Retail-less parking garage proposed for Downtown

[simms3]

I am still not convinced that dedicated parking spaces in a garage across the street will really work well for the landing. It is still a suburban style shopping center

I'm lost with this statement. So the Landing is built in a suburban style now? Them 'suburban style or suburban' phrases gets thrown around way too much. Now whether you like the style that it's built in is a different story, but it's not suburban.

Set back from the street, not particularly integrated into the urban fabric. It's not suburban, but it's not particularly urban either. It's not as bad as the New Orleans Riverwalk Mall, I'll say that. But it's a far cry from something like Chicago's Water Tower Place (a quite successful indoor urban shopping mall).

I just got some shopping done at Water Tower and 900 N Mich...those are still malls in every sense of the word.  Many of the shoppers are people who come in from the burbs to shop or tourists (like me).  A lot of the locals stay west of Michigan or go north to Armitage/Lincoln Park.  Rush St/Oak St are arguably more "urban" retail destinations now.  Water Tower Place is also several times larger than the Landing and it has traditional upscale mall stores, just instead of 1-3 levels with parking it is like 10 levels served by transit.

[JFman00]

I see it as doing exactly what it was intended to do. Can we say the same for the Landing?

[Lunican]

Does anyone actually pay $120 per month to park downtown? You'd have to be insane to pay that.

[Lunican]

Why have a design review board if they are going to waive all of the criteria they are supposed to enforce?

[thelakelander]

^Speaking of the sports district garages, they ended up not building them to incorporate retail. Since the city doesn't follow its own design guidelines its not surprising these type of poorly conceived projects keep popping up. As for retail, that's not a bad site for something like a ground floor Walgreens or Office Depot style retailer (assuming the retail space is designed to the right dimensions). The corner of Independent and Hogan would also make for a decent restaurant/bar space, considering one can see the river and the Omni and TU Performing Arts Center are across the street. Nevertheless, no matter what people think about the downtown market, every project that gets city money should go above and beyond the minimum. If you can't do right at the public level, go ahead, give up and save taxpayers a boat load of wasted money.

[thelakelander]

Does anyone actually pay $120 per month to park downtown? You'd have to be insane to pay that.

My firm has been considering switching garages. Yes, there a few that charge +$120/month for reserved parking. I refuse to pay that much to park monthly in any Florida downtown.

[JeffreyS]

Councilman Lumb was very responsive to my email. Without jumping to any conclusions on just my word acted to see what if anything should be done Kudos Councilman Lumb. Here is our email chain so far. I am posting this for everyone who thinks you can't get involved because no one will pay attention. Please contact your representatives when you feel something isn't right it is no magic pill but you can't blame government for not listening if you aren't talking. Again Kudos councilman Lumb for taking the time to look into this.

________________________________________
From: Jeff Sutton [jeff.sutton@ARSvend.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:12 AM
To: Lumb, Robin
Subject: New Garage
Mr. Lumb, The proposed parking garage across from the Landing is unacceptable.  Whereas this is one of the few spots in downtown that would benefit from additional parking the proposed design is detrimental to our city. 
It is hard for me to believe that Haskell would even propose having the city subsidize a project and then request that it be permitted to not live up to our pedestrian standards of integrated retail and streetscaping.
The site is a very important location in Jacksonville that will be shown in every postcard , interacted with at every big event for the city and most importantly sits in the middle of a downtown we would like to revitalize.
If taxpayer money is going into this (and I am OK with that) the project should go above and beyond not come up short.  It should include retail space, streetscaping with awnings and work as a pedestal for future vertical construction.
This site is not in a suburban office park or even on the edge of town this is where we define our city.  Thank you for your help in this matter.
_____________________________________________
From: Lumb, Robin [mailto:RLumb@coj.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:26 AM
To: Jeff Sutton
Subject: RE: New Garage

Mr. Sutton:

I will look into this but can you provide a few more details? Has there been legislation filed? What department is currently reviewing the plans?

Robin

_________________________________________
From: Jeff Sutton [mailto:jeff.sutton@ARSvend.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:45 AM
To: Lumb, Robin
Subject: RE: New Garage

I learned of it on the MetroJacksonville site here is the link.
Thanks again
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-jun-retail-less-parking-garage-proposed-for-downtown

___________________________________________
From: Lumb, Robin
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 4:08 PM
To: Reingold, Dylan
Subject: FW: New Garage

Dylan:

See the link below to metrojacksonville.com.  Does this project have to undergo design review? Is there a way we can encourage retail at the bottom of the garage? Does our agreement with Parador allow that?

Robin
________________________________________________
From: Reingold, Dylan
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 4:22 PM
To: Lumb, Robin
Subject: RE: New Garage

Council Member Lumb,

The garage proposal is going to the Downtown Development Review Board tomorrow for conceptual approval.  Their meeting is a 2 pm.  Would you like the agenda and the materials?

I will research the agreement and get back with you on that issue.

Dylan

________________________________________
On Jun 6, 2012, at 4:55 PM, "Lumb, Robin" <RLumb@coj.net> wrote:
Does the DDRB have the authority to require the inclusion of retail space on the first floor or for requiring the installation of awnings. Etc.?

