city history, needs at least 13 of 19 council members to approve it, a margin that is within reach based on a 15-4 vote Thursday night in favor of advancing the legislation....
How's the meeting going?
Hazouri's amendment to eliminate the breadbox loan was just shot down again 12-7.
This thing is gonna be close.
Starting to think there's a real chance Council votes no.
Could see it going either way.
Holy shit.
I think it's gonna fail.
Dennis is a no.
I'll be damned. They did it!
12-7 was the vote (needed 13).
No:
Dennis
DeFoor
Carlucci
Ferraro
Becton
Hazouri
Morgan
Angry Curry presser in 3 .... 2 .... 1 ....
Prologue: (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1349185448061579265?s=20)
QuoteThis sends a clear and negative e message to economic development in our downtown and city. Again, it's unfortunate but LOT J will not happen. I look forward to continue working on all the needs of our city for all of our citizens.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 11, 2021, 03:23:49 PM
If this thing passes, the next best thing is it just squeaks by with the bare number of 13 votes to send a message to the Jags and the Mayor not to take the taxpayers for granted. It would take 6 to come to their senses and do the right thing by the citizens of Jacksonville. Get 7 "no's" and its a real victory for the taxpayers. A "no" vote doesn't necessarily prevent the project, it can just send them back to the negotiating table for a fairer deal.
Those voting "yes" will be a great example of politicos doing the bidding of their donors, not their constituents. Hope people are reminded of this at the next election.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2021/01/11/votes-falling-place-council-approval-lot-j-deal-khan/6600211002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2021/01/11/votes-falling-place-council-approval-lot-j-deal-khan/6600211002/)
QuoteLot J deal on verge of winning Jacksonville City Council approval
The Lot J development deal with Jaguars owner Shad Khan is poised to win City Council approval Tuesday with a super-majority of council members in favor of legislation committing up to $233 million in city money for a cluster of buildings anchored by a year-round Live! entertainment district.
The deal, which ranks as one of the most expensive for taxpayers in city history, needs at least 13 of 19 council members to approve it, a margin that is within reach based on a 15-4 vote Thursday night in favor of advancing the legislation....
Ecstatic! Wow and speechless! Failed by one vote (Priestly Jackson should have been #8)! Congratulations to the super 7 (Al Ferraro, Danny Becton, Matt Carlucci, Randy DeFoor, Garrett Dennis, Tommy Hazouri, and Joyce Morgan). who appropriately stood up for the citizens of Jacksonville and prevented Lot J from going forward. Khan should be secretly joyful that the Council gave him a "graceful" way out of a poor business deal and a public relations disaster as I genuinely think Lot J was doomed to fail as presented. For once, City-wide public pressure on the Council prevailed.
Still saddened to know that the other 12* (cowards) didn't cave too and I hope voters remember their names at election time. Of course, Curry gets the blame for all of this just like JEA and the pension fiasco. Not many times when Curry, Khan and Harden turn up as losers all at once but the line in the sand hopefully sends a strong message that we want a new day in Jacksonville!
Quote* The following councilmembers voted for the Lot J proposal:
Aaron Bowman
Michael Boylan
Kevin Carrico
LeAnna Cumber
Rory Diamond
Terrance Freeman
Reggie Gaffney
Sam Newby
Ju'Coby Pittman
Brenda Priestly Jackson
Ron Salem
Randy White
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 12, 2021, 11:17:57 PM
Ecstatic! Wow and speechless! Failed by one vote (Priestly Jackson should have been #8)!
She was rather hostile (https://twitter.com/Priestjax/status/1349191362919489538?s=20) when I pointed out how disappointing it was to see her support this.
QuoteNot many times when Curry, Khan and Harden turn up as losers all at once but the line in the sand hopefully sends a strong message that we want a new day in Jacksonville!
There's a really great opportunity here to turn people's attention to the cost-effective solutions for many of downtown's problems. Fixing the convention center issue at the Ford on Bay site, returning passenger rail to Union Terminal by the time things are normal again, getting the Trio off the ground, two-waying streets, working with JTA to focus future land use around Skyway stations. So many things that don't actually cost all that much money (especially compared to their alternatives) but would go a long way into building a sustainable and thriving downtown in the long run.
This thread might now be obsolete, but honestly I find myself pretty optimistic that there's a chance to at least put Jacksonville on a better track, if not the right one.
This is not a new day in Jacksonville. This is more of the same. A visionless city council is completely incapable of doing anything 99% of the people on this forum propose. I'm actually quite disappointed in the way this ended. We've gone 2 decades of unprecedented economic growth throughout the US and Jacksonville has literally nothing to show for it. Going in a different direction with Khan/Kordish had risks for sure but now we're still here with the same-ol-same-ol.
Lamping said they want to shift focus to the shipyards now. I say good luck. They'll be stuck negotiating that for another 4-5 years before the city council probably pulls the plug out last minute again with no ideas of their own to counter.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 12, 2021, 11:01:49 PM
Prologue: (https://twitter.com/lennycurry/status/1349185448061579265?s=20)
QuoteThis sends a clear and negative e message to economic development in our downtown and city. Again, it's unfortunate but LOT J will not happen. I look forward to continue working on all the needs of our city for all of our citizens.
Interesting. I thought the Landing being turned into a $25 million lawn would have sent the clear and negative message.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on January 13, 2021, 07:59:36 AM
This is not a new day in Jacksonville. This is more of the same. A visionless city council is completely incapable of doing anything 99% of the people on this forum propose. I'm actually quite disappointed in the way this ended. We've gone 2 decades of unprecedented economic growth throughout the US and Jacksonville has literally nothing to show for it. Going in a different direction with Khan/Kordish had risks for sure but now we're still here with the same-ol-same-ol.
Lamping said they want to shift focus to the shipyards now. I say good luck. They'll be stuck negotiating that for another 4-5 years before the city council probably pulls the plug out last minute again with no ideas of their own to counter.
They should abandon all future efforts to negotiate with the mayor's office. In the meantime, focus should be given to seriously investing in the actual downtown now. It won't take 1/2 the amount of public money that was eyed for Lot J, to make significant and quick change in the Northbank.
Unfortunately I feel this is the beginning of the end of the Jags here and by default I can't see the likes of Florida Georgia sticking around.
Lamping might put up a public image about changing tactics but you can't not think that privately they aren't spitting and not actively considering their options now. As said I can't see them going through another 4-5 years of negotiations to potentially end up with nothing again.
Hey though if the people of Jacksonville don't want a professional sports team then thats their right to say so.
If Curry was a selfless, egoless public servant, he would come out and say that he negotiated what he thought was a good deal for the City, but many in the public clearly had concerns with the deal and those concerns were reinforced by the vote last night. Then say that he hopes the Jaguars do not give up on Downtown and are able to re-negotiate a different deal for Lot J or the Shipyards with the DIA and/or City Council.
Sadly for the City, it's residents, and perhaps more importantly, the Jaguars; the mayor is a pariah (heck even 4 republicans voted down Lot J). The guy absolutely botched the JEA deal with sheer greed, which I still think could have been a great for Jax if handled properly. Then he follows that up by circumventing the DIA (which was not the correct procedure legally per the DIA staff report) to negotiate a deal with the Jaguars, when neither he nor anyone on his team has any expertise in real estate development. So here Jacksonville is. No windfall from JEA sale to fund major infrastructure/capital improvements, alleviate pension debt, and fund major economic development projects or corporate relocations. No Lot J. No Landing. No Hart Bridge ramps. A pissed off public. A pissed off Jaguars. A divided City Council. No corporate relocations despite it being the best time ever in Florida history to recruit. A struggling Downtown, while every other major downtown in the state is booming.
I don't even think Pawnee would wish these type of problems on Eagleton.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 13, 2021, 08:26:25 AM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on January 13, 2021, 07:59:36 AM
This is not a new day in Jacksonville. This is more of the same. A visionless city council is completely incapable of doing anything 99% of the people on this forum propose. I'm actually quite disappointed in the way this ended. We've gone 2 decades of unprecedented economic growth throughout the US and Jacksonville has literally nothing to show for it. Going in a different direction with Khan/Kordish had risks for sure but now we're still here with the same-ol-same-ol.
Lamping said they want to shift focus to the shipyards now. I say good luck. They'll be stuck negotiating that for another 4-5 years before the city council probably pulls the plug out last minute again with no ideas of their own to counter.
They should abandon all future efforts to negotiate with the mayor's office. In the meantime, focus should be given to seriously investing in the actual downtown now. It won't take 1/2 the amount of public money that was eyed for Lot J, to make significant and quick change in the Northbank.
I like the idea for sure, but again, what are the odds anything like that actually takes place? We're now a half-decade out from anything meaningful happening downtown. At best. It's time we just declare the Berkman to be the new official emblem for the COJ. Nothing could be more appropriate. "Here stands Jacksonville. A visible eyesore with promise but instead remains dead and out-of-place".
Man this whole debacle is PEAK Jacksonville. Now we are left with no Lot J and no Landing. Way to go Jax!!
The original Lot J renderings from mid-2019, when the original $450mm price tag was established, showed a multi-story public garage with a green space on the roof, a high-rise residential tower with a dedicated garage, an office space with its own garage, plus the hotel and Live facilities. The latest site plan shows a surface lot, 2 mid-rise apartment buildings, and retained the hotel and Live. They removed the public garage with green space, significantly scaled back the residential, converted the office into a scaled-down residential, both of which appear similar to the 5 near-identical housing projects currently underway with far fewer incentives, but KEPT THE PRICE THE SAME. And were asking for nearly HALF from the taxpayers, for a project that on a grand scale looks to have been bait-and-switched.
Holding the proverbial gun to the taxpayers head of "move the project forward or the Jags get it" was a mean PR move to get the city to eat a bad deal by threatening us. Here's the kicker, though, even with Lot J, the team was not guaranteed to stay!
