Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/RD-River-City-Brewing-Tower-Project/i-h7QcpJ6/0/f7dce9b6/L/20231012_DDRB%20AGENDA%20PACKET_Page_078-L.jpg)
Redevelopment plans for the former River City Brewing mixed-use site are coming back to the Downtown Development Review Board (DDRB) for Final Approval. Here is a look at the $92 million, 24-story project's conceptual plans. Let us know what you think.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/rd-river-city-brewery-project-seeks-final-ddrb-approval/
Call me skeptical, but will hold out hope the tower is included in the final version.
Can you build a 24-story 410-unit residential tower, 511-space garage, and restaurant for $92 million in 2023?
Will never complain about more residential in the downtown area, but I still think that if we're going to spend significant city money to incentive this project, we need to insist that the restaurant is integrated into Friendship Park, as originally planned, versus being isolated in the rear along the river. Having that restaurant practically within/as an extension of the park is key to helping Friendship Park realize its potential (and investment) as a destination space. As currently proposed, there's practically no integration between the park and the project. Doesn't feel like there's any spillover effect with the current design that would help bolster our adjacent investment next door.
A chain is as weak as its weakest link. If the Riverwalk is going to be this narrow at some point, I have a problem, once again, with the setbacks for this project.
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/RD-River-City-Brewing-Tower-Project/i-B3dM2b6/0/fc4a26c9/L/20231012_DDRB%20AGENDA%20PACKET_Page_085-L.jpg)
The design itself appears to be a great improvement over the original boxy proposal although other than the curve at the building top, there isn't much to this design to make it stand out.
By the way, has anyone seen the LED panels on the garage at the apartments being completed at Hendricks and I-95? They really dress up that garage at night as you exit to Hendricks from the Acosta bridge. Kudos to the developers for adding those.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2023, 10:35:54 AM
Can you build a 24-story 410-unit residential tower, 511-space garage, and restaurant for $92 million in 2023?
Will never complain about more residential in the downtown area, but I still think that if we're going to spend significant city money to incentive this project, we need to insist that the restaurant is integrated into Friendship Park, as originally planned, versus being isolated in the rear along the river. Having that restaurant practically within/as an extension of the park is key to helping Friendship Park realize its potential (and investment) as a destination space. As currently proposed, there's practically no integration between the park and the project. Doesn't feel like there's any spillover effect with the current design that would help bolster our adjacent investment next door.
It's weird, $92 million sounds like the same price tag as the original building with nearly 100 fewer apartments. If there's more building, where are they cheaping out in order to end up with the same price tag?
Also yes, the fact that the riverwalk becomes a cramped corridor and the restaurant is tucked behind a private area really comes off as awful design. I don't understand how we've made it most of the year and ended up with essentially the same concept as back in the spring. With how dead this project already appeared to be I'm not too concerned right now about telling them to just try again. Finish the park, perhaps separate the restaurant concept from the housing and start early planning for what's going to replace MOSH when that moves in a couple years. We can afford to do better here.
Jaxlongtimer, just in this context.. I think the narrow Riverwalk is okay. The issue being that FDOT & CSX own right-of-ways under the Acosta. I live nearby, and the connection from the Southerly to the other side, seems impossible. This is like a spur route, similar to what Baptist has now (because it leads to a dead end).
Quote from: marcuscnelson on October 06, 2023, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2023, 10:35:54 AM
Can you build a 24-story 410-unit residential tower, 511-space garage, and restaurant for $92 million in 2023?
Will never complain about more residential in the downtown area, but I still think that if we're going to spend significant city money to incentive this project, we need to insist that the restaurant is integrated into Friendship Park, as originally planned, versus being isolated in the rear along the river. Having that restaurant practically within/as an extension of the park is key to helping Friendship Park realize its potential (and investment) as a destination space. As currently proposed, there's practically no integration between the park and the project. Doesn't feel like there's any spillover effect with the current design that would help bolster our adjacent investment next door.
It's weird, $92 million sounds like the same price tag as the original building with nearly 100 fewer apartments. If there's more building, where are they cheaping out in order to end up with the same price tag?
Also yes, the fact that the riverwalk becomes a cramped corridor and the restaurant is tucked behind a private area really comes off as awful design. I don't understand how we've made it most of the year and ended up with essentially the same concept as back in the spring. With how dead this project already appeared to be I'm not too concerned right now about telling them to just try again. Finish the park, perhaps separate the restaurant concept from the housing and start early planning for what's going to replace MOSH when that moves in a couple years. We can afford to do better here.
