Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/UF-Jacksonville/i-2mnRJt6/0/KtJRPZ9ZPPkJmfZfKBn3DDjQFfnQJRFXh9nDKQtVC/X2/IMG_1309-X2.jpg)
The City of Jacksonville has negotiated to provide 23 buildable acres to the University of Florida for the new graduate campus in downtown Jacksonville, pending an open and public disposition process. These parcels of land will begin moving through the Downtown Investment Authority process at the Retail Enhancement and Property Disposition Committee on February 13, followed by a full board vote on February 19. Upon DIA approval, the proposals will move to City Council. The first degree program is expected to begin in August 2025 with a main launch in 2026.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/coj-and-uf-take-first-major-step-towards-lavilla-campus/
City land swap with Gateway Jax would bring riverfront tower DowntownQuoteIn a Feb. 6 news release, the city said Gateway Jax planned to build a mixed-use development on the Riverfront Plaza development pad that would include 11 floors of residences, five floors of hotel rooms, two floors of podium parking and lobbies, a floor of public food and beverage space, and a public sky garden terrace.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/feb/06/city-land-swap-with-gateway-jax-would-bring-riverfront-tower-downtown/
Good with this....EXCEPT conveying the Train Station to UF. I realize it isn't a business, but I feel like this needs to stay in COJ hands.
Otherwise let's get it done.
Oh, and I think the ground level retail provision should be on Site A as well as Site B.
You're telling me the American Lion's Tower and the Ergisi Tower aren't happening?? [sarcasm]
Quote from: Joey Mackey on February 06, 2025, 05:36:39 PM
You're telling me the American Lion's Tower and the Ergisi Tower aren't happening?? [sarcasm]
LOL...hee hee (sarcasm).
Quote from: thelakelander on February 06, 2025, 04:38:24 PM
City land swap with Gateway Jax would bring riverfront tower Downtown
QuoteIn a Feb. 6 news release, the city said Gateway Jax planned to build a mixed-use development on the Riverfront Plaza development pad that would include 11 floors of residences, five floors of hotel rooms, two floors of podium parking and lobbies, a floor of public food and beverage space, and a public sky garden terrace.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/feb/06/city-land-swap-with-gateway-jax-would-bring-riverfront-tower-downtown/
Quote from: thelakelander on February 06, 2025, 04:38:24 PM
City land swap with Gateway Jax would bring riverfront tower Downtown
QuoteIn a Feb. 6 news release, the city said Gateway Jax planned to build a mixed-use development on the Riverfront Plaza development pad that would include 11 floors of residences, five floors of hotel rooms, two floors of podium parking and lobbies, a floor of public food and beverage space, and a public sky garden terrace.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/feb/06/city-land-swap-with-gateway-jax-would-bring-riverfront-tower-downtown/
If Gateway also takes the Ergisi parcel, any word on whether they will develop it?
More news on this topic: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/city-of-jacksonville-university-of-florida-take-step-toward-new-graduate-campus/ar-AA1yynu2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=96a552eb6e1a45e78bed394da3d9c187&ei=2
There's also a Gateway Jax design rendering/concept of their proposed tower on the old American Lion's site.
I do not want to jinx it, but I feel like we're starting to cook.
Riverfront Plaza pads A and B in exchange for Interline is the equivalent of Luka for AD, but I'm here for it, and I think the city should pull the trigger on the swap. Seeing how quickly Pearl Square is shooting from the ground gives me endless confidence in Gateway Jax right now.
Keep the momentum going.
FYI, the Times Union article noted that the Interline property needs to be appraised and that the Riverfront Plaza has to be put out for proposals from any others that might have interest in addition to Gateway. The City is obligated to get the best overall deal.
So, stay tuned.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 06, 2025, 09:31:26 PM
I do not want to jinx it, but I feel like we're starting to cook.
Riverfront Plaza pads A and B in exchange for Interline is the equivalent of Luka for AD, but I'm here for it, and I think the city should pull the trigger on the swap. Seeing how quickly Pearl Square is shooting from the ground gives me endless confidence in Gateway Jax right now.
Keep the momentum going.
I thought Luka was overweight tho?!?
Quote from: Jagsdrew on February 07, 2025, 08:46:51 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 06, 2025, 09:31:26 PM
I do not want to jinx it, but I feel like we're starting to cook.
Riverfront Plaza pads A and B in exchange for Interline is the equivalent of Luka for AD, but I'm here for it, and I think the city should pull the trigger on the swap. Seeing how quickly Pearl Square is shooting from the ground gives me endless confidence in Gateway Jax right now.
Keep the momentum going.
I thought Luka was overweight tho?!?
I will never, in my lifetime, understand this trade.
CRIMINAL to Mavs fans.
Everyone involved (Nico Harrison) should be run out of town.
A guy like Luka Doncic falls into a franchise's lap (if you're not the Lakers) once in a lifetime. It's even more rare that he loves the community and wants to retire as a Mav. And, it's even more rare that he's a unicorn in terms of marketability.
To piss that away for an older, injury-prone Anthony Davis and no serious draft capital is straight up malpractice. Because some idiot GM thinks Luka eats too much pie and drinks too much beer while putting up 30-9-9 a night.
It's a business, sure, but seeing how the Mavs treated Luka, and seeing how clearly devastated he is by the whole thing, makes me more a little more sympathetic to the Kevin Durants and Jimmy Butlers of the world trying to exercise some agency over their lives.
Who know else would make this trade? Nat Ford.
BUT I DIGRESS.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 06, 2025, 10:41:35 PM
FYI, the Times Union article noted that the Interline property needs to be appraised and that the Riverfront Plaza has to be put out for proposals from any others that might have interest in addition to Gateway. The City is obligated to get the best overall deal.
So, stay tuned.
In this specific case (a land swap with a property owner for a strategically important UF development parcel), I wonder what necessitates this RFP? Especially because it was just RFP'd maybe two years ago, American Lions was the only one who responded, and their proposal was wildly unrealistic and failed to materialize. Even if another developer came to the table with a proposal for Riverfront Plaza that was better on paper, it wouldn't solve the problem of opening up the Interline building for UF use.
Agree 100% about the Luka trade. The big NBA trade deadline winner is Bradley Beal!
If another developer came with something better, in a shorter amount of time than it took to come up with this proposal, then good for DT Jax. I doubt that happens, but if it did, I'd guess another comparable COJ owned parcel would possibly be considered for a swap.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 07, 2025, 10:03:30 AMIn this specific case (a land swap with a property owner for a strategically important UF development parcel), I wonder what necessitates this RFP? Especially because it was just RFP'd maybe two years ago, American Lions was the only one who responded, and their proposal was wildly unrealistic and failed to materialize. Even if another developer came to the table with a proposal for Riverfront Plaza that was better on paper, it wouldn't solve the problem of opening up the Interline building for UF use.
Sounds like a couple of DIA Board members want to hit the brakes on this land swap because they feel it's too rushed.
Totally fair to want to get a read on the incentives that Gateway Jax will be after for the Riverfront Plaza development, but the VERY last thing we need to do as a city is get in the way of UF's progress and get in the way of Gateway Jax if they've got a reasonable plan and an ability to turn dirty quickly at Riverfront Plaza. Last thing we need is another two year disposition cycle leading to a random developer overpromising and then flaking out.
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2025/02/13/uf-campus-gateway-land-swap-hurdles.html
Can't help but to think "here we go again." I am all for not rushing things, but when Jax pauses something it tends to be a permanent pause. Or maybe that's just my failed developments PTSD talking.
It's hard to imagine any competitive offers satisfying the criteria:
QuoteThe DIA will have to open both city-owned sites up for other bidders to make offers before any deal is finalized, but the qualifications necessary to make an eligible offer are restrictive: Any other bidder must be able to provide at least 36,000 square feet of existing office space with at least 1.25 acres of developable land in the "southern portion of the LaVilla District near the Convention Center" or provide enough cash to the city so it can buy the Interline building from Gateway.
https://jaxtrib.org/2025/02/13/multi-million-dollar-land-swap-would-make-once-obscure-developer-major-downtown-player/
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on February 14, 2025, 10:44:07 AM
It's hard to imagine any competitive offers satisfying the criteria:
QuoteThe DIA will have to open both city-owned sites up for other bidders to make offers before any deal is finalized, but the qualifications necessary to make an eligible offer are restrictive: Any other bidder must be able to provide at least 36,000 square feet of existing office space with at least 1.25 acres of developable land in the "southern portion of the LaVilla District near the Convention Center" or provide enough cash to the city so it can buy the Interline building from Gateway.
https://jaxtrib.org/2025/02/13/multi-million-dollar-land-swap-would-make-once-obscure-developer-major-downtown-player/
I could see a developer alleging the RFP is written to favor a single developer, though. This would delay the process for months. Does the DIA (or City) require bidders challenging the process to post any sort of bond, to protect the City/DIA from delay-induced costs?
In fairness to the City, Gateway closed on the subject property very close to UF going public with its announcement. Maybe they got lucky or maybe they had more than a suspicion on UF's choice-to-be. Either way, flipping it quickly may not have been far from their thinking even though they now say they don't need/want to sell.
The ultimate reason Gateway should work this out reasonably with the City, such as a straight sale vs. a land swap, is they make a quick profit of a few dollars (maybe less than they could otherwise get) and they are boosting Downtown big time which will ultimately increase the value of their other investments Downtown. If they upset the UF deal, they could be the biggest losers given they are the biggest investors currently in Downtown.
^Would argue that the last RFP proved that there's no realistic demand for the Riverfront Plaza private development pad at this moment in time, and Gateway Jax is a proven commodity with Pearl Square coming out of the ground on time, Water Street in Tampa under their belt, a history of working well with the DIA, and the capital stack to pull off the project. Unlike Related, Spandrell, Carter, Southeast, American Lions, and so many others, they've followed through, at a reasonable ask of the taxpayer. JWB and Gateway are making things happen throughout downtown, even on projects that aren't theirs, and without Gateway Jax, there's a very good chance that UF ends up at the Fairgrounds and something like Brightline never happens.
God forbid we reward one the most promising, sensical partners we've had in 30 years downtown with a slightly favorable land swap that kills two birds with one stone rather than forcing them to sell their property.
Benefits of executing the land swap:
- UF has the Interline building to jump start their campus almost immediately.
- Gateway Jax has the willingness and ability to stage construction of their private development alongside Phase 2 of the park.