As for setting precedents, I think the fact that this failed sends a good message that we won't be bullied into eating crap and saying thank you for the privilege while a developer makes off with millions of taxpayer dollars with almost no risk just because they're associated with a sports team.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on January 13, 2021, 09:13:07 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 13, 2021, 08:26:25 AM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on January 13, 2021, 07:59:36 AM
This is not a new day in Jacksonville. This is more of the same. A visionless city council is completely incapable of doing anything 99% of the people on this forum propose. I'm actually quite disappointed in the way this ended. We've gone 2 decades of unprecedented economic growth throughout the US and Jacksonville has literally nothing to show for it. Going in a different direction with Khan/Kordish had risks for sure but now we're still here with the same-ol-same-ol.
Lamping said they want to shift focus to the shipyards now. I say good luck. They'll be stuck negotiating that for another 4-5 years before the city council probably pulls the plug out last minute again with no ideas of their own to counter.
They should abandon all future efforts to negotiate with the mayor's office. In the meantime, focus should be given to seriously investing in the actual downtown now. It won't take 1/2 the amount of public money that was eyed for Lot J, to make significant and quick change in the Northbank.
I like the idea for sure, but again, what are the odds anything like that actually takes place? We're now a half-decade out from anything meaningful happening downtown. At best. It's time we just declare the Berkman to be the new official emblem for the COJ. Nothing could be more appropriate. "Here stands Jacksonville. A visible eyesore with promise but instead remains dead and out-of-place".
If Lot J were approved last night, we'd still be a half decade out from being defrosted frozen chicken wings and overpriced beer in that place. If I had to make a prediction, everything proposed in Lot J will end up in their Shipyards proposal....which will hopefully be better negotiated from the public's perspective.
QuoteWe're now a half-decade out from anything meaningful happening downtown.
I personally don't see Lot J as being any more meaningful than the combination of projects already moving forward in the Northbank. In fact, I'd argue that they're more meaningful and many will happen before Lot J would have opened anyway. These projects include the Laura Street Trio, the VyStar garage, Bread & Board and the VyStar breezeway, the JEA headquarters, the Emerald Trail through Hogan Street, and the adaptive reuse of the Independent Life, Ambassador Hotel, First Baptist Convention, Old Federal Reserve, Jones Brothers Furniture, Porter House buildings, etc. With Lot J taken out back and shot, I hope we can focus a bit more on the Northbank projects underway and targeting of upgrades to spaces and streetscapes that glue them together.
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on January 13, 2021, 09:16:11 AM
Man this who debacle is PEAK Jacksonville. Now we are left with no Lot J and no Landing. Way to go Jax!!
Lol, this was a sick feeling I had in my stomach when Curry and Hughes were stubbornly burying their heads in the sand and pushing forward with evicting tenants of the Landing two years ago. We wrote several editorials and articles on such a potential outcome and how where things were headed is counter to successful revitalization strategies. Unfortunately, time has proven us right once again.
So what does Lenny do now? What is his priority? Put it on autopilot and run out his term? Does he work and concentrate on quality of life/quality of downtown investment? Does he chase down the next Iguana proposal? Does he find a way to keep the Jags here (all in number . . . Stadium and development)? It does not appear Lenny can walk and chew gum.
I watched most of the meeting up until Councilwoman Pittman's comments just before the vote. I couldn't listen to the nonsense anymore. I was pleased with the final outcome. Councilman Becton and Councilwoman Defoor made some great points from my point of view as a more conservative voter. The taxpayers would have to shoulder huge hidden costs in taking on more debt and the council didn't even have all the details (e.g.- pro forma) they need to evaluate the project. Plus, why should we provide a sweetheart deal to this business over others?
From a business perspective, I can appreciate the Jaguars organization using their resources to get the best deal. They brought all of the celebrity firepower to bear. They used their philanthropy to persuade a block of councilmembers. They used their relationships with officials. That's good business for them, but the city government with some notable exceptions failed to advocate for the constituents. Councilman Boylan even acknowledged that he was going to vote against the will of his constituents.
I just hope that now the deal has failed, and we see how council can magically summon hundreds of millions, that we see a greater willingness to invest in things that actually serve the wider public good.
Quote from: Papa33 on January 13, 2021, 10:01:55 AM
So what does Lenny do now? What is his priority? Put it on autopilot and run out his term? Does he work and concentrate on quality of life/quality of downtown investment? Does he chase down the next Iguana proposal? Does he find a way to keep the Jags here (all in number . . . Stadium and development)? It does not appear Lenny can walk and chew gum.
Because Curry is NOT a public servant by any definition, but is a political operative/hack, he will do what such people do. He will seek revenge.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 13, 2021, 12:14:55 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 12, 2021, 11:17:57 PM
Ecstatic! Wow and speechless! Failed by one vote (Priestly Jackson should have been #8)!
She was rather hostile (https://twitter.com/Priestjax/status/1349191362919489538?s=20) when I pointed out how disappointing it was to see her support this.
This is a flat out unacceptable thing for anyone to say, but especially a public servant.
"I don't serve with a focus on male disappointments. I stated my position clearly and articulately on the record. You may disagree. That's your prerogative. I stand by my vote & rationale."
Imagine the shoe being reversed and a politician saying they don't care what their female constituents think....
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on January 13, 2021, 09:16:11 AM
Man this whole debacle is PEAK Jacksonville. Now we are left with no Lot J and no Landing. Way to go Jax!!
It's just so mind-numbingly depressing how many victims are left in the wake of this debacle.
The Landing. The Hart Bridge Ramps. Welcome to Rockville. Jacobs and the other firms who put in good-faith proposals for the convention center RFP. The Bay Street Innovation Corridor. The MOSH. The USS Orleck. The Eastside. The Jumbo Shrimp. RISE with their Doro project. Officials from UF and Georgia who have been negotiating an extension of the FL/GA game with promises of a new entertainment complex. Even JEA, because a lot of very good, honest people wasted a lot of time vetting a headquarters proposal based on what we now know to be grossly unrealistic construction schedule (<2 years) for a Lot J parcel that the Jags didn't even have the right to develop at the time.
All negatively effected, driven off, destroyed, let down, had their time and resources wasted, or set up to fail because Curry wrote a check in secret that City Council was asked to cash with a gun to their heads.
And Curry has the nerve to go on Twitter pulling the tough guy act as though City Council dropped the ball on approving this thing when, at the end of the day, it was ultimately as much a referendum on his needlessly shady bullshit as it was a No vote on the project itself.
Guy should be ashamed of himself.
Lot J was the city's to lose. We had the capital in Shad Khan. We had the developer in Cordish. And we had a good project that would have improved quality of life in Jacksonville and boosted local revenues for the Jags.
All Curry needed to do was land the plane with as transparent and fair of a deal for taxpayers as you're going to get from the NFL racket.
I honestly think a one-third split between all three parties (the City, Jags, and Cordish) put through the proper channels sails through the DIA and is approved by City Council 19-0.
Instead, the mayor unilaterally offers a 50/50 split for no clear reason, which is effectively a 50/25/25 split for the City, the Jags, and Cordish.
I don't blame the developer for jumping at the deal, but they also should have been smart enough to read the tea leaves and come down a bit on that $65 million breadbox grant. Joyce Morgan, one of the no votes, straight up said that if the developer would have made some concessions with the breadbox, she would have voted yes. Even restructuring a decent portion of the upfront "loan" to a backend REV grant likely would have swung the one vote necessary to pass Lot J back in the Jags' favor.
Where I do blame Jags/Cordish though, and ultimately Shad Khan, is the hubris. When you're asking for nearly half a billion dollars in public money when accounting for interest, from a small market, during a pandemic, when a lot of people are suffering and the city has a lot of other needs, at least have the common decency to show up for the meeting and act humble and appreciative.
Pleases and thank yous goes a long way in a city like Jacksonville, and never once did anyone on the Jags' side acknowledge the magnitude of the ask, show appreciation for the sacrifices it would entail, or transparently discuss the true purpose of the project (e.g. to allow the Jags to boost local revenue and stay competitive with other NFL cities through rent collection, parking, hotel room nights, etc).
We just got the silly platitudes about urban pioneering, downtown game changing, and the immeasurable civic pride that will come from seeing cranes in the air during the pandemic (disregarding the fact that construction might not even begin for years).
Cordish didn't do themselves any favors in the end either with their rigidity and unwillingness to disclose important details. If I had to pinpoint a specific point where the tide turned for City Council, it might have been the moment that Zed Smith flatly refused to share any details from the project's pro forma.
Meanwhile, back to Curry, throughout this entire process, you've got the mayor actively sabotaging goodwill toward his own deal.
If I'm the Jags, I'm furious with Curry. Threatening the City Council (bonus points for trying to expose infidelity and start a fist fight with the member who turned out to be swing vote). Putting words into the franchise's mouth about relocating if Lot J isn't passed. Trying to rush through the deal before the holidays (which I'm guessing is because he knew the JEA report was going to drop soon after New Year's).
One of Khan's most infamous comments alluded to Jacksonville's lack of "mojo."
I think the city, led by select Council members, the local press (particularly the T-U), and a newly engaged citizenry, showed an
incredible amount of mojo in telling Curry to fuck off with this particular deal.
Almost every City Council member who voted no spoke openly about wanting to see Lot J move forward eventually, just not under these hostage-like terms.
I respect the fact that the city has the self-confidence and pride to not roll over for a bum deal for Curry out of fear of losing the Jags.
Silver lining here is that the next ask from the Jags, likely a portion of the Shipyards, is probably going to land close enough to stadium negotiations that we'll be able to do what we should have done from the beginning - package the project up with the stadium ask, put it on the ballot, and let the public decide one way or another whether it's worth dropping $XXX million to keep the Jags in town for another few decades.
