Via Times Union....
http://jacksonville.com/business/2010-08-09/story/jacksonville-paying-millions-cover-losses-parking-garages (http://jacksonville.com/business/2010-08-09/story/jacksonville-paying-millions-cover-losses-parking-garages)
QuoteBy David Bauerlein
Jacksonville has paid $12.2 million to cover financial losses for the owner of three downtown garages, and the cost will likely continue to rise at a rate of $4 million a year until the new county courthouse opens in 2012.
The payments are part of an agreement that the city reached with Metropolitan Parking Solutions to build a parking garage that opened in 2007 next to the future county courthouse and two garages completed in 2006 near Veterans Memorial Arena.
The deal always anticipated the garages would operate at a loss for several years, requiring the city to fill the gap by providing loans that Metropolitan Parking Solutions would repay when the garages turned profitable. But on an annual basis, the city's subsidy is running four times higher than the original projections.
In addition to $12.2 million in "development loans" that plugged shortfalls and guaranteed the owners a return on their investment, the city also holds a $5.7 million promissory note that Metropolitan Parking Solutions agreed to pay for land where the garages stand.
The combined $17.9 million in loans broke through the $16 million threshold at which the city can buy out Metropolitan Parking Solutions and take over ownership. But city officials said the cost of the buyout would be too much, particularly when the city is in such tough shape financially.
"Right now, we really don't have that option," Chief Financial Officer Mickey Miller said.
The financial outlook will brighten after the new courthouse opens, said Kenneth Krismanth, an owner of Metropolitan Parking Solutions.
"That will have a big, dramatic swing," he said. "I think it's going to have an immediate impact."
The need for loan subsidies would drop to less than $1.87 million a year after the courthouse opens, according to Metropolitan Parking Solutions. The courthouse will attract visitors who park by the hour, which is a more lucrative market for garages than monthly parkers. The city expects to transfer employees into the new courthouse in spring or summer 2012.
Krismanth said there needs to be increased attendance at the arena and a recovery in downtown's office market to make the garages profitable and enable repayment of the loans. He said those conditions will occur at some point in the future but there are "too many variables" to predict how many years it will take.
The drain on the city's budget is a far cry from how city officials envisioned the agreement unfolding when it was reached in 2003.
The city viewed the deal as a way to build garages for two Better Jacksonville Plan projects - the courthouse and the arena - without tapping the Better Jacksonville Plan's budget. Voters approved the wide-ranging Better Jacksonville Plan in 2000 with a half-cent sales tax increase.
In addition to keeping the debt for building the garages off the city's books, the deal meant private ownership would pay property taxes and eventually share profits with the city. The city picked Metropolitan Parking Solutions from a handful of groups proposing to build and operate the garages. Metropolitan Parking Solutions is owned by Krismanth, Tony Manna and Mark Corr, all of Signet Development. Signet has offices in Jacksonville and Akron, Ohio.
The city agreed to make loans covering operating losses for the garages and an 8 percent return on $3 million the owners invested into the project. Some council members criticized the deal on grounds that taxpayers, rather than the owners, would take the hit if the garages weren't successful.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions used $50 million in tax-exempt bonds to get the garages built.
The original financial projection for the garages showed in the first 10 years the city would need to loan about $7 million for the subsidies. The biggest annual cost to the city would be roughly $1 million. After a decade, the garages would turn a profit and Metropolitan Parking Solutions would start repaying the loans, according to the projections.
In actuality, the city expects to fork over about $4 million in loans in the next fiscal year, an amount four times greater than the original projection for any single year.
When construction of the courthouse garage started in 2006, construction of the new courthouse hadn't begun and its completion date was slated for 2010. Metropolitan Parking Solutions and the city pressed forward anyway, banking on downtown workers and residents generating customers. Delays continued to plague the courthouse and the recession slashed downtown's workforce.
A 2008 report by the City Council Auditor's office recommended the city buy out Metropolitan Parking Solutions when the city's loans exceed $16 million, which happened this year.
"Every year, we're going to look at it and see if it's advantageous," Council Auditor Kirk Sherman said. He said the city already has a parking division and it could operate the garages at a lower cost by eliminating the various management fees associated with private ownership.
Krismanth said Metropolitan Parking's costs are comparable to the city's public parking division. He said if the city owned the garages, it would still be faced with the same parking market, and it wouldn't have the flexibility a private company has to offer rates that bring in monthly customers.
Miller said a big hurdle for a city buyout involves the terms of the bonds that financed construction of the garage. The bonds require bondholders to be paid interest through at least 2016, so if the city wanted to take ownership of the garages, the city would have to put about $56.5 million into an escrow account, guaranteeing bondholders would get their interest payments on top of retiring the loan. The city would also have to pay $3 million to Metropolitan Parking for its investment in the project.
Millers said that's too big a price for the city to pay.
A buyout also would eliminate the city's prospects for getting repayment of its loans. But there's no guarantee Metropolitan Parking Solutions will repay the loans in the current agreement, either. Until the garages start generating profits, the city will continue to pump more money into the garages, even at a time when many day-to-day service are facing budget cuts.
Another illustration of just how incompetent Downtown Vision is. Please, DVI, get off our backs and out of town. We don't need you. We don't want you, and as sure as hell, we don't want to pay for you and your fluffy nonsense.
Where's Tufsu when you need him?
Jacksonville is the most mis managed city I believe I have ever lived in.....
QuoteThe city agreed to make loans covering operating losses for the garages and an 8 percent return on $3 million the owners invested into the project. Some council members criticized the deal on grounds that taxpayers, rather than the owners, would take the hit if the garages weren't successful.
Hmmm... guaranteed 8% return. Did Nelson Cuba negotiate this deal for the parking companies too? :D
Really, it takes a lot of work to screw up the Shipyards, Cecil, the Courthouse, the Stadium, these garages, the Landing, Vestcor, Lavilla restaurant, etc. Not sure its fair, but I expect to see more arrows flying over this when Mr. Mullaney advances toward the mayoral election. All these deals happened on his watch.
Once again, the politicos were told these were awful deals and these consequences were warned about. Why were these garages built when there was no existing or imminently clear demand for them? I smell a rat and a grand jury needs to investigate. Someone needs to see who represented/lobbied for the parking company on this. Was it Paul Harden?
JTA and COJ are in a horse race for winning the Nobel Prize for incompetency.
4 years ago....
http://www.metjax.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2220&highlight=Metropolitan+Parking+Solutions
Here are two good reasons why this deal was done: Michael Munz and Preston Haskell. See below. Not only are we taxpayers being taken to the cleaners, but at some of the highest parking rates for this purpose in the State.
LOL when I saw the Police and Fire Pension fund also bid on this project. Maybe that IS where the seed for the guaranteed 8% return was planted! ;DQuotePublished Tuesday, December 23, 2003
Proposed courthouse parking garage would charge close to top-level rates
By DAVID BAUERLEIN
The Times-Union,
The proposed 1,300-space parking garage at the new Duval County Courthouse would charge the second-highest hourly rates for courthouse parking in Florida's largest counties, according to a Times-Union comparison.
Of the 12 most populous counties, only the Miami-Dade County Courthouse would charge a higher hourly rate for parking -- $4.
