Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/photos/i-9j3MqSD/0/L/i-9j3MqSD-L.jpg)
Here are 14 projects within a three block radius of James Weldon Johnson Park that could change the atmosphere of Downtown Jacksonville before 2025.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/a-northbank-renaissance-in-the-making/
Great update. Hopefully all of this starts soon - I wonder what the holdup is with the Vystar parking garage. I also heard something about there being a rooftop bar on the Life of the South building? That would be an interesting addition - if there is anything we have learned about ourselves over the last few years it's that we love our rooftop bars!
Quote from: simms3 on January 25, 2021, 12:54:42 PM
Great update. Hopefully all of this starts soon - I wonder what the holdup is with the Vystar parking garage. I also heard something about there being a rooftop bar on the Life of the South building? That would be an interesting addition - if there is anything we have learned about ourselves over the last few years it's that we love our rooftop bars!
The rooftop bar is underway. It will be run by bread and board, but i don't know much else. I can see them working on it from my office. Will zipline there from my desk when they open.
Two years on from this article and I don't think it would be unfair to say progress has worse than snails pace on the whole.
I think it's a little unfair. The article suggested these projects would be done before 2025, and that still seems realistic for most of these:
Gulf Life Insurance - Design proposed, construction not started
Jones Brothers Furniture - Major redesign, construction not started
Old Federal Reserve Bank - Under construction
Florida Baptist Convention Building - Under construction
Thomas V. Porter Mansion - Not sure of current status
Ambassador Hotel - Under construction
Marine National Bank - Not sure of current status
Independent Life Building - Under construction
JEA Corporate Headquarters - Nearing completion
Laura Street Trio - Limbo
VyStar Parking Garage - Nearing completion
VyStar Corporate Headquarters - Complete
Central Fire Station - Not sure of current status
Ashley Square Apartments - Complete
Out of 14 projects, 2 are already done, 2 more will likely follow this year, and another 5 are under construction and will likely be complete by next year. That's not unreasonable.
QuoteThat's not unreasonable.
For Jacksonville...
VyStar garage and Porter Mansion are both complete or pretty close to it. It takes a minimum of two to three years to construct many of these types of projects, regardless of the city they are located in.
Looks like two projects are starting to drag out.... The Hardwick and Ambassador have both asked for extensions.
QuoteDeveloper of former courthouse site seeks second extension on plan deadline
The developer of the mixed-use project Hardwick at Ford on Bay has asked for an extension to submit a conceptual design for the project located at the site of the old Duval County Courthouse....
....Also Wednesday, the DIA will review $1.6 million in loans for renovations at the 333 E. Bay St. property and granting an extension to the Ambassador Hotel project on Julia Street....
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2023/03/13/dia-hardwick-developer-asks-for-extension.html?utm_source=st&utm_medium=en&utm_campaign=me&utm_content=JA&ana=e_JA_me&j=30827881&senddate=2023-03-14
Hardwick seems like a pipe dream now. Doubtful it makes it to the finish line.
Just read the meeting notes. Nothing is hard until Dec, 31, 2023 now. Just amazing to me. A developer basically has "rights" to this parcel for 2 years?? Without any commitment to go hard? What is going on DT.. absolutely damaging to our credibility in issuing RFP's.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on March 14, 2023, 02:20:10 PM
Looks like two projects are starting to drag out.... The Hardwick and Ambassador have both asked for extensions.
QuoteDeveloper of former courthouse site seeks second extension on plan deadline
The developer of the mixed-use project Hardwick at Ford on Bay has asked for an extension to submit a conceptual design for the project located at the site of the old Duval County Courthouse....
....Also Wednesday, the DIA will review $1.6 million in loans for renovations at the 333 E. Bay St. property and granting an extension to the Ambassador Hotel project on Julia Street....
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2023/03/13/dia-hardwick-developer-asks-for-extension.html?utm_source=st&utm_medium=en&utm_campaign=me&utm_content=JA&ana=e_JA_me&j=30827881&senddate=2023-03-14
Ambassador is a real project. It's under construction. Hardwick is a conceptual dream at this point. I'm confident that the Ambassador will be completed. I'm not putting too much faith in the Hardwick until it breaks ground and vertical construction is completed.
In the meantime, U-Haul has broken ground on a new self-storage building off West Forsyth and Myrtle Avenue.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/UCU021923/i-w3s3Kt4/0/1ec4268a/XL/20230314_175059-XL.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/UCU021923/i-KdkK6F3/0/4a687d02/XL/20230314_175017-XL.jpg)
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 14, 2023, 02:51:27 PM
Hardwick seems like a pipe dream now. Doubtful it makes it to the finish line.
Apparently they're adding a hotel to it?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/mar/16/dia-board-gives-the-hardwick-ambassador-hotel-projects-more-time/
I guess Southeast was on to something. I wonder if the Hyatt is going to have any issues with that.
It will be interesting to see what they come up with but this project is years away from even breaking ground.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 16, 2023, 09:10:58 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 14, 2023, 02:51:27 PM
Hardwick seems like a pipe dream now. Doubtful it makes it to the finish line.
Apparently they're adding a hotel to it?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/mar/16/dia-board-gives-the-hardwick-ambassador-hotel-projects-more-time/
I guess Southeast was on to something. I wonder if the Hyatt is going to have any issues with that.
If I was Southeast, I'd be pretty upset at how this has gone down. Not saying they wouldn't make changes too.. but the Carter group has already value engineered quite a bit, and is now, all of a sudden, looking to add a hotel component.. LOL. Don't get me started.
Not to mention all of the other plans Southeast has put forward with the DIA/DDRB basically ignoring them.. That master plan by his would have done more for DT than all of the Sports Complex & Riverfront Park development combined. I've never seen a city unable to capture waterfront development like Jacksonville is right now.
I'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake. Literally just create the code to MANDATE a green space that is connected.. just like the riverwalk but beefed up. The Landing, being as infamous as it is, is probably the most obvious example for Jacksonville proving my point. Lets add River City Brew House to that list also! Development/improvement begins at the water and trickles its way upland. Happens everywhere but in JAX...
We will sit here in several years, looking at a completed park system that gets some temporary attention.. to then only be forgotten about because there is no reason to go there due to delayed or dumped projects. Forgotten renderings will continue to be our reputation nationally. Maybe I will be proven wrong, but we still have a very attractive jail right down the road, so this has to go well.. right!?
^ Appreciate your honesty as a "greedy developer" 8). Refreshing!
That said, there is a way to be greedy and preserve riverfront greenspaces. Develop one block back from the river. If you have green space between you and the river, you still have your riverfront view PLUS the value of green space as an amenity for enjoying the river and the great outdoors. It may even make the property you develop more valuable than being directly on the river given you have the best of all worlds. Unfortunately, I think we can all agree, the lack of any vision and standards by the City plus grossly incompetent deal making makes everyone frustrated and unhappy.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 10:44:08 AM
I'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake.
That's not been suggested anyone.
And the two high-profile new public spaces that are being planned -Riverfront Plaza & Shipyards West- have business/residential development proposed literally inside them. Restaurant, Cafe, apartments, food hall, etc.
Maybe even a TGI Friday's, if we get lucky
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 10:44:08 AM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 16, 2023, 09:10:58 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 14, 2023, 02:51:27 PM
Hardwick seems like a pipe dream now. Doubtful it makes it to the finish line.
Apparently they're adding a hotel to it?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/mar/16/dia-board-gives-the-hardwick-ambassador-hotel-projects-more-time/
I guess Southeast was on to something. I wonder if the Hyatt is going to have any issues with that.
If I was Southeast, I'd be pretty upset at how this has gone down. Not saying they wouldn't make changes too.. but the Carter group has already value engineered quite a bit, and is now, all of a sudden, looking to add a hotel component.. LOL. Don't get me started.
Not to mention all of the other plans Southeast has put forward with the DIA/DDRB basically ignoring them.. That master plan by his would have done more for DT than all of the Sports Complex & Riverfront Park development combined. I've never seen a city unable to capture waterfront development like Jacksonville is right now.
I'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake. Literally just create the code to MANDATE a green space that is connected.. just like the riverwalk but beefed up. The Landing, being as infamous as it is, is probably the most obvious example for Jacksonville proving my point. Lets add River City Brew House to that list also! Development/improvement begins at the water and trickles its way upland. Happens everywhere but in JAX...
We will sit here in several years, looking at a completed park system that gets some temporary attention.. to then only be forgotten about because there is no reason to go there due to delayed or dumped projects. Forgotten renderings will continue to be our reputation nationally. Maybe I will be proven wrong, but we still have a very attractive jail right down the road, so this has to go well.. right!?
Personally, I'd probably like to see Southeast actually deliver on the Laura Trio before giving them the job of reconfiguring the entire riverfront. It seems a bit concerning how that project especially seems to have fallen into limbo. Not to mention that with everything that's happened since 2021 (particularly interest rates) I'm unsure if their riverfront project would still be able to come together as-proposed.
^ exactly - its been over a decade now of unfulfilled proposals and promises from Atkins
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 10:44:08 AM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 16, 2023, 09:10:58 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 14, 2023, 02:51:27 PM
Hardwick seems like a pipe dream now. Doubtful it makes it to the finish line.
Apparently they're adding a hotel to it?
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/mar/16/dia-board-gives-the-hardwick-ambassador-hotel-projects-more-time/
I guess Southeast was on to something. I wonder if the Hyatt is going to have any issues with that.