Call me skeptical too! The unit price is $225k ish. What a discount compared to the Trio.. lol.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on October 06, 2023, 12:43:03 PM
The unit price is $225k ish. What a discount compared to the Trio.. lol.
The Laura Street Trio
by Cordish and Iguana. ;D
I get raked through the coals every time I say it, but having driven by each day during construction and seen the materials used and speed in which it went up, I still think there's got to be about $50 million buried under the Jags new $120 million practice facility somewhere.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on October 06, 2023, 11:14:01 AM
By the way, has anyone seen the LED panels on the garage at the apartments being completed at Hendricks and I-95? They really dress up that garage at night as you exit to Hendricks from the Acosta bridge. Kudos to the developers for adding those.
Yeah, it looks pretty cool driving by.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2023, 12:59:08 PM
I get raked through the coals every time I say it, but having driven by each day during construction and seen the materials used and speed in which it went up, I still think there's got to be about $50 million buried under the Jags new $120 million practice facility somewhere.
I know you like to compare the MEC budget to that of the FIS headquarters. Having been in both a few times, I can tell you that MEC is nicer than 90% of the FIS space. The bulk of the FIS building is still a cube farm. I can also tell you the quoted $156M budget of FIS does not include FF&E or technology. It's just the building.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on October 06, 2023, 03:41:43 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2023, 12:59:08 PM
I get raked through the coals every time I say it, but having driven by each day during construction and seen the materials used and speed in which it went up, I still think there's got to be about $50 million buried under the Jags new $120 million practice facility somewhere.
I know you like to compare the MEC budget to that of the FIS headquarters. Having been in both a few times, I can tell you that MEC is nicer than 90% of the FIS space. The bulk of the FIS building is still a cube farm. I can also tell you the quoted $156M budget of FIS does not include FF&E or technology. It's just the building.
I'll be the first to admit, I'm far from an expert on construction costs. There just seems to be a pattern with Jags projects over the years, both actualized and proposed, where it's tough to wrap my head around price tags that, to the untrained eye, seem higher than they should be.
I don't doubt it's beautiful, and comparisons are very admittedly apples to oranges, but $120 million is an astronomical amount of money. I see this guy and wonder, "Did really cost more than Vista Brooklyn and the Doro combined? Does it really cost more $40 million more than the 30-mile Emerald Trail project. Does it really cost more than building new parks at the Landing, Shipyards, Riversedge, and Times-Union center combined? More than what Related is proposing on the Southbank? $40 million more than Mosh 2.0?" $120 million is $45 million more than the BOFA Tower and Wells Fargo Towers have sold for in the last two years.
(https://snipboard.io/OC2kXL.jpg)
Even comparing it to what the University of Florida just built, in the same timeframe, down the road for $85 million, do we REALLY think it's a full $35 million more expensive?
(https://snipboard.io/OK6WcQ.jpg)
Answer might be yes, like I said, hell if I truly know, but I like to keep a little healthy skepticism when the city goes halfsies with the Jags, and they manage and price out the project.
Let's not forget, these were the guys who told us that this was a half-billion project, with a mid-scale hotel priced at over $1 million per key for construction.
(https://snipboard.io/JNm1VX.jpg)
Quote from: Ken_FSU on October 06, 2023, 04:28:49 PM
$120 million is $45 million more than the BOFA Tower and Wells Fargo Towers have sold for in the last two years.
Keep in mind that the replacement cost for these buildings is WAY more than they sold for recently.
Remember, the MEC price is fully furnished.
Desks, computers, state of the art draft room, team room and weight room. All full, all brand new. The technology and wiring cost alone is probably more than some smaller developments. It truly is apples to oranges to compare this to any residential, and most any office development.
