Several Major Downtown Projects. All May Need Public Money. Who Should Get It?

[thelakelander]

There are several major developments proposed for downtown Jacksonville. However, according to a recent Jax Daily Record article ( http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=544922 ), they all may need some form of public assistance from a small pot of available cash. If you had to pick only one to assist with public money, which one would it be and why?

Option 1: Shipyards

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-feb-khans-jacksonville-shipyards-plans-revealed

Option 2: Healthy Town

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-oct-peter-rummells-healthy-town-site-plan-released

Option 3: Laura Street Trio

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-sep-barnett-and-laura-street-trio-site-plan-september-2014

Option 4: Jacksonville Landing

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-oct-the-jacksonville-landing-what-should-it-be

Option 5: None of them

[Lunican]

I would go with the Laura Trio.

It seems to be the most feasible plan and also the furthest along. It would save 3 buildings that are headed toward demolition by neglect right in the center of downtown. The other plans are just dreams at this point.

[jcjohnpaint]

^^^ absolutely

[spuwho]

Laura Trio makes more sense.

[Tacachale]

Healthy Town is the one that's most likely to happen, and probably the one that needs the least assistance. It's the low-hanging fruit option. Laura Street Trio needs substantial assistance, but it could have a major effect right in the core of Downtown, and there's good momentum there. It's probably the most impactful option. The jury is out (or should be) on the Shipyards until we see some financials. And the Landing should be out of the running until there are some new plans to consider.

The city should find a way to make both the Trio and Healthy Town work as soon as possible, and be proactive about future plans on the other two.

[I-10east]

The Landing is basically off the radar, in contrast to three active proposals.

[Steve]

Agree with everything above. In addition, the Laura Trio is probably the one that isn't possible without public money because of the significant cost of renovating three very rundown buildings.

There is no Landing Plan, and I think the Shipyards (while important) is way too early to actually say we have a real plan here. I see no reason that Healthy Town can't happen on it's own. Really, that leaves one option.

[Jason]

Laura Trio!


I'm guessing that Kahn would be happy if the Shipyards property were "given" to him as the incentive to build his vision.

Healthy Town sounds like it already has the momentum and funding it needs.

The Landing: back to the drawing board.

[KenFSU]

The Laura Street Trio, without question. For numerous reasons:
- With the limited funding that the DIA has, you are getting the biggest, most immediate bang for your buck at Laura.
- Atkins has done much of the legwork already and it's clear that the group has a great plan for the Trio
- Without public assistance, I'm not sure if this project happens. You're potentially saving some very critical building stock.
- Healthy Town and the Shipyards are massively important in terms of downtown redevelopment, but they are largely islands unto themselves at this point. The Trio has the potential to reactive a large area directly in the heart of the downtown core.
- A restoration of the Laura Street Trio would complement the DIA's existing investment at Hemming Park.

After seeing Sleiman's last proposal for the Landing, I wouldn't give the guy a dime at this point, and I would be very hesitant to do anything with the Landing until we know exactly what will happen with the Shipyards.

On the Shipyards, it's way too early for the DIA to be handing out money. The city still needs to finish (start?) the remediation and issue an RFP. There are other ways to incentive this project as well, including land and long-term assurances on a riverwalk extension and/or Berkman II solution.

Like the Healthytown idea a lot, but it sounds like they might not need the funding as badly as the Atkins group, and I'd rather see the DIA's limited capital stay on the north bank for now.

[Charles Hunter]

The Laura Street Trio, without question. For numerous reasons:
- With the limited funding that the DIA has, you are getting the biggest, most immediate bang for your buck at Laura.
- Atkins has done much of the legwork already and it's clear that the group has a great plan for the Trio
- Without public assistance, I'm not sure if this project happens. You're potentially saving some very critical building stock.
- Healthy Town and the Shipyards are massively important in terms of downtown redevelopment, but they are largely islands unto themselves at this point. The Trio has the potential to reactive a large area directly in the heart of the downtown core.
- A restoration of the Laura Street Trio would complement the DIA's existing investment at Hemming Park.

After seeing Sleiman's last proposal for the Landing, I wouldn't give the guy a dime at this point, and I would be very hesitant to do anything with the Landing until we know exactly what will happen with the Shipyards.

On the Shipyards, it's way too early for the DIA to be handing out money. The city still needs to finish (start?) the remediation and issue an RFP. There are other ways to incentive this project as well, including land and long-term assurances on a riverwalk extension and/or Berkman II solution.

Like the Healthytown idea a lot, but it sounds like they might not need the funding as badly as the Atkins group, and I'd rather see the DIA's limited capital stay on the north bank for now.

What he said ...

[turdhead]

Whatever ends up being developed (hopefully all), there has to be a deterrent to making any or all finished projects becoming a loitering space for "teens" and other unpleasant people. Nobody with money to spend is going to spend any time navigating the go/no go areas.

[Jason]

Whatever ends up being developed (hopefully all), there has to be a deterrent to making any or all finished projects becoming a loitering space for "teens" and other unpleasant people. Nobody with money to spend is going to spend any time navigating the go/no go areas.

Ummmm wow.


Wait, was that stated "tongue-in-cheek"?

[KenFSU]

Whatever ends up being developed (hopefully all), there has to be a deterrent to making any or all finished projects becoming a loitering space for "teens" and other unpleasant people. Nobody with money to spend is going to spend any time navigating the go/no go areas.

You heard it here first.

Downtown Jacksonville's biggest albatross:

Loitering teens.

[Bill Hoff]

Trio, and not even close.

" - Without public assistance, I'm not sure if this project happens. You're potentially saving some very critical building stock. "

There's no forseeable avenue for this project without public funding.

[edjax]

Laura St trio if it is realistic.  But have just heard the Adkins group say lots of things and really nothing to date.  So a bit leary of him at this point. If not, then Shipyards.

Is the Laura Trio also not available though for other incentives that the shipyards would not be such money for the historical aspects???

Also, outside of the DiA I would think there other incentives.  I mean I just read where the city provided 18 million for nearly 100 fairly low paying jobs for the Volkswagain deal.  So I can see much more going towards the Shipyard and the payoff would be much greater than the VW thing with regard to job creation, increased tax revenue, quality of life enhancements and overall city pride.