Parking garage proposals
The Jacksonville Economic Development Commission chose Metropolitan Parking Solutions to build parking garages at the new county courthouse, arena and sports complex after evaluating five developers. Earlier this year, the commission asked each developer to state the maximum amount of city financial support that would be needed for the garages. The figures are based on the assumption the garages will be privately owned and subject to property taxes. In further negotiations, Metropolitan Parking Solutions agreed any city support would be in the form of loans, not cash grants.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions
Maximum city support over a 30-year period -- $25.7 million
Courthouse rates -- $3 for first hour, $2 for each additional hour. Maximum daily rate of $10. Monthly reserved rate of $120, non-reserved rate of $80.
Arena and sports complex rates -- $5 flat rate, $8 concert rate and $20 for football games.
First Coast Parking Group
Maximum city support over 30 years -- $2.9 million
Courthouse rates -- $ 3 for the first hour, $4 for the second hour, and $7 daily maximum. Monthly rate of $95 for non-reserved spaces and $190 for reserved spaces.
Arena and sports complex rates -- $5 for special events, $20 for football games.
Jacksonville Police Fire and Pension Fund
Maximum city support over 30 years -- $25.4 million
Courthouse rates -- 80 cents per hour. Maximum daily rate of $5.60. Monthly parking would be $60.
Arena and sports complex rates -- $5 for events, $20 for Jaguars games.
McGurn Investment Co.
Maximum support over 30 years -- $43.5 million
Courthouse rates -- $2 for first hour. Each additional hour would cost 75 cents. Maximum daily rate of $10. Monthly rate of $75.
Arena and sports complex rates -- $5 per car
MedPark Inc.
Maximum city support over 30 years -- $10.5 million.
Courthouse rates -- $3 per hour. Monthly rates at $80.
Arena and sports complex rates -- Did not make a proposal.
Source: Company proposals filed with JEDC
Next month, the Jacksonville City Council will begin debate on whether a private company should finance, construct, own and operate a parking garage at the new county courthouse, scheduled to open in 2007. The developer, Metropolitan Parking Solutions, also would build a 600-space garage at the new arena and a 1,000-space garage in the Alltel Stadium sports complex.
The city would give land valued at $5.2 million to Metropolitan Parking Solutions for the three garages. Metropolitan Parking Solutions would then charge market-based rates for parking. For instance, the proposed rates for the county courthouse garage would be $3 for the first hour and $2 for each additional hour.
Jurors will park free, said Heather Murphy, spokeswoman in Mayor John Peyton's office.
Other Florida counties have built government-owned garages and charge below-market parking rates. For instance, visitors at the Orange County Courthouse pay $1 per hour to park in a 1,500-space garage that was recently built by the city of Orlando.
On the other hand, the proposed Duval County Courthouse garage would generate several hundred thousand dollars in annual property taxes for City Hall, the schools and other local entities -- revenue that government-owned structures don't pay.
"Really, the main difference boils down to the property taxes," said Martin Stein, executive director of the National Parking Association, an industry group based in Washington.
Stein said the advantage of a government-owned facility is it can charge lower parking rates because the government doesn't have property taxes as part of its cost of doing business.
He said the advantage of a privately owned garage is it can benefit all taxpayers by generating property taxes.
"If you simply look at the parking rates, that's one thing," Stein said. "But that's more of a limited number of users that would benefit from that [lower parking rates], whereas all taxpayers benefit from a revenue-generating development."
Other large Florida counties have opted to emphasize below-market rates for parking at courthouses, even though it means giving up property tax revenue.
"Our goal is not to make money," said Carol Easterling, access manager for Palm Beach County's parking operation. "Our goal is to provide parking."
At the existing Duval County Courthouse, the hourly rate is 80 cents in the 400-space lot. The first half-hour is free. The proposed rates for new courthouse garage would triple that rate.
City Council Vice President Elaine Brown said she's not convinced that the higher rates are reasonable.
"At first blush, it really looks like people would be paying so much more than what we charge now that we need to take another look at it," Brown said.
City Council President Lad Daniels and Finance Committee Chairman Warren Alvarez said they support privatization in philosophy. They said charging market-based rates at the courthouse garage could persuade people to use the Skyway, the elevated downtown train that has economy-priced parking at its lots on the outer edge of downtown. Increased use of the Skyway would reduce the multimillion-dollar annual taxpayer subsidy for the service, Daniels said.
"We tend to want it both ways -- we want to have cheap parking and cheap transit," Daniels said. "I don't think we can have it both ways."
"Sometimes you have to force people to make choices and that might be a way to help the Skyway do a little better than it is," Alvarez said.
But Daniels and Alvarez said they question whether the proposed privatization goes far enough in putting the investment risk on Metropolitan Parking Solutions.
In the proposed deal, the city would issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds on behalf of Metropolitan Parking Solutions, which would be responsible for paying off the debt. In addition, the city would agree to make semi-annual loans to Metropolitan Parking to insure the company has enough money to cover its debt payments, operating expenses and a 10 percent return on the company's $3 million investment in the project.
"If we're going to privatization, I don't want to guarantee them a profit," Alvarez said.
"It sounds to me like the city has the risk," Daniels said. "That's not the way the game is supposed to be played."
Michael Munz, a spokesman for Metropolitan Parking, said that even with the city's loans, the company would be earning less than the typical amount for a real estate venture. He said the city will have the option of stepping in and taking over ownership of the garages if the city decides the loans are becoming too big.
According to Jacksonville Economic Development Commission forecasts, the garages will be profitable. Over a 30-year period, the three garages will actually make $18 million for the city from property taxes and sharing profits.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions, based in Jacksonville, comprises Janna Enterprises and Realistic Transportation Alternatives, Munz said. The company would use The Haskell Co. to build the garages and Republic Parking System for daily management.
Metropolitan Parking was formed when the JEDC asked developers for proposals on how they would finance and manage the parking garages. In May, the commission staff picked Metropolitan Parking over four other companies and entered into negotiations. JEDC Executive Director Kirk Wendland has said Metropolitan Parking was most willing to shoulder the financial risks for the garages and the members of its project team had solid track records.
The JEDC board voted Dec. 4 to recommend the negotiated deal for City Council approval.
Amazing :(
^ Stephen, just saw your similar post. Maybe great minds do think alike - once in a while! LOL.
Maybe ;)
Wow. So Jax is paying more a year on subsidizing half empty downtown parking garages than JTA pays for the skyway? I wonder why no one has ever mentioned this before?
Well ,,,Jax would be " WE" the taxpayers. No offense.. Are you really shocked to learn they would not tell us this ?
Janna Enterprises is a front company for Signet Enterprises per the Secretary of State. On Signet's web site, I found this connection posted on one of Signet's pages. EVP of Dalton Agency is.... Michael Munz.Quote
Image Is Everything
In today’s environment, doing business means communicating effectively. That’s why Signet Enterprises has formed a strategic alliance with The Dalton Agency of Jacksonville.
The Dalton Agency offers a comprehensive range of marketing and public relations services that strengthen the resources Signet Enterprises offers to its partners and portfolio companies.
The award-winning agency has assembled a team of experienced strategic planners and creative talent that is nationally recognized and respected for its excellence. With a fully integrated array of services, the agency offers brand development, media planning and placement, market-research analysis, creative development and execution and public affairs counseling.
The Dalton Agency’s comprehensive in-house Internet/Web communications and film- and video-production facilities offer Signet Enterprises’ clients access to a full range of multimedia services. The agency’s technological expertise is enhanced by sophisticated and innovative design capabilities deployed to create a powerful multimedia presence for its clients. Webcasts, DVDs and other interactive media enhance the tools available to clients.