Risks of delaying the land swap and going through another lengthy disposition:
- UF falls apart with nowhere to host early classes.
- Private development stalls at Riverfront Plaza, either delaying the completion of the park in perpetuity, or necessitating its closure in the future for private construction.
We gotta be able to strike while the iron is hot. Identify and vet the incentives, agree on a buyback price if the pads aren't developed within a fair timeline, and then hit the gas pedal.
How transformative would it be if we could flight this alongside everything else coming online by 2028?
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 14, 2025, 08:10:49 PM
In fairness to the City, Gateway closed on the subject property very close to UF going public with its announcement. Maybe they got lucky or maybe that had more than a suspicion on UF's choice-to-be. Either way, flipping it quickly may not have been far from their thinking even though they now say they don't need/want to sell.
The ultimate reason Gateway should work this out reasonably with the City, such as a straight sale vs. a land swap, is they make a quick profit of a few dollars (maybe less than they could otherwise get) and they are boosting Downtown big time which will ultimately increase the value of their other investments Downtown. If they upset the UF deal, they could be the biggest losers given they are the biggest investors currently in Downtown.
Another important piece of info from the meeting is that Gateway owns the block north of the proposed Daily's station. They purchased the 801 W Bay property with the intention to develop the parking lot fronting Jefferson Street to complement their planned development on that property. This is why their valuation of 801 W Bay is higher than what the DIA's valuation is and Gateway has no incentive to sell for less than favorable terms
QuoteMulti-million dollar land swap would make once-obscure developer major downtown player
Alex Sifakis sits atop a suburban Jacksonville empire: JWB, the company he co-founded in 2006, is a real-estate investment firm, a home buyer and seller, and a property manager, overseeing some 6,000 rental properties throughout the largest city by area in the contiguous United States. And in recent years, Sifakis, a gregarious and formerly obscure figure in city politics, has amassed influence, in the process expanding his considerable holdings to a new frontier: Downtown.
QuoteSalem, the City Council member, became a JWB investor in 2017, prior to his run for office. Over time, his JWB investment grew to more than $1 million, according to Salem's 2023 financial disclosure. But JWB itself was becoming more deeply involved in downtown development, requiring Salem to recuse himself from votes more often. "I wasn't comfortable recusing myself that frequently," he said, prompting him to ask Sifakis last year to "get me out as quickly as you can."
As of November, Salem said he'd divested himself of JWB and "never would have gotten involved" if he'd known Sifakis was going to begin pursuing major downtown projects and taxpayer incentives.
Full article: https://jaxtrib.org/2025/02/13/multi-million-dollar-land-swap-would-make-once-obscure-developer-major-downtown-player/
QuoteAs of November, Salem said he'd divested himself of JWB and "never would have gotten involved" if he'd known Sifakis was going to begin pursuing major downtown projects and taxpayer incentives.
^Maybe its just me but find Salem's quote very interesting. I'm not sure what the ultimate angle is for publicly making it.
This is real simple, and the answer is about self reflection and responsibility, IMO. If you're going to take a public paid position, don't get into the local real estate investment game. It doesn't matter if the investments are downtown or elsewhere within the municipality you're elected to serve. That's the sure fire way to avoid potential conflict of interests.
QuoteJordan Elsbury, who served as former Mayor Lenny Curry's chief of staff and is now a lobbyist, said UF's presence in downtown is paramount, but "a developer who frequently asks things of the city, is routinely and currently asking for things, shouldn't be a financial beneficiary of that."
Elsbury represented Atkins with the dead Trio deal that would have been super horrible for taxpayers. Can't take this quote serious either.
And this is coming from a lobbyist? :o
Quote from: thelakelander on February 15, 2025, 05:26:31 PMJordan Elsbury, who served as former Mayor Lenny Curry's chief of staff and is now a lobbyist, said UF's presence in downtown is paramount, but "a developer who frequently asks things of the city, is routinely and currently asking for things, shouldn't be a financial beneficiary of that."
Quote cracks me up when you think back to Curry, Hughes, and Elsbury trying to hand the keys to the general fund over to the Jags.
Also blows my mind that the sticking point for certain Council members seems to be a perceived $3 - $5 million gap in value between the Interline property ($4-$9 million in value, depending on who you ask) and the Landing pads ($6 to $10 million, depending on who you ask). Who gives a shit? Is that REALLY the hill you want to die on when UF is ready to move full steam ahead and Gateway Jax is offering to develop Riverfront Plaza concurrent to the park?
Even if there is a gap, working with Gateway is still going to be infinitely cheaper than dealing with some fly-by-night developer asking for the kitchen sink via some weird incentives request.
American Lions wants nearly $40 million, including a construction loan, for their pie-in-the-sky tower.
Related is asking for a $40 million cash grant upon completion of their $203 million Southbank project.
Southeast was asking for a $42 million cash grant on a $191 million Laura Street Trio project.
Conversely, Gateway Jax requested a mere $39 million in cash grants for their $419 million Pearl Street project. This (along with the Four Seasons) has got to be our best bang-for-the-bunk in over a decade in terms of incentives packages.
Once we have a clear understanding of the incentive ask and the clawback, let the dudes have it.
Risk of losing $3 million in a property swap to stand up UF and jumpstart private development at Riverfront Plaza is a DROP IN THE BUCKET compared to the risk of playing hardball with the most active developer in Downtown Jacksonville.
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones? No swap needed, Gateway gets quick income until something better comes along which might be after UF begins building out their campus. Then, Gateway unlocks all the value they could ever dream of. UF gets going right away as they asked. Everyone wins!
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
Yeah, UF wants the "whole hog sausage." They want Interline all for themselves right away, from the git go.
The Interline building is necessary for UF as they want to start classes ASAP and there aren't any other available buildings that are big enough or close enough. That's a legacy of the razing of LaVilla nearly 30 years ago, which we're only now starting to turn around (hopefully).
Given how much underdeveloped land the city owns, a land swap is a far better deal for taxpayers than paying millions to buy the Interline building. Especially as it can kick the private development at the Landing site into gear, which as we've seen from previous attempts (and 5 years of empty lawn) ain't exactly easy to pull off. But regardless, the Landing site will be put out for public bid. If a better proposal comes in than Gateway's, so much the better, we'll jump on that and look for other land to swap for the Interline building. It's all about finding the best deal for the citizens and getting it moving.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 15, 2025, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
Why not? Do they feel they need to own those parcels down the line? If not, what is wrong with leasing? Sometimes, decisions need to be made made on reasonable options available... we don't always get exactly what we want, especially if other options could work and the asking party doesn't have full leverage.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 15, 2025, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
A little surprising, given they seemed poised to lease space in the JEA building initially.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 16, 2025, 07:46:42 PM
Why not? Do they feel they need to own those parcels down the line? If not, what is wrong with leasing? Sometimes, decisions need to be made made on reasonable options available... we don't always get exactly what we want, especially if other options could work and the asking party doesn't have full leverage.
The last time someone told UF that they abandoned West Palm Beach.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 16, 2025, 07:46:42 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 15, 2025, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
Why not? Do they feel they need to own those parcels down the line? If not, what is wrong with leasing? Sometimes, decisions need to be made made on reasonable options available... we don't always get exactly what we want, especially if other options could work and the asking party doesn't have full leverage.
There's nothing wrong with renting, in fact UF is doing that now at the JEA building. They want to get started on the campus immediately, which in a town known for not striking fast enough while the iron's hot, is a great thing. This is the only available building in the campus area, so it's the solution.
Quote from: Tacachale on February 17, 2025, 12:43:47 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 16, 2025, 07:46:42 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 15, 2025, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
Why not? Do they feel they need to own those parcels down the line? If not, what is wrong with leasing? Sometimes, decisions need to be made made on reasonable options available... we don't always get exactly what we want, especially if other options could work and the asking party doesn't have full leverage.
There's nothing wrong with renting, in fact UF is doing that now at the JEA building. They want to get started on the campus immediately, which in a town known for not striking fast enough while the iron's hot, is a great thing. This is the only available building in the campus area, so it's the solution.
We get they want the Interline building to move fast. But, that still doesn't explain why leasing isn't an option that would meet that requirement. Do they see these buildings as a permanent part of the ultimate campus or can they live without them once the permanent buildings are built?
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 17, 2025, 11:30:27 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on February 17, 2025, 12:43:47 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 16, 2025, 07:46:42 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 15, 2025, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on February 15, 2025, 08:45:23 PM
What if Gateway just leased the Interline buildings until UF built their permanent ones?
UF rejected this idea.
Weren't interested in a lease.
Why not? Do they feel they need to own those parcels down the line? If not, what is wrong with leasing? Sometimes, decisions need to be made made on reasonable options available... we don't always get exactly what we want, especially if other options could work and the asking party doesn't have full leverage.
There's nothing wrong with renting, in fact UF is doing that now at the JEA building. They want to get started on the campus immediately, which in a town known for not striking fast enough while the iron's hot, is a great thing. This is the only available building in the campus area, so it's the solution.
We get they want the Interline building to move fast. But, that still doesn't explain why leasing isn't an option that would meet that requirement. Do they see these buildings as a permanent part of the ultimate campus or can they live without them once the permanent buildings are built?
This'll be a permanent part of the campus. It'll be a few years before other buildings can be constructed, and they have ambitious plans for the programs. The project will be done in phases, with benchmarks between them.
The price tag to purchase the Interline building will balloon if UF does in fact invest hundreds of millions in such a tight proximity. Hence, from UF's perspective, why lease something today that you know you are going to buy tomorrow for more?
I don't think anyone for a second believes the UF property is worth the same as the Riverfront parcels... But at this point, the city has invested hundreds of millions downtown & we need something to show for it. UF is the best chance for that (outside $$ coming in) so I really don't see the holdup over the land valuations. The city isn't hurting for DT land lol and the increased tax income should mean something in the equation.
If I was a council person, I would like to have current and independent appraisals of Interline and each Riverfront Parcel before making any kind of land swap. Take all of the entities involved and their prospective plans to improve Downtown out of the equation and imagine that COJ was making a land swap elsewhere Downtown without having a current appraisal of the properties involved.