There were too many incorrect assumptions to dispute, but now that a couple are out of the way I'll add in that the UF facility's budget only includes the building in the foreground as they had already spent $15M+ (in 2020 when everything was cheap because construction halted) on the indoor practice field and additional millions on the two outdoor fields. The Jaguars built those all in the same project (along with a 2,000 seat grand stand featuring 2 concession stands, a retail store, and restrooms), which accounts for the budget increase.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on October 09, 2023, 11:20:04 AM
There were too many incorrect assumptions to dispute, but now that a couple are out of the way I'll add in that the UF facility's budget only includes the building in the foreground as they had already spent $15M+ (in 2020 when everything was cheap because construction halted) on the indoor practice field and additional millions on the two outdoor fields. The Jaguars built those all in the same project (along with a 2,000 seat grand stand featuring 2 concession stands, a retail store, and restrooms), which accounts for the budget increase.
Quote from: Lostwave on October 09, 2023, 10:15:40 AM
Remember, the MEC price is fully furnished.
Desks, computers, state of the art draft room, team room and weight room. All full, all brand new. The technology and wiring cost alone is probably more than some smaller developments. It truly is apples to oranges to compare this to any residential, and most any office development.
Quote from: Steve on October 09, 2023, 09:47:56 AM
Keep in mind that the replacement cost for these buildings is WAY more than they sold for recently.
Good additional context to put the price tag into perspective, thanks fellas!
I've trusted all three of your opinions for years, so if you think the price tag is legit, I suppose I'll take off my tin foil hat until the next one.
As a guy who fully supports the city subsidizing a new stadium, and fully supported the scoreboard and Daily's Place projects, I do think the MEL is the hardest to justify from a public perspective. The stadium is a municipal facility. Daily's Place is a public concert venue filling a gap that's existed for decades. But to your point above, what reason would the City of Jacksonville have to own an NFL training facility, with draft rooms, state of the art equipment, practice fields, etc? More than any of the other projects, this feels like a private facility, for the Jaguars, with very little reason to otherwise exist for the general public. Can't wrap my head around the justification for $60 million in public dollars for a largely private facility.
Think of it more as the first installment in the subsidizing of the new stadium. No matter where the team plays while the stadium is under construction, the team will need somewhere to practice since their current home will be a job-site for a few years. This facility not only keeps the team in Jacksonville for the duration of construction, but it keeps them downtown for the long run.
I see your point that the other assets are more public facing or the jags are just one of many tenants, but far more people were able to attend training camp this year and the facility will create more public interaction going forward.
Back to the ex-RCBC project...
Architecturally it leaves a lot to be desired IMO. That said part of me is happy to see a rendering that looks like it's already been value engineered vs some flashy thing that you know is going to be completely neutered into the bland box shown.
Another thing to keep in mind about MEC is that the city (from the original lease) was responsible for all upkeep and upgrades to the "practice facility" inside the stadium, which was a big expense every year. Now with this investment, they don't have to pay for any of that anymore. The Jags are now responsible for all upkeep and upgrades. So with this investment the city got a big expense off the books forever. How long until it adds up to 60m, I have no idea, but it is another reason it helped make sense for the city to chip in.
Anyone know why there's a big crawler crane out there? Bulkhead work? Who's doing it?
I saw that too. Area of property closest to the fountain. Remove trees?
You don't need that to remove trees. It was over at the corner by the boat ramp and river today. There was some other equipment staged out there too. I'd guess it's for bulkhead work. It was pretty rough where the restaurant used to be.
I saw a Hal Jones truck or piece of equipment out there. They do bulkheads and marinas. That's likely what the work is.
The Related Group is back with a new, taller, more expensive proposal.
From the Business Journal article
Quote
The most recent proposal for the Southbank property included an eight-story, 328-unit multifamily development with a pad reserved for 3,200 square feet of restaurant space.
Now, Related is proposing a 25-story tower with eight floors of no less than 390 luxury units with a minimum of 4,000 square feet of restaurant, a nine-story parking garage and a 1,000-square-foot ship store.
The proposed incentives include a 75% rebate on property taxes over 15 years with a cap of $19.8 million. The incentive request also looks for the city to provide the developer a $39 million completion grant.
In return, the project would have a strict timeline for construction, with work beginning 120 days after permitting is complete and construction finished no later than April 30, 2029.
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2024/05/03/related-second-river-city-proposal.html?ana=e_JA_me&j=35277666&senddate=2024-05-06&empos=p4
From the staff analysis of the term sheet to be considered by the DIA Strategic Implementation Committee at their next meeting (May 10)
Quote
Current Project Proposal
Related has returned with a much more ambitious development proposal that is more impactful on Jacksonville's
Southbank riverfront and skyline (See Exhibit 1). The development project proposed will be included in the Related
Group's exclusive Icon, high-end multifamily portfolio. Features of the new design include:
• 25-story main tower with eight stories of residential units along Museum Circle on the south side of the
garage.