The Dalton Agency Public Relations +
The Dalton Agency’s PR + department views traditional and non-traditional public relationsâ€"from media relations, public affairs and lobbying to crisis management, internal communications, community outreach and partnership buildingâ€"as important components of an integrated program. This approach to strategic program development brings diverse elements together in multi-faceted projects and campaigns designed to support and significantly contribute to our clients’ overall business goals. There is tremendous power in combining the best of public relations and public-affairs disciplines, which our programs are designed to maximize.
A sampling of the Dalton Agency’s strategic communication capabilities include:
* Government Affairs
* Message development
* Spokesperson training
* Strategic media relations
* Executive-visibility programs
* Conference and trade-show support
* Sponsorship programs
* Special-event planning
* Internal communications
* Crisis and reputation management
For complete information, please visit the Dalton Agency Website at www.daltonagency.com.
http://www.signet-enterprises.com/public_affairs/dalton.html
Here is the law firm connection also posted at Signet's web site:QuoteOur affiliation with the business law firm of Brennan Manna & Diamond provides Signet Enterprises with the expertise of a full-service law firm concentrating on real estate, financing and business transactions. With a proven track record for the understanding and creative problem solving required for complex, innovative approaches to project structuring, BMD has provided counsel for each of Signet Enterprises’ transactions, allowing proven response and the ability to perform quickly.
Realistic Transportation Alternatives is led by Robert Mark Rimmer per the Secretary of State.
Here is who to send those "thank you" notes to. Looks like Kevin Hyde had some connections since he expressed a conflict of interest in not voting.QuotePublished Wednesday, February 25, 2004
City Council gives OK to developer of parking garages
By MATT GALNOR
The Times-Union,
Jacksonville will sell downtown land to a developer to build three parking garages and guarantee the company at least an 8 percent annual return on its investment.
The City Council voted 15-2 Tuesday night to approve the $50 million deal with Metropolitan Parking Solutions for garages near the planned Duval County Courthouse, the Veterans Memorial Arena and elsewhere in the sports complex.
"It's a deal I can live with," council President Lad Daniels said.
The city will sell the land for $5.7 million, which will be paid back toward the end of the 30-year contract.
The city will issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds from the project, which the developer will be responsible for paying back.
The city will make semi-annual payments to the developer to make sure it can cover its debt payments and operating expenses, as well as a guaranteed 8 percent return on the company's $3 million investment.
The city will not have any control over the parking fees and Metropolitan Parking Solutions will charge market rates at all three. Rates at the courthouse are projected to be $3 for the first hour and $2 each additional hour, said Mark Rimmer, a partner in the development group.
Jurors would park free off-site, and Peyton's office is negotiating to add some parking-validation options and to make the first half-hour free.
The project has been in the works since October 2002, when the city asked for proposals from companies to build and run the garages. The council has sat on it since December, while city auditors negotiated to get what they felt was a better deal for taxpayers.
Voting against the proposal Tuesday night were Art Graham and Jerry Holland. Kevin Hyde did not vote after declaring a conflict of interest. Elaine Brown was absent.
http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/022504/met_14912317.shtml
Looks like the City Council had second thoughts soon after the deal was done. But, apparently, going to see Prince in concert was more important!QuotePublished Sunday, May 9, 2004
CITY NOTES: Council to debate recanting support for parking garages
By MATT GALNOR
The Times-Union,
A City Council battle could break out Tuesday in an ongoing tussle about a $50 million deal for downtown Jacksonville parking garages that the council approved in February.
Some council members want Mayor John Peyton to take another look at the deal and have proposed a resolution asking Peyton to do so. Peyton, who would not be legally bound by the resolution, says contracts have been signed and the deal is done.
The council was supposed to take the issue up at its April 27 meeting, but council President Lad Daniels delayed the vote, mostly because he expected extended debate and several members wanted to leave to catch the Prince concert at Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena.
The proposal was approved unanimously in the council's Finance Committee but did not get the required four votes to pass the Recreation, Community Development and Education Committee. Committee members asked Councilman Art Shad, who is strongly opposed to the resolution, to vote for it just to get it out of committee, but Shad refused.
Now, 13 of the 19 members will have to vote Tuesday to take the resolution out of committee, and plenty of debate is expected.
Councilman Warren Alvarez, who along with Daniels sponsored the resolution, says the city is making a 30-year mistake on the garages. Plans call for three garages, two in the sports complex and a third by the new Duval County Courthouse.
As part of the deal, the city will issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds on behalf of Metropolitan Parking Solutions, which would be responsible for paying off the debt. The city would also make semi-annual loans to the developer so it can cover its debt payments, operating expenses and guarantee the company an 8 percent return on its $3 million investment.
SMG, the company that runs Jacksonville's sports facilities, is paid through concession sales, parking revenue and city subsidies. Some council members said they didn't know at the time of the first vote that SMG estimates it could lose $800,000 annually in parking revenue, which would drive the city subsidy up.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions said that estimate isn't accurate, and Peyton's office said the council had ample time to review the proposal.
"I'm man enough to admit I made a mistake," Alvarez said.
just shocking .. :)
epic failure! i just do not get it. mean while more employers continue to leave downtown leaving more unused parking spaces and less riders on the Skyway. JTA has suffered major losses at its Convention Center park and ride lots for the Skyway.
It almost seems like Planning for Parking /The Skyway/Etc is on self-destruct,,,,at our expense.
Ron Littlepage nailed this one for the taxpayers. Peyton, City Council, and company can't say they weren't warned.QuotePublished Tuesday, February 24, 2004
Peyton should seriously question deal for garages
By The Times-Union
Mayor John Peyton already has a nasty blot on his public service record when it comes to building parking garages.
If he's not careful, he could very well end up with some more.
Although Peyton probably wishes you would forget, you may remember that during his six years on the Jacksonville Transportation Authority he had a heavy hand in building the Kings Avenue parking garage on the Southbank.
The $12 million, 1,650-space garage sits mostly unused and stands as a monument to stupidity -- not quite on the same level as the JTA's decision to build the Skyway, but close.
Now on Peyton's table is a proposal to build three more garages: a 1,375-space garage across from the new county courthouse, a 480-space garage adjacent to the new arena and a 1,000-space garage at the sports complex.
The proposed deal is a sweet one, to say the least, for the developers -- Metropolitan Parking Solutions.
The City Council Finance Committee, at the urging of council auditors, took some of the sugar out of the deal last week, but it's still awful syrupy.
Before the Finance Committee changes, the city was going to give MPS the land for the three garages. The city will instead sell the land to MPS for $5.7 million, which is what the city paid for the three parcels.
Considering the city's track record on land deals, that sounds bold, until you read the fine print.
MPS won't be inking a $5.7 million check to the city to fill the hole left when the city paid for the land. Instead it won't begin paying off the debt until the three garages begin making a profit.
And that -- hold on to your hats -- may not happen for 15 years, if estimates in the proposal turn out to be right.
But don't worry. That $5.7 million will be accruing interest while the city waits to get its hands on the money -- at a whopping 2.85 percent interest rate annually.
There are other details in this deal that are likely to leave you sputtering and wondering where you can sign up to get in on this kind of action.
For instance, the city will issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds that MPS will use to build the garages. For its part, MPS will only put up $3 million in equity.