Huge disgrace for the Curry administration, big win for the public, and you've got to think that the Jags are smart enough to know that this was ultimately a vote of no confidence in Curry and his practices and a pass on a unfavorable deal, rather than an active vote against the Jags and their future in Jacksonville.
^Ken, agree fully with your great analysis. Curry brings a wrecking ball to everything he touches. Would hate to be his business partner.
QuoteFrom a business perspective, I can appreciate the Jaguars organization using their resources to get the best deal. They brought all of the celebrity firepower to bear. They used their philanthropy to persuade a block of councilmembers. They used their relationships with officials. That's good business for them, but the city government with some notable exceptions failed to advocate for the constituents. Councilman Boylan even acknowledged that he was going to vote against the will of his constituents.
As Nate Monore noted on Twitter, the Jag's left out the most crucial "celebrity" of all - Shad Khan. He did not show up at a public hearing once in this process sending a subtle message to the public this wasn't an essential deal for him or that he was willing to stick his neck out for it. Clearly, he privately cajoled Council members but that just played into the hands of those saying this was in for a "fix" behind closed doors. Like the entire process, Khan was not transparent himself.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 13, 2021, 10:45:00 AM
Quote from: Papa33 on January 13, 2021, 10:01:55 AM
So what does Lenny do now? What is his priority? Put it on autopilot and run out his term? Does he work and concentrate on quality of life/quality of downtown investment? Does he chase down the next Iguana proposal? Does he find a way to keep the Jags here (all in number . . . Stadium and development)? It does not appear Lenny can walk and chew gum.
Because Curry is NOT a public servant by any definition, but is a political operative/hack, he will do what such people do. He will seek revenge.
Just pointed this out in another thread. Curry didn't become Mayor by accident. He formed a powerful coalition of donors and influencers as state GOP chair. That weaponry is almost certainly going to be turned on whoever it can come the next election.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 13, 2021, 11:59:55 AM
It's just so mind-numbingly depressing how many victims are left in the wake of this debacle.
The Landing. The Hart Bridge Ramps. Welcome to Rockville. Jacobs and the other firms who put in good-faith proposals for the convention center RFP. The Bay Street Innovation Corridor. The MOSH. The USS Orleck. The Eastside. The Jumbo Shrimp. RISE with their Doro project. Officials from UF and Georgia who have been negotiating an extension of the FL/GA game with promises of a new entertainment complex. Even JEA, because a lot of very good, honest people wasted a lot of time vetting a headquarters proposal based on what we now know to be grossly unrealistic construction schedule (<2 years) for a Lot J parcel that the Jags didn't even have the right to develop at the time.
All negatively effected, driven off, destroyed, let down, had their time and resources wasted, or set up to fail because Curry wrote a check in secret that City Council was asked to cash with a gun to their heads.
It's ridiculous how much money we've wasted because of Curry and friends' secret agenda. I really do shudder at what would have happened if they had actually managed to sell of JEA, and given that gang such a big pot of money.
QuoteLot J was the city's to lose. We had the capital in Shad Khan. We had the developer in Cordish. And we had a good project that would have improved quality of life in Jacksonville and boosted local revenues for the Jags.
All Curry needed to do was land the plane with as transparent and fair of a deal for taxpayers as you're going to get from the NFL racket.
I honestly think a one-third split between all three parties (the City, Jags, and Cordish) put through the proper channels sails through the DIA and is approved by City Council 19-0.
As I've said before, I remember a bunch of us here being pretty okay with Lot J several months ago when it looked like a three-way split of $150 million each. That number managing to rise to $240 million for the city, then $390 million including interest as we started to realize the project was way smaller than the numbers should have indicated was a big part of what scuttled the whole thing.
QuoteCordish didn't do themselves any favors in the end either with their rigidity and unwillingness to disclose important details. If I had to pinpoint a specific point where the tide turned for City Council, it might have been the moment that Zed Smith flatly refused to share any details from the project's pro forma.
I really thought that seemed out of character for them as a company. I wonder if that was really them speaking, or the Jags insisting they needed to shut up, show nothing, and take their cut or something.
With this deal sunk, and the Jags apparently just giving up and going back to the Shipyards instead of trying to actually make this work, I wonder if it'd be too out there for the city to offer Cordish Lots M, N, and P for at least a Live! arena and Loews hotel as Ennis has suggested. Hopefully with quite a bit fewer incentives this time.
QuoteIf I'm the Jags, I'm furious with Curry. Threatening the City Council (bonus points for trying to expose infidelity and start a fist fight with the member who turned out to be swing vote). Putting words into the franchise's mouth about relocating if Lot J isn't passed. Trying to rush through the deal before the holidays (which I'm guessing is because he knew the JEA report was going to drop soon after New Year's).
Seriously, this guy only seems to have one strategy of accomplishing anything, and it's quickly becoming clear that it's no longer working and is going to land him in jail if he doesn't try something different.
QuoteI respect the fact that the city has the self-confidence and pride to not roll over for a bum deal for Curry out of fear of losing the Jags.
Not if you're sports radio Twitter, apparently. Those guys are big mad. As I've said here and elsewhere though, this is a chance to offer alternatives that are both cost-effective and... actually effective. I don't think moving the jail is happening without BJP 2.0, but we certainly can do things that have been mentioned here like get the Laura Street Trio off the ground, get ready for adaptive reuse of JEA's headquarters, quickly get Amtrak back downtown, and focus some TOD around the Skyway. Even bigger things like adding an exhibition hall to the Hyatt should be doable.
QuoteSilver lining here is that the next ask from the Jags, likely a portion of the Shipyards, is probably going to land close enough to stadium negotiations that we'll be able to do what we should have done from the beginning - package the project up with the stadium ask, put it on the ballot, and let the public decide one way or another whether it's worth dropping $XXX million to keep the Jags in town for another few decades.
Huge disgrace for the Curry administration, big win for the public, and you've got to think that the Jags are smart enough to know that this was ultimately a vote of no confidence in Curry and his practices and a pass on a unfavorable deal, rather than an active vote against the Jags and their future in Jacksonville.
Hear, hear! 100%.
I only expect their demands to double down when it comes to stadium renovations and future requests if anything. It'll all be part of their plan to get out when they don't get what they want.
Theres no way on earth I see them tucking their tail between their legs and continuing to plod along.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 13, 2021, 02:02:49 PM
As I've said here and elsewhere though, this is a chance to offer alternatives that are both cost-effective and... actually effective. I don't think moving the jail is happening without BJP 2.0, but we certainly can do things that have been mentioned here like get the Laura Street Trio off the ground, get ready for adaptive reuse of JEA's headquarters, quickly get Amtrak back downtown, and focus some TOD around the Skyway.
Forgive my confusion, but is the suggestion here that these things and Lot J are mutually exclusive? That, e.g., the Trio wouldn't happen unless Lot J failed?
^ Not at all. What I'm referring to there is that for whatever reason, the city seems to have a bad track record of walking and chewing gum at the same time. Spending the political capital on Lot J takes attention away from the many other projects they could be putting their weight behind instead, that would improve things quicker.
The Trio is likely to happen eventually, with or without Lot J, but with Lot J gone the Trio can now be a focus that council members and others put effort into getting done as quickly as possible. If the city put the amount of dogged determination that Curry and others had for Lot J into stuff like the Trio, or into getting Amtrak back downtown, or sitting Hyatt and Spandrel down to hash out a deal on an exhibition hall, it is much more likely that we would see genuine progress compared to far-flung projects like Lot J.
I appreciate all the insightful analysis on this by many of the posters. It's damn complicated. I am happy about the results. Had this gone forward I think everything else that's needed or been promised (downtown)would have never come to fruition. This could be a great downtown if COJ really wanted that. The fact that Khan was not there had to be a factor, he shot himself in the foot. I'm betting his pride will never let him admit that.
Quote from: MusicMan on January 13, 2021, 03:50:40 PM
I appreciate all the insightful analysis on this by many of the posters. It's damn complicated. I am happy about the results. Had this gone forward I think everything else that's needed or been promised (downtown)would have never come to fruition. This could be a great downtown if COJ really wanted that. The fact that Khan was not there had to be a factor, he shot himself in the foot. I'm betting his pride will never let him admit that.
He is also being mum on the hiring of a head coach. So, I don't know why anybody expected him to be in attendance based off what is going on with the football side.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 13, 2021, 02:02:49 PM
With this deal sunk, and the Jags apparently just giving up and going back to the Shipyards instead of trying to actually make this work, I wonder if it'd be too out there for the city to offer Cordish Lots M, N, and P for at least a Live! arena and Loews hotel as Ennis has suggested. Hopefully with quite a bit fewer incentives this time.
I don't read them saying Lot J is dead as them giving up. At the end of the day, Lot J was a small hotel, some retail/entertainment and 400 apartment units. Not something game changing. I expect, if truly viable, these will all end up being included as uses in their Shipyards proposal.
Several postmortem comments:
If Khan asks for $151 million from the City for the Four Seasons, etc. at Metro Park (assuming the National Park Service caves), I think there could again be push back on the dollar amount. That seems disproportionate, once again, to what the project might entail. We shall see.
I don't think, in the end, Khan was willing to go to the mat for Lot J given he never appeared in public to make his case. I think there are a few reasons, which no one would likely ever admit to, for this:
1. Given the initial controversy, he saw it could be a potential "third rail"to his local image if he was too front and center with the public. Basically, he hedged his bets and let Lamping and Harden wear the "black hats." Once the train left the station, he couldn't strand Curry and his team with backing out so he let them fight the "good" fight. The more "graceful" way to assure an out was to refuse to compromise. If it won, he got a windfall. If it lost, he could walk away from what could have been an anchor around his interests for years to come.