• Not less than 390 luxury units with balconies and terraces with the proposed unit mix to include:
o 8 Studios – 569 avg square feet
o 174 1-bedroom units – 774 avg square feet
o 163 2-bedroom units – 1,143 avg square feet
o 48 3-bedroom units – 1,521 avg square feet
• Minimum 4,000 square foot restaurant integral to the building, facing the St. John's River, with two-story
ceiling height.
• Nine-story parking garage wrapped on the first two floors by utility rooms and screened on floors above.
• 1,000 square foot Ship's Store
• Shade sails, benches, bike racks, light fixtures along the Riverwalk and waterfront promenade
Total Development Costs (as presented): $202,746,000
Direct Development Cost: $173,597,000
REV Proposed: $19,798,000
REV Structure: 75% / 15 Years
Completion Grant: $39,000,000
Completion Grant Structure: Funded During Construction
https://dia.coj.net/getattachment/41e4242d-c6f6-4ca8-a079-67a040060804/.aspx
The Related proposal starts on page 19 at that link, a Site Plan and renderings are on pages 28 and 29.
QuoteOperating Budget:
Rents at the luxury multi-family complex are targeted to range between $3.13 psf for 3-bedroom units
(approximately $4,320 monthly) to $3.95 psf for Studio units (approximately $2,247 monthly). This rental range is
10-25% higher than rents proposed on other recent development plans reviewed by the DIA. Parking, utility
4
reimbursement, and other income add as much as $218 per unit per month. These measures along with increased
unit count and retail square footage increase the stabilized pro forma Effective Gross Income from $8.2 million,
as projected in 2021, to $14.8 million, an increase of 80.4%. Inclusive of the REV grant offset to property taxes,
pro forma Net Operating Income is forecast at 82.5% above previous models, an increase from $5.7 million to
$10.4 million.
Very questionable rents used in their underwriting. I hope this actually goes.
There's no universe where we should be handing $40 million in public cash to a developer as a reward for building luxury homes for 390 people.
REV grants are one thing.
A massive completion grant from the general fund just doesn't seem to make sense for this one.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on May 06, 2024, 02:02:33 PM
There's no universe where we should be handing $40 million in public cash to a developer as a reward for building luxury homes for 390 people.
REV grants are one thing.
A massive completion grant from the general fund just doesn't seem to make sense for this one.
There was an article a couple weeks back in the Palm Beach Post about luxury condos in Downtown West Palm Beach and how many projects are currently in the works. Mostly about Related (Not to be confused with Related Group), who are doing an absolutely insane amount of development there. But there was mention of Related Group's Ritz Carlton condo project and if I recall correctly, Related Group said something like: "we have deep pockets, we can be patient with sales" or something like that. Unfortunately, it's behind a paywall for me now and I can't access it, but if you want to Google it, it's titled "Family Church, Related Cos. plan new church school and two condo towers in West Palm Beach".
The leaders of Jax are so desperate to claim they get stuff done that they are throwing crazy amounts of money at developers. Like you I'm all for Rev Grants. Heck, I'm even fine with a 100% REV Grant for longer than 15 years, but that completion grant amount feels like U2C level of waste.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on May 06, 2024, 02:02:33 PM
There's no universe where we should be handing $40 million in public cash to a developer as a reward for building luxury homes for 390 people.
REV grants are one thing.
A massive completion grant from the general fund just doesn't seem to make sense for this one.
Sounds like a we're begging for highrise construction.
Between low building standards (waiving setbacks, architecture, zoning, etc.) and throwing money at developers for projects like this and the Four Seasons, Jax is nothing more than a prostitute for developers.
Using these incentives for infrastructure, green spaces, streetscapes, etc. that benefit the community at large (including not one, but many, developers) would have a far greater ROI than throwing this at private property owners who keep all the benefits of the incentives for themselves.
