QuoteMayor’s office balks at Jacksonville Landing owner’s plea for parking subsidy
Jacksonville Landing owner Toney Sleiman is convinced the struggling riverfront mall can attract nationally known restaurants - and boost downtown nightlife - if the city helps him buy a nearby parking lot with room for 300 spaces.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-04-08/story/mayor%E2%80%99s-office-balks-landing-owner%E2%80%99s-plea-parking-subsidy
my favorite statement is this:
"Skipper, an aide to Mayor John Peyton, said Sleiman's proposal wouldn't boost parking availability because he's looking to buy an existing lot that's already open to the public."
If parking is paid by city subsidies (our tax money), shouldn't parking be free?
no. parking should be a revenue generator and if the tax base puts up the investment then all the better
It will work if the parking for Landing customers is free. Otherwise nothing changes. Might as well go to SJTC.
Did anyone notice that the lot in question is worth no more than it was in the '80's. Even in a down economy that is just sad.
I take people to the Landing quite a bit. Whenever I comment that they could be enjoying Cheesecake Factory while in this most picturesque of settings if not for the city's unwillingless to make good on previous parking agreements, their jaws drop. Everyone I bring down is reminded of the beauty of our city. And every one of them would come back for a national tenant like Cheesecake or PF Changs. (You know how us Jacksonvillians love our chain restaurants ;) )
I'm amazed the city still doesn't understand the parking situation. With the Landing, its never been about creating "extra" parking. Its about being able to set aside a certain number of spaces to help secure national tenants by being able to meet their requirements. It would be great to have that side of the Landing renovated along with the remake of Laura St. Its been 20 years already. If an existing lot works, let's go ahead and resolve this issue.
Lake:
Do you believe all major retailers that go into downtown spaces all require a certain number of parking spaces? How is that possible in built urban environments?
Quote from: fieldafm on April 09, 2010, 02:25:01 PM
And every one of them would come back for a national tenant like Cheesecake or PF Changs. (You know how us Jacksonvillians love our chain restaurants ;) )
Too true. I'd rather not have a chain anchor the Landing, but even a local place would need the parking to be successful.
Kay, in an urban environment with heavy foot traffic and reliable mass transit in place, parking isn't as critical. DT Jax currently offers neither. As for fitting it into an urban environment, you just have to integrate it well. For example, I've been in DT New Orleans all week. A building down the street from my hotel had a courtyard and a number of restaurants at street level. It took me two days to look up and notice that the entire thing was a parking garage.
I've heard more enlightening conversations in the check-out lines at Wal-mart at 2 a.m. than what I have read at the end of that article on jax.com.
I have tried to resolve myself to not read those comments any longer. They make me lose faith in humanity.
Quote from: redglittercoffin on April 09, 2010, 03:12:01 PM
I've heard more enlightening conversations in the check-out lines at Wal-mart at 2 a.m. than what I have read at the end of that article on jax.com.
I have tried to resolve myself to not read those comments any longer. They make me lose faith in humanity.
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/9587/jamesjoycethisthisandth.jpg)
Not to get too far off track, but Jacksonville.com and Jacksonville Craigslist Rants and Raves are two places that deserve a special level in hell all to their own.
12 news comments come in a close third.
And on topic: If the parking fee isn't unreasonable then it would be OK. If the landing were busy and self supporting enough to not charge for parking (E.G. SJTC or The Avenues) then they shouldn't. But it's kinda hard to revitalize such a huge red herring as the landing.
Just to clear things up:
Many are thinking Sleiman is asking the City for money to buy a parking garage. The money isn't being paid by the City.
It was already paid by Humana (in the agreement with the City, Humana and Sleiman). Humana paid $3.5 million: http://jacksonville.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2006/07/31/dail...
Also, the move to build parking for the Landing would make the city about $1.2 million per year in rent. Had the city provided the parking in 1987 that would have been almost $28 million in rent payments.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/082803/bus_13385355.shtml
Sleiman isn't asking for a handout, he is asking that the City provide the parking (paid for by Humana) that the City agreed to provide in 1987.
Quote from: redglittercoffin on April 09, 2010, 03:12:01 PM
I've heard more enlightening conversations in the check-out lines at Wal-mart at 2 a.m. than what I have read at the end of that article on jax.com.
I have tried to resolve myself to not read those comments any longer. They make me lose faith in humanity.
If it's any consolation, I think it's the same five or six people who post those comments over and over. Every article I've ever read at the T-U site in the past couple of years has a comment from some guy named BMF gratuitously calling for the Jaguars to be moved, regardless of the topic of the article.
It has been 23 years let's get this done. Kudos to Councilman Clark for supporting this.
It truly amazes me how the city of Jacksonville has such a tough time making small, simple decisions. Why should there be such a debate of a parking lot?????? Does the mayor's office not see how the landing could help bring downtown to life if everything was done properly?? The owner's seem's to have some plans for the Landing and is just asking the city for parking. That's it. And they cant provide that? That seems to be a bit ridiculous.
Quote from: duvaldude08 on April 09, 2010, 04:15:37 PM
It truly amazes me how the city of Jacksonville has such a tough time making small, simple decisions.