2. Khan isn't stupid. I believe he may have had some second thoughts about the wisdom and financial viability of this project as it moved forward. Some of this can be seen in the decision to downsize it. That shows they didn't have a good handle at the beginning on the financial sustainability of the concept. It also may be why they insisted on the City contributing so much. It wasn't for the construction, it was for reserves to draw upon for years to save face while it failed to be profitable in the hopes that it could be turned around before the reserves ran out. I think that's why they may have refused to share their proformas and other financial details. Regardless, I sense some relief from his team that Lot J got defeated. This is evidenced by their instant declaration that Lot J is dead and they have no interest in further pursuing it. Good riddance.
3. Khan is also savvy enough to stay focused on his priorities. Seeing the public sentiment foment against Lot J, at some point, he needed to weigh Lot J against his ultimate ask for the stadium. The latter is far more important. It wasn't worth risking the stadium for Lot J. At some point, you decide to just let the chips fall where they may on Lot J but don't lose sleep over its outcome.
4. For the above reasons, Khan has slipped out of a poorly conceived project and a public relations disaster that could have simmered for years if Lot J became the next Landing. Moving on to Treveor Lawrence and Urban Meyer will provide him with a welcome distraction to offer Jacksonville citizens in the hopes their memories of Lot J will fade fast and he can rebuild his and the Jags image with the public in time for his big ask on the stadium improvements/rebuild.
5. The real losers in this are Curry and the Council members who stuck their necks out to support Lot J. They will be hung out to dry, left spinning in the wind. Deservedly so for not sticking up for the citizens who they are supposed to represent.
Go Jags!!!!!..... Yea, just Leave Us Alone. Go Away.
End of an Era.
Onward!!
Lot J No Problem
Don't tell me that this COULD mean that Khan could either sell the team and leave, or pull chocks and relocate the team to another city (Orlando?)...Florida jaguars?
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 15, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
Distance from Baltimore (Ravens) to D.C. (Washington Football Team) is 32 miles. Distance from Orlando to Tampa is 80-ish miles. If NFL owners can make more money with a team in Orlando rather than Jax, they won't hesitate. Just ask San Diego, St. Louis, and Oakland.
Quote from: Todd_Parker on January 16, 2021, 10:44:52 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 15, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
Distance from Baltimore (Ravens) to D.C. (Washington Football Team) is 32 miles. Distance from Orlando to Tampa is 80-ish miles. If NFL owners can make more money with a team in Orlando rather than Jax, they won't hesitate. Just ask San Diego, St. Louis, and Oakland.
Charles Hunter is correct....at least not without Tampa Ownership's approval. Orlando is officially a Secondary Market for Tampa (and Jacksonville), so no team can enter a secondary market of another team without their approval....even if the other 31 owners agree to it.
In the example you cited, Washington had to sign off on Cleveland's "relocation" to Baltimore. Originally Jack Kent Cooke was opposed (remember, he voted for Carolina and Jacksonville in the expansion process 2 years earlier when Baltimore bid)). The reason he reversed course - he wanted the shiny new stadium in Landover, Maryland and he wanted Maryland tax dollars to build it. If he opposed the move (When realistically he knew the market was strong enough to support both teams), then he wasn't likely to get Maryland state dollars for his stadium.
Orlando is a totally different animal. While they certainly have the tourism and hotels, Washington and Baltimore are the #7 and #19 Metros in the US, respectively. Tampa is #17 and Orlando is #32. Much different animal.
Oh.....and Orlando has refused to fund a stadium for their bowl games while the Citrus Bowl is falling in on itself.
Couple of things I've thought about in hindsight.
1) Why the change from a convention center to a four seasons? Weirdly, and someone could correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't putting the convention center in the sports district have given us a unique position in the country? I know they have similar districts in places like Philly, but I just mean in terms of the collective gamut of events venues within close proximity - Stadium, ballpark, arena, ampitheater, convention center. Additionally, do four seasons offer anything different to typical hotels from a conferencing/convention stand point?
2) The failure to attract an office tenant - As someone pointed out a few posts previously, how on earth did they fail to do this when as cited, theres never been a better time arguably to move to florida and do business?
Conversely however, what is the plan b as an alternative to turning this down? Whats the alternative If anything I see more bureaucracy and red tape with the shipyards given we have the landswap issue on top of the environmental stuff we already had with lot J.
I think we are now looking at a situation where the team leave. This feels too similar to all the other relocations I've seen down the years. It always starts with a vote being rejected or funding for something being knocked back.
Quote from: Todd_Parker on January 16, 2021, 10:44:52 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 15, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
Distance from Baltimore (Ravens) to D.C. (Washington Football Team) is 32 miles. Distance from Orlando to Tampa is 80-ish miles. If NFL owners can make more money with a team in Orlando rather than Jax, they won't hesitate. Just ask San Diego, St. Louis, and Oakland.
As someone who lives in the DMV area, I can tell you those 32 miles feel much longer via car, perhaps longer than 80-ish.
Quote from: landfall on January 16, 2021, 07:19:39 PM
Couple of things I've thought about in hindsight.
1) Why the change from a convention center to a four seasons? Weirdly, and someone could correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't putting the convention center in the sports district have given us a unique position in the country? I know they have similar districts in places like Philly, but I just mean in terms of the collective gamut of events venues within close proximity - Stadium, ballpark, arena, ampitheater, convention center. Additionally, do four seasons offer anything different to typical hotels from a conferencing/convention stand point?
The Four Seasons has long been expected in some form, the more recent renderings are just the first time they've been called that. Previously there was a tower near the convention center concept believed to be it.
More importantly, rumor is that Curry's/Khan's plan became building a convention center at the site of the jail with the returns from selling JEA to FPL. Obviously that didn't happen, so it's somewhat in limbo. Meanwhile Lori Boyer at DIA reportedly wants to build one on the old parking lot of the Landing, but there's no telling when/if that would happen, or if that site really makes any sense beyond being on the river.
One of the issues with the talk about having the venues together is that there isn't much in terms of daily activity to encourage activity in the area. If there isn't a major event - be it a game, show, or convention - is it going to be a massive ghost town? The goal of a district should be constant, even if not bursting at the seams, activity. Clustering does work, but you need to cluster different uses beyond just arenas. That's why there's been so much talk here about keeping it cheap & simple and just adding an exhibition hall to the back of the Hyatt so that conventions are now in the heart of downtown.
Quote2) The failure to attract an office tenant - As someone pointed out a few posts previously, how on earth did they fail to do this when as cited, theres never been a better time arguably to move to florida and do business?
There are others more qualified to speak to this than I am.
QuoteConversely however, what is the plan b as an alternative to turning this down? Whats the alternative If anything I see more bureaucracy and red tape with the shipyards given we have the landswap issue on top of the environmental stuff we already had with lot J.
I think we are now looking at a situation where the team leave. This feels too similar to all the other relocations I've seen down the years. It always starts with a vote being rejected or funding for something being knocked back.
To turning down the Lot J deal? It's somewhat unclear. The Jags are reportedly pivoting to the Shipyards, but it's unclear if City Hall (meaning Curry) ever came up with an alternative, likely assuming it would pass with enough arm-twisting.
This forum, however, has offered plenty of alternatives over the years. There is a substantial need to focus our incentive capacity on supporting projects in the urban core, like what JWB and Augustine Development are building, or on the Laura Street Trio. For a lot less money than Lot J we can get more residential units and more hotel rooms, in a walkable area that isn't a mile away from other development. Making the necessary policy and infrastructure changes to foster an environment for developers to adaptive reuse and infill is a much larger bang for our buck.
In terms of the Live! arena, it's truly a shame that Curry knocked down the Landing thinking he would get a smaller one on the taxpayer's dime at the stadium, but what's done is done. There are now six-year-old plans to turn the Landing into a mixed-use development with a plaza, but those seem to have been left by the wayside in favor of a largely passive greenspace that we will spend the next two or so years trying to figure out what to do with. Personally, I'm a supporter of going back to Cordish and asking about the prospect of building a more realistically-priced development, perhaps on some of the other lots at TIAA Bank Field (Ennis has talked about that at length).
In order to keep myself from continuing to ramble, the point is that there is a
lot we could do as an alternative. The question is whether our city's leadership is interested or willing to take charge in making it happen. Anything is possible in terms of the team leaving (Lamping did say they were a free agent team), but as Nate Monroe has said, if they were really going to leave from the failure of Lot J, there's not much we could have done to stop them anyway.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 15, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
You could be right, but IMO I don't think so. Why? Oakland was right across the bay from San Francisco and that worked out for years...didn't it? And of course you have instances of two teams in one city, though those cities are big league world class. Apples and oranges I guess, but I don't think the NFL would rule that out. Orlando has a huge metro population and so does Tampa, so there shouldn't be no conflict there relative to fans and TV viewership. I could be wrong, but just my opinion.
Fair points Marcus. I didn't actually realise that was part of the JEA privatisation to put a convention center there on the jail. I guess my point in terms of a plan b is really we are back to square one, there wasn't an alternative. I'm hoping sometime in the next year the Jags/City/County can work on a realistic compromise rather than a yes votes v no votes divide occurring and cliques developing. I wasn't totally enamored with Cordish as a developer as I feel the tenant mix in their developments is uninspiring and also given some of the other developments posted on here like Midtown Tampa I felt we were being short changed and getting not a lot for a lot. I'd hope any mayoral candidates are proactive in engaging with the team and any riverfront development than simply treating them as an afterthought. Maybe thats just the sports fan in me.
Regarding Orlando and to an extent this probably extends to Jacksonville. As much as the population of sun belt cities is growing, much of that growth is transient and coming from people who already are fans of teams in other cities hence the difficulty in attracting fans proportionate to actual population. I expect it'll be the usual suspects who would be a threat to taking the team i.e. San Antonio.
Quote from: landfall on January 16, 2021, 07:19:39 PM
Couple of things I've thought about in hindsight.