Of note in the DIA agenda packet is they're giving The Related Group right of first refusal on the MOSH site should it be made available for private development
QuoteADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
COJ/DIA shall grant to Related a right of first refusal ("ROFR") for a period of ten (10) years from the
Effective Date of the RDA to purchase the MOSH site in the event such site is made available for private
commercial redevelopment to be more fully defined in the RDA. The ROFR shall require Related to match
not only the cash purchase price to be paid for the land but also to commit to construction of commercial
improvements of equal value and similar use as to that proposed, on the same or shorter performance
schedule, resulting in a similar tax revenue to COJ. Such right of first refusal shall not be applicable to any
sale, lease or redevelopment for civic use, park space or other use in which the public is invited to visit such
as a museum, aquarium, gallery, etc. The CEO shall be authorized to further negotiate the terms of the
ROFR with Related and shall bring any material changes to the Board for approval. The ROFR shall
terminate at the earlier of a sale of the property or the 10th Anniversary of the Effective Date of the RDA.
Quote from: Zac T on May 07, 2024, 08:13:28 AM
Of note in the DIA agenda packet is they're giving The Related Group right of first refusal on the MOSH site should it be made available for private development
QuoteADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
COJ/DIA shall grant to Related a right of first refusal ("ROFR") for a period of ten (10) years from the
Effective Date of the RDA to purchase the MOSH site in the event such site is made available for private
commercial redevelopment to be more fully defined in the RDA. The ROFR shall require Related to match
not only the cash purchase price to be paid for the land but also to commit to construction of commercial
improvements of equal value and similar use as to that proposed, on the same or shorter performance
schedule, resulting in a similar tax revenue to COJ. Such right of first refusal shall not be applicable to any
sale, lease or redevelopment for civic use, park space or other use in which the public is invited to visit such
as a museum, aquarium, gallery, etc. The CEO shall be authorized to further negotiate the terms of the
ROFR with Related and shall bring any material changes to the Board for approval. The ROFR shall
terminate at the earlier of a sale of the property or the 10th Anniversary of the Effective Date of the RDA.
This whole thing is such a perfect example of why, despite pumping hundreds of millions into downtown, Jacksonville has nothing to show for it.
1. Ford on Bay is RFP'd. Related proposed a market-appropriate 350-unit multifamily development with retail fronting the riverwalk. DIA chooses a less realistic Spandrel project instead that never materializes.
2. Ford on Bay is RFP'd again. Related Group, despite a solid track record in Florida, is passed over again by the DIA in favor of a Carter development that fails to materialize.
3. MOSH plans a major $40 - $60 million renovation of their Southbank museum, in conjunction with improvements to Friendship Park.
4. Related takes over and demolishes the River City Brewing Company site, without a development agreement in place, with promises of building housing and a restaurant to serve museum and park visitors.
5. The City secretly agrees to pay MOSH $20 million to flee the Southbank and move behind a partially abandoned highway ramp on the Northbank to help provide foot traffic for a Lot J development that never comes to fruition.
6. Related is dumbfounded that no one told them the museum was moving.
7. A two-year project to restore Friendship Fountain and build a park supporting it turns into a 7-year project, including a four-year park closure.
8. Related's parkfront restaurant gets moved to the opposite side of the building, removing all interaction with the city's $10 million+ investment in restoring Friendship Park. No one in leadership cares.
9. In order to remove the current blight from the leveled waterfront restaurant that we gleefully demolished, we are now being asked to give Related SIXTY MILLION DOLLARS in completion grants and REV rebates to build a luxury high-rise in an urban area with so much vacant horizontal property that it looks like a moonscape.
10. On top of that $60 million, including $40 million in cash straight from the general fund, because why the hell not, we're also throwing in right of first refusal for the old MOSH site, because if the Ford on Bay/Hyatt situation has shown us anything, it's that nothing catalyzes development like locking prime land behind complex ROFR agreements.
All in, that's close to $100 million in city money we've put down to eliminate a vibrant museum/restaurant anchor for the south end of the Main Street Bridge, replace it with luxury housing, and lock up the MOSH site in arbitration for the next decade.
Toss in what's we've spent on the other side of the Main Street Bridge to buy out Toney Sleiman, demolish the Landing, redevelop it, and eventually subsidize whatever goofy high rise ends up on the private development pad, and we're likely looking at a total of nearly $200 million dollars just to replace what was currently there with something less vibrant.
We could have fully funded the MOSH's Southbank improvements, given Toney Sleimain the subsidy he wanted to redevelop the Landing with parking, and still had over $100 million left over to build out our park system, subsidize historic rehab, put extra police officers on the streets, rebuild James Weldon Johnson Park, two-way the streets, etc.