That said, this is a unique situation and there seems to be a fairly simple solution to the deal that protects all parties. In UF's land swap with COJ, they have to complete construction on parcel A and start construction on Parcel B before commencing any work on the Prime Osborn. COJ could structure the Riverfront parcels/Interline land swap similarly, but instead tie it to the development of Gateway Jax. Gateway appears to be getting a favorable deal here to open the door for UF, but presumably also because of their other plans downtown. So give Gateway one of the parcels directly for the Interline Building and allow them to have the other parcel for free once they have hit certain benchmarks for Gateway (similar to the Prime Osborn deal). As a very small carrot/olive branch to Gateway for this deal, it would keep them from paying property taxes on one of the Riverfront parcels for a period of time.
As with the revised Laura Street Trio deal, there are probably 20 different ways to structure a deal that protects all the parties and ensures benchmarks are met.
Following up on my above post, it looks like the DIA does not have to follow the typical land disposition process used elsewhere in COJ:
https://library.municode.com/fl/jacksonville/codes/code_of_ordinances/422374?nodeId=TITVADPE_CH122PUPR_PT4REPR_SPCCOREREPRDI
QuoteBoyer argued the two pieces on and near Riverfront Plaza are closer in value to the vacant Interline building than it might first appear.
One site is about 1 acre and sits in the northeast corner of Riverfront Plaza – a spot a previous developer had envisioned would house a high-rise. The other site served as a parking lot for the former Landing just east of the plaza and is partially covered by the Main Street bridge off ramps. That location is larger but, Boyer argued, is "considerably less desirable due to the (Main Street) bridge ramps and utility encumbrances," which drives down the value.
Together, Boyer estimated both pieces of land are worth a combined $4.3 million to $5.6 million.
But that is considerably lower than previous estimates of those sites' value outlined in prior development agreements and other city records. In 2007, for example, Toney Sleiman, the former owner of the Landing, agreed to pay the city $4.7 million for the east parking lot site, a price based on a 2006 appraisal, according to legal filings. In its effort to force Sleiman out of the Landing so it could be demolished, the city paid him back a portion of that sale price in 2019.
Last year, a proposed term sheet from a previous developer – which the DIA never advanced – estimated the east parking lot to be worth about $6.3 million.
In 2022, the DIA estimated the 1-acre site at Riverfront Plaza was worth $3.4 million.
Together, that would put the high-end estimate of the sites' value near $10 million.
Boyer argued that the land swap would obligate Gateway to build certain elements into its development, like a hotel, that restricts the land's value.
Gateway purchased the Interline building for $4 million, but its owners – and Boyer – argue it's worth significantly more, somewhere between about $5.5 million to as much as $9 million. Arguing that the building has "development potential," Gateway has advanced the higher end of that range, although the DIA said in a report it takes some "exception" to "values included in that appraisal."
It's not clear if the DIA's estimates of the riverfront sites' value included their "development potential."
In sum, Boyer said she did not view the land swap as an incentive provided to Gateway because the trade would result in the city "receiving fair market value" for its two properties.
Boyer also said she anticipates that, if the land swap is approved, Gateway would ask for incentives to support its future development plans along the water.
It seems like Boyer is grasping at straws a bit here, but it does have to be extremely difficult to conduct appraisals on all the properties at play given the current and anticipated projects near them. Should the present value of the Interline building include the potential increase in value due to proximity of UF's new campus, if the UF campus doesn't happen without the land swap? Tough call. Either way, imo COJ has to find a way to make the land swap happen, while ensuring that Gateway delivers.
The DIA should be able to dispose of property under market value for uses that have greater benefits than whatever is being given as that discount. That reasoning is why the downtown incentives provide an ROI calculation for incentive requests & why (technically) the DIA would need city council's approval on any negative ROI calculated for DT incentives.
Holding up a $200M campus extension would be one of those things, in my opinion, that isn't worth leaving some money on the table for. The sales tax alone will eclipse any given benefit if things work out the way people say they will. The focus needs to be on implementing terms for the Gateway team to execute so that the city/taxpayer is protected for that immediate value given away.
The latest "straight skinny" on the "land swap" deal. Still some knots and snags to undo before smooth sailing and cruising. All in all? Looks like (maybe) a go.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/land-swap-deal-for-uf-campus-and-riverfront-park-development-moves-forward-full-purchase-proposed/ar-AA1zoy4v?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=79828e8ceeb14365d078d2c27f2790c9&ei=16
Ironic that Ron Salem wants to purchase the property outright given his public grievances about the upcoming budget deficits. Seems he's only intent on counteracting anything the mayor does
Someone get this man a seat on the U2C, because Ron Salem has gone full-clown in the last year or two.
If I'm Gateway, i stop this whole Salem thing dead in its tracks and say that I'm not selling my privately owned investment property to the City. $4 million? GTFO with that nonsense.
This land swap is an absolute layup for the city, where everyone comes out for the better and a strained general fund spends $0.
Truly moronic that Salem would try to torpedo it, just to grind his personal axe and build his own goofy clout.
We get it, you hate the mayor.
But you're only making yourself look like a petulant child with the constant undercutting and witch hunts.
Well put and amen Ken, amen.
So disappointed with Salem.
This feels like he's exploring a Mayoral Bid in 2027.
Ken, Heights, Steve....you literally all said the things that were bouncing around in my head. And people wonder why Jacksonville has a perpetual image complex? Things like this....that is why. Good lord.
Me too and he is from all I am hearing
From JBJ (https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2025/02/19/dia-approves-gateway-uf-land-swap.html).
Another conceptual sketch of what Perkins&Will/Gateway envision for the private development pad:
(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/12925477/20250219-riverfront-plaza-dia-board-email-1.jpg)
And details of incentives conversations:
QuoteMoll provided the board with a maximum incentive number: $20 million.
The resolution also included that if Gateway Jax were unable to execute a redevelopment agreement with the city within 15 months of closing, the city has repurchase rights and can get the riverfront property back and pay $6.75 million for the former Interline Brands building, a reduced price from Gateway Jax's perspective.
Seems perfectly reasonable when you consider that Related is asking for $40 million across the river (which Council approved 17-0, for the record), Southeast wanted $87 million for the Trio, and American Lions wanted nearly $30 million in incentives for their proposed tower.
What's also important to keep in mind is that the city was going to
GIVE the private development pads to American Lions for $100.
Meanwhile, Gateway Jax is
trading a $5 to $8 million piece of property key to UF's graduate program for it.
If you assume that the city was going to end up giving away the pad to whoever was chosen to develop it, we're really talk about max incentives closer to $12-15 million, versus $20 million, when you factor in what the city is getting back from Gateway.
But yeah, Ronnie. Let's try to hit the skids on the whole idea, despite a fair clawback and capped incentive, based on "private conversations you've had with business owners," just so the evil Hologram lady doesn't get a pat on the back.
That's great for Jacksonville. Good job.
Quote from: Steve on February 20, 2025, 08:22:05 AM
This feels like he's exploring a Mayoral Bid in 2027.
"You know that guy who spends 80% of his time challenging Donna Deegan's Chili's receipts? Same guy who feels like his 'powers were infringed upon' because the mayor removed a Confederate statue from a public park? You know, the one who has steam coming out of his ears because the mayor has a hologram in the airport? The guy who wants to hit the pause button on the University of Florida and finishing Riverfront Plaza properly because it's not costing taxpayers enough from the general fund? You know, the guy who gutted homeless support and affordable housing from the 2025 budget?"
THAT's who I want as my mayor.
(Said no one ever).
Good luck with the current approach though.
Immaturely undermining a mayor with a 63% approval rating at the expense of the taxpayers.
Should work out well.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 20, 2025, 03:49:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on February 20, 2025, 08:22:05 AM
This feels like he's exploring a Mayoral Bid in 2027.
"You know that guy who spends 80% of his time challenging Donna Deegan's Chili's receipts? Same guy who feels like his 'powers were infringed upon' because the mayor removed a Confederate statue from a public park? You know, the one who has steam coming out of his ears because the mayor has a hologram in the airport? The guy who wants to hit the pause button on the University of Florida and finishing Riverfront Plaza properly because it's not costing taxpayers enough from the general fund? You know, the guy who gutted homeless support and affordable housing from the 2025 budget?"
THAT's who I want as my mayor.
(Said no one ever).
Good luck with the current approach though.
Immaturely undermining a mayor with a 63% approval rating at the expense of the taxpayers.
Should work out well.
But he has that all-important "R" after his name. And if he aligns with whatever way the wind is blowing from DC at the time ...
Jacksonville has proved a few times to buck the trend of national politics.
I mean in the spring of 2023 it was pretty clear the country was moving right, and we still elected Deegan.
Put it this way-I'm a (moderate) Republican and I voted for Deegan.
Think about it this way: 40% of any electorate will vote for the R no matter what. Another 40% will vote for the D no matter what. It's the middle 20% that decide the election.
Her 4 year track record will determine her fate.
(And now we probably should get back on topic as I have zero desire to wade into the septic tank that is National politics.)
Quote from: Charles Hunter on February 20, 2025, 06:16:05 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on February 20, 2025, 03:49:26 PM
Quote from: Steve on February 20, 2025, 08:22:05 AM
This feels like he's exploring a Mayoral Bid in 2027.
"You know that guy who spends 80% of his time challenging Donna Deegan's Chili's receipts? Same guy who feels like his 'powers were infringed upon' because the mayor removed a Confederate statue from a public park? You know, the one who has steam coming out of his ears because the mayor has a hologram in the airport? The guy who wants to hit the pause button on the University of Florida and finishing Riverfront Plaza properly because it's not costing taxpayers enough from the general fund? You know, the guy who gutted homeless support and affordable housing from the 2025 budget?"
THAT's who I want as my mayor.
(Said no one ever).
Good luck with the current approach though.
Immaturely undermining a mayor with a 63% approval rating at the expense of the taxpayers.
Should work out well.
But he has that all-important "R" after his name. And if he aligns with whatever way the wind is blowing from DC at the time ...
I think I mentioned this a couple of weeks back, but we saw how well the dirty approach worked for Daniel Davis, who was a near lock for Lenny's successor before building a platform solely on attacking his opponent.
Way too early prediction: Donna wins by a landslide for term two.
IMO she's doing a super, superlative, awesome, stellar, ostentatious job (need I say more LOL?)
Donna is doing an excellent job concerning energizing downtown and urban Jax in general. I was very skeptical of her at first, but now I'm pleasantly surprised. I'm willing to overlook a couple of political controversies that she had; I'm not gonna throw the baby out with the bath water. One thing that I give credit with many people on the left (including here on this website), they know about urban planning matters.
