Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Downtown-Slumlord/i-cG3tvwz/0/c3b6d779/L/20171222_164106-L.jpg)
It's no secret that Downtown Jacksonville's vibrancy and authenticity has been set back in recent years by continued demolitions of urban building stock, leaving the core filled with potholes of pedestrian hostile surface parking lots and sodded fields of inactivity. For anyone interested in Downtown revitalization and sustainability, a change in public policy is in order and desperately needed. Now, a major change could be on the way.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/could-downtown-historic-preservation-be-a-game-changer/
It certainly would not hurt. I'm curious if this can continue to be funded but the concept makes total sense.
At this point, I think I've become allergic to the term "game changer," because it seems to virtually guarantee that it won't happen. I still hope though.
It still seems like a lot of steps. How does the proposed process compare with the current process? Are there fewer steps?
Given that the current "game" is demolishing any old and/or unused building, then I'd say yes - it would be a game changer.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on July 14, 2020, 01:50:15 PM
It still seems like a lot of steps. How does the proposed process compare with the current process? Are there fewer steps?
The current process is a developer assumes the old buildings have no value and are too expensive to rehabilitate or maintain. So the process largely ends up with the developer/property owner applying for demolition permits in the hope that it makes the properties more marketable.
It is not clear to me if this will apply to any proposed redevelopment of a historic structure or a contributing structure in the National Historic District; or, this only applies if the developer chooses to apply for one of the programs in the proposed legislation?
I note that "National Historic District" is not defined in the bill. Is there just one that is more or less the same as (or smaller than) the DIA? What about Riverside or Springfield?
This DIA program is specifically for downtown. The historic district mentioned would be the Downtown Jacksonville National Register Historic District. From what I can tell, a developer would have to choose to apply, similar to what takes place now with the historic trust fund. However, this is a modification of current criteria and incentive percentages to be more in line with the market reality to rehabiliting historic buildings in the downtown core.
If I understand correctly, then it is important to landmark or designate as historic as many buildings as possible. Now to get a process in place to do that (oh, and new DIA program).
Yes. From how I read it, it encourages the property owner/developer to have their properties landmarked because that makes them elibigle for a higher percentage of incentives to rehabilitate.
Fantastic quotes here, Ennis.
City is lucky to have you advocating for our historic building stock.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2020/08/07/2-historic-areas-in-duval-county-among-most-threatened-in-state/?outputType=amp
Update on this (Bill is 2020-0527):
On 9/15 this goes through both Finance Committee (9:30AM) and Rules Committee (2:00PM)
Current Finance Committee:
Matt Carlucci, Chair
Randy DeFoor, Vice Chair
Ron Salem, Pharm. D.
Brenda Priestly Jackson
Joyce Morgan
LeAnna Cumber
Scott Wilson (listed but I thought he resigned to run for clerk)
Rules Committee:
Brenda Priestly Jackson, Chair
Garrett Dennis, Vice Chair
Randy DeFoor
Matt Carlucci
Sam Newby
Ju'Coby Pittman
Michael Boylan
There's actually a decent amount of overlap with Carlucci, DeFoor, Priestly Jackson. Of note Carlucci is a co-sponsor so I'd like to think that vote is safe. I also would be optimistic that DeFoor and Priestly Jackson would be in favor given their previous positions on this. That puts it in good position but I'd like to see it pass unanimously or close to it, as that would bode well for full council.
Article in the Daily Record about it:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/bill-would-boost-city-incentives-for-downtown-redevelopment
Update on this plan:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/mendenhall-report-developers-see-promise-in-downtown-incentives-plan
Quote
Two Council committees deferred the bill Sept. 14 after the DIA's Council liaison, LeAnna Cumber, asked to streamline its language and reduce the program's forgivable loan periods from 10 to 5 years for developers who used more than one program incentive.
It still seems like it will pass. I'm overall indifferent on Cumber's changes, though I suppose it could make the management of this easier over time. I don't know how difficult managing two amortization periods is though. On the other hand, it could shorten the amortization period for some projects which could hurt the financials.
Passed full council last night 19-0. Quiet deal but big deal.
It is a very big deal, as two COAs were already submitted in anticipation of this funding being passed by City Council. There are two others that should be submitting COAs shortly, and a third which will probably get submitted within 60 days.