Wildly asinine.
Could not agree more with you on the MOSH site Ken. Absolute dumpster fire. Along with several other things.
That is a sad list, but not surprising. It seems like how it's worked for decades unfortunately.
Ken, agree 100%. Thanks for supporting my comment that putting taxpayer dollars in public infrastructure would go much further than the treadmill we are on of subsidizing these developments to the tune of 20% to 30% or more. I wish the City did this for me when I bought my home... I have done a lot to advance the tax rolls and economic activity on my land plot... so why shouldn't I get the same treatment?
So much for free market... how does one compete with this distortion of costs. I get it for historic preservation as there is a higher goal in mind and, with any grants, the result is just being brought back to market costs for new construction. But, that is the only exception that comes to mind that I would support.
I'm struggling to justify this beyond the nicety of a high-rise under construction. This money would probably be better served closing the capital gap on MOSH/Shipyards West/Riverfront Plaza, or funding a deal on the Trio, or getting RiversEdge to vertical construction, or completing the local match for the UF campus, or a common sense plan for an exhibition hall at Ford on Bay, or generally finishing more of the park plans. Lots of better and higher priorities before you even look outside of Downtown.
Maybe in a few years if the market improves this project could get a smaller incentive deal or just close the capital gap themselves. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice rendering, but I'm not sure this is the best use of $59 million right now. Also don't see why we'd be giving that money and right of first refusal on MOSH. I'd feel bad to essentially screw Related again, but as a city there's got to be an obligation for best and highest use with this much money.
It would be interesting to see the potential ROI on this money here vs. the Trio.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on May 07, 2024, 12:53:29 PM
I'm struggling to justify this beyond the nicety of a high-rise under construction.
If we get 9 cranes going in Downtown at once, the 10th is free. Basic economics.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on May 07, 2024, 12:53:29 PM
or getting RiversEdge to vertical construction,
This would just be showing favoritism toward one developer over another. Preston Hollow isn't doing anything altruistic to bring Rivers Edge to Jacksonville. Not defending Related, but I don't see how this would be more beneficial than providing the completion grant to Related other than this area has been derelict longer.
Quote from: Steve on May 07, 2024, 01:15:15 PM
It would be interesting to see the potential ROI on this money here vs. the Trio.
It won't be accurate when our investment body allows for studios to be underwritten at $2200+ per unit. Exact same issue with the Doro btw when they went to leaseup. Maybe an out of town company would see those rents as justified, but the DIA should have the ability to refute them. It makes their ROI calculation pointless.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on May 07, 2024, 12:53:29 PM
I'm struggling to justify this beyond the nicety of a high-rise under construction. This money would probably be better served closing the capital gap on MOSH/Shipyards West/Riverfront Plaza, or funding a deal on the Trio, or getting RiversEdge to vertical construction, or completing the local match for the UF campus, or a common sense plan for an exhibition hall at Ford on Bay, or generally finishing more of the park plans. Lots of better and higher priorities before you even look outside of Downtown.
Maybe in a few years if the market improves this project could get a smaller incentive deal or just close the capital gap themselves. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice rendering, but I'm not sure this is the best use of $59 million right now. Also don't see why we'd be giving that money and right of first refusal on MOSH. I'd feel bad to essentially screw Related again, but as a city there's got to be an obligation for best and highest use with this much money.
Agree completely. I don't know if the DIA realizes this - but they do not have an unlimited source of money, which means they must prioritize how they spend limited funds.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 07, 2024, 03:28:57 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on May 07, 2024, 12:53:29 PM
or getting RiversEdge to vertical construction,
This would just be showing favoritism toward one developer over another. Preston Hollow isn't doing anything altruistic to bring Rivers Edge to Jacksonville. Not defending Related, but I don't see how this would be more beneficial than providing the completion grant to Related other than this area has been derelict longer.