If I was Southeast, I'd be pretty upset at how this has gone down. Not saying they wouldn't make changes too.. but the Carter group has already value engineered quite a bit, and is now, all of a sudden, looking to add a hotel component.. LOL. Don't get me started.
Not to mention all of the other plans Southeast has put forward with the DIA/DDRB basically ignoring them.. That master plan by his would have done more for DT than all of the Sports Complex & Riverfront Park development combined. I've never seen a city unable to capture waterfront development like Jacksonville is right now.
Comparing Carter to Southeast is like comparing the Houston Astros to the Chinese World Baseball Classic team.
As a developer, you should be aware that purchase contracts are routinely made subject to securing entitlements and the like. That's no different than what is going on here.
A much worse outcome would be to convey the land over to a developer who never breaks ground on their project- and then try to sue them to get the land back... like what is happening at Sisters Cities Plaza.
Or perhaps selling the land to a developer and then instead of holding those funds in escrow to be used to satisfy another part of an economic development deal to provide contractually obligated dedicated parking, they are used to fund flex space at Metro Park (which was never used then ultimately sold to the Jaguars 16 years later), and then losing in court when said developer sues you... like what happened with the Jacksonville Landing's East Parking Lot parcel.
Or maybe deeding over land to build a second expansion of a corporate office park, and instead using that land for a surface parking lot going on almost 30 years... like what happened with the Interline campus in LaVilla.
Etc, etc.
1). Not sure I have seen a single site RFP take 2+ years in the type of market we just had. Maybe 08.
2). Southeast did the master plan, by no means does that automatically mean are the master developer across all sites. They would likely just be entitled to 'some'
3). You don't need to convey the land at once. The master plan was in 6 phased when it was developed. The idea is that there is some consistency/higher power at play. AND FUTURE planning.
4). No other plan announced has dealt with the issues around unusable land, the jail, and the usage of COJ's water parcels.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 03:21:58 PM
1). Not sure I have seen a single site RFP take 2+ years in the type of market we just had. Maybe 08.
2). Southeast did the master plan, by no means does that automatically mean are the master developer across all sites. They would likely just be entitled to 'some'
3). You don't need to convey the land at once. The master plan was in 6 phased when it was developed. The idea is that there is some consistency/higher power at play. AND FUTURE planning.
4). No other plan announced has dealt with the issues around unusable land, the jail, and the usage of COJ's water parcels.
Carter was selected in early 2022. I don't know what world you are living in, but interest rates and subsequently cap rates are rising, economic growth is slowing, the cost of capital in the private equity markets is increasing, banks are requiring much lower LTVs (see: the inherent quandary for the cost of capital being more expensive- a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario)... and not shockingly deal flow is declining.
Also in 2022, issues underground on this particular site have been identified that weren't disclosed in the original RFP.
If you think Southeast is the group that should be entrusted with large swaths of Downtown's riverfront... not only are you barking up the wrong tree... you are in the wrong forest.
Yup, and they have 0 commitments until 12/31/23. Also doesn't mean the site is entitled then, just that they have conceptual approval. So idk the math there adds up to me as more than 2 years. Not sure what world you are in either.
That happens all the time, and projects still move forward. They already VE'd the site because of it.
No thats a fat assumption on your part. I just said.. Southeast is the only company to put together a comprehensive plan, incorporating many big ticket elements no other developer has attempted to tackle. They should be given some parcels, but not "everything" as your implying. At the end of the day, they are the only folks with a vision.
I agree that the Laura St Trio is not a good look for them, but this plan was also proposed more than a year ago. They did well on the Barnett Building too. Its not as polar as you claim it to be.
QuoteSoutheast is the only company to put together a comprehensive plan, incorporating many big ticket elements no other developer has attempted to tackle.
I guess you are too young to remember Ed Burr's failed attempt at the Shipyards. That resulted in a bankruptcy and a grand jury investigation.
https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/the-shipyards-20-years-of-renderings/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/the-shipyards-20-years-of-renderings/)
Here's a better example of a master plan that doesn't rely on an unreliable developer (spoiler alert: Carter has actually developed several of the parcels here)
https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/getting-it-right-columbus-commons/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/getting-it-right-columbus-commons/)
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 07:32:34 PM
Its not as polar as you claim it to be.
Forget the Trio. Remember that parking garage with over $13mm in taxpayer subsidies that they couldn't deliver?
I'm speaking on the last economic boom. Previous 'plans' just add to our city slogan of "The city where renderings goto die." That plan was several years ago. Economics now are vastly different.
See all of my other responses on parking DT. Parking DT is a money pit and there's no return to be made, for any for-profit developer. If anything that proves my point, down below, on how the city can't hold a negotiation.
--
https://www.romeyard-tampa.com/
Great example.. This site is being developed by Related Group (lol). The RFP was awarded March 17, 2021. The site is receiving their final approvals now with it being in LUZ atm. Construction is happening this year.
Heres why JAX looks bad compared to other cities, like our neighbors on the gulf, when issuing RFP's.
- This plan was 18-acres... incorporating more than a dozen parcels
- This plan had a mandatory affordable housing component with Tampa Housing Authority
- This site was categorized as a Brownfield site
- This site is waterfront
So we have here... a $300M+ redevelopment, accounting for over 18 acres of redevelopment & incorporating affordable housing. All of that was done in the same timeframe our good folks at the Hardwick will end up having for conceptual approval. (Might I add there is literally 0 platting involved for the Hardwick!).
Oh.. Here's the kicker.. The City of Tampa had the foresight... to do the Brownfield Cleanup themselves... (I know shocking). It's almost like doing these cleanups make the parcels more marketable.
So.. unless something changes with our ability to say no, demand clauses that protect the COJ, and refuse these WACK extensions with major project modifications, our city will continue to be unable to perform an RFP. Our RFP's right now are basically developers fighting to be the exclusive negotiator with the DIA.. that's not how these were intended to work.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 18, 2023, 10:31:27 AM
I'm speaking on the last economic boom. Previous 'plans' just add to our city slogan of "The city where renderings goto die." That plan was several years ago. Economics now are vastly different.
See all of my other responses on parking DT. Parking DT is a money pit and there's no return to be made, for any for-profit developer. If anything that proves my point, down below, on how the city can't hold a negotiation.
--
https://www.romeyard-tampa.com/
Great example.. This site is being developed by Related Group (lol). The RFP was awarded March 17, 2021. The site is receiving their final approvals now with it being in LUZ atm. Construction is happening this year.
Heres why JAX looks bad compared to other cities, like our neighbors on the gulf, when issuing RFP's.
- This plan was 18-acres... incorporating more than a dozen parcels
- This plan had a mandatory affordable housing component with Tampa Housing Authority
- This site was categorized as a Brownfield site
- This site is waterfront
So we have here... a $300M+ redevelopment, accounting for over 18 acres of redevelopment & incorporating affordable housing. All of that was done in the same timeframe our good folks at the Hardwick will end up having for conceptual approval. (Might I add there is literally 0 platting involved for the Hardwick!).
Oh.. Here's the kicker.. The City of Tampa had the foresight... to do the Brownfield Cleanup themselves... (I know shocking). It's almost like doing these cleanups make the parcels more marketable.
So.. unless something changes with our ability to say no, demand clauses that protect the COJ, and refuse these WACK extensions with major project modifications, our city will continue to be unable to perform an RFP. Our RFP's right now are basically developers fighting to be the exclusive negotiator with the DIA.. that's not how these were intended to work.
RFPs in Downtown Jax are 100% problematic. This site (of which I am an owner) has published various articles (of which I am a contributor) detailing this ad nauseum. The only problem in this specific RFP, is the timing. If this specific RFP was done two years earlier, and marketed in the way that this RFP was marketed... there would have been an entirely different outcome. The original 2020 RFP for this site was awful and not widely-advertised. The 2021 RFP was much better, and widely advertised... and as such, had a tremendous response rate. Unfortunately, the credit markets in 2022 are vastly different than 2021. Hence, the delays.
Praising Southeast and downplaying Carter as developers is just as problematic.
QuoteI'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake. Literally just create the code to MANDATE a green space that is connected.. just like the riverwalk but beefed up. The Landing, being as infamous as it is, is probably the most obvious example for Jacksonville proving my point. Lets add River City Brew House to that list also! Development/improvement begins at the water and trickles its way upland. Happens everywhere but in JAX...
I'll also say that I agree with this point, as well. The DIA's plans for Lenny's Lawn, the TUPAC site and the Shipyards is going to require a STAGGERING amount of taxpayer money... that the general public really can't comprehend as the numbers are basically hidden and VASTLY under-reported. Just this week, the DIA suggested that fixing the piers (which were identified as far back as Ed Burr's scuttled attempt at the Shipyards of yester-decade) would cost more than $20mm. That doesn't include the MOSH site (which will require shoring up of its own).
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 10:40:10 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 18, 2023, 10:31:27 AM
I'm speaking on the last economic boom. Previous 'plans' just add to our city slogan of "The city where renderings goto die." That plan was several years ago. Economics now are vastly different.
See all of my other responses on parking DT. Parking DT is a money pit and there's no return to be made, for any for-profit developer. If anything that proves my point, down below, on how the city can't hold a negotiation.
--
https://www.romeyard-tampa.com/
Great example.. This site is being developed by Related Group (lol). The RFP was awarded March 17, 2021. The site is receiving their final approvals now with it being in LUZ atm. Construction is happening this year.
Heres why JAX looks bad compared to other cities, like our neighbors on the gulf, when issuing RFP's.