So you can well imagine what it will be like trying to get anything in the proposed 2030 Mobility Plan done.
^^I hope you're right stephendare, I really do.
QuoteClark said he's asked the council auditor to scour the budget for the $3.5 million. The city didn't earmark money in the current budget for the parking obligation because no one was building a garage, or even planning to, Skipper said.
The above quote says it all and points up the real issue.
My guess is that the $3.5 million from Humana, if that is accurate, or from any other source, was spent years ago by some prior administration on long ago forgotten projects and/operations rather than being held in an escrow account. With the City facing employee cuts, pay cuts, benefit cuts, and overall service cuts, coughing up the $3.5 million may just not be possible. And, can you imagine any politico going to the taxpayers and saying we are raising your taxes to assist Tony Sleiman? ;D
stjr.........not only NO but Hell No! They won't find any money unless they use the Mayor's secret books! You know the ones he uses to suddenly produce money for whatever pet project he has in mind! I allways have wondered just where the money for River Walk upgrades was coming from!
The city promised this money long ago. The bill has come due. I am just not sure why the city never wanted the 28mil in rent it could have earned.
Quote from: stjr on April 09, 2010, 04:38:28 PM
My guess is that the $3.5 million from Humana, if that is accurate, or from any other source, was spent years ago by some prior administration on long ago forgotten projects and/operations rather than being held in an escrow account. With the City facing employee cuts, pay cuts, benefit cuts, and overall service cuts, coughing up the $3.5 million may just not be possible. And, can you imagine any politico going to the taxpayers and saying we are raising your taxes to assist Tony Sleiman? ;D
If this dedicated $3.5 million has been spent on something else, then maybe the money should come out of the Metropolitan Park improvement funds. ;)
lake............I hope to heck that Tony has it in writing and if he does............then it is past time for the City to pay up! Maybe the current Administration can pass the hat around all of the 227 AMIO's and all of the 6 figure plus paid inner circle? Should be able to come up with that real easy!
It only makes sense to deal with this problem for once and for all now. Its already been 23 years. I think that is enough time to come to the conclusion that what we have been doing isn't working. With the Jackson statue getting ripped out of ground and Laura Street rebuilt, this is the best time to address how the face of the Landing will meet/integrate with these publicly funded infrastructure projects.
Lake I agree! Current administration will procrastinate and hem and haw and pawn the problem off on the next administration! Like I have said before............no vision and no plan! Current administration could not plan their way out of a phone booth.......they could buy their way out but not plan out!
The problem here seems to be a long-standing difference of opinion between Mayor Peyton and Tony Sleiman on various issues....this will likely need to wait until at least Summer 2011
Reading through the thread and interestingly enough, this just happens to be the topic of my column in Sunday's paper.
QuoteOne thing should be abundantly clear when discussing Toney Sleiman’s $5 million proposal to purchase a 300-space parking lot across from The Jacksonville Landing: Despite the fact that he’s asking for the city to fork over $3.5 million for the purchase, this isn’t exactly a taxpayer bailout.
It is, in fact, Sleiman’s effort to collect on a 23-year-old obligation that calls for the City of Jacksonville to provide parking for the Landing.
The rest of the column can be read here: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/401574/abel-harding/2010-04-09/23-years-later-its-time-solve-landing-parking-problem (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/401574/abel-harding/2010-04-09/23-years-later-its-time-solve-landing-parking-problem)
Quote from: AbelH on April 10, 2010, 06:30:39 AM
Reading through the thread and interestingly enough, this just happens to be the topic of my column in Sunday's paper.
QuoteOne thing should be abundantly clear when discussing Toney Sleiman’s $5 million proposal to purchase a 300-space parking lot across from The Jacksonville Landing: Despite the fact that he’s asking for the city to fork over $3.5 million for the purchase, this isn’t exactly a taxpayer bailout.
It is, in fact, Sleiman’s effort to collect on a 23-year-old obligation that calls for the City of Jacksonville to provide parking for the Landing.
The rest of the column can be read here: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/401574/abel-harding/2010-04-09/23-years-later-its-time-solve-landing-parking-problem (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/401574/abel-harding/2010-04-09/23-years-later-its-time-solve-landing-parking-problem)
I read the article this morning Mr Harding. It was a good piece. Thank you for consistently devoting time and ink to these issues.
Nice job Abel!
Totally agree. The fact that this is going on 23 years later is embarrassing. Some cities have completely revitalized their downtown in less time. We can't even solve the issue of parking at the landing in 23. I don't just blame Peyton for this. I blame every city leader since 1987 for this one. However, Peyton can really step up here, and add something to his toteboard before he leaves office (granted, if he just sold Sleiman the land in 2003, it would be a non-issue).
I'll just add again, it would be great to go ahead and get this settled for once and for all. With Laura and Independent Drive being rebuilt and the Jackson statue moving, this is a great opportunity to coordinate facade changes to the Landing at Hogan & Independent. It would also do wonders for downtown's image to be able to roll out a new look Landing (facing Independent & Laura) with the completion of the streetscape project. It also would not hurt to start having the Landing pay rent by settling this issue.