The kicker is this: While the garages are losing money -- remember that could be for 15 years -- the city will loan MPS money every six months to cover any deficit in debt service and operating costs.
And, oh yeah, the city loans will be enough to guarantee MPS an 8 percent to 10 percent return on its $3 million investment.
MPS will have to begin paying back those loans, again at 2.85 percent interest, once the cash flow from the garages is positive -- whenever that might be.
You might be asking, golly, what risk is the developer taking?
Good question.
But it's more than the financial aspects of this deal that Peyton should be questioning.
The courthouse garage should have a strong enough daily demand to make it workable, but are there enough events at the arena and sports complex to make those garages viable when there's already plenty of surface parking?
And do sports fan attending, say, a Jaguars game really want to tailgate inside a parking garage?
And imagine the fun of everyone trying to leave the parking garages at the same time.
Peyton already is associated with a garage that sits mostly empty. The thought of two more should send shivers down his spine.
ron.littlepagejacksonville.com, (904) 359-4284
http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/022404/opl_14896089.shtml
Good ol' Boys still at work. It's just amazing they keep finding stooges for their scams. Grand jury needs to investigate. Can our "representatives" really be this stupid? Follow the money.
QuoteMichael Balanky and his partners Carlton Jones, Toney Sleiman and Mark Rimmer of the Kings Avenue Redevelopment Group, LLC;
Just because we can't find readily available public documents naming partners and stockholders, one has to wonder if all these guys aren't partners in the City garages and the new Landing parking lot just given to Mr. Sleiman. The plot thickens.
Any city bidder seeking a contract with a non-public company should be required to make full disclosure of all stockholders and partners during the life of the contract. If this is already done (which I believe it may), Stephen, you should submit a request under the Sunshine Act to request it through the General Counsel's office. The City is compelled to disclose all its records.
Stephan, do you know what people like these truly want? These people and organizations can make so much more money and gain so more power if Jacksonville turned into a powerhouse city.
Have they given up on that idea? What's happening here? Why are these people leaving so much money on the table?
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 09:35:27 PM
Quote from: cityimrov on August 09, 2010, 09:29:07 PM
Stephan, do you know what people like these truly want? These people and organizations can make so much more money and gain so more power if Jacksonville turned into a powerhouse city. Have they given up on that idea? What's happening here?
Most people want a great city, these people are just bottom feeders, cityimrov. But there has been uncertainty and turmoil for the past 5 years.
Combination of the changing of the guard in the older families, and the total collapse of the younger sharks due to the real estate crash and stock market implosion.
Added to that the lackluster vision of the administration, and the toxic bubble of downtown and its been a real downer.
It needs leadership. Thats all.
WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE!
This whole episode is saddening. Good detective work guys. Unfortunately no one but a handful of us really care how corruption has really ruined this city, especially the urban core. Last week Jon Stewart started a segment called "I give up." This would certainly qualify. Seriously, "I give up."
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 09:35:27 PM
Quote from: cityimrov on August 09, 2010, 09:29:07 PM
Stephan, do you know what people like these truly want? These people and organizations can make so much more money and gain so more power if Jacksonville turned into a powerhouse city. Have they given up on that idea? What's happening here?
Most people want a great city, these people are just bottom feeders, cityimrov. But there has been uncertainty and turmoil for the past 5 years.
Combination of the changing of the guard in the older families, and the total collapse of the younger sharks due to the real estate crash and stock market implosion.
Added to that the lackluster vision of the administration, and the toxic bubble of downtown and its been a real downer.
It needs leadership. Thats all.
I'm just amazed how short sighted some people can be - to their own detriment. With all the land and all the property they own, these guys could be multimillionaires to maybe even billionaires if they just stop looking five feet in front of them and see the wonderful potential this area has.
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 06:21:39 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on August 09, 2010, 06:17:37 PM
Where's Tufsu when you need him?
designing garages, one assumes
or perhaps at a local organization meeting....you know, volunteering to make the community better!
It is a bit late tonight, so I'll look through this tomorrow and, if need be, respond
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 09, 2010, 11:22:06 PM
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 06:21:39 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on August 09, 2010, 06:17:37 PM
Where's Tufsu when you need him?
designing garages, one assumes
or perhaps at a local organization meeting....you know, volunteering to make the community better!
It is a bit late tonight, so I'll look through this tomorrow and, if need be, respond
:)
ok...so here are my thoughts:
1. It sucks that the City agreed to this deal in the first place
2. That said, if the City had built the garages, the cost to taxpayers would have been much higher
3. Things wouldn't have been so bad if the courthouse was built on schedule (like the garage was)
4. Imagine how empty the garages might stay if we made all street parking free w/ no time limits
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 09, 2010, 11:22:06 PM
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 06:21:39 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on August 09, 2010, 06:17:37 PM
Where's Tufsu when you need him?
designing garages, one assumes
or perhaps at a local organization meeting....you know, volunteering to make the community better!
It is a bit late tonight, so I'll look through this tomorrow and, if need be, respond
Yeah the parking policies you promote & defend have surely made things better alright. For exactly 3 people.
I'm sure Rimmer will send you a "Thanks" from the satphone on his yacht.
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 10, 2010, 07:56:06 AM
4. Imagine how empty the garages might stay if we made all street parking free w/ no time limits
Yeah, wouldn't it be great? That's the whole point.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on August 10, 2010, 08:03:09 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 09, 2010, 11:22:06 PM
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 06:21:39 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on August 09, 2010, 06:17:37 PM
Where's Tufsu when you need him?
designing garages, one assumes
or perhaps at a local organization meeting....you know, volunteering to make the community better!
It is a bit late tonight, so I'll look through this tomorrow and, if need be, respond
Yeah the parking policies you promote & defend have surely made things better alright. For exactly 3 people.
I'm sure Rimmer will send you a "Thanks" from the satphone on his yacht.
wait...so now you're attacking me for volunteering on the board of a local community organization (not a development-related one btw)....nice!
NOT ONE PERSON has proposed unlimited free parking, tufsu1.
I have not read all of this, because it is so lengthy, but DVI is not the culprit. They are just an arm of the city. Peyton is the father and executor of this idea, for good or bad.
I never thought it was a good idea to guarantee a profit to MPS, and states as much before the garages were built.
Quote from: vicupstate on August 10, 2010, 08:25:31 AM
NOT ONE PERSON has proposed unlimited free parking, tufsu1.
not true vic...both Stephen and Chris support the idea of no on-street parking limits
Quote from: stephendare on August 10, 2010, 08:59:38 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on August 09, 2010, 08:06:10 PM
Wow. So Jax is paying more a year on subsidizing half empty downtown parking garages than JTA pays for the skyway? I wonder why no one has ever mentioned this before?
And Lake you may remember that in order to justify building these parkingscrapers, Rimmer was instrumental in getting the ordinances changed, raising the parking tickets from 5 dollars to 15.
After they changed the fees (tripling them in most cases), rimmer and associates then drove around downtown for months, having memorized all the statutes, and would begin calling in and complaining all day as 'citizens' (while he was still using the DVI address, incidentally) until parking enforcement was issuing two and three tickets at a time. People were leaving downtown with 70 dollar tickets.
All to force people to use the garages.
prick.
Who know this would open such a can of worms ;)
Tufsu, these parking policies have killed the urban core.