- This plan was 18-acres... incorporating more than a dozen parcels
- This plan had a mandatory affordable housing component with Tampa Housing Authority
- This site was categorized as a Brownfield site
- This site is waterfront
So we have here... a $300M+ redevelopment, accounting for over 18 acres of redevelopment & incorporating affordable housing. All of that was done in the same timeframe our good folks at the Hardwick will end up having for conceptual approval. (Might I add there is literally 0 platting involved for the Hardwick!).
Oh.. Here's the kicker.. The City of Tampa had the foresight... to do the Brownfield Cleanup themselves... (I know shocking). It's almost like doing these cleanups make the parcels more marketable.
So.. unless something changes with our ability to say no, demand clauses that protect the COJ, and refuse these WACK extensions with major project modifications, our city will continue to be unable to perform an RFP. Our RFP's right now are basically developers fighting to be the exclusive negotiator with the DIA.. that's not how these were intended to work.
RFPs in Downtown Jax are 100% problematic. This site (of which I am an owner) has published various articles (of which I am a contributor) detailing this ad nauseum. The only problem in this specific RFP, was the timing. If this specific RFP was done two years earlier, and marketed in the way that this RFP was marketed... there would have been an entirely different outcome. The original 2020 RFP for this site was awful and not widely-advertised. The 2021 RFP was much better, and widely advertised... and as such, had a tremendous response rate. Unfortunately, the credit markets in 2022 are vastly different than 2021. Hence, the delays.
Praising Southeast and downplaying Carter as developers is just as problematic.
QuoteI'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake. Literally just create the code to MANDATE a green space that is connected.. just like the riverwalk but beefed up. The Landing, being as infamous as it is, is probably the most obvious example for Jacksonville proving my point. Lets add River City Brew House to that list also! Development/improvement begins at the water and trickles its way upland. Happens everywhere but in JAX...
I'll also say that I agree with this point, as well. The DIA's plans for Lenny's Lawn, the TUPAC site and the Shipyards is going to require a STAGGERING amount of taxpayer money... that the general public really can't comprehend as the numbers are basically hidden and VASTLY under-reported. Just this week, the DIA suggested that fixing the piers (which were identified as far back as Ed Burr's scuttled attempt at the Shipyards of yester-decade) would cost more than $20mm. That doesn't include the MOSH site (which will require shoring up of its own).
To be clear, I don't want to come across as praising Southeast. I just am yet to see another comprehensive plan put forth by another developer. And I think there are a few reasons why. I think what Southeast provided was a vision, and I have to say that's about where their expertise in DT runs out. Nonetheless, they were one of the first firms to do mixed-use conversions DT.. and for that there is something to be said. I honestly think it would be horrible to trust any one developer for a DT redevelopment. Needs to be a team of folks. What upsets me about the Carter team with the Hardwick is the complete curve ball of now adding(?) a hotel & reworking the scope. That's just not being fair to the other proposals and their promises.
I completely agree on your second point. The lack of information is what continues to hurt redevelopment DT and elsewhere around the city. LeAnna has one thing correct for certain and that is that U2C is a huge crime to the taxpayers of Jacksonville.
Quotethey were one of the first firms to do mixed-use conversions DT
Mixed-use adaptive reuses have been going on Downtown since the Delaney administration in 2003 (four mayors and twenty years ago). Southeast was the second to last developer to do so (JWB being the most recent).
https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/why-preservation-not-demolition-has-worked-downtown/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/why-preservation-not-demolition-has-worked-downtown/)
QuoteWhat upsets me about the Carter team with the Hardwick is the complete curve ball of now adding(?) a hotel & reworking the scope. That's just not being fair to the other proposals and their promises.
The original RFP allowed for both residential and hotel as potential uses. Neither of the six winning bidders would have been immune to the changes in the capital markets in 2022, nor the site issues later uncovered/disclosed after the RFP was completed.
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 12:04:06 PM
Quotethey were one of the first firms to do mixed-use conversions DT
Mixed-use adaptive reuses have been going on Downtown since the Delaney administration in 2003 (four mayors and twenty years ago). Southeast was the second to last developer to do so (JWB being the most recent).
https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/why-preservation-not-demolition-has-worked-downtown/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/why-preservation-not-demolition-has-worked-downtown/)
QuoteWhat upsets me about the Carter team with the Hardwick is the complete curve ball of now adding(?) a hotel & reworking the scope. That's just not being fair to the other proposals and their promises.
The original RFP allowed for both residential and hotel as potential uses. Neither of the six winning bidders would have been immune to the changes in the capital markets in 2022, nor the site issues later uncovered/disclosed after the RFP was completed.
Please don't compare city-funded housing redevelopment & what has been done at the Barnett building to prove a point. Apples to oranges. Also I love the constant age dig you got going. Unless there's another building I just don't know about... please enlighten me. (Huge fan of Vestcor).
Lets just blame capital markets then? Not that simple. This project has the luxury of virtually 0 land costs, and an almost 10% completion grant. All the renegotiation has made their situation worse for themselves. They are waiting for the next capital cycle, that's all. While we sit on the land. Meanwhile dozens of city-level projects elsewhere in FL will continue, unimpeded.
Quote from: fsu813 on March 17, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 10:44:08 AM
I'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake.
That's not been suggested anyone.
And the two high-profile new public spaces that are being planned -Riverfront Plaza & Shipyards West- have business/residential development proposed literally inside them. Restaurant, Cafe, apartments, food hall, etc.
Maybe even a TGI Friday's, if we get lucky
I have to vehemently disagree with this post. TGI Friday's should take a back seat to Fuddrucker's. In fact bringing Hooter's back should be before both of those.
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 10:40:10 AM
I'll also say that I agree with this point, as well. The DIA's plans for Lenny's Lawn, the TUPAC site and the Shipyards is going to require a STAGGERING amount of taxpayer money... that the general public really can't comprehend as the numbers are basically hidden and VASTLY under-reported. Just this week, the DIA suggested that fixing the piers (which were identified as far back as Ed Burr's scuttled attempt at the Shipyards of yester-decade) would cost more than $20mm. That doesn't include the MOSH site (which will require shoring up of its own).
OK, since everyone on this thread this week seems to be in the mood for "robust discussion," I will add that I disagree with the premise above.
If the City would take much (or all) of its developer incentive and "giveaway" dollars and invest it in green infrastructure I believe Downtown and the citizens of this City would be far better off... and developers would be swarming Downtown to take advantage of the enhanced quality of life and resident/visitor amenities. The dollars needed for quality riverfront parks pales in comparison to the hundreds of millions going for projects that may or may not benefit Downtown. It comes down to priorities and sensible ROI's derived from good planning and disciplined execution. We have none of that here. Whatever, don't tell me we can't find the dollars... we always find them for "friends of the mayor."
QuotePlease don't compare city-funded housing redevelopment & what has been done at the Barnett building to prove a point. Apples to oranges.
There's a link provided, which provides a list of a variety of mixed-use, adaptive reuse projects in Downtown over the last two decades. All of which received various city incentives- including property tax abatements, completion grants, construction loans, historic preservation grants, below-market rate junior liens (some that have been deferred many times), historic tax credit financing, etc. Although one capital stack is not like the other, you can't get more apples to apples than that. I'm familiar with the proformas on most of those (including the Barnett and Hardwick). Point being, the Barnett wasn't the first mixed-use adaptive reuse to come online in Jacksonville, and it isn't the last. Maybe now is a good time to bow out of this conversation, cheers.
QuoteOK, since everyone on this site this week seems to be in the mood for "robust discussion," I will add that I disagree with the premise above
Lenny's Lawn, the former Courthouse and the Shipyards West sites (which excludes the Jaguars portion east of Hogans Creek) have had more than $100mm in taxpayer monies spent on them since 2009... and all are currently grass lots. For the plans on all of those sites to come to fruition, multiples of that will still be needed.
Quote from: vicupstate on March 18, 2023, 03:41:02 PM
Quote from: fsu813 on March 17, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 17, 2023, 10:44:08 AM
I'll be that greedy developer and say that "preserving" all of the Riverfront is a huge mistake.
That's not been suggested anyone.
And the two high-profile new public spaces that are being planned -Riverfront Plaza & Shipyards West- have business/residential development proposed literally inside them. Restaurant, Cafe, apartments, food hall, etc.
Maybe even a TGI Friday's, if we get lucky
I have to vehemently disagree with this post. TGI Friday's should take a back seat to Fuddrucker's. In fact bringing Hooter's back should be before both of those.
Hooters has already proven that they can succeed. Even when the city tried everything it could to drive the Landing out of business.
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 09:03:35 PM
Lenny's Lawn, the former Courthouse and the Shipyards West sites (which excludes the Jaguars portion east of Hogans Creek) have had more than $100mm in taxpayer monies spent on them since 2009... and all are currently grass lots. For the plans on all of those sites to come to fruition, multiples of that will still be needed.
This may be one of the most unfortunate things of all, concerning downtown. +$100 million spent and currently grass lots.
- The Barnett Building has received the smallest incentive package, proportional to the project size of any project DT. Fact check me. Find another 100 unit project with actual mixed use that has the package it had.
- The Barnett Building was delivered with and continues to have successful mixed-use
- The Barnett Building was not financed, more than 50%, with a low interest 20-Year Fixed Loan from the COJ
- The Barnett Building was and still is the largest building to be redeveloped
Nobody in real estate finance would compare a GOVT guarantee loan (THROUGH CONSTRUCTION!!!!) to a completion grant with a (small) REV grant. What Vestcor got was a once in a lifetime business opportunity that should never happen again if we do things right DT. What Southeast has done isn't a complete pile of garbage either.. except for the trio.