The latest on this.
Quote
City Council member Ron Salem challenges Mayor Deegan on how to get building for UF campus
David Bauerlein
Jacksonville Florida Times-Union
Feb. 28, 2025
Mayor Donna Deegan and City Council member Ron Salem are headed toward a showdown on how the city will acquire an office building that will kick-start the University of Florida graduate campus in downtown.
Deegan and Salem both support the UF campus but have staked out sharply different ways for how the city would acquire the building, currently owned by the Gateway Jax development team, so UF can begin class at it in August.
Deegan supports a land swap where the city would get the office building at 801 W. Bay St. and Gateway Jax would get a 1-acre parcel for development at Riverfront Plaza. Salem wants City Council to instead reach an agreement with Gateway Jax on a purchase price the city would pay in cash.
...
DIA says land swap follows what council members are saying
Downtown Investment Authority CEO Lori Boyer said that as she heard those concerns from council members, it guided her when she worked with Gateway Jax on a way for the city to acquire the office building without paying cash.
"We have a lot of (city-owned) land and we were trying to make use of it and effectively redevelop downtown," she told the board.
[DIA board member Micah] Heavener noted a Special Committee on the Future of Downtown, which Salem formed last year when he was council president, criticized the pace of revitalization in the urban core of downtown.
Heavener said the ongoing construction of a public park at Riverfront Plaza, the development of the one-acre parcel in one corner of the plaza, and the redevelopment of the Laura Street Trio a couple of blocks away all could serve as catalysts for the urban core.
Board member Jill Caffey said she agrees the "momentum is now" and said Gateway's plan fits with the design for Riverfront Plaza. Gateway Jax has committed to building a tower that resembles what the public saw when the city selected a design by Perkins&Will in 2021 for Riverfront Plaza.
"I think it's potentially a missed opportunity if we kick the can down the road," she said.
Read more: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2025/02/28/mayor-deegan-and-council-member-salem-split-on-getting-building-for-uf/80286918007/
Credit where it's fully due after lots of criticism over the last few years - Lori Boyer is dead right about this one, and the land swap was a masterful proposal to kill multiple birds with one stone and propel several key projects forward at zero dollars in taxpayer expense. Never too proud to admit that the DIA is cooking since Donna took over, and when a half dozen stalled projects from parks to two-waying of streets to facade grants suddenly kick to life with a new administration, that probably does speak to some kneecapping that was going on behind the scenes and outside of public view with the last administration.
Can only speak for myself, but really happy with the work the DIA is doing lately. Negotiated a hell of a deal with Gateway Jax, pushing for smart restaurant activations at Riverfront Plaza and Friendships Park, swiftly facilitating some very complex dispositions with UF, and helping push a lot of smart infrastructure projects forward. Still a lot of work to be done in terms of office occupancy rates, small business attrition, and figuring out a smarter, more strategic plan for JWJP and the blocks immediately surrounding it, but I really am a fan of this post-Curry DIA. Doing a lot without a lot of resources. I think a lot of people are taking notice.
Just reeks of desperation.
Guy is just so badly misreading the room lately.
QuoteJacksonville City Council Member Ron Salem will hold a meeting on Tuesday at City Hall to discuss a possible effort he's referring to as "Duval DOGE."
The meeting will come as DOGE's efforts at the federal and state levels to eliminate "unnecessary" spending to ensure government efficiency are already underway.https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2025/03/06/is-doge-coming-to-jacksonville-council-member-will-hold-meeting-to-discuss-local-efforts/
Quote from: Ken_FSU on March 07, 2025, 12:17:06 AM
Just reeks of desperation.
Guy is just so badly misreading the room lately.
QuoteJacksonville City Council Member Ron Salem will hold a meeting on Tuesday at City Hall to discuss a possible effort he's referring to as "Duval DOGE."
The meeting will come as DOGE's efforts at the federal and state levels to eliminate "unnecessary" spending to ensure government efficiency are already underway.https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2025/03/06/is-doge-coming-to-jacksonville-council-member-will-hold-meeting-to-discuss-local-efforts/
Quote"We are looking at some very difficult budgets going forward," Salem said. "We're looking at deficits anywhere from $70-$100 million dollars over the next two, three years. And I think it's time that we put forth an effort to try to tighten our belts and try to save some money."
Instead of cutting City services that are many times underfunded already, how about a small increase in the lower end property tax millage rate, redirecting the gas tax from U2C to road paving, undoing the Curry pension fund sales tax fiasco, supporting the garbage fee increase after 10 to 15 years of no change, etc. Do you think you can cut enough expenses to pay for a new jail, new JSO HQ's, the stadium, a new convention center, septic tank conversions, paying off the garbage fee deficit, fully funding pensions, properly funding City parks, increasing JSO funding, etc.? Revenue enhancement is just as critical as expense management to balance a budget.
QuoteSalem also said his recommendation for the effort is to leave out what many consider to be core government, including police, fire, and garbage collection.
Well, he just took about 50% or more of City expenses off the table (If Federal DOGE doesn't touch Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and other contractually "locked in" expenses, 70% of the Federal budget will be off the table too). Don't want to lose the fire and police union support at election time, huh? How about cutting back incentives to developers including monies for Khan's projects? No? I didn't think so. Is that also off the table? Don't want to lose those supporters either? Is his City Council salary eligible for such a review?
So, what does he want to look at? Our underfunded parks and recreation? Our underfunded public works? Septic tank conversions to sewers? Capital and maintenance expenditures? Are we going after the 1% and less expenditures like Musk, making a big deal of cutting them out, and in the end, not impacting the total budget one nit? Let's start with the District Council members individual slush funds and their donations to "nonprofits" that their colleagues and friends work for. Ready for that review?
Don't we have a City auditor? Isn't this their job? Where was this suggestion when fellow Republican Curry was mayor?
I am all for efficiencies but let's not politicize it and selectively enforce it. Don't indiscriminately cut meat and bone, not just fat, like Musk is doing and, in the end, reducing efficiencies, not enhancing them. And why would you exempt 50%+ of the budget from review? You don't think you could find some "inefficiencies" at JSO and JFRD? They are that much better than other City departments?
Quote"Well, depending on the extent of the deficits we have, there might be some belt-tightening that could include people," Salem responded. "When you've got deficits like that, it's hard not to make that kind of balance the budget, as we have to do in Jacksonville. We have a balanced budget, sometimes without involving people. They may be vacant positions that aren't filled or various ways that you can cut positions without necessarily cutting people."
Reducing positions is cutting people (i.e. people available to deliver City services, not necessarily just people let go), no matter how you slice it. I bet most of the City budget is for salaries so you can be sure he is after cutting people in the end. See Federal DOGE.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on March 07, 2025, 01:03:35 AM
Quote"We are looking at some very difficult budgets going forward," Salem said. "We're looking at deficits anywhere from $70-$100 million dollars over the next two, three years. And I think it's time that we put forth an effort to try to tighten our belts and try to save some money."
Instead of cutting City services that are many times underfunded already, how about a small increase in the lower end property tax millage rate, redirecting the gas tax from U2C to road paving, undoing the Curry pension fund sales tax fiasco, supporting the garbage fee increase after 10 to 15 years of no change, etc. Do you think you can cut enough expenses to pay for a new jail, new JSO HQ's, the stadium, a new convention center, septic tank conversions, paying off the garbage fee deficit, fully funding pensions, properly funding City parks, increasing JSO funding, etc.? Revenue enhancement is just as critical as expense management to balance a budget.
If we're being serious about "government efficiency," it makes little sense to put a quarter billion dollars towards repaving roads that will need to be repaved again, while at the same time approving thousands of lane miles of new suburban roads that will also need to be repaved again. Use that U2C money on transportation alternatives that will move more people and help them keep a little more money in their pockets given the impact of tariffs on gas prices. To a similar point, we are hopefully not approving any new developments with septic tanks when we know them to be an expensive liability for conversion down the line.
It's not clear to me what exactly makes the pension fund tax an issue once BJP runs out, since we'll have to pay down that pension debt one way or another and future police & fire are at least going into FRS instead of the city plan. I thought the garbage fee and stadium were a done deal? We've at least committed to the latter.
JSO seems to at least have taken over the Florida Blue tower in Brooklyn instead of seeking a new facility outright, which is a relief. I remember reading a year or two ago that Clay County is also considering a new jail, perhaps teaming up with them would save some money. This forum has hammered on enough about the silly idea of building a whole new convention complex instead of adding to the Hyatt (especially silly with how many times Ford on Bay has fallen through already). After that, we're essentially asking about where we want to prioritize. We recently made some big commitments to police & fire with the new pension plans and some salary increases, I would hope between that and the JSO move their needs are largely met for at least a few years while some of the other challenges are addressed.
But of course, none of that is as fun as waving a chainsaw around.
To get back on topic, the land swap seems like a reasonably efficient idea provided that Gateway isn't being spread too thin. They'd still need to get that tower financed which may also involve incentives, on top of the city funding to build Phase 2 of the park. Granted, that doesn't change the need to get UF their building or that odds are anyone who builds on that plaza site is going to ask for those things anyway.
Quote
The city is considering a second land swap for property for the proposed University of Florida graduate center campus in LaVilla, this time for a parcel owned by multifamily developer Vestcor.
City chief communications officer Phil Perry said the city was exploring a land swap among other options for acquiring a 2.04-acre lot along West Bay Street near Interstate 95.
Perry provided a city-ordered appraisal of the property listing its value at $2.58 million. The appraisal was conducted by the Colliers commercial real estate company.
The lot is directly north of the parking lot of the Prime F. Osborn III Convention Center.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/mar/20/city-considering-land-swap-for-vestcor-owned-property-for-uf-campus
The City is going to screw this up yet. UF wants the Interline building so they can start classes quickly - targeting this Fall Term. The Vestcor parcel is a vacant lot. I wonder who initiated this request. Someone on City Council? With an "R" after their name?
Probably the Sax parcel. That's what they wanted years ago. But that's a horrible location for Vestcor's type of product.
QuoteAppraised value of property city wants to give UF for graduate campus tops $30 million
Land that the city of Jacksonville plans to provide for the University of Florida graduate campus in LaVilla has a total appraised value of more than $30 million, according a Downtown Investment Authority presentation about the campus project April 24 at City Hall.
