Landing bill moves forward without preservation funds, but mayor may veto

[tufsu1]

that's not a new smell...its been happening on occassion for years

[simms3]

Field:

OK so I criticized Toney as so many people have.  You are defending him as adamantly as I criticized him...so my vendetta which isn't as strong as you think it is is probably as strong as your apparent loyalty to the guy.  Maybe I spoke too soon, but I'm just going off of hearsay from people who have dealt with him.  (and yes in case you were wondering i'm partial to Regency)

And yes I hate that strip mall that took the place of the theater.  Sure my parents and just about everyone else in the neighborhood can more conveniently go to Pinch a Penny there rather than God forsaken Orange Park, but nothing else imo is redeemable there.  And the center is ugly as sin.  I had a lot of memories from the crappy theater there and grew up with the Kents whose family owned that theater and a few others so I was disappointed to see it replaced with the current building.

I also have been to the Landing with Twisted and since Twisted left and I noticed a huge difference.  Sure Twisted is not my thing, I would never go there...ew, but it brought crowds.

I also don't want to be quick to place full blame for the Landing's shortcomings on the City.  It's a touchy subject.  I realize the parking is 90% the city's fault, but I think even that is semi complicated.  Don't forget how prime the current parking lot is where the Riverwatch was planned.  If that development had gone through (and I am sure even had Kuhn not gone bankrupt he is happy that something of that scale did not get built with his name attached) the parking situation would have been largely solved and an awesome development would have simultaneously gone in (with parking on the non-river side and an attractive building covering it up from the river side).

So answer me this...Sleiman does not hold a ground lease?  If Sleiman holds a standard lease of the Landing building, what is the term?  If Sleiman does hold a ground lease, what is preventing him from doing what he wants/should with the building?  He could essentially demolish part of the Landing in that case and build his own freakin parking! (of course the city still has failed to uphold their parking contract and nobody is denying that)

Also, you are right and Sleiman is shrewd, which is why I think we shouldn't excuse him as the complete victim here.  He has dealt with the city a million times and knew what he was getting into with the Landing.  He knew of the ongoing failure of the city to uphold its end of the bargain and supply dedicated parking and he knew most if not all of the individuals in City Hall with which he would be dealing with.  He took on the challenge knowing all the risks, so what exactly is going to happen and why should we completely sympathize with Sleiman?  I for one am taking the stand of not sympathizing with the city or with Sleiman.

[Steve]

-He has a ground lease, which usually are for 99 years and allows the "tenant" to build whatever zoning permits on the ground

His lease is under 50 years, not 99, which according to him has specifically been a financing issue.  This was uncovered during a MetroJacksonville interview with him in 2006.

[fieldafm]

-He has a ground lease, which usually are for 99 years and allows the "tenant" to build whatever zoning permits on the ground

His lease is under 50 years, not 99, which according to him has specifically been a financing issue.  This was uncovered during a MetroJacksonville interview with him in 2006.

BINGO!!!  That means, more than likely, funding a large buildout will be heavily reliant on cash.

I also don't want to be quick to place full blame for the Landing's shortcomings on the City.  It's a touchy subject.  I realize the parking is 90% the city's fault, but I think even that is semi complicated.  Don't forget how prime the current parking lot is where the Riverwatch was planned.  If that development had gone through (and I am sure even had Kuhn not gone bankrupt he is happy that something of that scale did not get built with his name attached) the parking situation would have been largely solved and an awesome development would have simultaneously gone in (with parking on the non-river side and an attractive building covering it up from the river side).

If the Riverwatch building was ever started, it would resemble Berkman II today.
If it ever got built, it would be largely empty and had been foreclosed on.
It was a mixed blessing it never got built.

Also, you are right and Sleiman is shrewd, which is why I think we shouldn't excuse him as the complete victim here.  He has dealt with the city a million times and knew what he was getting into with the Landing.  He knew of the ongoing failure of the city to uphold its end of the bargain and supply dedicated parking and he knew most if not all of the individuals in City Hall with which he would be dealing with.  He took on the challenge knowing all the risks, so what exactly is going to happen and why should we completely sympathize with Sleiman?  I for one am taking the stand of not sympathizing with the city or with Sleiman.