--
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on March 18, 2023, 05:19:20 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 10:40:10 AM
I'll also say that I agree with this point, as well. The DIA's plans for Lenny's Lawn, the TUPAC site and the Shipyards is going to require a STAGGERING amount of taxpayer money... that the general public really can't comprehend as the numbers are basically hidden and VASTLY under-reported. Just this week, the DIA suggested that fixing the piers (which were identified as far back as Ed Burr's scuttled attempt at the Shipyards of yester-decade) would cost more than $20mm. That doesn't include the MOSH site (which will require shoring up of its own).
OK, since everyone on this thread this week seems to be in the mood for "robust discussion," I will add that I disagree with the premise above.
If the City would take much (or all) of its developer incentive and "giveaway" dollars and invest it in green infrastructure I believe Downtown and the citizens of this City would be far better off... and developers would be swarming Downtown to take advantage of the enhanced quality of life and resident/visitor amenities. The dollars needed for quality riverfront parks pales in comparison to the hundreds of millions going for projects that may or may not benefit Downtown. It comes down to priorities and sensible ROI's derived from good planning and disciplined execution. We have none of that here. Whatever, don't tell me we can't find the dollars... we always find them for "friends of the mayor."
It is a tough cookie to crack, certainly a chicken or the egg concept. This is my biggest concern too, we are somewhat erasing the future tax base of DT. In all reality the city is paying tomorrow's taxes today. I can't image that works out for the best.. I think that's why I am a big believer in developing the Riverfront with a mandatory setback green space.. That land shouldn't require the grants that we see closer to the thick of things DT. In theory that staggers in over time but theory doesn't always work out.
All of these things would turn out much better and be implemented much quicker if everyone was on the same page and swimming in the same direction regarding downtown development. We've been talking about downtown revitalization in this town since the 1950s. Despite that, ask 20 people what their definition of downtown vibrancy is today and you'll likely get 20 different opinions.
A blind man could have seen the Hardwick was pie in the sky. Completely suckered hook, line and sinker by renderings of something tall and shiney, rather than the substance of how realistic the project was. Other than the Southeast project this was easily the toughest of the six bids to finance and build.
Quote from: landfall on March 20, 2023, 06:27:28 AM
A blind man could have seen the Hardwick was pie in the sky. Completely suckered hook, line and sinker by renderings of something tall and shiney, rather than the substance of how realistic the project was. Other than the Southeast project this was easily the toughest of the six bids to finance and build.
Exactly... Instead of pushing for an under 10-story product, lets shoot for the 18-20 story proposal. That would be economically difficult even on prime land around the Southbank.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 20, 2023, 09:23:18 AM
Quote from: landfall on March 20, 2023, 06:27:28 AM
A blind man could have seen the Hardwick was pie in the sky. Completely suckered hook, line and sinker by renderings of something tall and shiney, rather than the substance of how realistic the project was. Other than the Southeast project this was easily the toughest of the six bids to finance and build.
Exactly... Instead of pushing for an under 10-story product, lets shoot for the 18-20 story proposal. That would be economically difficult even on prime land around the Southbank.
The state of Bay Street really is criminal. It should be Jacksonville's nightlife strip and the place to be for young professionals. All it needed on the vacant parcels was some of the run of the mill, nothing special, cooker cutter, apartment buildings with ground floor retail that are a dime a dozen in cities all over the country now to create vibrancy on each side of the street. Going with the likes of the Mid America or Vantrusts proposals for instance would have been a far safer option, but they wanted to go for glory, take the risk and get the vanity skyscraper.
You wouldn't even need to get rid of the Police HQ etc to start with.
Quote from: fieldafm on March 18, 2023, 09:03:35 PM
QuoteOK, since everyone on this site this week seems to be in the mood for "robust discussion," I will add that I disagree with the premise above
Lenny's Lawn, the former Courthouse and the Shipyards West sites (which excludes the Jaguars portion east of Hogans Creek) have had more than $100mm in taxpayer monies spent on them since 2009... and all are currently grass lots. For the plans on all of those sites to come to fruition, multiples of that will still be needed.
The fact that City wasted or overpaid millions of dollars in the past should not prevent taking corrective action in the future. The past is a result of failed and incompetent leadership. I would gladly entrust the needed millions to a competent, forward thinking administration. The real issue is can we get one.
We need to look at this point going forward. The ROI on spending millions on green space, in my opinion, is far greater than spending millions on developers with poorly conceived and/or "iffy" projects that will not stand the test of time and can be just as successful or more so one block or more back from riverfront green space. In a 100 years, our descendants are going to wonder who the crazies were that not only gave up our riverfront but paid people to take it off our hands, just so some politicos could try and get instant gratification to support their next run for office.
If the current developers fail to follow through on their bid awards, I say let the next mayor and council back up and take these properties off the market and make them green space. For a fraction of the money going to JTA's AV project or for the upcoming stadium renovation or other Khan projects, past, present and future, we could pave our parks with gold. So, again, money is not the issue, it is priorities. I might add that some creative grant writers might get some dollars from the Feds and/or State, such as under the banners of "resiliency," brownfield mitigation or urban renewal. Florida Inland Navigation funding is another possible source. I am sure there are many more. But, we need a solid plan and leadership to execute it.
You've suggested this a number of times before, and personally it's getting a little confusing when we are already attempting to spend quite an amount of money on park space, and clearly struggling to gather all of the needed funds and operational ability to do so. Between Metro Park, Shipyards West Park (including the Naval Museum), the new MOSH and the park space next to that, the expansion of the Northbank Riverwalk, the Riverfront Plaza Park, the Music Commons Park, the McCoys Creek Park, Gefen Park next to FIS, the Riverside Arts Market Park, the Artist Walk Park, the St. Johns River Park where MOSH currently is, and the new park at RiversEdge, and the Southbank Riverwalk extension, we are building or upgrading a lot of parks.
That's before you even start talking about the Emerald Trail or Hogan's Creek or Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing or any of the other major park projects in the urban core, and that all comes on top of already having the largest urban park system in the country, much of which needs improvement anyway. You've treated this for some time like we're somehow not doing anything to create or improve park space in Jacksonville, which seems pretty contrary to the facts on the ground. Heck, we already did pretty much what you asked for by tearing down the Landing and rededicating most of it to signature park space, something we are still struggling to actually bring to completion after 4 years since starting to do so! Or McCoys Creek Park, where we're even relocating the mouth of the creek to better serve as a central point for the park. Lori Boyer is pretty open if you ask that the former City Hall Annex site is going to be park space for events pretty much indefinitely.
There's a lot of work that a lot of public money is already trying to satisfy your vision with and you don't seem to have any sense of satisfaction about it. I can't seem to figure out what is actually an acceptable amount of urban park space for you, especially in the context that this is still ultimately supposed to be an urban neighborhood with offices and restaurants and amenities and housing and infrastructure.
Those of us who build understand that there needs to be a first win, before anything happens. Like Landfall is saying, that Ford site could have easily been the proof in the pudding for future sites. Didn't need to be the flashiest site.
Many boom cities like Nashville & Austin started with smaller developers taking risks. The incentives should be used as a way to get the ball rolling. Not to maximize a rendering. You get the flashy buildings later.
I completely agree with Marcusnelson also in that there is just way too much public money and space being put towards parks. We already have a massive park system. How much of our city budget goes to just maintaining parks and how much more will go towards maintaining the several thousand foot bulkheads? Make those parcels private and make developers and revenue generating businesses pay for the ongoing cost nightmare that these parks will create for future residents.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 21, 2023, 12:29:31 PM
Those of us who build understand that there needs to be a first win, before anything happens. Like Landfall is saying, that Ford site could have easily been the proof in the pudding for future sites. Didn't need to be the flashiest site.
Many boom cities like Nashville & Austin started with smaller developers taking risks. The incentives should be used as a way to get the ball rolling. Not to maximize a rendering. You get the flashy buildings later.
I completely agree with Marcusnelson also in that there is just way too much public money and space being put towards parks. We already have a massive park system. How much of our city budget goes to just maintaining parks and how much more will go towards maintaining the several thousand foot bulkheads? Make those parcels private and make developers and revenue generating businesses pay for the ongoing cost nightmare that these parks will create for future residents.
Personally, I'm not afraid of the concept of investing in some signature buildings, provided we can afford to. We already have some really interesting smaller development efforts like JWB, Augustine, and Corner Lot. North Core is going to be impressive once those projects get completed and new ones proceed. Meanwhile there's a lot of pressure involved in making the riverfront development look significant when it's going to impact the city's skyline. In theory, projects like Broadstone River House and the Southerly and One Riverside are already our toes in the water. The fair question at this point is whether the developers the DIA is picking to develop these sites are actually capable of delivering and if we're prepared to invest what might be demanded of us in order to make these projects feasible. I'm spitballing, but perhaps we'd be better off declaring upfront how much we're actually willing or able to spend on incentivizing the use of these parcels instead of hoping people come to us with numbers that we can afford. And if we're going to spend the effort on the Godzilla method of development in the first place, we shouldn't then be surprised by what's under the grass we just planted.
Re: Parks, don't get me wrong here, I do think investing in parks is worthwhile and valuable. The Emerald Trail and many of these parks are great for downtown. But at some point there needs to be room for people to actually utilize these amenities. We've spent an enormous amount of resources on the idea that suburbanites will drive in from Southside or the beaches or St. Johns simply to enjoy the beaches when we should be well aware at this point that there have to be people
living downtown to use downtown. Rededicating the entire riverfront to park space that we then don't have anyone close enough to actually enjoy and use is a contrived mindset.