We've tried it your way, and it's failed miserably. For the city, for taxpayers, for business owners, for everyone. What exactly would be wrong with eliminating these asinine policies and getting rid of parking meters? We already tried it your way, it doesn't work.
I think a reasonable compromise is Jerry's idea, which is scrapping all meters and replacing it with open parking with a REASONABLE (e.g., not 30 minutes) time-limit. Barring that, I say get rid of paid parking altogether. Since we've finally determined the real number of workers down there is 7,000 (down from 90,000 thanks in large part to your parking policies), every single worker would have to bring 5 cars with them before we'd start to have a shortage.
These asinine policies do nothing more than create an artificially inflated price for something there is an oversupply of and no demand for. And now we know we're all actually paying for it as taxpayers. Nice.
Quote from: stephendare on August 10, 2010, 08:19:43 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 10, 2010, 07:56:06 AM
ok...so here are my thoughts:
1. It sucks that the City agreed to this deal in the first place
2. That said, if the City had built the garages, the cost to taxpayers would have been much higher
3. Things wouldn't have been so bad if the courthouse was built on schedule (like the garage was)
4. Imagine how empty the garages might stay if we made all street parking free w/ no time limits
your points two and four cancel each other out, dont they?
And if we can imagine that they would be empty, then doesnt that make the point that they were completely unecessary?
well realistucally there aren't many streets down by the sports complex...so there's not much opportunity for on-street parking....and those garages do just fine when there are events at the dtsaium, ballpark, and/or arena....they were clearly built for that purpose.
And I'm also willing to bet the courhouse garage will be well used once the building opens....and here's why...
As has been noted here before, there are streets downtown that don't have meters and yet remain without many parked cars...meanwhile, many people continue to use meter spots....maybe, just maybe, they like to park near their destination.
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 10, 2010, 10:01:25 AM
Quote from: stephendare on August 10, 2010, 08:19:43 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 10, 2010, 07:56:06 AM
ok...so here are my thoughts:
1. It sucks that the City agreed to this deal in the first place
2. That said, if the City had built the garages, the cost to taxpayers would have been much higher
3. Things wouldn't have been so bad if the courthouse was built on schedule (like the garage was)
4. Imagine how empty the garages might stay if we made all street parking free w/ no time limits
your points two and four cancel each other out, dont they?
And if we can imagine that they would be empty, then doesnt that make the point that they were completely unecessary?
well realistucally there aren't many streets down by the sports complex...so there's not much opportunity for on-street parking....and those garages do just fine when there are events at the dtsaium, ballpark, and/or arena....they were clearly built for that purpose.
And I'm also willing to bet the courhouse garage will be well used once the building opens....and here's why...
As has been noted here before, there are streets downtown that don't have meters and yet remain without many parked cars...meanwhile, many people continue to use meter spots....maybe, just maybe, they like to park near their destination.
Of course the courthouse garage will be used, no $h!t sherlock! It's not like the defendants, their lawyers, the court reporters, the court clerks and judicial employees can all decide they're not going to go there because of the asinine parking policies, can they?
It's a completely captive audience. What a ridiculous argument!
ok Chris....maybe (although I doubt it) we can end this debate...
As I have said all along, I support any/all of the following measures
1. replacing the meters with smart meters which take coins, credit cards, cell phone payments, etc.
2. replacing meters with parking boxes (1 per block)
3. removing meters and having time-restricted free parking....in some places, it may need to be no more than 30 minutes (like in front of the UPS store...ask them about the 2 hour meters)...but probably can't be more than 3 hours anywhere
Quote from: tufsu1 on August 10, 2010, 10:05:00 AM
3. removing meters and having time-restricted free parking....in some places, it may need to be no more than 30 minutes (like in front of the UPS store...ask them about the 2 hour meters)...but probably can't be more than 3 hours anywhere
I think that's a reasonable compromise, except it ought to be a blanket 2 or 3 hours everywhere. It's an urban area, the reality is that people need to learn they might have to walk a half a block. Also, we've all seen how these politico weasels manipulate the system, and how parking enforcement twists the law (e.g., issuing 3 and 4 tickets at a time to the same vehicle for the same offense, because nothing says they can't).
I believe there need to be no loopholes whatsoever in the policy that would allow for the continuation of "business as usual." To that end, I think allowing anyone the leeway to declare 30 minute time limits and then enforce them would wind up with the same disastrous results as the parking meters have. Next thing we'd know, all of downtown would be a 30-minute limit. And the whole point is to simplify things such that people go down there, so having a bunch of different time zones would defeat the goal of eliminating confusion.
I think it should be "no less than" 2 or 3 hours, with some of the outlying areas where nobody ever parks being de-limited altogether. But we're making progress on this debate, I'll give you that. The current policies do nothing except continue to kill what little is left of downtown, and cost the taxpayers hugely, while enriching 3 individuals.
DT Greenville has 2 hr non-metered parking throughout, but certain select spaces are designated with 15 or 30 minute limits. The lower limits are specifically at the 'in and out' businesses like banks. Not all of the spaces near 'in and out' businesses are 15/30 minutes, just the closest ones. After 6pm and on weekends, all street parking is free and unlimited as are a couple of the garages as well.
It works very, very well. It is a challenge to find a space on Friday and Saturday evenings, as all the restaurants are packed all evening (not a bad problem to have), otherwise it is a breeze.
stjr............by my standards, tis a dead heat on which is the most incompetant! I think there is a difference between incompetance and outright stealing.............take your pick either one and either way!
I am cheap and most of the time proud of it. ;) I refuse to pay ridiculous amounts for parking downtown and have never once in the past 3 years I've lived here paid to park in one of the privately run garages. Paying $3-6 to run errands is stupid! So what do I do?
1) I don't mind walking. During the day I will park in the free-1 hour limit spot on Adams and walk to Burrito Gallery, Main Library, Chamblins, Bank of America or my eye doctor.
2) If those spots are taken, which now they probably will be since I shared my secret, then I will park in an open meter because 50 cents is acceptable to pay in my mind. There are usually a lot of open meters on the western blocks past Hogan. People just need to stop being fat and be willing to walk a block or two!
3) After 6 I always park in the free courthouse lot if I'm going to the Landing or Bay Street. If I'm going to the TU I park on the free side streets north of Forsyth and West of Hogan. It's completely dead up there.
4) If I'm attending the Arena or a Suns game, there is free parking on streets to the northwest of the jail and only about a half mile walk to the Arena.
5) Artwalk can be tricky, but there are always open spots by the churches.
I wonder how many people are like me? If there are a lot, then it will give you some insight into the parking situation downtown and how it could be improved and/or why the city entered into what they should have seen as a stupid-ass agreement. Peyton and his crooks are so arrogant! ::)
Detective stephen...who was behind the initial push for BRT on all of the downtown streets? I just realized that by making all of the street parking into bus only lanes, they might have thought they could force everyone into parking in their expensive garages. :o Will getting rid of street parking around the new courthouse force everyone into their parking garage? Are these same folks behind why we can't put BRT in its grave?
Brainstormer, I think the City is eliminating 75 parking spaces on Broad and Jefferson for BRT. JTA said they were only used 5% of the time. Of course, that's without consideration of the completion of the courthouse. Don't you just love how they think ahead at COJ and JTA?
And, I agree, there is a conspiracy to eliminate street parking over time downtown. I mentioned this before and was chastised for being a bit paranoid but, sorry, it's true and its happening day by day, a little bit here and little bit there.