I never said he was a victim.  He was shrewd enough to finally get the city to live up to its parking obligation... even in the face of an ongoing feud b/w two families.

You can choose two options, hate on the guy and root for the centerpiece of downtown to fail... or root for the guy, which in turn is rooting for the success of the city's identified ground zero of downtown revitlization.

[Riverrat]

Side bar: The Landing is currently experiencing a new and indelicate issue, a plumbing matter of some sort. I've breezed in and out over the past few weeks and there is what seems like a raw sewage smell inside centered around the central thruway! Very disgusting and not the least bit appetizing to the routine user much less the out of town guest! Needs to be resolved asap, me thinks!

Seriously - that smell is foul. There must be a serious ongoing issue, but it needs to be taken care of!

Moving on...the Landing is an embarrassment to the city at this point. I would never take a visitor there as it gives off such a horrible impression of Jacksonville. It attracts a very low class crowd, the work force in the restaurants are shady, and it doesn't look like anything has been renovated since the mid 90's. It's going to take more than a parking lot to save this dump.

[thelakelander]

^Yet its about the only place in DT where you'll find people on a regular basis.  So if it sucks, that's a larger indictment on downtown in general.  It will take more than parking to get the best utilization out of it.  Dedicated parking is to help lure additional tenants.  If you want the place renovated, then the city should seriously consider a deal that sells the guy the land underneath it and also demolishes the central portion to open the courtyard to Laura Street.  Until that is done, don't expect significant improvement to take place on the property.

[Ethylene]

http://jaxdailyrecord.com/downtowntoday.php?dt_date=2010-11-10

Perhaps this drainage work can mitigate the foul odor issue.

[fieldafm]

That links to a blurb about the Peacemaker... my dad and I toured the ship yesterday, and it was fascinating.  They basically live and operate like the pilgrims once did.  Its free and I would encourage anyone to take a tour.

[KuroiKetsunoHana]

They basically live and operate like the pilgrims once did. 

where do they find native americans to exploit?

[fieldafm]

They basically live and operate like the pilgrims once did. 

where do they find native americans to exploit?

You should really tour the ship before you make fun... they were all wonderfully nice and goodwilled people that you would be honored to make aquaintance with.

[fieldafm]

5 months have gone by and this administration is dragging its feet as much as humanely possible to release this money.

The feud continues....

[thelakelander]

Mayor, council in a time crunch to salvage deal with Jacksonville Landing


Jacksonville Mayor John Peyton apparently will be standing by to sign a bill he doesn't like Tuesday night so plans to improve parking at The Jacksonville Landing don't evaporate at midnight.

The city and Landing owner Toney Sleiman don't have an agreement yet that would fulfill a pledge the city made in the 1980s to provide parking for the downtown shopping center.

Instead, they have a deadline of midnight Tuesday to use or lose an agreement the City Council made last year to give Sleiman $3.5 million toward the purchase of a 300-space parking lot at Hogan and Bay streets. That purchase would conclude the city's obligation.

full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-02-21/story/mayor-council-time-crunch-salvage-deal-jacksonville-landing

[urbaknight]

Will these idiots ever solve this problem? It's getting to the point that, I don't even care how it's paid for, just get the damn thing done already!!!

[copperfiend]

Its a joke at this point.

[johnny_simpatico]

I say let it fail.  The city, which owns the underlying property can then demolish the thing and work some forward-thinking developers to build something that will work and that will will work with the remaining fabric downtown.  I heard yesterday that Flamers has flamed out in the Landing's food court, leaving only four remaining businesses.  Sleiman is doing his best to chase the remaining tenants out by selling his own beer during major events, while undercutting his tenants prices.  He also charges admission to the "mall" on rare occasions, such as the Florida-Georgia game. 

The problem isn't parking.