We already tried the "nothing flashy" approach when we picked Spandrel for the first RFP. I'd say the DIA exercised some wise discretion by not falling for the flashy option in Southeast's proposal for round two. Carter is a serious developer with a track record, and while there was some debate here over whether mid-century modern architecture in general was appealing for the site, there was a lot of praise for the scoring criteria, evaluation process, and final selection.
Inflation was happening when Carter was selected, and the construction industry was in the throes of the severe supply chain issues. I can't imagine any developer would have agreed to quick or even typical timelines with the fallout from those economic conditions still on the horizon. It's okay in my mind to be disappointed at the extended timeline, but also realize it's the reality of our market, economic conditions, and the fact that the city wasted a decade of record-low interest rates, low inflation, and a strong economy doing....something?
A value-engineered Hardwick will still be a win on that site. It's more realistic, even as a high rise, than Spandrel's 74,000 sq ft of proposed retail, and it's proposed on land the city is actually legally able to transfer.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 21, 2023, 02:12:20 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 21, 2023, 12:29:31 PM
Those of us who build understand that there needs to be a first win, before anything happens. Like Landfall is saying, that Ford site could have easily been the proof in the pudding for future sites. Didn't need to be the flashiest site.
Many boom cities like Nashville & Austin started with smaller developers taking risks. The incentives should be used as a way to get the ball rolling. Not to maximize a rendering. You get the flashy buildings later.
I completely agree with Marcusnelson also in that there is just way too much public money and space being put towards parks. We already have a massive park system. How much of our city budget goes to just maintaining parks and how much more will go towards maintaining the several thousand foot bulkheads? Make those parcels private and make developers and revenue generating businesses pay for the ongoing cost nightmare that these parks will create for future residents.
Personally, I'm not afraid of the concept of investing in some signature buildings, provided we can afford to. We already have some really interesting smaller development efforts like JWB, Augustine, and Corner Lot. North Core is going to be impressive once those projects get completed and new ones proceed. Meanwhile there's a lot of pressure involved in making the riverfront development look significant when it's going to impact the city's skyline. In theory, projects like Broadstone River House and the Southerly and One Riverside are already our toes in the water. The fair question at this point is whether the developers the DIA is picking to develop these sites are actually capable of delivering and if we're prepared to invest what might be demanded of us in order to make these projects feasible. I'm spitballing, but perhaps we'd be better off declaring upfront how much we're actually willing or able to spend on incentivizing the use of these parcels instead of hoping people come to us with numbers that we can afford. And if we're going to spend the effort on the Godzilla method of development in the first place, we shouldn't then be surprised by what's under the grass we just planted.
Re: Parks, don't get me wrong here, I do think investing in parks is worthwhile and valuable. The Emerald Trail and many of these parks are great for downtown. But at some point there needs to be room for people to actually utilize these amenities. We've spent an enormous amount of resources on the idea that suburbanites will drive in from Southside or the beaches or St. Johns simply to enjoy the beaches when we should be well aware at this point that there have to be people living downtown to use downtown. Rededicating the entire riverfront to park space that we then don't have anyone close enough to actually enjoy and use is a contrived mindset.
I think we need a true win in the Northbank. I've mentioned this before but the jail really shys developments off in the Adams St area. The skyline tells that tale. Very difficult to guess what banks will underwrite here vs. the Southbank. I do agree that we have local developers doing a lot of great work.. however most of it is still under 5-story product. RISE is likely going to be the best comp for the Northbank folks on rents and such.. but even then I'd say RISE is closer to a lot more happening right next to it.. & the location is pretty nice.
I am also for parks, and don't want to sound like someone who wants every last inch developed.. I just believe were likely going a little far with everything were doing combined.
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on March 21, 2023, 04:17:25 PM
We already tried the "nothing flashy" approach when we picked Spandrel for the first RFP. I'd say the DIA exercised some wise discretion by not falling for the flashy option in Southeast's proposal for round two. Carter is a serious developer with a track record, and while there was some debate here over whether mid-century modern architecture in general was appealing for the site, there was a lot of praise for the scoring criteria, evaluation process, and final selection.
Inflation was happening when Carter was selected, and the construction industry was in the throes of the severe supply chain issues. I can't imagine any developer would have agreed to quick or even typical timelines with the fallout from those economic conditions still on the horizon. It's okay in my mind to be disappointed at the extended timeline, but also realize it's the reality of our market, economic conditions, and the fact that the city wasted a decade of record-low interest rates, low inflation, and a strong economy doing....something?
A value-engineered Hardwick will still be a win on that site. It's more realistic, even as a high rise, than Spandrel's 74,000 sq ft of proposed retail, and it's proposed on land the city is actually legally able to transfer.
I agree if it all works out! lol.. If not, then this will be another case of selecting a design that wasn't feasible in the first place.. regardless of the capital & construction markets. 18-stories vs 10-stories is a huge price difference per sf.
What's your definition of a "true" win for the Northbank? I'd say the completing the cluster of adaptive reuse projects just northwest of city hall is a true win in the works right now. Combined, those projects will bring more residential units and retail square footage online within the next few years than anything else on the urban core's radar, along with some true old school density. Some of those buildings, like the Florida Baptist Convention, have sat vacant for 30-40 years. There's some infill proposed with these projects that will only add more density and beef up the skyline as well.
There definitely is a problem here of beggars not being choosers so we go and risk it with small timers like Spandrel or Southeast who have more renderings than actual projects. There was no excuse with the Ford on Bay this time however. We literally had the largest owner of apartments in the United States as one of the bidders, you can't get anymore legitimate than that. All we are missing is a clown car monorail like in that Simpsons episode. Oh wait hold on....
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 21, 2023, 08:11:33 AM
You've suggested this a number of times before, and personally it's getting a little confusing when we are already attempting to spend quite an amount of money on park space, and clearly struggling to gather all of the needed funds and operational ability to do so. Between Metro Park, Shipyards West Park (including the Naval Museum), the new MOSH and the park space next to that, the expansion of the Northbank Riverwalk, the Riverfront Plaza Park, the Music Commons Park, the McCoys Creek Park, Gefen Park next to FIS, the Riverside Arts Market Park, the Artist Walk Park, the St. Johns River Park where MOSH currently is, and the new park at RiversEdge, and the Southbank Riverwalk extension, we are building or upgrading a lot of parks.
That's before you even start talking about the Emerald Trail or Hogan's Creek or Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing or any of the other major park projects in the urban core, and that all comes on top of already having the largest urban park system in the country, much of which needs improvement anyway. You've treated this for some time like we're somehow not doing anything to create or improve park space in Jacksonville, which seems pretty contrary to the facts on the ground. Heck, we already did pretty much what you asked for by tearing down the Landing and rededicating most of it to signature park space, something we are still struggling to actually bring to completion after 4 years since starting to do so! Or McCoys Creek Park, where we're even relocating the mouth of the creek to better serve as a central point for the park. Lori Boyer is pretty open if you ask that the former City Hall Annex site is going to be park space for events pretty much indefinitely.
There's a lot of work that a lot of public money is already trying to satisfy your vision with and you don't seem to have any sense of satisfaction about it. I can't seem to figure out what is actually an acceptable amount of urban park space for you, especially in the context that this is still ultimately supposed to be an urban neighborhood with offices and restaurants and amenities and housing and infrastructure.
Here are some of my points on why we need to preserve as much river frontage and depth for parks as we can, now:
1. A lot of "smaller" parks, as listed in your post, is not the same as contiguous acreage making up one larger park with more wide open/natural/passive use spaces uninterrupted by substantial buildings/development. The Emerald Trail is fantastic but it is a different type of green space, more of a green connector/pathway.
2. Compared to many cities our largest contiguous acreage for any green space Downtown is a mere pittance. 20 to 40 acres at the Shipyards doesn't compare to a hundred to hundreds of acres many cities have at their heart.
3. We are only the largest urban park system in the country because we have the largest City limits in the mainland US and the Timucuan Preserve single handedly accounts for a disproportionate part of our park system acreage.
4. I don't know many citizens who think there is ever too much green space other than developers who never saw land they didn't want to build on. Green space is a critical component to quality of life for many.
5. Green space also is needed to exploit the value of our natural environment including the river and flora and fauna. It is what gives our corner of the world its character.
6. If Jacksonville continues on its growth trajectory, we will have millions more people here over the next decades and green space to support those numbers will be ever harder to obtain or retrieve, if at all. Further, a larger population will expect the City to host ever larger events/gatherings that will rival past events such as the Super Bowl where public space (over half of that slated for development) was required to host outdoor events for hundreds of thousands at once. We will be hard pressed to do so with broken up parcels and lesser acreage of the larger parcels.
7. There are plenty of successful urban districts with green space at their heart. Look no further than Central Park in Manhattan. With the view expressed in the quoted post, no one would have approved the creation of Central Park. Who would want to live in much of Manhattan without Central Park? Is that enough for NYC? No, they are now building out a greenbelt around the entire island of Manhattan along their waterfront. It demonstrates that green space is an economic development driver, not the opposite.
8. Large parks are needed to promote more Downtown living. If you want a pickup football, basketball, soccer, volleyball or softball game, you need bigger parks. The same for a dog park or to fly a kite or drone. And, the same if you want to jog or bike a few miles close to where you live while also hosting a nice sized marina, riverwalk, gardens, public art, a water feature, food venues, bathrooms, passive spaces amongst an urban forest, etc.
9. Green space along the river is an entirely different and more pleasing aesthetic than buildings, especially multistory ones.