The city plans to initially deliver five properties for the campus, including the Interline Brands Inc. building at 801 W. Bay St., which it wants to acquire via a land swap. The four properties are city-owned: two sites directly north and northeast of the historic Jacksonville Terminal train station, the station itself and the attached newer portion of the Prime F. Osborn III Convention Center.
Later, the city hopes to acquire a sixth property, a site owned by multifamily developer Vestcor immediately north of the Convention Center parking lot.
DIA CEO Lori Boyer presented a slide breaking down the appraised values as follows:
• Interline Brands: $5.35 million to $6.75 million.
• Site A, the designation that the DIA has given to the parcel immediately north of the train station: $3.25 million.
• Site B, which is located across Lee Street from Site A: $1.84 million.
• Jacksonville Terminal: $1.68 million.
• Convention Center: $15.52 million.
• Vestcor lot: $2.58 million.
As with the Vestcor property, the city would need to acquire the Interline Brands Inc. building, which is owned by the Gateway Jax development partnership.
With the Vestcor lot included, the total appraised value of the city's contributions to the campus would range from $30.22 million to $31.62 million.
The five initial properties total 23.24 acres. With the Vescor lot, the total rises to 25.28 acres.
In addition, City Council has approved $50 million in funding for the project and Mayor Donna Deegan has pledged another $50 million.
Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/apr/24/appraised-value-of-property-city-wants-to-give-uf-for-graduate-campus-tops-30-million/
Who did these appraisals? The values here make no sense.
Site A: ~1.25 acres & worth $3.25M
Site B: ~2.3 acres & worth $1.84M
Vestcor Lot: ~2.15 acres & worth $2.58M
Site A also has a lovely air restriction on it but is still valued at almost double per acre as two sites literally within a block of it with the same zoning, soils etc. Wild & explains some of the appraisals I've gotten here in Jax lmfao.
Those appraisals are crazy. Lol at the Jax Terminal building parcel being only worth $1.68 million but that dusty Vestcor lot being $2.58 million.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 25, 2025, 01:13:43 PM
Those appraisals are crazy. Lol at the Jax Terminal building parcel being only worth $1.68 million but that dusty Vestcor lot being $2.58 million.
Glad I'm not the only one.. Where is that Jax Terminal Building parcel? Assuming its under the Convention Center Parcel ID?
(https://i.postimg.cc/C5XHxRB1/Screenshot-2025-04-25-at-2-52-54-PM.png)
Quote from: Jax_Developer on April 25, 2025, 07:52:17 AM
Who did these appraisals? The values here make no sense.
Site A: ~1.25 acres & worth $3.25M
Site B: ~2.3 acres & worth $1.84M
Vestcor Lot: ~2.15 acres & worth $2.58M
Site A also has a lovely air restriction on it but is still valued at almost double per acre as two sites literally within a block of it with the same zoning, soils etc. Wild & explains some of the appraisals I've gotten here in Jax lmfao.
If anything like home appraisals, then it's highly subjective. Beauty/opportunity is in the eye of the beholder.
So disappointing that the campus will be separated from downtown by a gas station.
Maybe someone (Appraiser or Appraisal Company) was paid to come up with those numbers? Unbelievable. When I first seen them I too thought, "those numbers are too high." I used to do appraisals in Dade county (1990's). I thought that the UF campus will be in downtown (though at the extreme western end); please explain why the gas station will separate the campus? Thanks.
The Gate gas station they are building between broad and Jefferson
Quote from: fsu813 on April 25, 2025, 04:44:57 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on April 25, 2025, 07:52:17 AM
Who did these appraisals? The values here make no sense.
Site A: ~1.25 acres & worth $3.25M
Site B: ~2.3 acres & worth $1.84M
Vestcor Lot: ~2.15 acres & worth $2.58M
Site A also has a lovely air restriction on it but is still valued at almost double per acre as two sites literally within a block of it with the same zoning, soils etc. Wild & explains some of the appraisals I've gotten here in Jax lmfao.
If anything like home appraisals, then it's highly subjective. Beauty/opportunity is in the eye of the beholder.
Land is appraised based on what can be reasonably built. Things like zoning, environmental, or other limiting factors are how you would differentiate between the appraisal value between two vacant land parcels.
These parcels are basically identical in every capacity with the exception of "some" interpretation as to one being a superior location than another but in the end this is all supposed to be on the same campus. But, parcel A also had some of the air rights restricted by the Skyway. Meaning that out of those 3 parcels, the highest appraised parcel per square foot has the least economical air rights of all three parcels. These air rights matter for any building 2+ stories so pretty relevant.
Just really doesn't pencil in any logical way unless there's like intense remediation needed on Site B & the Vestcor lot but not the Site A lot? That doesn't really add up either.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on April 25, 2025, 08:40:37 PM
The Gate gas station they are building between broad and Jefferson
Its a good example of what happens when there's not an actual plan or vision being followed. The initial spot zoning that led to the gas station should have never been allowed to happen.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on April 25, 2025, 08:40:37 PM
The Gate gas station they are building between broad and Jefferson
You call it a Gate gas station.
I call it a locally owned bodega and craft brewery, where community gathers and memories are made, conveniently complimented by a shaded fuel station.
And a dumpster on the corner.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on April 25, 2025, 08:40:37 PM
The Gate gas station they are building between broad and Jefferson
I recall it being a Daily's. Which is it?
It will be a Daily's.
Anyone know what happened at City Council today with the Riverfront Plaza/Interline vote?
I think the meeting was at 1, but haven't heard any info yet.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on May 21, 2025, 06:57:21 PM
Anyone know what happened at City Council today with the Riverfront Plaza/Interline vote?
I think the meeting was at 1, but haven't heard any info yet.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/may/21/owner-reduces-asking-price-for-building-that-city-would-provide-for-uf-campus/
Turned into a workshop as there wasn't quorum, with several council members not making it. Will do a second Committee of the Whole first week of June.
I just watched the Committe on the Whole meeting (https://www.jacksonville.gov/city-council/city-council-meetings-online). I can't really understand the pushback for this project from some City Council Members. For those who seemed to be in opposition: Salem just wants to buy the building and leave Parcel B as an empty lot - with the hope that a future RFP will change that; Arias just fundamentally rather see twenty small projects get funded instead of one mega-project, he also had some hangup with Avant Construction that I couldn't' really follow; Miller doesn't like how he received so much lobbying in favor of it, which made him suspicious. And overall, a general sense that they do not like the "process."
Option A is to have an empty lot. Option B is to have an integrated river front high rise. Seems simple.
I really hope this doesn't turn into another Laura Street Trio travesty, where Parcel B stays an empty lot next to an $80 million park for the next twenty years.
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 04:01:17 PM
I really hope this doesn't turn into another Laura Street Trio travesty, where Parcel B stays an empty lot next to an $80 million park for the next twenty years.
There are those of us would like to see Parcel B included in the park. That option should still be on the table. Plenty of other places around Downtown to build high rises.
Don't need to "squeeze" one in on public land here. I have heard all the reasons for doing so but, I don't think building on this corner will stand the test of time as a good decision. Short sighted to only think about the immediate future, which is so typical of Downtown "planning." Where has that gotten us?
I actually agree with Bryan Moll on the necessity of developing Parcel B. Currently, there are no amenities integrated with Riverfront Plaza Park. There are no restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. (I understand a small cafe is being built currently). It is currently designed to be an island by itself. The argument he made at the meeting, based on his experience in Tampa, is a great urban park needs both. The park itself needs to be great (check) and there needs to be integrated amenities that guarantee a base line of visitors on a daily basis, like integrated restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. Also, the Independent One Building and the Vystar Building do not provide that type of ground floor integration. With the Gateway proposal, the argument is people will always be at Riverfront Plaza Park either because they live there, they are staying there, or they are eating/shopping there. Otherwise, Riverfront Plaza Park, by itself, will not attract the necessary number of daily visitors to obtain the critical mass of "vibrancy."
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 05:33:58 PM
I actually agree with Bryan Moll on the necessity of developing Parcel B. Currently, there are no amenities integrated with Riverfront Plaza Park. There are no restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. (I understand a small cafe is being built currently). It is currently designed to be an island by itself. The argument he made at the meeting, based on his experience in Tampa, is a great urban park needs both. The park itself needs to be great (check) and there needs to be integrated amenities that guarantee a base line of visitors on a daily basis, like integrated restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. Also, the Independent One Building and the Vystar Building do not provide that type of ground floor integration. With the Gateway proposal, the argument is people will always be at Riverfront Plaza Park either because they live there, they are staying there, or they are eating/shopping there. Otherwise, Riverfront Plaza Park, by itself, will not attract the necessary number of daily visitors to obtain the critical mass of "vibrancy."
The choice on parcel B is not to develop a high rise or keep as green space. That's a false choice pushed by advocates of X side.
A low rise development on parcel B would provide activation, cost far less, be much quicker, and is line with Tampa's popular outdoor riverfront spaces. But I think that ship has sailed.
Also, there is a restaurant planned for each quarter of the "park". Cafe in NW quarter, restaurant in SW quarter, beer garden in SE quarter, and the high rise in the NE quarter. Certainly no island. In fact, I'm not sure how much greenspace there will actually be if all these developments come to fruition - more like a restaurant area with common space than a green space park. And that can be OK. There are great urban parks which are highly structured/hardscapped, but I think the average Joe, as the quoted comments indicate, doesn't understand that it'll be more "plaza" than "park" if the current plans play out.
Personally, I'm hopeful the restaurant development pad in the SW quarter is permanently cut. Spending money on a new construction building in a highly vulnerable, controversial location, when there a bazillion existing buildings that could use financial incentives to be productive/activated, is a head scratcher. Not to mention, the market study wasn't great.
Devils in the details. As is greatness.
^given the DIA's request to repurchase the $1M restaurant contingency fund for Snyder church, the restaurant looks like it may be dead. However, I dont see why a development on the tower site -- regardless of height-- couldn't or shouldn't include a restaurant and beer garden. IMO, that needs to happen. I dont care if that building is 2 stories or 20, but I suspect the economics of any development may well require a certain density.
(Apologies in advance to heights_unknown ;))
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 04:01:17 PM
Arias just fundamentally rather see twenty small projects get funded instead of one mega-project, he also had some hangup with Avant Construction that I couldn't' really follow;
That's interesting considering the council pushback at the committee hearing for the Juliette Balcony incentives. Doesn't really seem like the council has an appetite to do anything productive to move Downtown forward at the moment.