My point was that RiversEdge is a project we have already made commitments to, and given the previous challenges in moving it forward, it would make more sense to use some of this money to push that horizontal work a little further instead of spreading ourselves thinner on a new site that seems to have a pretty uncertain future anyway. If the indication now (given the proposed right of first refusal) is that Related is also potentially going to develop the MOSH site anyway then what's the harm in focusing on the fountain park and other projects, building up the overall market and letting Related find more capital to finance their project with? Maybe by then everyone has their crap together and can holistically plan around the fountain.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 07, 2024, 03:28:57 PM
Quote from: marcuscnelson on May 07, 2024, 12:53:29 PM
or getting RiversEdge to vertical construction,
This would just be showing favoritism toward one developer over another. Preston Hollow isn't doing anything altruistic to bring Rivers Edge to Jacksonville. Not defending Related, but I don't see how this would be more beneficial than providing the completion grant to Related other than this area has been derelict longer.
RiversEdge is about to go vertical with a townhouse development. Its on the DDRB agenda this week.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-3JCWDnQ/0/FLF43xrfKh45mksbVRsNKs4B9nt36bsZw8KJKJw5q/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_33-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-f34MG2j/0/9ZTMkqf3zr2BfzxkGhqhtsX9D7dkN29vhdTHL3Pm/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_35-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-58gcrPB/0/FDJ5JTfrWwtZDTdtVRJp4j25dmQ8bz7JWXmXWcHpk/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_40-X3.jpg)
Quote from: Ken_FSU on May 07, 2024, 09:20:23 AM
All in, that's close to $100 million in city money we've put down to eliminate a vibrant museum/restaurant anchor for the south end of the Main Street Bridge, replace it with luxury housing, and lock up the MOSH site in arbitration for the next decade.
Toss in what's we've spent on the other side of the Main Street Bridge to buy out Toney Sleiman, demolish the Landing, redevelop it, and eventually subsidize whatever goofy high rise ends up on the private development pad, and we're likely looking at a total of nearly $200 million dollars just to replace what was currently there with something less vibrant.
We could have fully funded the MOSH's Southbank improvements, given Toney Sleimain the subsidy he wanted to redevelop the Landing with parking, and still had over $100 million left over to build out our park system, subsidize historic rehab, put extra police officers on the streets, rebuild James Weldon Johnson Park, two-way the streets, etc.
Wildly asinine.
Unfortunately, where we're at was so predictable a decade ago. On this forum and in previous editorials we said this would essentially be the outcome of when there's no master plan for publicly owned sites and when you subtract instead of enhancing and adding to what was already in place. You basically cost yourself hundreds of millions and set things back by a generation (i.e. a full decade or more). The ultimate end will be hundreds of millions spent upon completion and a completed product that will attract less people to the area than the things we intentionally took out. The proof of this outcome is 70 years of continuously talking about downtown revitalization and billions spent. We can repeat past failed redevelopment strategies and expect the next attempt to pay off (i.e. Skyway then...now U2C, instead of investing in proven solutions).
Anyway, I'm encouraged that change is happening now, moreso than I was back then. However, it still means we're going to reap what we've sown for the decisions made during the previous mayoral administration.
Are these renderings for real or placeholders? Hope not the former but if real, just when I thought we couldn't get uglier than the Doro... I can't imagine expensive townhouses with no architectural features or character, just plain building block looks. Reminds me of prison guard towers or a militaristic building. And, no trees across the front along the street?
Quote from: thelakelander on May 07, 2024, 07:22:29 PM
RiversEdge is about to go vertical with a townhouse development. Its on the DDRB agenda this week.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-3JCWDnQ/0/FLF43xrfKh45mksbVRsNKs4B9nt36bsZw8KJKJw5q/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_33-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-f34MG2j/0/9ZTMkqf3zr2BfzxkGhqhtsX9D7dkN29vhdTHL3Pm/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_35-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge/i-58gcrPB/0/FDJ5JTfrWwtZDTdtVRJp4j25dmQ8bz7JWXmXWcHpk/X3/20240408_102418%20%281%29_Page_40-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/UCU042024/i-dhHk73X/0/CkjGN9MjThggnSVJx7CvqxZKpCknBDJHSQ4Qs7TDv/X3/20240413_101549-X3.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/UCU042024/i-X3HgGCK/0/DZcQ3bcWn2jV63m8zgWPNgRWH6Pqs2fPTTGGMx3Cq/X3/20240413_101606-X3.jpg)
Looks pretty similar to the San Marco product they just put up down the street.