10. Green space provides a resiliency buffer as it is all-but-certain the river is going to be flooding is banks going forward. Building in this flood plain is insanity. It is also a heat-sink and helps purify/oxygenate the urban air.
11. As long as there is an ROI that exceeds other project ROI's, there should be no shortage of investable funds in parks. This City has, or is, spending over $400 million on AV's, $50 million on tearing down the Hart Bridge Ramp, $20 to $50 million with no claw back on UF's mystery project, $25 million to create Lenny's Lawn (that's on the Mayor's incompetence, not on parks), hundreds of millions for a Four Seasons that few expect to benefit much of the urban core, millions more for developments that never seem to come out of the ground, perhaps $750 million to over a billion on the future stadium improvements, tens of millions for the stadium's previous improvements including scoreboards, millions on legal fees fighting the school board referendum and dealing with JEA's sale, millions or tens of millions kicking the pension fund down the road for the Mayor's political expediency, giving millions away to City Council's favored non-profits and business friends from Federal COVID dollars, forfeiting tens of millions not raising the garbage fee, forfeiting hundreds of millions with a too-low property tax rate, etc. And, many of these projects were never in a long range plan and often are funded on an ad hoc basis.
12. This isn't about today, tomorrow or even 5 years out. This is thinking far beyond, decades and even a hundred years out. The #1 issue with this City is it has no coherent, well thought-out long term plan for land use that is adhered to over such long periods. Such a plan would address my concerns, most certainly. As the adage does, the trees we enjoy today were planted long before we were born. It is up to us to plant such trees for the people of tomorrow.
Bottom line, urban parks are critical to the future success of Downtown and we remain well short of what we need to do. And, if we want parks, we can find the dollars. It's about priorities, the will, planning, visioning and execution based on robust leadership. Jacksonville is in short supply on every count.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 21, 2023, 06:28:23 PM
What's your definition of a "true" win for the Northbank? I'd say the completing the cluster of adaptive reuse projects just northwest of city hall is a true win in the works right now. Combined, those projects will bring more residential units and retail square footage online within the next few years than anything else on the urban core's radar, along with some true old school density. Some of those buildings, like the Florida Baptist Convention, have sat vacant for 30-40 years. There's some infill proposed with these projects that will only add more density and beef up the skyline as well.
I mean ground up new construction. Agreed those are great projects. Banks will likely underwrite those deals differently than true ground up. There needs to be a new "riverfront" (or close to) Northbank property essentially.. I do think the RISE project helps that guesstimating. The projects in Brooklyn & the Southbank essentially serve as the definitive caps to any valuation for the northbank. (Which makes this difficult) Those areas seem to be going 8-ish stories right now. In theory Northbank can't support similar ground-up density. Hopefully that makes sense.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on March 22, 2023, 12:35:47 AM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on March 21, 2023, 08:11:33 AM
You've suggested this a number of times before, and personally it's getting a little confusing when we are already attempting to spend quite an amount of money on park space, and clearly struggling to gather all of the needed funds and operational ability to do so. Between Metro Park, Shipyards West Park (including the Naval Museum), the new MOSH and the park space next to that, the expansion of the Northbank Riverwalk, the Riverfront Plaza Park, the Music Commons Park, the McCoys Creek Park, Gefen Park next to FIS, the Riverside Arts Market Park, the Artist Walk Park, the St. Johns River Park where MOSH currently is, and the new park at RiversEdge, and the Southbank Riverwalk extension, we are building or upgrading a lot of parks.
That's before you even start talking about the Emerald Trail or Hogan's Creek or Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing or any of the other major park projects in the urban core, and that all comes on top of already having the largest urban park system in the country, much of which needs improvement anyway. You've treated this for some time like we're somehow not doing anything to create or improve park space in Jacksonville, which seems pretty contrary to the facts on the ground. Heck, we already did pretty much what you asked for by tearing down the Landing and rededicating most of it to signature park space, something we are still struggling to actually bring to completion after 4 years since starting to do so! Or McCoys Creek Park, where we're even relocating the mouth of the creek to better serve as a central point for the park. Lori Boyer is pretty open if you ask that the former City Hall Annex site is going to be park space for events pretty much indefinitely.
There's a lot of work that a lot of public money is already trying to satisfy your vision with and you don't seem to have any sense of satisfaction about it. I can't seem to figure out what is actually an acceptable amount of urban park space for you, especially in the context that this is still ultimately supposed to be an urban neighborhood with offices and restaurants and amenities and housing and infrastructure.
Here are some of my points on why we need to preserve as much river frontage and depth for parks as we can, now:
1. A lot of "smaller" parks, as listed in your post, is not the same as contiguous acreage making up one larger park with more wide open/natural/passive use spaces uninterrupted by substantial buildings/development. The Emerald Trail is fantastic but it is a different type of green space, more of a green connector/pathway.
2. Compared to many cities our largest contiguous acreage for any green space Downtown is a mere pittance. 20 to 40 acres at the Shipyards doesn't compare to a hundred to hundreds of acres many cities have at their heart.
3. We are only the largest urban park system in the country because we have the largest City limits in the mainland US and the Timucuan Preserve single handedly accounts for a disproportionate part of our park system acreage.
4. I don't know many citizens who think there is ever too much green space other than developers who never saw land they didn't want to build on. Green space is a critical component to quality of life for many.
5. Green space also is needed to exploit the value of our natural environment including the river and flora and fauna. It is what gives our corner of the world its character.
6. If Jacksonville continues on its growth trajectory, we will have millions more people here over the next decades and green space to support those numbers will be ever harder to obtain or retrieve, if at all. Further, a larger population will expect the City to host ever larger events/gatherings that will rival past events such as the Super Bowl where public space (over half of that slated for development) was required to host outdoor events for hundreds of thousands at once. We will be hard pressed to do so with broken up parcels and lesser acreage of the larger parcels.
7. There are plenty of successful urban districts with green space at their heart. Look no further than Central Park in Manhattan. With the view expressed in the quoted post, no one would have approved the creation of Central Park. Who would want to live in much of Manhattan without Central Park? Is that enough for NYC? No, they are now building out a greenbelt around the entire island of Manhattan along their waterfront. It demonstrates that green space is an economic development driver, not the opposite.
8. Large parks are needed to promote more Downtown living. If you want a pickup football, basketball, soccer, volleyball or softball game, you need bigger parks. The same for a dog park or to fly a kite or drone. And, the same if you want to jog or bike a few miles close to where you live while also hosting a nice sized marina, riverwalk, gardens, public art, a water feature, food venues, bathrooms, passive spaces amongst an urban forest, etc.
9. Green space along the river is an entirely different and more pleasing aesthetic than buildings, especially multistory ones.
10. Green space provides a resiliency buffer as it is all-but-certain the river is going to be flooding is banks going forward. Building in this flood plain is insanity. It is also a heat-sink and helps purify/oxygenate the urban air.
11. As long as there is an ROI that exceeds other project ROI's, there should be no shortage of investable funds in parks. This City has, or is, spending over $400 million on AV's, $50 million on tearing down the Hart Bridge Ramp, $20 to $50 million with no claw back on UF's mystery project, $25 million to create Lenny's Lawn (that's on the Mayor's incompetence, not on parks), hundreds of millions for a Four Seasons that few expect to benefit much of the urban core, millions more for developments that never seem to come out of the ground, perhaps $750 million to over a billion on the future stadium improvements, tens of millions for the stadium's previous improvements including scoreboards, millions on legal fees fighting the school board referendum and dealing with JEA's sale, millions or tens of millions kicking the pension fund down the road for the Mayor's political expediency, giving millions away to City Council's favored non-profits and business friends from Federal COVID dollars, forfeiting tens of millions not raising the garbage fee, forfeiting hundreds of millions with a too-low property tax rate, etc. And, many of these projects were never in a long range plan and often are funded on an ad hoc basis.
12. This isn't about today, tomorrow or even 5 years out. This is thinking far beyond, decades and even a hundred years out. The #1 issue with this City is it has no coherent, well thought-out long term plan for land use that is adhered to over such long periods. Such a plan would address my concerns, most certainly. As the adage does, the trees we enjoy today were planted long before we were born. It is up to us to plant such trees for the people of tomorrow.
Bottom line, urban parks are critical to the future success of Downtown and we remain well short of what we need to do. And, if we want parks, we can find the dollars. It's about priorities, the will, planning, visioning and execution based on robust leadership. Jacksonville is in short supply on every count.
Our largest urban park has historically been Springfield Park. It's just as large as the Boston's Common. It could be a real crown jewel but will need hundreds of millions to bring that vision to reality.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 01:14:56 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on March 21, 2023, 06:28:23 PM
What's your definition of a "true" win for the Northbank? I'd say the completing the cluster of adaptive reuse projects just northwest of city hall is a true win in the works right now. Combined, those projects will bring more residential units and retail square footage online within the next few years than anything else on the urban core's radar, along with some true old school density. Some of those buildings, like the Florida Baptist Convention, have sat vacant for 30-40 years. There's some infill proposed with these projects that will only add more density and beef up the skyline as well.
I mean ground up new construction. Agreed those are great projects. Banks will likely underwrite those deals differently than true ground up. There needs to be a new "riverfront" (or close to) Northbank property essentially.. I do think the RISE project helps that guesstimating. The projects in Brooklyn & the Southbank essentially serve as the definitive caps to any valuation for the northbank. (Which makes this difficult) Those areas seem to be going 8-ish stories right now. In theory Northbank can't support similar ground-up density. Hopefully that makes sense.