My constituent Mr. Sutton, along with others at Metro Jacksonville, believes that the present structure is stark in design and not compatible with the objectives of developing a more visually attractive and pedestrian friendly  downtown.

What can be done to address these concerns? (Thanks for the link to the agenda items which I have already forwarded to Mr. Sutton.)

[simms3]

So for such a prominent site/such a major development (for Jax), this thing has had no press.  Does anyone beside me feel that that alone is a little fishy?  Like maybe the city is trying to push this through to wash its hands of the mess of an agreement it has with the Landing?  Like we are just finding out here on MetroJacksonville after it has gone through initial review and approval?

I know the local broker community found out for the most part today and it has been a topic of discussion.  Most of the surface lots actually have capacity and many of the garages are 50+% empty.  There is something else at work here because this garage is not really serving office and doesn't appear to be feasible on its own.

Also, either your company pays $80-$130/space for unreserved/reserved (perhaps only for senior level and secretaries) or you pay $80-$130/space to park in a garage downtown.  This is why there is an "argument" out there as to the reason companies are moving to the burbs (and parking is always at the top of the list when really it shouldn't be an issue).

[simms3]

Thanks JeffreyS.  They sounded baffled, too, that there was a garage even up for approval at that prominent downtown site.  That blows my mind...when there is NOTHING going on in the city and finally something could go vertical on arguably the most prime piece of land in the city and NOBODY except for the review committees and the developer knows about it?!?!

[CityLife]

Jeffrey and others, while it is good to have the council engaged and aware of this, you should be contacting the DDRB members (listed by Kay in a previous post). DDRB will be meeting about it tomorrow afternoon. Below is the review process by the DDRB. Tomorrow is step 3 in the process.


The process is most productive for the applicant when the developer/design team meets with JEDC staff very early in the planning process - creating a collaborative approach with the city. The DDRB reviews and approves zonings, variances, exceptions and designs of new and rehabilitation projects in the downtown area for compliance with the Downtown Master Plan, Downtown Zoning Overlay and the Downtown Sign Overlay. This review process includes the following:

1) Meeting with JEDC/DDRB staff

2) Provide a completed DDRB Application (PDF 271K) that includes information on the project, appropriate drawings, etc.

3) Conceptual review and critique by the DDRB at a public meeting

4) Negotiate redevelopment agreement with JEDC staff allocating DRI development rights for project that requires JEDC Board and City Council approval.

5) Final review by the DDRB at a public meeting that includes revisions and supplemental information. Deviations to the Design Criteria and Special Sign Exceptions are also addressed during the Final Review process, if applicable.

[tufsu1]

So the idiots at the developer agencies / engineering firms didn't even bother to READ about the recommendations.

I'm betting they know quite well what the requirements are....but they are going to see what they can get away with....clearly this stripped-down garage will be relatively inexpensive to construct.

[JeffreyS]

I contacted both groups and hope many of my fellow readers have as well.

[JeffreyS]

Anyone available to live blog this tomorrow? I am going to try to make it.

[JeffreyS]

So the idiots at the developer agencies / engineering firms didn't even bother to READ about the recommendations.

I'm betting they know quite well what the requirements are....but they are going to see what they can get away with....clearly this stripped-down garage will be relatively inexpensive to construct.

I am betting you are right.

[CityLife]

Jeffrey and others, while it is good to have the council engaged and aware of this, you should be contacting the DDRB members (listed by Kay in a previous post). DDRB will be meeting about it tomorrow afternoon. Below is the review process by the DDRB. Tomorrow is step 3 in the process.

The process is most productive for the applicant when the developer/design team meets with JEDC staff very early in the planning process - creating a collaborative approach with the city. The DDRB reviews and approves zonings, variances, exceptions and designs of new and rehabilitation projects in the downtown area for compliance with the Downtown Master Plan, Downtown Zoning Overlay and the Downtown Sign Overlay. This review process includes the following:

1) Meeting with JEDC/DDRB staff

2) Provide a completed DDRB Application (PDF 271K) that includes information on the project, appropriate drawings, etc.

3) Conceptual review and critique by the DDRB at a public meeting

4) Negotiate redevelopment agreement with JEDC staff allocating DRI development rights for project that requires JEDC Board and City Council approval.

5) Final review by the DDRB at a public meeting that includes revisions and supplemental information. Deviations to the Design Criteria and Special Sign Exceptions are also addressed during the Final Review process, if applicable.

Meh.  Having the council engaged in this process (after all they created the legislation in the first place) is a pretty good idea.

If we had relied on DDRB contacts alone for the monroe street closure, there would be a six lane roadway in front of the courthouse right now.

While its also a good idea to suggest that people contact DDRB members, City Life, its not such a good idea to tell people what not to do in this context.

Meh. Engaging the body who enforces said legislation should be the first step. If that fails then there will be plenty of time to mobilize people to speak at City Council and discuss the matter with their council people.

And for the record, I never said don't contact council people. Just that people should be contacting DDRB members.

If everyone in Jacksonville let past decisions made by City Council, DDRB, HPC, etc deter them from challenging an issue, nobody would ever speak at a public hearing.