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 08:39:59 AM
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Starting price is mid $700,000. https://www.tollbrothers.com/luxury-homes-for-sale/Florida/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 08, 2024, 08:59:16 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 08:39:59 AM
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Starting price is mid $700,000. https://www.tollbrothers.com/luxury-homes-for-sale/Florida/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge
I just can't fathom it. Even with 20% down ($140k) that's over $4000/mo at today's rates. Plus I'm sure there's an HOA fee. Who buys these?!? That requires a household income of like $175k or more to be comfortable
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 08:39:59 AM
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Only way to stabilize the housing crisis is increasing supply. As with anything, they'll either get what they're asking or they'll lower it. Those were an empty lot before, and even those nuts prices aren't out of line for others in San Marco of that size.
You're right, I do appreciate that they're building homes, I just wish they weren't so darned unaffordable. We'll see how the housing market shakes out in the next few years
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 09:44:25 AM
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 08, 2024, 08:59:16 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 08:39:59 AM
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Starting price is mid $700,000. https://www.tollbrothers.com/luxury-homes-for-sale/Florida/Toll-Brothers-at-RiversEdge
I just can't fathom it. Even with 20% down ($140k) that's over $4000/mo at today's rates. Plus I'm sure there's an HOA fee. Who buys these?!? That requires a household income of like $175k or more to be comfortable
Retired People
Professionals
DINKS
Etc.
Quote from: Tacachale on May 08, 2024, 09:45:04 AM
Quote from: jax_hwy_engineer on May 08, 2024, 08:39:59 AM
only thing I don't like about those places is the San Marco townhomes are going for like $800k-900k. Ridiculous. I wonder what these townhomes will list for?
Only way to stabilize the housing crisis is increasing supply. As with anything, they'll either get what they're asking or they'll lower it. Those were an empty lot before, and even those nuts prices aren't out of line for others in San Marco of that size.
I am not sure a supply shortage is the only thing holding prices up. The cost of construction has risen dramatically over the last 5 years and I am not sure how low a cost a builder can get to for building less expensive housing. Add that land costs are also higher than ever, at least here. It is why we are continually seeing smaller lots, higher density and less architectural details. The days of a 1/4 acre lot or more for even a larger, more expensive home, are becoming rarer and rarer. Compare the density of new developments in almost any price range with those from decades ago.
Typically, about half of above-ground construction costs are for labor and, given the shortages we still have there, I don't see things changing anytime soon. What a lot of people also don't realize is that a big chunk of construction labor is by recent immigrants and we all know where that has been going.
I think the future of housing in the U.S. is moving toward what much of the rest of the world already experiences... much smaller square footage homes in much higher density housing. Nothing wrong with this and maybe overdue in the U.S. but it will be a significant lifestyle change for many Americans.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on May 08, 2024, 11:42:54 AM
I am not sure a supply shortage is the only thing holding prices up. The cost of construction has risen dramatically over the last 5 years and I am not sure how low a cost a builder can get to for building less expensive housing. Add that land costs are also higher than ever, at least here. It is why we are continually seeing smaller lots, higher density and less architectural details. The days of a 1/4 acre lot or more for even a larger, more expensive home, are becoming rarer and rarer. Compare the density of new developments in almost any price range with those from decades ago.
Typically, about half of above-ground construction costs are for labor and, given the shortages we still have there, I don't see things changing anytime soon. What a lot of people also don't realize is that a big chunk of construction labor is by recent immigrants and we all know where that has been going.
I think the future of housing in the U.S. is moving toward what much of the rest of the world already experiences... much smaller square footage homes in much higher density housing. Nothing wrong with this and maybe overdue in the U.S. but it will be a significant lifestyle change for many Americans.
Another reason why all that vacant publicly owned land in downtown and the urban core should not be held hostage. It can be used to make various projects more financially feasible without necessarily requiring the city give cash based incentives and grants.
That was quick, on to City Council already:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/may/15/dia-board-backs-5879-million-in-incentives-for-related-high-rise/
"The project would include an additional eight-floor apartment building, a 550-space parking garage, a river-facing restaurant and a ship store that would sell beverages, ice and other items to patrons of the adjacent boat ramp.
In addition, Related would also manage and execute improvements to the Riverwalk and deed a 4,200-square-foot parcel to the city to permit expansion of St. Johns River Park and Friendship Fountain. "
The restaurant and ship store make this way better than I had hoped for. Can't wait to see the site plans for this to see what the park extensions look like