1) Why the change from a convention center to a four seasons? Weirdly, and someone could correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't putting the convention center in the sports district have given us a unique position in the country? I know they have similar districts in places like Philly, but I just mean in terms of the collective gamut of events venues within close proximity - Stadium, ballpark, arena, ampitheater, convention center. Additionally, do four seasons offer anything different to typical hotels from a conferencing/convention stand point?
I don't think the Four Seasons is spotted in the same place as the convention center alluded to in Khan's renderings. The FS would be in Metro Park and the CC would be on the eastern edge of the Shipyards. This would essentially still be in the "stadium district." While I hate to see our riverfront not used as public green space, if something is going to go there, subject to the "deal," I agree that the idea of the CC being with the stadium, arena, baseball grounds, amphitheater and fair grounds could make good sense, especially with some synergies over shared events and parking. Plus, I think the area allows for either a larger and more flexible CC and/or for expansion in the future if the City's needs continue to grow.
QuoteI think we are now looking at a situation where the team leave. This feels too similar to all the other relocations I've seen down the years. It always starts with a vote being rejected or funding for something being knocked back.
If the Jags can get a sweetheart deal on a billion dollar stadium redo here, I think all else will be "forgiven." This is why Lot J, Metro Park and the Shipyards should all be considered in one massive plan and deal. I think the main advantage to Khan, had he gotten Lot J, was to leverage the City's massive investment in Lot J into getting a better stadium deal when it comes around. In other words, the City would spend hundreds of millions more to "protect" the hundreds of millions already sunk in Lot J. Curry was being sucker punched and wasn't smart enough or otherwise blinded by Khan to realize it. Just plain stupid or crooked, take your pick.
There would be nothing unique about putting the convention center near the stadium. Chicago and Detroit are two NFL examples of already having that situation and doing it better. There's not much Jax can do to be unique, other than being itself and building up upon its existing and historical assets.
Also, the Four Seasons plan is dramatically different from the old convention center rendering:
Convention Center Plan:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-rSDG7bt/0/1c4c4fc3/X3/3kQevw-X3.jpg)
Four Seasons Plan:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/The-Shipyards-Renderings/i-FVWDFM8/0/6ccddb35/XL/shipyards-dia-01_1024xx5401-3038-0-282-XL.jpg)
With Lot J, they played the Curry hard ball game of take it or leave it, and it got left. I have no doubt that if any of Lot J is feasible and gives them a chance to make money, those uses will resurface. Keep in mind, resurfacing could simply mean these similar uses end up in the plan for Metropolitan Park.
Hasn't there also been talk a bout a NEW stadium? Where does that go? Remove the current one? So bright and shiny development will be next to a multi year construction and demolition zone for several years?
They've talked about revamping the existing stadium. So it won't be moving to a different location.
Quote from: landfall on January 16, 2021, 07:19:39 PM
Couple of things I've thought about in hindsight.
1) Why the change from a convention center to a four seasons? Weirdly, and someone could correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't putting the convention center in the sports district have given us a unique position in the country? I know they have similar districts in places like Philly, but I just mean in terms of the collective gamut of events venues within close proximity - Stadium, ballpark, arena, ampitheater, convention center. Additionally, do four seasons offer anything different to typical hotels from a conferencing/convention stand point?
Particularly with the failure of Lot J to pass, we'd be both insane and hypocritical to build a convention center in the sports district. The reason the Ford on Bay convention center was killed (aside from the cost, the city's utter shock that no one was willing to shoulder the cost to built it for us, and the Jags' harpooning of the procedures) was because a previous DIA study identified a lack of complemeting entertainment uses as a major impediment to Lot J's success.
As Marcus mentioned above, in the absence of Lot J, where are event attendees going to go during the evenings? If you've been to a convention in Kansas City, for example, there's really great synergy between the convention center and Power & Light, which is only like two or three blocks away. In the absence that nightlife component at the Sports Complex, we'd be setting up a convention center to fail.
Minor clarification on future convention center plans:
The DIA has kind of thrown their hands in the air for now, at least until Curry is out.
They've always been operating on a separate (read: public) track as the Curry admin (read: secretive).
The convention center at the Courthouse site was torpedoed by Curry and his secretive talks with the Jags about a Shipyards CC.
The DIA was never in the loop on this, and started discussing the riverfront space between the Landing and Hyatt for an alternative location after the courthouse RFP was abandoned.
When the pandemic crushed conventions, the Jags shifted their focus to the Four Seasons stuff, shelved their plans for a potential CC down the road, and Curry and his team started floating the idea of replacing the jail with a CC sometime down the line.
For stuff like this, and the MOSH, and Lot J, it'd be a faulty assumption to think that anything is being communicated back to the DIA. Instead, a lot of the backdoor Curry/Hughes nonsense has made the DIA's job harder with their existing projects (e.g. RFPing a convention center and having to dismiss all entries; selling Related on a museum-front residential complex only to find out in the press that MOSH is moving to the Northbank, etc.). Pure speculation, but Aundra Wallace (for my money, the best leader the DIA ever had) decided to step down around the same time that Curry started heavily meddling with downtown.
Quote2) The failure to attract an office tenant - As someone pointed out a few posts previously, how on earth did they fail to do this when as cited, theres never been a better time arguably to move to florida and do business?
Different timings. The office tower already had a foot out the door before the covid-19 pandemic came along and all these other businesses started relocating to states like Florida and Texas. Throw in the fact that no business wants to commit to moving into a speculative office tower that may not be ready for move-in for 7 years. Also, throw in the fact that we've squandered the greatest economic boom of our generation and failed to build the type of downtown and supporting infrastructure that would attract these companies.
I've mentioned this before, but what in God's name would have happened had JEA actually selected Lot J for their new headquarters? Cordish's best and final offer showed a construction timeline of less than two years, which is totally at odds with the 7 years listed in the Lot J development agreement.
Ideally, any office tenant at Lot J or the proposed office tower at Met Park would be net new to the area. Extra ideally, all of those Chamber and City trips to London to "drum up business for Jacksonville" would have resulted in an international relocaction/expansion by now.
QuoteConversely however, what is the plan b as an alternative to turning this down? Whats the alternative If anything I see more bureaucracy and red tape with the shipyards given we have the landswap issue on top of the environmental stuff we already had with lot J.
To me, the Shipyards plan is going to be a harder sell to the public than Lot J, even if the price tag is $150 million instead of $249 million. At least with Lot J we ended up with a city-owned public amenity (the Live! venue) that the average citizen could enjoy, would increase quality of life in the city, and would help bring new events to the sports complex and retain the existing ones.
Where's the taxpayer benefit to a Four Seasons hotel that the average citizen will never use (and don't tell me bed taxes), an orthopedic center primarily used by the Jags (like the ones the Vikings and Packers have recently built), and office and residential? It just isn't there. We'll hear the $150 million price tag from the city and the Jags, but the real hidden cost is going to be building a new park to replace Metro Park with, assuming the Feds even agree to the land swap (which is going to be tougher with a new administration coming in). Should come as no shock that the word is that Hughes and the Curry admin have made no friends with the feds on this, and that part of the reason the bill was rescinded to pay back the feds in lieu of a land swap was because the feds aren't convinced we had that contractual right to begin with.
Lori Boyer was supposed to have more info to share on the land swap back in November once the DIA took over, but something tells me we would have heard something by now had the response been, "Sure! Develop that land!"
QuoteI think we are now looking at a situation where the team leave. This feels too similar to all the other relocations I've seen down the years. It always starts with a vote being rejected or funding for something being knocked back.
The hope here is that sanity prevails on the Jags' side and guys like Shad Khan and Mark Lamping know deep down that the deal that Curry offered was a shit deal for the taxpayers and that no city in their right mind would accept it. Paul Harden in particular is smart enough to know that Curry tanked this one, rather than the city actively telling the Jags to fuck off.
Goes without saying, but just watching everything that's happened in the aftermath of Lot J, ownership continues to act in a way that suggests they want to make this franchise successful in Jacksonville. Judging by the season ticket deposits, that shouldn't be a problem.
Quote from: MusicMan on January 17, 2021, 09:03:21 AM
Hasn't there also been talk a bout a NEW stadium? Where does that go? Remove the current one? So bright and shiny development will be next to a multi year construction and demolition zone for several years?
The Jags don't want a new stadium. It really is as simple as that. More specifically, they don't think there's enough untapped revenue in our market specific to our 7-8 regular season home games to justify the cost of a billion dollar stadium replacement. It's going to be a major rehab, like with Hard Rock in Miami, but it's not going to be a rebuild. Things that I've heard they're looking for include:
- Cover from the elements
- Widened concourses
- New press boxes
- Escalators
- New field drainage system that would divert water out of the sports complex for added resiliency
- New electrical system to replace the aging system in place
Here's a quote from Lamping:
"The question is what's the capacity of the market place," Lamping said. "Teams often build new stadiums because they believe there's an untapped river of revenue, and that they just didn't have the facility to take advantage of it. I'm not sure that's the case here. But we have to keep the stadium up to date."
Because the Jags have a smaller fanbase, the goal is going to continue to be trying to drive more 365/24/7 revenue out of that existing fanbase with these ancillary projects.
QuoteWith Lot J, they played the Curry hard ball game of take it or leave it, and it got left. I have no doubt that if any of Lot J is feasible and gives them a chance to make money, those uses will resurface. Keep in mind, resurfacing could simply mean these similar uses end up in the plan for Metropolitan Park.
I hope you're right, particularly with the Live! component. The reason I'm not sure is because Cordish and the Jags have both insisted that Cordish has no interest in partnering with the franchise on anything below Bay Street. I don't think they want to be involved on the riverfront. Which sucks because the two most exciting, city-beneficial elements of the Lot J proposal were the Live! venue and the Live by Loews hotel. The city could have REALLY benefited from having those dining and entertaining options down by the stadium (particularly in partnership with a successful operator who was contractually committed to maintaining 75%+ occupancy). And having a nice hotel (without the Four Seasons ADR) would have been great for the sports complex as well.