P.S. Is Laura Street losing any street parking to the rebuild?
As to your avoidance of paid parking, especially garages, I follow the same "rules of engagement" you do. I pride myself in mostly avoiding paying at all, and certainly no more than 1 to 2 hours on a meter. Not only are garages expensive, they are tight to navigate, and, the worst, when an event is over, you can wait 30 to 45 minutes to exit one. All this for a premium price! :D And, for the most part, none of them have validated parking programs with businesses downtown. So, the businesses and the garages just sit empty.
Here is another idea: When meeting people for a downtown event, park just outside of downtown and pile into one car. Save looking for parking spaces blocks apart from each other and the costs.
In the end, sadly, like has been said here, many times downtown is just not considered due to the poor navigation and user-friendliness of the place. And, I really do love being down there to boot.
Growing up, the best place to park was CSX. But, then they got tight fisted, fenced their property, and put up electric gates and "no parking" or "reserved 24 hrs. for CSX" signs. It looks like they use their parking as an "employee benefit" for events downtown as I do see some of them swooping in for shows at the TUPAC.
stjr....I agree! There is definitely something wrong with the parking for sure! What there is, could be considered not user friendly by any stretch of the imagination! COJ and JTA can not plan their way out of a wet paper bag and the proposed BRT, we taxpayers will be funding, is a crock of crud! So much wrong with it and still the problems JTA has with ridership numbers, drivers without common courtesy and the lack of shelters throughout the system just leaves me cold! JTA still has not posted operating numbers for last year have they?
QuoteDT Greenville has 2 hr non-metered parking throughout, but certain select spaces are designated with 15 or 30 minute limits. The lower limits are specifically at the 'in and out' businesses like banks. Not all of the spaces near 'in and out' businesses are 15/30 minutes, just the closest ones. After 6pm and on weekends, all street parking is free and unlimited as are a couple of the garages as well.
It works very, very well. It is a challenge to find a space on Friday and Saturday evenings, as all the restaurants are packed all evening (not a bad problem to have), otherwise it is a breeze.
Perfect. What's preventing us from doing this here, and I mean right away?
^Policy
FIRE policy !
So in you guys opinion, does removing or changing the policies on parking make downtown more attractive to business owners as in bringing in new businesses? I have lived downtown for 2 years and even after leaving, parking has never really been a gripe for me. I always seem to find parking, though I'm never really downtown that much during the day other than the occasional lunch downtown. But whatever is going to get more businesses to move into downtown, I'm all for it.
Years ago around 5 Points all the parking was restricted to two hours. The nice policeman would come around on his tricycle and mark the back tires of the cars with colored chalk (different color every day). Two hours later he would circle back around and ticket all those cars that still had marks on the tires and mark the new ones.
No meters, reasonable time limit, no more difficult to enforce than what we have now, BUT, no revenue from meters.
Was always funny to see women in heels and hats crouched down by their cars trying to rub the chalk marks away.
QuoteYears ago around 5 Points all the parking was restricted to two hours. The nice policeman would come around on his tricycle and mark the back tires of the cars with colored chalk (different color every day). Two hours later he would circle back around and ticket all those cars that still had marks on the tires and mark the new ones.
No meters, reasonable time limit, no more difficult to enforce than what we have now, BUT, no revenue from meters.
Was always funny to see women in heels and hats crouched down by their cars trying to rub the chalk marks away.
The Parking enforcement employees use hand-held computers in Greenville. They type in the plate numbers on their circuit and when a plate number is repeated 2 hrs after it was first entered, it prints a ticket. No chalk to erase. Because the circuit takes 15 or so minutes to cover, you normally get 5-15 gratis minutes before a ticket is actually issued.
Chalk IS old technology! ;)
Quote from: stjr on August 09, 2010, 08:31:56 PM
Looks like the City Council had second thoughts soon after the deal was done. But, apparently, going to see Prince in concert was more important!
QuotePublished Sunday, May 9, 2004
CITY NOTES: Council to debate recanting support for parking garages
By MATT GALNOR
The Times-Union,
A City Council battle could break out Tuesday in an ongoing tussle about a $50 million deal for downtown Jacksonville parking garages that the council approved in February.
Some council members want Mayor John Peyton to take another look at the deal and have proposed a resolution asking Peyton to do so. Peyton, who would not be legally bound by the resolution, says contracts have been signed and the deal is done.
The council was supposed to take the issue up at its April 27 meeting, but council President Lad Daniels delayed the vote, mostly because he expected extended debate and several members wanted to leave to catch the Prince concert at Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena.
The proposal was approved unanimously in the council's Finance Committee but did not get the required four votes to pass the Recreation, Community Development and Education Committee. Committee members asked Councilman Art Shad, who is strongly opposed to the resolution, to vote for it just to get it out of committee, but Shad refused.
Now, 13 of the 19 members will have to vote Tuesday to take the resolution out of committee, and plenty of debate is expected.
Councilman Warren Alvarez, who along with Daniels sponsored the resolution, says the city is making a 30-year mistake on the garages. Plans call for three garages, two in the sports complex and a third by the new Duval County Courthouse.
As part of the deal, the city will issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds on behalf of Metropolitan Parking Solutions, which would be responsible for paying off the debt. The city would also make semi-annual loans to the developer so it can cover its debt payments, operating expenses and guarantee the company an 8 percent return on its $3 million investment.
SMG, the company that runs Jacksonville's sports facilities, is paid through concession sales, parking revenue and city subsidies. Some council members said they didn't know at the time of the first vote that SMG estimates it could lose $800,000 annually in parking revenue, which would drive the city subsidy up.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions said that estimate isn't accurate, and Peyton's office said the council had ample time to review the proposal.
"I'm man enough to admit I made a mistake," Alvarez said.
Stephen, I stand corrected. Warren Alvarez initially voted for MPS but it was in the resolution to have it reversed that he brought this mistake that we now know is true as being a taxpayer nightmare. That's what I recall and he was crunching some numbers at that time that should of had it reversed.
Good thing that the city council just voted themselves free parking under this new DIA. Is there any update on the $20,000 emergency no bid contract for the new comfy chairs?
I don't recall anything that Alvarez did that did not benefit someone, other than the politicians, contractors, and such, at the expense of the tax payers. He never saw a bad development.
Companies will continue to leave downtown until the landlords of the office buildings and the parking facilities decide to compete with the suburbs. They have to do it with either rates, rents, or amenities. But they are not trying now.
Every city has to compete with the burbs. Office rental rates in the best suburban locations in Jax seem on par, if not slightly higher, than rental rates DT. Amenities in buildings downtown likely far surpass those found in the burbs already, simply due to size and concentration (and being near lunch spots and after work entertainment is a big amenity when compared to suburban locations). Parking in DT Jax is really really cheap, of course it seems expensive compared to free parking in Deerwood, but ~$80/mo probably on average? Nashville is probably close to double that already.
Landlords of the office buildings are held hostage by a lack of vision from the city overall and a lack of high brow business in general, which would typically locate in a CBD tower over a suburban campus. Pricing of DT office buildings reflects this, as there is no rent growth as a result and major vacancy risk. There is no fault to the landlords on why companies leave DT and there is no reason for them to upgrade their buildings when original pricing is set to allow them to "survive" in this tough market and hopefully walk away with a decent return (which is exceedingly unlikely).