2027 council elections will be very important for those who want a successful Downtown. We need a city council that is not trying to hamstring the mayor at every turn
I don't remember a council that was pro downtown. A few members here and there. Wasn't long ago, council was full of tea baggers. Now DOGE.
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on May 24, 2025, 11:04:45 PM
^given the DIA's request to repurchase the $1M restaurant contingency fund for Snyder church, the restaurant looks like it may be dead. However, I dont see why a development on the tower site -- regardless of height-- couldn't or shouldn't include a restaurant and beer garden. IMO, that needs to happen. I dont care if that building is 2 stories or 20, but I suspect the economics of any development may well require a certain density.
(Apologies in advance to heights_unknown ;))
The restaurant is still planned, but delayed given the current deals. Hopefully, we can get the swap done on schedule and the whole Landing can be completed together. If not, of course there will be delays on the various amenities.
Quote from: fsu813 on May 24, 2025, 08:51:48 PM
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 05:33:58 PM
I actually agree with Bryan Moll on the necessity of developing Parcel B. Currently, there are no amenities integrated with Riverfront Plaza Park. There are no restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. (I understand a small cafe is being built currently). It is currently designed to be an island by itself. The argument he made at the meeting, based on his experience in Tampa, is a great urban park needs both. The park itself needs to be great (check) and there needs to be integrated amenities that guarantee a base line of visitors on a daily basis, like integrated restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. Also, the Independent One Building and the Vystar Building do not provide that type of ground floor integration. With the Gateway proposal, the argument is people will always be at Riverfront Plaza Park either because they live there, they are staying there, or they are eating/shopping there. Otherwise, Riverfront Plaza Park, by itself, will not attract the necessary number of daily visitors to obtain the critical mass of "vibrancy."
The choice on parcel B is not to develop a high rise or keep as green space. That's a false choice pushed by advocates of X side.
A low rise development on parcel B would provide activation, cost far less, be much quicker, and is line with Tampa's popular outdoor riverfront spaces. But I think that ship has sailed.
Also, there is a restaurant planned for each quarter of the "park". Cafe in NW quarter, restaurant in SW quarter, beer garden in SE quarter, and the high rise in the NE quarter. Certainly no island. In fact, I'm not sure how much greenspace there will actually be if all these developments come to fruition - more like a restaurant area with common space than a green space park. And that can be OK. There are great urban parks which are highly structured/hardscapped, but I think the average Joe, as the quoted comments indicate, doesn't understand that it'll be more "plaza" than "park" if the current plans play out.
Personally, I'm hopeful the restaurant development pad in the SW quarter is permanently cut. Spending money on a new construction building in a highly vulnerable, controversial location, when there a bazillion existing buildings that could use financial incentives to be productive/activated, is a head scratcher. Not to mention, the market study wasn't great.
Devils in the details. As is greatness.
The currently proposed building is much smaller than the American Lions proposal. It's 17 stories with hotel and condos plus restaurant and terrace space on the bottom floor. In addition to adding needed density, the deal would be contributing annual money to programming and upkeep which is where other spaces in Jax have struggled. It's always been part of the overall design, this is just a version that can actually work.
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 04:01:17 PM
I just watched the Committe on the Whole meeting (https://www.jacksonville.gov/city-council/city-council-meetings-online). I can't really understand the pushback for this project from some City Council Members. For those who seemed to be in opposition: Salem just wants to buy the building and leave Parcel B as an empty lot - with the hope that a future RFP will change that; Arias just fundamentally rather see twenty small projects get funded instead of one mega-project, he also had some hangup with Avant Construction that I couldn't' really follow; Miller doesn't like how he received so much lobbying in favor of it, which made him suspicious. And overall, a general sense that they do not like the "process."
Option A is to have an empty lot. Option B is to have an integrated river front high rise. Seems simple.
I really hope this doesn't turn into another Laura Street Trio travesty, where Parcel B stays an empty lot next to an $80 million park for the next twenty years.
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 05:33:58 PM
I actually agree with Bryan Moll on the necessity of developing Parcel B. Currently, there are no amenities integrated with Riverfront Plaza Park. There are no restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. (I understand a small cafe is being built currently). It is currently designed to be an island by itself. The argument he made at the meeting, based on his experience in Tampa, is a great urban park needs both. The park itself needs to be great (check) and there needs to be integrated amenities that guarantee a base line of visitors on a daily basis, like integrated restaurants/residences/hotels/retail. Also, the Independent One Building and the Vystar Building do not provide that type of ground floor integration. With the Gateway proposal, the argument is people will always be at Riverfront Plaza Park either because they live there, they are staying there, or they are eating/shopping there. Otherwise, Riverfront Plaza Park, by itself, will not attract the necessary number of daily visitors to obtain the critical mass of "vibrancy."
Excellent observations.
Quote from: Zac T on May 25, 2025, 01:21:56 PM
Quote from: Joey Mackey on May 22, 2025, 04:01:17 PM
Arias just fundamentally rather see twenty small projects get funded instead of one mega-project, he also had some hangup with Avant Construction that I couldn't' really follow;
That's interesting considering the council pushback at the committee hearing for the Juliette Balcony incentives. Doesn't really seem like the council has an appetite to do anything productive to move Downtown forward at the moment.
2027 council elections will be very important for those who want a successful Downtown. We need a city council that is not trying to hamstring the mayor at every turn
+1,000,000
Live City Council meeting.
https://jaxcityc.granicus.com/player/event/3209?view_id=1&redirect=true
OK...so, WHAT was the outcome of this meeting? And the purpose? And...what will happen on the June 12th meeting? Thanks.
Quorum was broken (by several CMs not showing up, and then one running out once it appeared there'd be quorum after all). So they weren't able to take a vote but they did hold discussion. Disappointing but not surprising. As a result, they'll either have to move the bills at one of the next two scheduled Council meetings (June 10 or June 24j or schedule another committee of the whole and hope enough members show. Sorry, but I can't say much more than that.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 03, 2025, 12:30:55 AM
Quorum was broken (by several CMs not showing up, and then one running out once it appeared there'd be quorum after all). So they weren't able to take a vote but they did hold discussion. Disappointing but not surprising. As a result, they'll either have to move the bills at one of the next two scheduled Council meetings (June 10 or June 24j or schedule another committee of the whole and hope enough members show. Sorry, but I can't say much more than that.
Very, very frustrating meeting to watch.
For many reasons.
If NOTHING else gets through to City Council, I hope they listened to bit clarifying that they're not being asked to vote on a redevelopment agreement or a blank check for $20 million. They're simply voting on agreeing to hear out Gateway Jax's proposal in more detail, to vote up or down, in exchange for a discount on the Interline property.
It really is as simple as that.
Patently INSANE that any of them would truly believe that something better is going to magically appear in the next 15 months when we're months away from another RFP on the property.
Just can't help walking away from some of these meetings feeling like either: 1) Either no one takes the time to read anything, or they do, and they just don't understand basic fundamentals of what this vote is, or 2) There's some weird special interest pressuring these people to actively sabotage two great deals (UF & Riverfront Plaza) simultaneously.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on June 03, 2025, 12:46:40 AM
Patently INSANE that any of them would truly believe that something better is going to magically appear in the next 15 months when we're months away from another RFP on the property.
Just can't help walking away from some of these meetings feeling like either: 1) Either no one takes the time to read anything, or they do, and they just don't understand basic fundamentals of what this vote is, or 2) There's some weird special interest pressuring these people to actively sabotage two great deals (UF & Riverfront Plaza) simultaneously.
Both can be true.
The "special interest" seems to be "R" council members, some of whom will run for Mayor vs a "D" Mayor.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 03, 2025, 10:27:46 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on June 03, 2025, 12:46:40 AM
Patently INSANE that any of them would truly believe that something better is going to magically appear in the next 15 months when we're months away from another RFP on the property.
Just can't help walking away from some of these meetings feeling like either: 1) Either no one takes the time to read anything, or they do, and they just don't understand basic fundamentals of what this vote is, or 2) There's some weird special interest pressuring these people to actively sabotage two great deals (UF & Riverfront Plaza) simultaneously.
Both can be true.
The "special interest" seems to be "R" council members, some of whom will run for Mayor vs a "D" Mayor.
This has been readily apparent since the day she took office.
But I just don't understand the angle the R's are going for here.
What's the platform?
"Heroic Republicans shoot down partnering with vested, well-respected developer to prevent Riverfront Plaza from becoming an active, profitable, self-sustaining space?"
Where's the win there for Salem?
It's also such a dangerous gamble, as there is no universe where this space is developed by the next mayoral election, or even permitted, if we punt and RFP it again.
Sounds like the MAGA Party gameplan - [a] Break Something, [b.] Blame Democrats, [c] Run on being "The Only Ones Who Can Fix It"
I don't think the majority of Jacksonvillians care if downtown development takes place, as long as "their hard-earned tax dollars" aren't spent downtown.
It's almost understandable that some Council Members believe they were being asked to approve $20 million in incentives with this vote—especially when both DIA board members speaking in opposition suggested as much. Wohlers even outright claimed the DIA had already voted on the incentives, despite Boyer and board chair Krechowski clearly stating no such vote had occurred.
The argument about the optimal use study feels like a red herring. As Boyer noted, the study was actually prompted by the Cross Regions proposal—not uncertainty about the planned use of the American Lions site. Suggesting that failure to complete a multi-parcel study invalidates the site-specific analysis already done is disingenuous. The site has been studied. It went through a competitive RFP. Criticizing the land swap as "the same [failed] process over and over again"—as board member Cameron Hooper did—ignores the fact that a new RFP and study is literally the same process that was just followed. And as Boyer rightly asked: why re-study a parcel the city already spent millions designing a few years ago?
Meanwhile, Gateway claims to have the project fully underwritten and appears to be further along in due diligence than any hypothetical future RFP recipient would be. Their transparency and professionalism stand in refreshing contrast to the fiasco of the Lot J negotiations.
If the land swap doesn't go through, the likeliest scenario is: a higher-cost outright purchase, a yearlong new study, an RFP for something no better (and possibly worse), and an incentive request that could be larger—and still might not get funded. All while the site sits empty.
CM Miller asserted, "There is nobody on this dais, nobody in the DIA, that I know of, who would allow that to happen." But if that's true, were the Shipyards, Berkman II, Laura Street Trio, and even the Landing left vacant because previous councils and DIAs wanted blight downtown? Of course not. Intent doesn't matter if the process leads to the same delays again and again.