Would really suck to see the Lot J project die entirely.
Was a great project, just needs some tweaks to the numbers.
Part of me wonders if the optics and support would have been better had the Jags had eliminated the $53 million benefit from the breadbox loan, but asked the city to pay for all of the Live! Venue.
So instead of:
- City and Cordish each pay $50 million for Live! City owns, Cordish operates
- City pays $73 million infrastructure
- City pays $53 million grant to help with residential and hotel; developer pays rest
The ask is:
- City funds the $100 million Live! venue; Cordish operates, pays operating costs; guarantees occupancy
- City pays $73 million infrastructure
- Developer pays 100% of costs for residential and hotel
We're still paying more than we should, but I wonder how much better the optics would have been had we positioned the public ask as being solely for the components that would be publicly owned (Live!, infrastructure) and positioned the developer contribution as 100% of the privately owned components (hotel, residential, office, etc.).
At this point the city has a massive amount of riverfront property and all the options and plans for any of it don't seem to be part of an overall plan at all, but conceived as singular siloed projects. Perhaps now is the time to truly master plan the entire Northbank/Southbank riverfront.
Waterfront vacant parcels currently: Landing, City Hall Annex, Old Courthouse, Shipyards, The District. SUPPOSEDLY the Berkman2 site will be vacant as well in the near future. PLUS, Metro Park may be moved and is essentially open space now anyway.
MOSH may move from the Southbank to the Northbank and River City Brewing Company is on board for redevelopment.
Hire a world class planner like Sassaki to evaluate the entirety of DT and decide the highest and best use for all of those parcels. Include all city owned property around the stadium and the jail too.
Awesome. Let's get moving. Next!
Quote from: Todd_Parker on January 16, 2021, 10:44:52 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 15, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
I don't think the NFL will allow a team in Orlando - too close to Tampa Bay.
Distance from Baltimore (Ravens) to D.C. (Washington Football Team) is 32 miles. Distance from Orlando to Tampa is 80-ish miles. If NFL owners can make more money with a team in Orlando rather than Jax, they won't hesitate. Just ask San Diego, St. Louis, and Oakland.
combined metro size of Bal-Wash is 9+ million. Combined size of Tam-Orl (including Polk County in between) is roughly 6.5 million
Quote from: Steve on January 16, 2021, 03:08:20 PM
Oh.....and Orlando has refused to fund a stadium for their bowl games while the Citrus Bowl is falling in on itself.
FYI - the stadium was mostly rebuilt a few years ago - and there are plans to do even more to it in the near future.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 17, 2021, 12:18:12 PM
At this point the city has a massive amount of riverfront property and all the options and plans for any of it don't seem to be part of an overall plan at all, but conceived as singular siloed projects. Perhaps now is the time to truly master plan the entire Northbank/Southbank riverfront.
Waterfront vacant parcels currently: Landing, City Hall Annex, Old Courthouse, Shipyards, The District. SUPPOSEDLY the Berkman2 site will be vacant as well in the near future. PLUS, Metro Park may be moved and is essentially open space now anyway.
MOSH may move from the Southbank to the Northbank and River City Brewing Company is on board for redevelopment.
Hire a world class planner like Sassaki to evaluate the entirety of DT and decide the highest and best use for all of those parcels. Include all city owned property around the stadium and the jail too.
All good (and alluring) points, although I imagine that becomes much more difficult if this is true:
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 17, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
The DIA has kind of thrown their hands in the air for now, at least until Curry is out.
Not to mention that Boyer seems to have already started a process with the Landing alone, and they might not want to abandon that in favor of a riverfront master plan.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on January 17, 2021, 11:17:05 AM
QuoteWith Lot J, they played the Curry hard ball game of take it or leave it, and it got left. I have no doubt that if any of Lot J is feasible and gives them a chance to make money, those uses will resurface. Keep in mind, resurfacing could simply mean these similar uses end up in the plan for Metropolitan Park.
I hope you're right, particularly with the Live! component. The reason I'm not sure is because Cordish and the Jags have both insisted that Cordish has no interest in partnering with the franchise on anything below Bay Street. I don't think they want to be involved on the riverfront. Which sucks because the two most exciting, city-beneficial elements of the Lot J proposal were the Live! venue and the Live by Loews hotel. The city could have REALLY benefited from having those dining and entertaining options down by the stadium (particularly in partnership with a successful operator who was contractually committed to maintaining 75%+ occupancy). And having a nice hotel (without the Four Seasons ADR) would have been great for the sports complex as well.
Would really suck to see the Lot J project die entirely.
Was a great project, just needs some tweaks to the numbers.
Part of me wonders if the optics and support would have been better had the Jags had eliminated the $53 million benefit from the breadbox loan, but asked the city to pay for all of the Live! Venue.
So instead of:
- City and Cordish each pay $50 million for Live! City owns, Cordish operates
- City pays $73 million infrastructure
- City pays $53 million grant to help with residential and hotel; developer pays rest
The ask is:
- City funds the $100 million Live! venue; Cordish operates, pays operating costs; guarantees occupancy
- City pays $73 million infrastructure
- Developer pays 100% of costs for residential and hotel
We're still paying more than we should, but I wonder how much better the optics would have been had we positioned the public ask as being solely for the components that would be publicly owned (Live!, infrastructure) and positioned the developer contribution as 100% of the privately owned components (hotel, residential, office, etc.).
It seems to me like this is based on the assumption that those costs remain accurate. If all of Lot J is
really only a $250 million project, then we're
really getting screwed having to pay ~70% of that. On top of that, the Jags appear to have zero interest in still working on Lot J, and from the sound of things zero interest in Cordish, either.
From the attitude the Jags are putting off, it's really up to the city (presumably DIA) to pick up the pieces, go back to Cordish, and offer a new, more grounded deal. At which point, as Ennis has said, it might make more sense to go move it to a different lot without the remediation costs. I'd also support spending the $7 million Cordish quoted on stormwater management for the pond. And as I said before, putting together a temporary space on Lot J for the "cocktail party" stuff since the Landing is now gone and while the deal is made for a Live! Arena and hotel.
Here's a
very crude concept of what I'm thinking about:
(https://i.imgur.com/5UQKHjh.png)
Quote from: tufsu1 on January 17, 2021, 07:07:24 PM
Quote from: Steve on January 16, 2021, 03:08:20 PM
Oh.....and Orlando has refused to fund a stadium for their bowl games while the Citrus Bowl is falling in on itself.
FYI - the stadium was mostly rebuilt a few years ago - and there are plans to do even more to it in the near future.
That stadium blows. I went for a Florida Classic game a year or two ago. Even with the renovation a few years back, it's nowhere near the level of a modern NFL facility. If the Jags think our Sports and Entertainment District sucks, wait to they get a wind of OBT.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 17, 2021, 07:53:52 PM
Not to mention that Boyer seems to have already started a process with the Landing alone, and they might not want to abandon that in favor of a riverfront master plan.
Boyer's process with the Landing is Curry's paper napkin sketch from a few years back:
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Business/Jacksonville-Landing/i-hPvBnQP/0/87d38d84/L/183444_standard-L.png)
Nevertheless, regardless of what they do with the Landing site, like the Hyatt or performing arts center, it can be included into a riverfront master plan. The riverwalks could both use a lot more activity in the form of restaurants, retail, cultural spaces, museums, etc. as opposed to just grass lawns. So the redevelopment of the Landing site (whenever it happens) should be a plus compared to what's there today.
^ Yes, I know it is, I'm just saying they might not want to deviate from that plan in favor of a riverfront master plan. (Or perhaps Curry won't "allow" them to.)
And yeah, I guess. Hopefully it will at least be better.
The master plan (if they did one) would just incorporate potential Landing plans like it would existing buildings like the Hyatt, Berkman or the Peninsula. It shouldn't be viewed as a detriment to a master planning or visioning process.
I just watched "Hidden Figures".....from simple orbit to Moon landing in 10 years.
Surely Jax can get their act together in the next 10 years?
Quote from: MusicMan on January 18, 2021, 10:27:53 AM
I just watched "Hidden Figures".....from simple orbit to Moon landing in 10 years.
Surely Jax can get their act together in the next 10 years?
A great movie! Ego's ended up being second fiddle to doing the right thing. Other differences: NASA had visionary, progressive, focused, open minded, collaborative and proactive leadership.
Jacksonville leadership... not so much of even one of those traits.
It took thousands working as a "team" to get us to the moon. Curry couldn't get a team together to cross a street without breaking down. Ironic, given his love of "team" sports.
Seeing as the attempt to repeat that effort will take at least 15 years from the beginning of the rocket's development, and nearly 20 years since the beginning of the capsule's development, it's hard to say we still have that attitude.
But let's think for a moment. Ten years from now will be 2031. (assuming we haven't changed it yet, that will also be an election year.)
Curry remaining in office (unless he is recalled) will lose us at least two years or so. Assuming someone of his ilk isn't elected to replace him, and that any successor receives a Council prepared for teamwork, there's a lot of effort that would have to be expended, efficiently, for this city to get its act together within the remaining eight years. We're already missing out on perhaps the best chance to get federal funding poured into the city for infrastructure (unless Democrats have the political capital to continue after the 2022 midterms), and state support will be hard to come by (unless Democrats win at least the Governorship in 2022). Taxpayers will have to be willing to put up at least some portion of funds for big projects like moving the jail or major transit reform, and City Hall must have a plan to gain that will. There are big potential opportunities in the long run, like Brightline at the terminal downtown, that we can't really afford to miss.
Hopefully we'll skip spending money on moving the jail. The riverfront jails in downtown Fort Lauderdale and Houston haven't stopped either of those downtowns from booming. Like the homeless, I think the jail is something that's been used as an excuse for bad leadership and decision making regarding downtown. We should be able to spend our money on things that will rapidly move the needle forward and address the jail when its lifetime is up.