This is no worse than the corporate welfare thats been a huge part of cash bleeding from this city.
Quote from: simms3 on May 30, 2013, 11:43:39 AM
................Landlords of the office buildings are held hostage by a lack of vision from the city overall and a lack of high brow business in general, which would typically locate in a CBD tower over a suburban campus. Pricing of DT office buildings reflects this, as there is no rent growth as a result and major vacancy risk. There is no fault to the landlords on why companies leave DT and there is no reason for them to upgrade their buildings when original pricing is set to allow them to "survive" in this tough market and hopefully walk away with a decent return (which is exceedingly unlikely).
Modis would disagree.
Quote from: Overstreet on May 30, 2013, 02:19:41 PM
Quote from: simms3 on May 30, 2013, 11:43:39 AM
................Landlords of the office buildings are held hostage by a lack of vision from the city overall and a lack of high brow business in general, which would typically locate in a CBD tower over a suburban campus. Pricing of DT office buildings reflects this, as there is no rent growth as a result and major vacancy risk. There is no fault to the landlords on why companies leave DT and there is no reason for them to upgrade their buildings when original pricing is set to allow them to "survive" in this tough market and hopefully walk away with a decent return (which is exceedingly unlikely).
Modis would disagree.
Modis would disagree to what?
One of the major reasons Modis left downtown was because of the cost associated with parking. It's one thing to pay higher prices for something that has nothing to do with your line of business if the surrounding environment makes up for it. However, if you have hundreds of employees, and you're in the business of making money, it does make sense to locate in areas where public subsidies make it cheaper to operate.
it doesn't matter if parking is cheap compared to other cities. it matters if a company is willing to pay that cost to be downtown.
^^^Yes. And let's do the quick math here.
Modis had what around 400 employees in there? Let's assume they parked 300 people at an average of $80/mo per person. I believe they occupied around 115,000 SF. That works out to an additional $2.50/sf. In the grand scheme of things that's chump change, especially for a large parent such as MPS group.
The spread in rent between Deerwood and Modis Tower is a couple bucks at most, if there is even a spread - it's basically the same rent, so the largest difference is probably parking, which is not that great of a difference. Call it a $5 spread ($20 base in Deerwood, $25 base in DT). A 1.25x with parking included. They had signage downtown, as well. When in the grand scheme of your balance sheet your Jacksonville rent is negligible, does it really warrant an expensive move, especially when the difference isn't that great?? It's one thing to leave $60 rents in Manhattan to pay $35-$40 rents elsewhere, thus over 115,000 SF saving nearly $3M/year in rent, not to mention a parking rate going from $500+ to maybe $250, which is a much larger difference than going from $80 to $0. In Jax they are saving at the same SF with a $5psf spread including parking at most $575,000/year. Is that worth the move for a company the size of MPS???
I would have to bet that given the cost to move locations, especially a major change of formats (multi-floor, multitenant high rise to large floorplate, possibly single-tenant building), there are other driving reasons for the move.
Perhaps they're simply downsizing space? There could be host of reasons why they left (didn't they go from 115,000 SF to 80,000 SF?). It wasn't the LL, who actually appears to have more than backfilled the space with a better credit profile tenant. If Modis sees no reason to be DT and takes the easy excuse out by calling "parking", I think city leaders need to ask themselves more questions, which it seems as if they have been. There's no reason why a large office user such as Modis should not in fact be downtown. In Jax, given the lack of a major spread between SS/Baymeadows office space and DT office space, there should be an easier excuse TO BE downtown.
From 2010:
Quote from: fieldafm on July 27, 2010, 03:18:06 PM
From what I've heard... the financials were all around better with Flagler. Parking is one thing, but that coupled with a more flexible and cheaper lease term with comparable facilities made it an easy deal to make.
And, not everyone that works in the Modis building has access to the parking garage. Some employees still pay for outside parking.
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,9268.msg167025.html#msg167025
I thought this was an interesting article that relates to this topic.
QuoteCharlotte Center City Partners President Michael Smith believes it’s time to add some skyscrapers to uptown’s skyline.
Last year, vacancy rates in uptown dropped 2.3 percent for prime office space â€" called “Class A†in real estate parlance. Vacancies now have fallen below 9 percent, an encouraging trend as companies buoyed by the economic recovery add workers.
But to make the new skyscrapers happen, Smith told City Council earlier this month, city leaders might need to subsidize the attendant parking garages.
That idea didn’t exactly make council members leap for joy. They’re already getting an earful from residents annoyed by a newly approved 7.25 percent city tax hike and the city’s $87.5 million contribution toward the Panthers’ renovation of Bank of America stadium.
But when I circled back to Smith last week, he elaborated on why the city might want to at least give the concept some thought.
Before the banking crisis, Smith said, the amount of office space in uptown kept growing because Bank of America and the former Wachovia kept growing.
In the 1990s, uptown added 5 million square feet of office space. In the first decade of the 21st century, it added 6 million square feet. But since 2010, no new space has come online.
According to Center City Partners, 118,000 square feet of space is available in the Fifth Third Center, 100,000 at 101 Independence Center and 90,000 at 525 North Tryon.
Vacancy rates above the 15th floor in all of uptown’s towers are down to 2 percent to 3 percent.
When insurance giant MetLife earlier this year announced it was coming to Charlotte and bringing 1,300-plus jobs, it chose 340,000 square feet of space at Ballantyne Corporate Park.
Uptown lost out.
So who’ll do the building now that the big banks are no longer in aggressive expansion mode? It appears the job might fall to more traditional developers. And for them, the calculus of launching a major office tower project uptown isn’t the same as it is for a big bank.
While the banks built towers to expand their operations and increase their long-term profits, a traditional developer comes in asking a more urgent set of questions.
Can the financing be arranged? How much will it cost? Are tenants lined up? How long before the initial investment can be recouped?
In short, the question of risk looms larger.
And since the city’s zoning code requires parking spaces for new office buildings of a certain size uptown, some say city-subsidized parking becomes a quick risk reducer.
“The uptown space is more expensive just due to the fact that you have to pay for parking,†said John Culbertson of Cardinal Real Estate Partners. “If you subsidize parking, it levels the playing field.â€
Parking isn’t generally something most people think of as an economic development lever.
But cities around the country commonly build parking garages as a way to attract office space and jobs, said Casey Jones, immediate past chairman of the International Parking Institute, a trade group representing the parking industry.
“If the city is able to partner with the private sector and create opportunities for the office environment to grow, then retail will follow that and restaurants and service industries will follow both,†he said.
City planners are thinking about parking as they look for ways to keep uptown growing. Laura Harmon, assistant director of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Department, told me her department is talking with a consultant now about parking rules.
If the city doesn’t like the idea of subsidizing garages for developers, why not just eliminate the off-street parking requirements? After all, don’t they just encourage car driving in a city that’s spending heavily on light rail and trolleys?
“We’d be fine if (developers) would build in uptown without parking,†Harmon said. “But I don’t know that it would work. An office worker usually wants parking.â€
Bryan Howell of Parkway Properties said parking is a key piece of the puzzle when it comes to building office space uptown. But he’s not convinced the time is right for more towers.
While he sees the point some are making about vacancy rates uptown, when he digs down into the data, he sees enough space coming available uptown over the next year or so to accommodate a major corporate relocation.
Plus, when it comes to building a new tower, he says, there’s always the question of whether you can get financing.