I come from the development world as well. I understand your opinion. I differ a bit on if a true win is determined by building height. The Northbank has several other dynamics at play when compared to some of the larger markets across the state and sunbelt. With that said, I do believe we've dropped the ball in taking advantage of the two boom periods that have occurred since 2000. With a bit of vision and coordinated investment in the early 2000s, we'd be having a different discussion regarding DT now.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 01:14:56 AM
I mean ground up new construction. Agreed those are great projects. Banks will likely underwrite those deals differently than true ground up. There needs to be a new "riverfront" (or close to) Northbank property essentially.. I do think the RISE project helps that guesstimating. The projects in Brooklyn & the Southbank essentially serve as the definitive caps to any valuation for the northbank. (Which makes this difficult) Those areas seem to be going 8-ish stories right now. In theory Northbank can't support similar ground-up density. Hopefully that makes sense.
Yeah wouldn't that be great?!?! I feel like it's been at least four seasons since we've had a project like that proposed or constructed. Hopefully something can break ground soon at a site like the shipyards or something. It would be great to get a high end hotel or office over there. Maybe even luxury residential would work there.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 22, 2023, 07:45:28 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 01:14:56 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on March 21, 2023, 06:28:23 PM
What's your definition of a "true" win for the Northbank? I'd say the completing the cluster of adaptive reuse projects just northwest of city hall is a true win in the works right now. Combined, those projects will bring more residential units and retail square footage online within the next few years than anything else on the urban core's radar, along with some true old school density. Some of those buildings, like the Florida Baptist Convention, have sat vacant for 30-40 years. There's some infill proposed with these projects that will only add more density and beef up the skyline as well.
I mean ground up new construction. Agreed those are great projects. Banks will likely underwrite those deals differently than true ground up. There needs to be a new "riverfront" (or close to) Northbank property essentially.. I do think the RISE project helps that guesstimating. The projects in Brooklyn & the Southbank essentially serve as the definitive caps to any valuation for the northbank. (Which makes this difficult) Those areas seem to be going 8-ish stories right now. In theory Northbank can't support similar ground-up density. Hopefully that makes sense.
I come from the development world as well. I understand your opinion. I differ a bit on if a true win is determined by building height. The Northbank has several other dynamics at play when compared to some of the larger markets across the state and sunbelt. With that said, I do believe we've dropped the ball in taking advantage of the two boom periods that have occurred since 2000. With a bit of vision and coordinated investment in the early 2000s, we'd be having a different discussion regarding DT now.
Couldn't agree more. True that the building height isn't the biggest factor for success, however this part of DT 'should' have taller buildings than the Southbank or Brooklyn. I think that's the tricky predicament to some degree when we see these tall projects being selected.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on March 22, 2023, 10:05:49 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 01:14:56 AM
I mean ground up new construction. Agreed those are great projects. Banks will likely underwrite those deals differently than true ground up. There needs to be a new "riverfront" (or close to) Northbank property essentially.. I do think the RISE project helps that guesstimating. The projects in Brooklyn & the Southbank essentially serve as the definitive caps to any valuation for the northbank. (Which makes this difficult) Those areas seem to be going 8-ish stories right now. In theory Northbank can't support similar ground-up density. Hopefully that makes sense.
Yeah wouldn't that be great?!?! I feel like it's been at least four seasons since we've had a project like that proposed or constructed. Hopefully something can break ground soon at a site like the shipyards or something. It would be great to get a high end hotel or office over there. Maybe even luxury residential would work there.
I like the creative writing there lol that Khan project could have brought us that first example. Now we will have comps for luxury office space, luxury condos, and a luxury hotel. Not sure many of those uses will be recreated in the next 10 years other than maybe the condos with the Berkman 2 or something. Maybe a mixed-use hotel.
This always gets me:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/business/real-estate/2022/05/11/four-seasons-hotel-jacksonville-look-shipyards-project/9706825002/
"The biggest condominium would be a 19,000-square-foot penthouse whose sales value would equate to $16.5 million"
Like what? Maybe for Khan himself lol..
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 10:35:04 AM
This always gets me:
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/business/real-estate/2022/05/11/four-seasons-hotel-jacksonville-look-shipyards-project/9706825002/
"The biggest condominium would be a 19,000-square-foot penthouse whose sales value would equate to $16.5 million"
Like what? Maybe for Khan himself lol..
LOL, has to be
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 10:31:45 AM
I like the creative writing there lol that Khan project could have brought us that first example. Now we will have comps for luxury office space, luxury condos, and a luxury hotel. Not sure many of those uses will be recreated in the next 10 years other than maybe the condos with the Berkman 2 or something. Maybe a mixed-use hotel.
So are you saying jax is just going to apartment build itself into a better tomorrow? The district has Class A office space, hotel uses, and at times it has advertised for sale residential. Eyes will definitely be on this project to use as a benchmark.
Spec office space hasn't been built downtown since 501 Riverside in the early 2000s. Condos haven't' been built since 2008, despite taking off nationally for the past few years. Nothing above a 3 star hotel has been built in decades despite a boom in South Florida and Tampa lately. There likely won't be direct comps to these projects for 25 years, but I think the shipyards will be very illuminating and expand the realm of what's achievable downtown. It will definitely set price records across the board for all uses.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on March 23, 2023, 10:49:29 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on March 22, 2023, 10:31:45 AM
I like the creative writing there lol that Khan project could have brought us that first example. Now we will have comps for luxury office space, luxury condos, and a luxury hotel. Not sure many of those uses will be recreated in the next 10 years other than maybe the condos with the Berkman 2 or something. Maybe a mixed-use hotel.
So are you saying jax is just going to apartment build itself into a better tomorrow? The district has Class A office space, hotel uses, and at times it has advertised for sale residential. Spec office space hasn't been built downtown since 501 Riverside in the early 2000s. Condos haven't' been built since 2008. Nothing above a 3 star hotel has been built in decades. There likely won't be direct comps to these projects for 25 years, but I think the shipyards will be very illuminating and expand the realm of what's achievable downtown. It will definitely set price records across the board for all uses.
What other uses do you suggest?
There won't be another ground up Class A office space nearby for quite some time. There won't be another Four Season's level hotel built around here for probably a decade. I can guarantee you there won't be a condo selling for $16M anytime soon, outside of this PH. All of those comps will likely not lead to further successes in the same use. So in terms of uses that can actually bring in 'enough' revenue let alone the highest and best use, you don't have a ton of options. The Berkman is selling at or near replacement cost. That's why the city flung MOSH nearby.. they might be one of those exceptions? Apartments almost always lead condos in transitional areas. I bet that RISE's project will do more for this comp domino than the 4S project will. It's just more practical.
Another DIA/Downtown project turning into a dumpster fire. It is clear that DIA's generous handout of incentives is not working and only leads to more requests for ever more incentives. Projects in the suburbs get finished everyday without incentives. Incentives are often evidence of the shaky economics underpinning these projects leaving no room for error.
Instead of spending money on incentives, the City should be investing those dollars in transit, infrastructure, amenities and disciplined planning and standards that will create the foundation for better economics that mean developers won't need incentives.... the projects will be able to easily stand on their own two feet with a substantial cushion for things not going as planned but still allowing successful completion of the project.
The City needs a whole new approach to how DIA works. Its track record is terrible.
QuoteDeveloper of Ambassador Hotel and Independent Life building grapples with stack of liens
A developer that owns three historic buildings in downtown Jacksonville is grappling with nearly $1.4 million in liens filed by contractors and two foreclosure lawsuits, casting a shadow on the long-running restoration of the Ambassador Hotel.
The Ambassador Hotel, built in 1922, is among the neighboring buildings owned by corporations related to Augustine Development Group, based in St. Augustine. The other buildings are the 18-story Independent Life Building tower that originally opened in 1955 and the Central National Bank Building built in 1957.
The location of the buildings in the core of downtown puts them on the frontlines of the city's drive to bring more residents into the historic district where redevelopment of vacant but architecturally important buildings is harder and more unpredictable than starting from scratch....
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2023/06/28/downtown-jacksonville-developer-deals-with-liens-and-foreclosure-suits/70331767007/
Rev Grants are fine if they aren't abused. Everything else needs to go towards another use. Tired of 7 or 8 figure completion grants. The District is the only exception imo, given they are doing a lot of infrastructure work that the city would otherwise do.
Does anyone know how much work went into these buildings since they will sit for another 100 years?
From a picture in the TU article, lots of windows have been removed to facilitate demo, exposing the interior to the elements. The photo only shows the north building face, so I don't know if the same condition exists on the south face. If this project is dead, or even entering a long coma, I hope they seal up the building's exterior.
(https://www.jacksonville.com/gcdn/presto/2023/03/28/NFTU/70429ab7-e9be-43ab-9eb3-a8b87478197a-JKI_020123_Historic_Buildin.jpg?width=1320&height=884&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
So much for the North Bank Renaissance. I'm beginning to think that DIA is just a bunch of no load misfits (in all due respect). What is going on?
Why would the city give incentives to the latter two projects (I-Life and Central bank) when they hadn't finished the Ambassador Hotel project?
JWB needs to get these buildings and the sooner the better.
QuoteWhy would the city give incentives to the latter two projects (I-Life and Central bank) when they hadn't finished the Ambassador Hotel project?
Both the Ambassador Hotel and I-Life buildings are being worked on at the same time. I saw workers at both sites about two weeks ago.
Any idea how much progress has been made? Is the Ambassador 80% complete or closer to 40%. Same question for the other buildings.