I don't disagree, but people (read: voters) have gotten so attached to it that it seems like it might as well be on the table. I've always wondered how serious people were about it though (by which I mean I've repeatedly asked people saying we should move the jail whether they'd be willing to spend half a billion in taxpayer money, likely through tax increases, to do so).
" Cocktail Party"
Empty Space
You could make it cute enough while we're all waiting on the Live! arena. Benches, whatever temporary shade we can get in there, room for food trucks to pull in.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 18, 2021, 08:45:42 PM
I don't disagree, but people (read: voters) have gotten so attached to it that it seems like it might as well be on the table. I've always wondered how serious people were about it though (by which I mean I've repeatedly asked people saying we should move the jail whether they'd be willing to spend half a billion in taxpayer money, likely through tax increases, to do so).
I haven't heard many people outside of Curry's circle and known local Republicans claim we need to spend hundreds of millions to move the jail to revitalize downtown. From what I can tell, the general public seems more interested in other areas of downtown, upgrading riverfront parks or totally ignoring downtown completely. More voters will align messages related to crime reduction, safety, economic development in NW Jax, etc.
I know social media isn't necessarily representative of every single voter in Jacksonville, but in my experience every time something has come up about Downtown's issues there are multiple comments about the jail, from people who generally at least don't appear to be in Curry's circles or known local Republicans. Although to your credit there are often also comments about the homeless, so maybe there are just a lot of skewed perspectives at hand.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 19, 2021, 02:26:33 PM
I know social media isn't necessarily representative of every single voter in Jacksonville, but in my experience every time something has come up about Downtown's issues there are multiple comments about the jail, from people who generally at least don't appear to be in Curry's circles or known local Republicans. Although to your credit there are often also comments about the homeless, so maybe there are just a lot of skewed perspectives at hand.
I think moving the jail is one of those things people ask for until they see the price tag. The average citizen here probably hasn't paid enough attention to know this has a $400 million plus price tag associated with it. For that money, which is even more than Lot J, you can bet there will be plenty of people asking for other priorities to be funded first. Even, after the Lot J fiasco, including the stadium :).
Moving the jail is something that will take more than one mayoral term. The expense would also handicap the general budget and would come at the expense of public needs elsewhere.
If I were running, I'd just say I'm going to create a clean, walkable and highly active and vibrant downtown by the end of my term by programming and focusing on and maximizing our existing assets, buildings and businesses......and I'm not going to break the piggy bank doing it. It doesn't mean that we won't take advantage of economic development opportunities spread out around the the CBD. It would a part of a short term prioritization strategy, focusing on quick change by cleaning up and upgrading our Northbank public spaces, programming them, and targeting complimentary adaptive reuse and infill adjacent to existing businesses and projects already planned or underway. All around clustering, complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting. If you don't see progress at the end of 4 years and still can't find cup of coffee on a Sunday morning outside of the hotels and 7_Eleven, vote me out of office.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 19, 2021, 02:47:16 PM
Moving the jail is something that will take more than one mayoral term. The expense would also handicap the general budget and would come at the expense of public needs elsewhere.
If I were running, I'd just say I'm going to create a clean, walkable and highly active and vibrant downtown by the end of my term by programming and focusing on and maximizing our existing assets, buildings and businesses......and I'm not going to break the piggy bank doing it. It doesn't mean that we won't take advantage of economic development opportunities spread out around the the CBD. It would a part of a short term prioritization strategy, focusing on quick change by cleaning up and upgrading our Northbank public spaces, programming them, and targeting complimentary adaptive reuse and infill adjacent to existing businesses and projects already planned or underway. All around clustering, complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting. If you don't see progress at the end of 4 years and still can't find cup of coffee on a Sunday morning outside of the hotels and 7_Eleven, vote me out of office.
Ennis, have you filed yet for your mayoral run :)? I think many here would support you.
If not, maybe Carlucci, if he wins, hires you to run DIA or another urban planning agency for the City! You can bring Marcus along with you too. The Dream Team!
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 19, 2021, 02:39:15 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 19, 2021, 02:26:33 PM
I know social media isn't necessarily representative of every single voter in Jacksonville, but in my experience every time something has come up about Downtown's issues there are multiple comments about the jail, from people who generally at least don't appear to be in Curry's circles or known local Republicans. Although to your credit there are often also comments about the homeless, so maybe there are just a lot of skewed perspectives at hand.
I think moving the jail is one of those things people ask for until they see the price tag. The average citizen here probably hasn't paid enough attention to know this has a $400 million plus price tag associated with it. For that money, which is even more than Lot J, you can bet there will be plenty of people asking for other priorities to be funded first. Even, after the Lot J fiasco, including the stadium :).
There are at least a few people who are
surprisingly willing to accept that price tag, although I doubt it's enough to justify doing so. At the end of the day, the ideal convention center solution for our market is likely adding the final piece (an exhibition hall) to the 3/4 of a convention center at the Hyatt. It's a shame that Curry's antics have at best put that on hold and at worst scuttled it entirely. And it's annoying that so much breath has to be spent on explaining the cost of the jail to everyone who insists that moving it is the first thing we should do.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on January 19, 2021, 03:03:00 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 19, 2021, 02:47:16 PM
Moving the jail is something that will take more than one mayoral term. The expense would also handicap the general budget and would come at the expense of public needs elsewhere.
If I were running, I'd just say I'm going to create a clean, walkable and highly active and vibrant downtown by the end of my term by programming and focusing on and maximizing our existing assets, buildings and businesses......and I'm not going to break the piggy bank doing it. It doesn't mean that we won't take advantage of economic development opportunities spread out around the the CBD. It would a part of a short term prioritization strategy, focusing on quick change by cleaning up and upgrading our Northbank public spaces, programming them, and targeting complimentary adaptive reuse and infill adjacent to existing businesses and projects already planned or underway. All around clustering, complementing uses within a compact pedestrian scale setting. If you don't see progress at the end of 4 years and still can't find cup of coffee on a Sunday morning outside of the hotels and 7_Eleven, vote me out of office.
Ennis, have you filed yet for your mayoral run :)? I think many here would support you.
If not, maybe Carlucci, if he wins, hires you to run DIA or another urban planning agency for the City! You can bring Marcus along with you too. The Dream Team!
Haha, now there's an idea! I pointed out in another thread that this city has a remarkable track record of electing outsider candidates. There's no reason someone from the brain trust here couldn't be that candidate.
To put on the campaign hat for a moment, I'd recommend punching up the language a bit. Voters tend to get bored of long-winded explanations of the specific policies that would be implemented (not saying the policies shouldn't exist, just that you don't have to offer them up front). Think "We have the tools to rebuild downtown, and it's time to use them." or "We're going to make downtown a place you can walk around and enjoy yourself in, day or night." or perhaps "We
can afford a clean, walkable, and vibrant downtown, what we need is leadership to build it."
That line about a cup of coffee on Sunday morning is terrific though.
Also, it's probably a given, but one probably can't run for mayor on
just downtown. But being able to make a case for how the proposals for downtown are also applicable to other neighborhoods (assuming NIMBYs don't somehow derail that) probably puts one on track for success in that area.
Addressing the rest of the city is simple too. Addressing things like crime, taxes, parks, libraries, education, economic development, infrastructure, etc. will always appeal to the masses. You just need enough campaign money for people to be sold on you. The fact of not wasting $400 million on the jail will mean that money could go to other areas. The opponent of anyone talking about moving the jail should hit the jail candidate over the head again and again with that tax money sucker.
True, true. Money is always going to be a big part of the challenge, which is a shame, really.
I could see the jail candidate hitting back with "Well clearly you don't really care about downtown then! You want to see us fail!" Does that really make sense? Nope. Will it work on some people? Absolutely! I mean, look at some of the rhetoric around the Lot J deal from some people.
That would be a losing proposition. There are too many examples of vibrant downtowns with jails to pluck apart that position.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 18, 2021, 06:08:17 PM
Hopefully we'll skip spending money on moving the jail. The riverfront jails in downtown Fort Lauderdale and Houston haven't stopped either of those downtowns from booming. Like the homeless, I think the jail is something that's been used as an excuse for bad leadership and decision making regarding downtown. We should be able to spend our money on things that will rapidly move the needle forward and address the jail when its lifetime is up.
My issue as such as isn't that the jail is Downtown, its where it is, facing onto Bay St where much of Downtown's development opportunities lie.
Bay Street really could be thee Jacksonville Street in my eyes. Sadly there are too many stars that need to align for that and things move at a snails pace. Berkman and The Ford On Bay for starters. Then the Shipyards and the other vacant lots on Bay, I can think of a couple in particular directly opposite TFOB.
Maxwell House is probably in the same bracket as the jail. Its not a fit for the area in 2021 IMO. That doesn't mean to say the building couldn't be repurposed and repackaged as opposed to another wrecking ball moving in.
Bay St isn't going to become Bourbon or Beale (they're tacky anyway!) However I don't think there's any reason they couldn't match up to places like Mass Ave in Indianapopis or w25th in Cleveland. Previously neglected urban streets in middling cities that have experienced recent and ongoing regeneration and development.
I don't believe the future of downtown is the Shipyards, Metropolitan Park or the Stadium District. Those will become their own district, sort of like Brickell is a different place than Downtown Miami. Everything dreamed up and hoped for this area is still a good decade away from opening and when they do open, they'll still be pretty isolated for another decade or two. Since the actual cohesive development of anything east of Liberty is still 20-30 years away, it makes sense to me to place a higher priority on activating our low hanging fruit short term opportunities in the Northbank. Then 10-15 years down the road, see where we're at with a need to address what is currently a functioning jail.