He’d like to see the occupancy rates squeeze even tighter.
“The underwriting of the fundamental economics has got to be in place. I’m not sure the market has those underwriting fundamentals in place yet,†he said.
That doesn’t mean uptown’s not a great market, he added. It’s still got the advantage of being home to the big bank headquarters and the networking opportunities that brings.
Smith said that while he’d welcome another bank-built tower, he also believes the current state of affairs represents an opportunity for Charlotte’s economy to evolve, to diversify.
He said he’s working with developers on multiple sites.
“We are a maturing market,†he said. “We do believe the demand is there.â€
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/06/22/4121843/to-build-next-skyscraper-must.html#storylink=cpy
Just happened to stumble on this and given the recent urban construction update any thoughts? Is the new DIA or is it OED that is overseeing parking?
Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2010, 07:50:33 PM
Published Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Duval courthouse parking privatization would bring big rate hike
By DAVID BAUERLEIN
The Times-Union,
Privatizing the parking garage for the new Duval County Courthouse could be a big moneymaker for City Hall, but visitors and employees would pay the price in sharply higher parking rates, according to documents for the proposed deal.
City Council will consider giving land to Metropolitan Parking Solutions for a new 1,300-space courthouse parking garage, plus a 600-space garage next to the new arena and a neighboring 1,000-space garage at the sports complex.
The privatized courthouse parking proposal would include a 1,300-space garage, plus other garages for the arena and nearby for the sports complex. -- Rendering provided by the Metropolitan Parking Solution
The Jacksonville Economic Development Commission calculates that a combination of property taxes from the three garages and profit-sharing with the developers will pump more than $18 million into City Hall coffers over a 30-year period.
The flip side of privatization is people will pay market-based rates at the courthouse garage.
Currently, visitors pay 80 cents an hour to park in the 400-space lot behind the existing courthouse. The first half-hour is free. Metropolitan Parking Solutions' proposed rates for the new courthouse garage would be $3 for the first hour and $2 for each additional hour, reflecting the current rate for downtown garages. The rates would apply to all courthouse visitors, including jurors, who use the garage.
"That's excessive," said Jacksonville resident Harold Felder, who was doing research at the law library. "We pay taxes as it stands now and that should provide us with some kind of benefit. I don't expect taxes to cover everything so I expect to pay some charge. But $3 for the first hour is excessive."
"I think they're entitled to make a little bit of profit, but not make it so it costs you an arm and a leg to park there," said Jacksonville resident Thomas Mangan, who was looking up county clerk records.
Monthly rates for the new courthouse garage would be $80 for non-reserved spaces and $120 for reserved spaces, compared with $25 a month at the current courthouse lot. However, monthly parking is scarce because of the lot's small size.
The $2.2 billion Better Jacksonville Plan, approved by voters with a half-cent sales tax increase in 2000, contains funding for construction of the new county courthouse, which is slated to open in 2007, and for the new arena and baseball park. The Better Jacksonville Plan contained no money for parking garages at the new buildings.
A year ago the JEDC invited private developer proposals for financing the garages. The JEDC chose Metropolitan Parking Solutions, which is a joint effort of The Haskell Co., Republic Parking System, Jana Enterprises, Realistic Transportation Alternatives and Carl Walker Inc.
The JEDC board voted Dec. 4 for the parking privatization plan. The city would issue $50 million in tax-exempt bonds on behalf of Metropolitan Parking Solutions, which would be solely responsible for paying off the debt. In addition, Metropolitan Parking Solutions would manage the 600-space garage being built with taxpayer money for the new downtown library.
This rendering shows what a 600-space arena parking structure would look under Metropolitan Parking Solutions' proposal. -- Rendering provided by the Metropolitan Parking Solution
Mayor John Peyton supports the proposed agreement, said Susan Wiles, his chief of special initiatives and communication.
However, Peyton is looking for ways in which City Hall will help pay the cost of parking for visitors at the courthouse and library, she said. For instance, she said the new library might have a validation program for patrons in which they could park free for the first hour. The city would set up a similar program to pick up some of the cost for short-term parking at the courthouse, she said.
In both cases, City Hall would make payments to Metropolitan Parking Solutions to help cover the cost of parking for courthouse and library visitors.
The city has not finalized details of the program or what it will cost City Hall to implement them.
"The overarching goal is to get people downtown and enable them to do business conveniently and at a minimum cost," Wiles said.
City Council Auditor Richard Wallace said the best way to curb parking rates might be for the city to own and operate the garages.
"All things being equal, the city can operate a garage less expensively than the private sector," Wallace said, noting the city doesn't need to turn a profit.
The JEDC did some rough calculations on what the city would have to charge for parking to break even if the city were to own and operate the garages. The monthly rate would need to be about $69 and the hourly rate would have to be about $1 "at a minimum," said Steve Emery, chief of finance and administration for JEDC.
City-owned garages wouldn't generate property tax revenue for City Hall or other entities, including the school district. But Wallace said there's an argument to be made that parking is part of the basic infrastructure of the courthouse, library and sports complex.
"Sure, we can privatize it with the idea that the private sector can charge what it wants to make a profit, but let's remember that our citizens are the ones who pay that [parking fee]," he said.
Many employees will hunt for cheaper parking because they can't afford the courthouse garage, said Chief Assistant State Attorney Jay Plotkin.
"You've got to charge what you've got to charge to do it financially," he said. "But it is an added burden."
Metropolitan Parking Solutions recognized when putting together its proposal that not everyone could or would pay market-based rates, said Mark Rimmer, a member of the development team. The JEDC originally called for 2,600 spaces at the courthouse, but that has been cut in half in the proposal pending before the City Council.
Rimmer said the city-approved downtown master plan and a series of parking studies have called on market-based parking prices in the core of downtown, with more affordable parking offered on the edge of downtown at park-and-ride locations.
For instance, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority's Trolley -- which is a bus that resembles a streetcar -- picks up downtown workers who park for $25 a month in a lot at the sports complex. The Skyway, which runs on elevated tracks through downtown, connects with the Kings Avenue Parking Garage on the Southbank and at parking lots next to the Prime Osborn Convention Center.
The JTA's rates for the monthly parking ranges from $28 to $33.
Metropolitan Parking Solutions' proposed rates for the parking garage at the arena and sports complex are based on a 2000 JEDC study that was done for the new arena and baseball stadium.
The proposed fee for special events is a $5 flat rate, $8 for concerts and $20 for football games. The 1,000-space garage, which is next to the trolley's park-and-ride lot, also will offer monthly parking for $25.
neither...there is an Office of Parking....but there has been some talk of moving downtown parking under the auspices of the DIA
When I worked in the Loop in Chicago, you could buy discounted parking stickers from the company which allowed you to park in a nearby garage. But this was a private arrangement between my employer and the garage owner.
I rarely drove anyway and took Metra everyday because the State of Illinois cut a deal with the Feds to allow people to use tax free dollars as a payroll deduction to purchase monthly passes. That was hugely successful.
I don't think its right to be subsidizing parking garages. If anything let employers negotiate their own deals with the garages. They will have just as much leverage as the city because they can shop it.
Public garage subsidies should really be going into transit funding. If people used transit to reach employers downtown, then you don't need so much garage space. Then employers have even more leverage to negotiate for parking space.
Its a circle that needs to be broken. All it takes is some leadership and some reliable fixed transit options that people can rely on. And I am not talking about BRT.