In summary, objecting to this deal on the basis of process boils down to: "We're afraid this might not work and could delay things 15 months. So instead, let's guarantee a delay of at least that long—and pay a premium for it." I have far more respect for the Riverfront Parks Now position than for that kind of circular logic.
P.S.: Two consecutive non-quorums on this issue are inexcusable. Credit to the "no" votes who are at least showing up and engaging in the democratic process. But the unexcused absences from some of the loudest public opponents of the land swap suggest their real priority isn't constructive debate—it's obstruction for its own sake.
Totally out of the loop, but is it possible that some City Council members are waiting to see what shakes out with the UF Presidential hiring process before taking action? The Florida Board of Governors voted today 10-6 to deny UF's appointment of Ono from University of Michigan.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/executive-leadership/2025/06/03/florida-board-rejects-ono-uf-job
It appears UF is going to be rudderless and embroiled in turmoil for the near future. Also 5 of their 16 deans are Interim's and they are waiting on the new President to make those hires. This includes Medicine, Engineering, and Law. Hopefully this doesn't hinder their efforts to pull off the Jax campus.
Quote from: CityLife on June 03, 2025, 06:03:56 PM
The Florida Board of Governors voted today 10-6 to deny UF's appointment of Ono from University of Michigan.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/executive-leadership/2025/06/03/florida-board-rejects-ono-uf-job
Total insanity by right wing MAGA Republicans. I wasn't thrilled with this choice given his willingness to quickly do a 180 on DEI, etc. to pacify the UF Board. But, given that he did so, and that still wasn't enough to survive, I have to wonder if there is any competent professional that will have interest in applying to any position in any red state. Take those people out, and what you are often left with are the loyalist goons we see running our state and federal capitals today.
Just like the Library board in in Jax, the politicization of every position and job, no matter the nature of it, over competency is so dangerous. Like it or not, DEI has been promoted for decades, both by government policy but also by public acceptance in most corners. OK, so now it is out of vogue but that means that there are a lot of people walking around that were encouraged to support DEI up until now. And, this has become the sole litmus test for a job, more so than experience, service to constituents, integrity, etc.?
I suppose if liberals were running the show, they should forever dismiss anyone who ever praised or considered MAGA positions as worthy or who ever voted for a MAGA candidate for any office. Or, was ever a registered Republican given no one registered as a Democrat is ever appointed by a GOP governor or president in the present age. This behavior is reminiscent of the model followed by the Communist party in China... If you are not a loyal party member, you go nowhere. Dissent and free thinking is not allowed. Party line only.
To add, based on reports, this looks like a setup for a GOP politician to get this job. Who else could pass the litmus test being used? Who else would bother to apply after this? No surprise, DeSantis has been engineering the takeover of State universities for a while. Next, who will want to go to a State university run as a political operation? Our best and brightest are likely to look elsewhere.
Well, there's the possibility of an adminstrator from Hillsdale or Liberty meeting the DuhSatan requirements to take on UF.
What a significant milestone!!! UF has secured site control in LaVilla for their graduate campus:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/dec/19/university-of-florida-says-it-closed-on-downtown-land-for-jacksonville-graduate-campus/
Keep the momentum downtown Jax!!
In the article it says:
" UF plans to adapt the Jacksonville Terminal train station to modern uses, keeping its exterior as-is while renovating the interior for such potential uses as retail and restaurants.
The Prime F. Osborn III Convention Center would be demolished to make way for new construction."
Let's hope that it can be restored back to a train station...fingers crossed....
^That's always been the plan. UF can't bring rail back but COJ has been working on this.
Is there actually a chance they destroy the Prime Osborne? That would be such a shame. I kind of thought the UF Campus would make the rail more likely, not less.
I feel like the rail won't happen because way too many resources going to U2C. We really should have used that $400 million for Emerald Trail, First Coast Commuter Rail, and enticing Brightline.
I also would love to build a "Ruby Trail" and a "Sapphire Trail". I have some big ideas. Ruby Trail could be the beaches. I know that wouldn't be funded the same way since it's technically different city. Sapphire Trail could be town center area and bridge together neighborhoods like Seven Pines, Gate Parkway, St John's Bluff, and Deerwood.
Quote from: Jankelope on December 22, 2025, 11:03:14 AM
Is there actually a chance they destroy the Prime Osborne? That would be such a shame. I kind of thought the UF Campus would make the rail more likely, not less.
I feel like the rail won't happen because way too many resources going to U2C. We really should have used that $400 million for Emerald Trail, First Coast Commuter Rail, and enticing Brightline.
I also would love to build a "Ruby Trail" and a "Sapphire Trail". I have some big ideas. Ruby Trail could be the beaches. I know that wouldn't be funded the same way since it's technically different city. Sapphire Trail could be town center area and bridge together neighborhoods like Seven Pines, Gate Parkway, St John's Bluff, and Deerwood.
To be clear, they're talking about demolishing the convention center that was built in the 1980's. Not the Historic Train Station. That won't be torn down.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 22, 2025, 07:03:53 AM
^That's always been the plan. UF can't bring rail back but COJ has been working on this.
Yes....COJ's work on this is critical, and having a major institutional anchor like UF downtown could help strengthen the long-term case for transit, density, and more investment in Lavilla. Either way, it's encouraging to see real movement after so many years of stagnation.
I just hope the COJ doesn't drop the ball on bringing passenger rail back to the core like it has dropped the ball on other proposals/projects in the past...and can the COJ speed this process up.... Like can passenger rail realistically be brought back downtown within the next 5 years? What does the city need to do to execute this plan? How can the city put this plan into high gear? The time is NOW! Also, JTA needs to drop U2C like yesterday!
I don't see JTA having any involvement
So very sad :(
https://nypost.com/2025/12/23/us-news/ex-sen-ben-sasse-announces-stage-4-pancreatic-cancer-diagnosis-says-he-is-gonna-die/
Didn't he resign because his wife had cancer?
^ epilepsy
Quote from: Jones518 on December 19, 2025, 08:13:57 PM
What a significant milestone!!! UF has secured site control in LaVilla for their graduate campus:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/dec/19/university-of-florida-says-it-closed-on-downtown-land-for-jacksonville-graduate-campus/
Keep the momentum downtown Jax!!
In the article it says:
" UF plans to adapt the Jacksonville Terminal train station to modern uses, keeping its exterior as-is while renovating the interior for such potential uses as retail and restaurants.
The Prime F. Osborn III Convention Center would be demolished to make way for new construction."
Let's hope that it can be restored back to a train station...fingers crossed....
Big outcome from this has to be getting the Convention Center over to the empty space on Bay next to the Hyatt.
I get the feeling that the "powers that be" already have an inkling and/or ideas regarding a new Convention Center "somewhere" Downtown. We'll see what happens. For them to just give up the Prime Osborn to UF and raze/demolish the Convention Center portion at the Prime Osborn, they must already have some type of plan, proposals, etc. in mind.
Quote from: heights unknown on December 27, 2025, 06:28:40 PM
I get the feeling that the "powers that be" already have an inkling and/or ideas regarding a new Convention Center "somewhere" Downtown. We'll see what happens. For them to just give up the Prime Osborn to UF and raze/demolish the Convention Center portion at the Prime Osborn, they must already have some type of plan, proposals, etc. in mind.
Yeah, there's a pretty good consensus there should be a convention center, and that it must be downtown. The main debate is over whether to put it by the Hyatt (my personal preference, for clustering and price reasons) or another spot, presumably as part of a bigger development. We aren't anywhere close to selecting a site or putting out bids yet, however.
See to me this one is simple: Phase 1, you use the two vacant blocks on Bay - it's adjacent to the Hyatt, you can get about 175k SqFt out of it (accounting for back of house functions), and as long as you line the ground floor with retail, it would be a great compliment to the area. I'd like to think that - especially with a PPP for the convention center letting the private sector build the thing - this could be done relatively quickly. Parking isn't ideal. I'd suggest a garage at the block bounded by Bay/Catherine/Forsyth/Marsh. It's 2 blocks which some won't like, but it could also serve the Shipyards West park. Alternatively, you could look at the block bound by Forsyth/Liberty/Adams/Washington, though you'd have to take down part of the stupid Hart Bridge Ramps. I'm assuming the JEA site right by the Main St. Bridge ramp isn't easily moveable (plus access in/out for cars would be weird).
If the convention business takes off, then you look at Phase 2, at the JSO/Jail site which could be connected by a skywalk (one of the very few times I'd be down for a skywalk). Not counting the parking garage lot that you built in Phase 1, in the superblock bound by Bay/Marsh/Adams/Liberty, you can get another 450k SqFt out of that (Assuming you'd remove the ridiculous old Hart Bridge ramps that encroach on the site). Combined, you'd be at 650 SqFt, which would be quite a good size. If you needed more parking with Phase 2, you have the lot at Adams/Market/Monroe/Liberty. I'm pretty sure the State recently said they're going to surplus. BTW, this parking could serve the churches in the Cathedral district if needed, as in their master plan they'd like to develop some of the vacant lots north of the churches they use for parking.
I know this was brought up before and dissed here, but I still think a convention center amidst the stadiums/arena complex is a viable option. Lots of existing parking that could be shared and the ability to co-host events with the stadiums/arena. Add now a hotel with the Four Seasons (albeit not the size of the Hyatt). However, with Khan owning the fairgrounds (will he pitch that as a convention site?!) and its potential to host hotels plus his dream still of an entertainment complex, the area has much to offer over the next few years. Nearby will also be riverfront parks, the Navy ship and MOSH (maybe) that also could support event break-outs. Access for long service trucks will also be superior. Potential flood hazards will likely be less too.
P.S. The Hyatt can't even handle parking for its own events. I don't see them able to accommodate anything more. Maybe JTA could use U2C (not!) to shuttle patrons to the sports complex and everyone is happy ;D.
There are positives to a convention center near the stadium-land and parking being the main two. But, the Four Seasons isn't a convention hotel. Aside from the capacity, they aren't generally in the market of mass room discounts/convention rates.