In other words, if we had $400 million to spend in downtown, I'd rather see $100 million go to adding an exhibition hall at the Hyatt (resolving our convention center situation), $100 million for world class public spaces at the Landing site, JWJ Park, Courthouse plaza, and then $200 million to activate as many corridors and projects as possible between a compact area bounded by Broad, Beaver, Liberty and the riverfront than moving the jail and having another grass lawn after the $400 million is spent. IMO, if that were done, I believe we'd have a vibrant downtown regardless of what happens and when it happens in adjacent areas.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 22, 2021, 11:39:04 AM
I don't believe the future of downtown is the Shipyards, Metropolitan Park or the Stadium District. Those will become their own district, sort of like Brickell is a different place than Downtown Miami. Everything dreamed up and hoped for this area is still a good decade away from opening and when they do open, they'll still be pretty isolated for another decade or two. Since the actual cohesive development of anything east of Liberty is still 20-30 years away, it makes sense to me to place a higher priority on activating our low hanging fruit short term opportunities in the Northbank. Then 10-15 years down the road, see where we're at with a need to address what is currently a functioning jail.
In other words, if we had $400 million to spend in downtown, I'd rather see $100 million go to adding an exhibition hall at the Hyatt (resolving our convention center situation), $100 million for world class public spaces at the Landing site, JWJ Park, Courthouse plaza, and then $200 million to activate as many corridors and projects as possible between a compact area bounded by Broad, Beaver, Liberty and the riverfront than moving the jail and having another grass lawn after the $400 million is spent. IMO, if that were done, I believe we'd have a vibrant downtown regardless of what happens and when it happens in adjacent areas.
If we followed this plan then I would say there is zero chance the Jags are still in Jax. Also the stadium issue will come up in the next 5 years and he will expect a decision within 7. I'm not opposed to what you're saying but if we are on a 20-30 year plan, then I pray for this city. I think a lot of people of this forum couldn't care less about the Jags, this scares me.
Quote from: Pottsburg on January 23, 2021, 09:27:01 AM
If we followed this plan then I would say there is zero chance the Jags are still in Jax.
I disagree unless Lamping was lying when he stated that one of the three things they needed to be viable in Jax long term was a vibrant downtown. You can't ignore your downtown and expect it to someone get vibrant.
QuoteAlso the stadium issue will come up in the next 5 years and he will expect a decision within 7.
Neither the Jags stadium issue or having a vibrant downtown have anything to do with spending $400 million to relocate the jail. Actually, by not spending $400 million on relocating the jail, we would have that same $400 million to possible put toward the stadium issue and having a vibrant downtown. So I'd argue that the stadium issue is yet another reason why tax money should not be used to relocate the jail before addressing more pressing issues.
QuoteI'm not opposed to what you're saying but if we are on a 20-30 year plan, then I pray for this city.
Get on your knees and start praying. I'm just being a realist. Even if Lot J would have passed the other week, the earliest it was going to be fully built out was seven to ten years from now. A mile of empty waterfront isn't getting built out in five years or less. Heck, we're already +20 years in with the Shipyards and have nothing much to show for it.
QuoteI think a lot of people of this forum couldn't care less about the Jags, this scares me.
I think a lot of people do care about the Jags. Some on the forum here happen to be big fans and season ticket holders. However, the jail doesn't have anything to do with them being here long term. By the same token, the future of downtown isn't dependent on the shipyards or the stadium district. They should almost be treated as independent issues but addressed in a manner to where they complement each other.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 23, 2021, 03:21:56 PM
Quote from: Pottsburg on January 23, 2021, 09:27:01 AM
If we followed this plan then I would say there is zero chance the Jags are still in Jax.
I disagree unless Lamping was lying when he stated that one of the three things they needed to be viable in Jax long term was a vibrant downtown. You can't ignore your downtown and expect it to someone get vibrant.
I personally think Lamping interpretation of downtown is different from yours. He would consider lot J downtown, when in fact most people break up the little areas downtown. So when he says downtown, he means the shipyards and lot J imo. I just think there is a lot of people trying to call a bluff on if he would say screw it and move the team.
If im Khan i buy up a huge parcel of land in St Johns county and create my own little Jerrys world. Look how successful the battery has become in Cobb county.
Lamping and the Jags should not be in control of the future of a nearly 200 year old downtown. Those are two different animals and the downtown one being something they have no professional or political experience at dealing with. Going that route will not only end up with them leaving, but taxpayers be milked for billions and left with a failure of a sports district and actual downtown. The best way is to be able to help them with their needs, while also creating a more livable downtown simultaneously. Also, creating more activity in the sports district should be pursued as well, so I'm not saying this is an either/or situation. I'm just being a realist in saying that spending $400 million to relocate the jail doesn't help either downtown or the Jags. I'm also saying that no matter what they do, it will take well more than a decade to complete. That has less to do with Jax and more to do with the time it takes to develop that much urban property from paper napkin concept to Pottsburg being able to walk into a completed Live! and order an overpriced beer.
Also, Khan would move the team to St. Louis, San Antonio or a host of other cities that are already larger than the Jax MSA before he'd consider moving it to a small place with no corporate base like St. Johns County. The Downtown of today is more active than St. Johns County and there's already a stadium in place. Cobb isn't remotely comparable to anything in NE Florida. It nearly has as much people by itself as Duval and the Atlanta MSA is five times our size.
No way should they be in charge of downtown. They would screw that up real quick.
I wouldn't doubt they are looking at St John's County tbh, especially on the border with Duval around Fruit Cove/St. Johns. Theres plenty of cheap land, wealthy people and a dearth of entertainment options. However, I also can't see the tax base there being large enough to commit big money to a new stadium. Same as there won't be a new stadium on the current site. It'll be renovations or leaving town altogether, IMO.
Personally I don't think there is a lot wrong with the stadium. Its not like the Oakland stadium which was a complete dump nor anywhere near as old and basic as say Buffalo is or San Diego was.
I doubt they are looking at St. Johns County. No offense, but it's podunkville in terms of the NFL. This market is Jax or bust and the existing stadium is the site. I could have sworn that they have already stated that renovation of the existing stadium is what they are looking at. This would include throwing a roof on it, similar to what was done in South Florida with the Dolphin's stadium.
I'm watching the KC vs Buffalo game and Kansas City , defending Super Bowl Champs, have a pathetic little video board. Maybe someone should tell Shad Khan it's (video board) not as important as the god damn team that plays on the field.
If they ever considered moving the stadium, I would propose the likely site would be on land owned by the Davis family south of JTB and north of the county line/Nocatee, They still own thousands of undeveloped acres there and it would be centrally located to the higher income areas of the Beaches, Southside and St. Johns County with interstate-type access from JTB and maybe some new roads connecting from I-295 or the Nocatee Parkway.
Not encouraging the urban sprawl that would bring above and beyond what is already going on around there but I don't think there is a better spot after Downtown. And Khan and the Davis's could combine their billions to build another new "city" around such a stadium. The incentive for them to make the land available for free or a great deal is the roads, cache and traffic that would enhance the value of the rest of their property. Not unlike their donation of 400 acres to Mayo, the Fletcher's donation to the PGA or the Skinner's donating land for UNF.
I don't think they are looking for the Anyplace USA suburban experience. That's counterproductive to everything they've proposed or discussed so far. There's nothing special about that and Davis (or any other private entity) isn't going to give the NFL anywhere near the hundreds of millions in money that COJ would. Davis doesn't need to subsidize a NFL stadium to continue developing their property. It's also hard to see COJ pushing for something like that. Taxpayers would have to spend a billion on a new stadium and be left with an albatross in the Sports and Entertainment District.
This conversation seems like a lot of wasted breath. If they're going to move, they're going to move. Pretending there's even a conversation to be entertained about the Jags moving anywhere within this market is a fool's errand.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 24, 2021, 10:52:49 PM
This conversation seems like a lot of wasted breath. If they're going to move, they're going to move. Pretending there's even a conversation to be entertained about the Jags moving anywhere within this market is a fool's errand.
No one was advocating for a move. I think this was just a speculative discussion of "what ifs." Typical of these forums to think above and beyond the possibilities in front of us. Although, agreed, it is highly unlikely, it is not entirely an option off the table until it is, especially given other teams have stadiums remote from their urban core/downtown.
Coincidentally, Mark Woods just ran this column about "stand alone stadiums" associated with the final four of this year's NFL playoffs:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/mark-woods/2021/01/23/nfls-final-four-proves-smaller-markets-can-compete-and-off-field/6669753002/ (https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/mark-woods/2021/01/23/nfls-final-four-proves-smaller-markets-can-compete-and-off-field/6669753002/)
His conclusion:
Quote
....But all four of these cities and teams punch giant holes in one half of the argument for Lot J — that for a small-market team to be viable, it has to have an entertainment district next to the stadium, and taxpayers have to pay for most of it.
The other half of the argument was that this would pump some much-needed life into downtown. How we do that remains a good question. But perhaps it should have been preceded by this: Is pouring hundreds of millions into Lot J the best way to do it? And is the sports complex even downtown?
While it is only about a mile from the tallest buildings (as the Trevor Lawrence pass flies), the reality is that it's detached from downtown. And, at least for now, maybe that's OK.
Maybe it's OK that Lot J remains a parking lot.
Maybe we should focus on the future of the stadium, not a parking lot next to it. And maybe instead of trying to turn our sports complex into our downtown, we should make the most of our existing riverfront and downtown.
Arrowhead Stadium, Kansas City:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2021/01/22/NFTU/9188eb8c-4c6c-4328-82aa-016c516c4ecb-Arrowheadaerial.jpg?width=660&height=438&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Raymond James Stadium, Tampa:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2021/01/22/NFTU/bab7222a-13e0-4448-923d-1f27ae77ead1-Raymond_James_Stadium_satellite_view.jpg.png?width=660&height=435&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Aerial video showing parking lots as far as you can see around Arrowhead and the Royal's stadium complex:
https://youtu.be/_1S6CbMrKyM (https://youtu.be/_1S6CbMrKyM)