If the buildings are not fully dried in then likely around the 50% mark.
Quote from: heights unknown on June 28, 2023, 09:15:49 PM
So much for the North Bank Renaissance. I'm beginning to think that DIA is just a bunch of no load misfits (in all due respect).
Laura Street feels worse off today than it was even a year ago.
JWJ fenced off.
Jacobs all boarded up.
Trio still looking like a Ukrainian war-zone.
Every project is obviously different, I'm not a developer, and I do appreciate all of the developers who do put their money with their mouths are when it comes to our urban core.
But when you look at the status of so many downtown projects:
- Friendship Fountain: Closed for nearly 4 years; reopening perpetually delayed
- Ford on Bay: RFP'd twice; nothing has materialized
- Related Southbank project: River City Brewing demolished; original proposal fell apart; residential tower with no timeline announced
- Old Greyhound Station: illegally converted to a parking lot; no recourse
- The District/Riversedge: Seeking new timeline extensions
- Riverfront Plaza private development: only one responder to RFP; still no development agreement
- Riverfront Plaza park: botched RFP prioritizing public art, choosing a winner based on the JAX sculpture, and then backtracking on public art
- Jones Bros Furniture: hasn't broken ground
- Laura Street Trio: third round of negotiations; no recommendation made by DIA; still hasn't broken ground
- Independent Life and Ambassador Hotel: in question
- Two-way streets: no conversion
- Retail and restaurant corridor program: none of the targeted restaurants have opened downtown
- Main Library retail: still not activated
- Times-Union Center Park: in planning stages for six years
Someone must be smoking something REAL good if they look at our urban landscape, consider all of the projects that we haven't been able to push through to the finish line in the last few years, and think to themselves:
"You know, we should probably give the CEO of the DIA a contract extension AND a raise."
^Much of this is the result of having leadership in place that has no earthly idea of what it is doing, outside of personally sucking on the public teat. Your out-going mayor gave himself a pat on the back for leaving the scene worse than it was before he was elected.
QuoteThe city looks somewhat different. The Landing and other landmarks were torn down. The Landing was replaced with Riverfront Plaza, or as some call it, "Lenny's Lawn."
Some also gave Curry the nickname "The Teardown Mayor."
"Somebody had to tear all that garbage down," Curry said. "I mean, the previous administration spoke for years about doing something downtown and they let those rotten buildings sit. So, we knocked all the rot down and they're prepared now for development. And I think Lenny's lawn looks pretty, it's a beautiful green space that will at some point have vertical on it."
https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2023/06/28/im-gonna-miss-the-people-lenny-curry-looks-back-on-8-years-as-jacksonvilles-mayor/
QuoteI mean, the previous administration spoke for years about doing something downtown and they let those rotten buildings sit.
Actually Lenny, the previous administration had a plan for the Landing that would have cost half as much as what has already been spent to demolish it. But he had a 'D' after his name, so the GOP powers that be (that control the city) couldn't let that happen.
But thanks for earning JAX a well deserved reputation for corruption. Again.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, brah.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on June 29, 2023, 08:33:46 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on June 28, 2023, 09:15:49 PM
So much for the North Bank Renaissance. I'm beginning to think that DIA is just a bunch of no load misfits (in all due respect).
Laura Street feels worse off today than it was even a year ago.
JWJ fenced off.
Jacobs all boarded up.
Trio still looking like a Ukrainian war-zone.
Every project is obviously different, I'm not a developer, and I do appreciate all of the developers who do put their money with their mouths are when it comes to our urban core.
But when you look at the status of so many downtown projects:
- Friendship Fountain: Closed for nearly 4 years; reopening perpetually delayed
- Ford on Bay: RFP'd twice; nothing has materialized
- Related Southbank project: River City Brewing demolished; original proposal fell apart; residential tower with no timeline announced
- Old Greyhound Station: illegally converted to a parking lot; no recourse
- The District/Riversedge: Seeking new timeline extensions
- Riverfront Plaza private development: only one responder to RFP; still no development agreement
- Riverfront Plaza park: botched RFP prioritizing public art, choosing a winner based on the JAX sculpture, and then backtracking on public art
- Jones Bros Furniture: hasn't broken ground
- Laura Street Trio: third round of negotiations; no recommendation made by DIA; still hasn't broken ground
- Independent Life and Ambassador Hotel: in question
- Two-way streets: no conversion
- Retail and restaurant corridor program: none of the targeted restaurants have opened downtown
- Main Library retail: still not activated
- Times-Union Center Park: in planning stages for six years
Someone must be smoking something REAL good if they look at our urban landscape, consider all of the projects that we haven't been able to push through to the finish line in the last few years, and think to themselves:
"You know, we should probably give the CEO of the DIA a contract extension AND a raise."
And how much was spent on studies/reports for all of that lol...
The Curry administration was more concerned about politics, paybacks and connections financially benefitting than downtown vibrancy. No one should be surprised at all that all the promises of cranes, etc. failed to materialize. With the Landing nonsense, it was clear early on that they were going to set downtown back by a good generation and spend hundreds of millions doing so. Luckily, the potential still remains. We just need to stop tripping over our own two feet.
I saw a quote from Brian Hughes recently in a related article. He expressed concern over a project...maybe it was an article related to the Independent Life/Ambassador Hotel.
Regardless, where does he fit into all of this? Aside from being attached to absolutely bombastic and negative campaigning for candidates very few of us think of fondly (Curry being one), is he one of those "he gotsta go" guys in the outgoing administration or is he actually a strong advocate and someone we should keep around?
He's a part of the Curry administration. They had eight years. Time for him to go as well.
Quote from: simms3 on June 30, 2023, 01:57:31 PM
I saw a quote from Brian Hughes recently in a related article. He expressed concern over a project...maybe it was an article related to the Independent Life/Ambassador Hotel.
Regardless, where does he fit into all of this? Aside from being attached to absolutely bombastic and negative campaigning for candidates very few of us think of fondly (Curry being one), is he one of those "he gotsta go" guys in the outgoing administration or is he actually a strong advocate and someone we should keep around?
Hughes was famously critical of a proposed $11.8 million subsidy for the redevelopment of the Landing under Toney Sleiman.
Specifically, he said:
"Throwing money, nearly $12 million, at special interests while kids are being gunned down in the street because of fewer cops is not simply outrageous, it's disgusting."A couple of years later, he was on the Khan's private jet with Lenny Curry, taking a secret, off-the-records trip to Cordish developments around the country. Upon returning, he sent secretive messages (eventually coming out via Sunshine State Law) about "finding the money to make it happen." A month later, the bully tactics against Sleiman and eventual pulled permits started to materialize, leading to an eventual buyout and demolition of the landing that - combined with related lawsuits - cost the city more than twice in the short-term (and even longer in the long-term) than it would have cost to just partner with Sleiman to redevelop it in the first place.
He was also instrumental in drafting the $250 million Lot J subsidy eventually shot down by City Council.
He was also on the secretive Atlanta trip with Aaron Zahn, Tim Baker, Sam Mousa, Lenny Curry during the failed JEA privatization scandal.
I do not believe he should be kept around.
^^^WOW.
I thought so. I was pretty outspoken on my thoughts on the recent election so y'all know where I stand generally with this group of characters. Sometimes you hear things that make you second guess your original thoughts and/or instincts, but thanks for reminding me. These people have done untold damage to this city, and downtown revitalization.
Yeah, they really screwed downtown at a point when the market was perfect for urban projects. Very glad to see this dark period in DT Jax's time, come to an end before more was detonated.
Quote from: simms3 on June 30, 2023, 04:31:59 PM
^^^WOW.
I thought so. I was pretty outspoken on my thoughts on the recent election so y'all know where I stand generally with this group of characters. Sometimes you hear things that make you second guess your original thoughts and/or instincts, but thanks for reminding me. These people have done untold damage to this city, and downtown revitalization.
For what it's worth, there were also allegations of bullying from two Council Members:
https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local/jacksonville-councilman-says-he-was-threatened-by-mayors-chief-of-staff-following-disagreement/940781125/
And from at least one city staffer:
https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/video-watch-alleged-bullying-incident-between-mayor-currys-chief-of-staff-city-staffer/77-518431535
Not only did Curry's team bully... but they also signaled a quid pro quo at times on getting things done. I will just leave it at that.
Quote from: simms3 on June 30, 2023, 01:57:31 PM
I saw a quote from Brian Hughes recently in a related article. He expressed concern over a project...maybe it was an article related to the Independent Life/Ambassador Hotel.
Regardless, where does he fit into all of this? Aside from being attached to absolutely bombastic and negative campaigning for candidates very few of us think of fondly (Curry being one), is he one of those "he gotsta go" guys in the outgoing administration or is he actually a strong advocate and someone we should keep around?
Hughes was first Chief of Staff and then Chief Administrative Officer for Curry. Mayor Deegan has already announced people for those roles.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 30, 2023, 05:46:37 PM
Not only did Curry's team bully... but they also signaled a quid pro quo at times on getting things done. I will just leave it at that.
I'm glad he, Hughes is being replaced by someone from Mayor Deegan's staff. He needs and gotsta go. WHY is everyone on a power trip nowadays? It seems that if you give someone a little taste, a little thimble of power, it goes to their head. I'm glad she filed a complaint, and, I BELIEVE HER. Not because she is a female, but because it seems that Hughes is aggressive, authoritarian, over bearing, and foaming at the mouth for power and to be in charge.
Change the thread title to a Northbank exodus in the making.
Yep, here we go again (and again, and again); Jax AGAIN missed its window of opportunity.