No one else is building a 1,000 room hotel downtown anytime soon. Plus, I like the idea of the convention center (and its corporate attendees on expense accounts) feeding the elbow during the early/mid week, while the locals can feed it late in the week/weekends.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 28, 2025, 02:04:24 AM
I know this was brought up before and dissed here, but I still think a convention center amidst the stadiums/arena complex is a viable option. Lots of existing parking that could be shared and the ability to co-host events with the stadiums/arena. Add now a hotel with the Four Seasons (albeit not the size of the Hyatt). However, with Khan owning the fairgrounds (will he pitch that as a convention site?!) and its potential to host hotels plus his dream still of an entertainment complex, the area has much to offer over the next few years. Nearby will also be riverfront parks, the Navy ship and MOSH (maybe) that also could support event break-outs. Access for long service trucks will also be superior. Potential flood hazards will likely be less too.
P.S. The Hyatt can't even handle parking for its own events. I don't see them able to accommodate anything more. Maybe JTA could use U2C (not!) to shuttle patrons to the sports complex and everyone is happy ;D.
Anything that gets built at The Ford on Bay lots, whether a convention center or private development, would require a sizeable parking garage which would solve the parking issue. Considering the Hyatt has right of first refusal, I'd imagine they would want a development there that would only benefit their operations
If there wasn't already an existing convention hotel with two massive vacant lots next to it right in the heart of our entertainment district then building a convention center by the stadium would definitely make sense. But considering the above, this is a no-brainer and would be a boon to the true core of Downtown. Plus with the future Hard Rock, Riverfront Plaza Hotel, and Laura Trio hotels, you have 300-500 additional rooms being planned all within walking distance of this site
^This. Plus, there's a number of vacant lots so if the convention business really takes off, you can get some complimentary Select Service Hotels (Courtyards, Springhills, Hamptons, etc.). Those are popular around convention centers for those that have to attend but want to save a few bucks over the generally higher-priced convention hotels.
To me it's the only site that could spark development around it, unless you want to do nothing until JSO completely vacates the Jail site (then you're still disconnected from the Hyatt and you still have the problem of the vacant lot behind it which the owners have no incentive to do anything with unless it benefits them.
I'm pretty passionate about this topic, given I'm at between 5-8 conventions/trade shows a year for my day job. Jacksonville won't be Atlanta/Chicago/Orlando/New York/Vegas/New Orleans in terms of conventions. But it doesn't have to be to get their share of the pie.
Quote from: Tacachale on December 27, 2025, 06:40:59 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on December 27, 2025, 06:28:40 PM
I get the feeling that the "powers that be" already have an inkling and/or ideas regarding a new Convention Center "somewhere" Downtown. We'll see what happens. For them to just give up the Prime Osborn to UF and raze/demolish the Convention Center portion at the Prime Osborn, they must already have some type of plan, proposals, etc. in mind.
Yeah, there's a pretty good consensus there should be a convention center, and that it must be downtown. The main debate is over whether to put it by the Hyatt (my personal preference, for clustering and price reasons) or another spot, presumably as part of a bigger development. We aren't anywhere close to selecting a site or putting out bids yet, however.
I agree that the parcel adjacent to the Hyatt combined with the Hyatt itself—is the most ideal site for a new convention center. The clustering benefits are clear, along with the close proximity to amenities like the Riverwalk, riverfront, hotels, dining, elbow district, etc.
I envision a new construction: vertical, mixed-use convention center with ground-floor retail, a structured parking podium (approx. 5–6 floors), and large, flexible meeting and exhibition spaces above (6–12+ floors). There's also an opportunity to add more hotel beds on the upper floors to directly support convention demand.
This approach maximizes land efficiency, strengthens the downtown core, and reinforces a walkable, amenity-rich convention district rather than a standalone facility.
I think it's a no brainer. It also would help bolster that Hyatt occupancy rate hopefully. I would be curious what the justification would be for considering any other space for convention.
Also...wasn't there discussion of a Hard Rock hotel considering that Ford on Bay space? Did that kind of fizzle?
Quote from: Jankelope on January 05, 2026, 11:59:11 AM
I think it's a no brainer. It also would help bolster that Hyatt occupancy rate hopefully. I would be curious what the justification would be for considering any other space for convention.
Also...wasn't there discussion of a Hard Rock hotel considering that Ford on Bay space? Did that kind of fizzle?
Hard Rock is looking at the Berkman 2 site. Discussions are continuing. Re other convention sites, there's talk of it being part of other larger development. Such a thing would be years away, were it to progress at all.
^ Isn't the clock starting to tick on when UF gets around to wanting to redevelop the Prime Osborn? How many years away can such a thing afford to be before we start risking either artificially capping the new campus or going without a convention center?
What is the issue with Hyatt?
Quote from: Jankelope on January 05, 2026, 11:59:11 AM
I would be curious what the justification would be for considering any other space for convention.
See my post below made prior to yours why another space might be considered. Don't have to agree, but a case could be made for other locations.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 28, 2025, 02:04:24 AM
I know this was brought up before and dissed here, but I still think a convention center amidst the stadiums/arena complex is a viable option. Lots of existing parking that could be shared and the ability to co-host events with the stadiums/arena. Add now a hotel with the Four Seasons (albeit not the size of the Hyatt). However, with Khan owning the fairgrounds (will he pitch that as a convention site?!) and its potential to host hotels plus his dream still of an entertainment complex, the area has much to offer over the next few years. Nearby will also be riverfront parks, the Navy ship and MOSH (maybe) that also could support event break-outs. Access for long service trucks will also be superior. Potential flood hazards will likely be less too.
P.S. The Hyatt can't even handle parking for its own events. I don't see them able to accommodate anything more. Maybe JTA could use U2C (not!) to shuttle patrons to the sports complex and everyone is happy ;D.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on January 05, 2026, 06:55:16 PM
What is the issue with Hyatt?
The Hyatt originally opened as the Adams Mark Hotel and was built at the time for one main reason only: It was needed for Jax to get a Super Bowl given it has almost 1,000 rooms. Once the Super Bowl was over, it went bankrupt, not once, but at least twice, including once as the Hyatt, as I recall. Way oversized for Downtown Jax most of the year. It was also built on the cheap given its brutal architecture. The Hyatt has say on an adjacent parcel so that impacts what happens around it. Others can fill in the issues there. Another example of Jax chasing pots of gold at the end of rainbows. Its ace in the hole is, other than the existing convention center, Jax really doesn't have many indoor options, if any, that can accommodate large crowds for events serving food to large numbers of people (500 to 2,000).
Ok, so kind of understood the issue. Why wouldn't they want a convention center built in and around the structure? It would only help the Hyatt, right? From what I remember, this caused the last CC proposal to fall apart?
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 28, 2025, 02:04:24 AM
I know this was brought up before and dissed here, but I still think a convention center amidst the stadiums/arena complex is a viable option. Lots of existing parking that could be shared and the ability to co-host events with the stadiums/arena. Add now a hotel with the Four Seasons (albeit not the size of the Hyatt). However, with Khan owning the fairgrounds (will he pitch that as a convention site?!) and its potential to host hotels plus his dream still of an entertainment complex, the area has much to offer over the next few years. Nearby will also be riverfront parks, the Navy ship and MOSH (maybe) that also could support event break-outs. Access for long service trucks will also be superior. Potential flood hazards will likely be less too.
P.S. The Hyatt can't even handle parking for its own events. I don't see them able to accommodate anything more. Maybe JTA could use U2C (not!) to shuttle patrons to the sports complex and everyone is happy ;D.
I suppose this is
a case, but it seems rather speculative compared to the alternative.
The existing parking is a point, although much of that is speculated to be intended for future use anyway, like whatever Lot J might maybe one day come back as. Like you already note, the Four Seasons is not a convention-focused hotel, so you'd need to build another standard convention hotel anyway (think several generations ago Shipyards proposals included this, but current plans don't reflect that). We can't do much about whether or not Shad Khan might at some point in the future maybe decide to propose the Fairgrounds site be used for a convention center, and even if he did that'd still mean paying incentives to build more, new hotels in addition to the actual exhibition space.
Further to your point, we
already have a thousand-room hotel on the riverfront with large, available riverfront parcels that would benefit from added patronage, the inclusion of more parking, and more retail space. How many times now has this city bailed on just killing a flock of birds with one stone to chase after doing more, other speculative developments?
And the city would have to find the money for whatever option they choose in addition to building a new jail, whatever other incentive packages in the future, and everything else. None of the alternatives are going to be cheaper than fixing the large hotel we already have.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on January 05, 2026, 08:44:29 PM
Ok, so kind of understood the issue. Why wouldn't they want a convention center built in and around the structure? It would only help the Hyatt, right? From what I remember, this caused the last CC proposal to fall apart?
To the contrary, the last set of serious CC proposals fell apart because the city changed its mind and decided to pursue a convention center elsewhere (at the time in 2018 likely the Shipyards) instead, so they dropped that RFP and then attempted to build apartments on the site, before remembering that the Hyatt ROFR existed and having to restart the RFP, after which point the winner was unable to build anything (twice).
Hyatt would (as far as we all know) love an expanded site with convention space, the issue is the city's disinterest in building one in an effort to pursue other things.
Tried to find them on here, but must have been on Metro Jacksonville. Studies and renderings were done if I remember correctly
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 05, 2026, 05:51:22 PM
^ Isn't the clock starting to tick on when UF gets around to wanting to redevelop the Prime Osborn? How many years away can such a thing afford to be before we start risking either artificially capping the new campus or going without a convention center?
We're many years from UF getting to the Prime Osborn. The initial phases will be the Interline building and the other two adjacent parcels north of Bay Street, and that all won't wrap up till 2035. We'll need to have an idea of what we're doing before then, but there's time to get there. Like I said, the Hyatt is the best bet to my mind (and the most likely right now) but the amount of things happening downtown right now means things can change pretty rapidly.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on January 05, 2026, 08:59:54 PM
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on January 05, 2026, 08:44:29 PM
Ok, so kind of understood the issue. Why wouldn't they want a convention center built in and around the structure? It would only help the Hyatt, right? From what I remember, this caused the last CC proposal to fall apart?
To the contrary, the last set of serious CC proposals fell apart because the city changed its mind and decided to pursue a convention center elsewhere (at the time in 2018 likely the Shipyards) instead, so they dropped that RFP and then attempted to build apartments on the site, before remembering that the Hyatt ROFR existed and having to restart the RFP, after which point the winner was unable to build anything (twice).
Hyatt would (as far as we all know) love an expanded site with convention space, the issue is the city's disinterest in building one in an effort to pursue other things.
Yes, this is correct. Terrible leadership. It's impossible to overstate how far back some of these issues put us.