Is it time to reassess the Berkman Plaza II

[downtownbrown]

^except that they are in the construction business, so my guess is they'd rather find a developer to finish it.  I suppose it could be better for them to demolish it and sell the clean dirt, but hard to imaging them making any money in that scenario.

[downtownbrown]

"We have got to deal with Berkman Plaza. We began investigating that in my first week," he said. "Liberty Street was one of the first questions I asked. The Jacksonville Landing is ... um. Eh. I'll leave it at that."-Lenny Curry

So Berkman is on the mayor's radar.  Good.

[whyisjohngalt]

At this rate the property will receive historic designation in its current state.

The city better be levying fines daily and then the city can "foreclose" like the bostwick building.

[coredumped]

"We have got to deal with Berkman Plaza. We began investigating that in my first week," he said. "Liberty Street was one of the first questions I asked. The Jacksonville Landing is ... um. Eh. I'll leave it at that."-Lenny Curry

So Berkman is on the mayor's radar.  Good.

Quote is from this article if anyone is interested: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/blog/morning-edition/2015/12/pensions-public-safety-taxes-and-downtown-mayor.html

[FlaBoy]

He is referring to the hole in Liberty St., not Berkman Plaza II though, right?

[mtraininjax]

No one comes to downtown Jacksonville and goes "wow, that empty structure sure would be something if it had cool shops and restaurants in it", nope, but they do it with The Landing.

The Mayor and Sleiman have to come to some agreement to get the Landing renovated, improved, something. But that thing on the river is the gateway to Laura Street and at this point, I think we need to see more progress than 2 design options and then "call it a day boys" mentality.

[strider]

I can think of a dozen other projects that city or government funds should be sunk into before the landing is torn down and "improved".  Berkman II is on that list.  It does no good to tear down and build new something that is producing and leave something that is a true determent and says we may not be worth investing in. As the "Gateway to Laura Street" the iconic Landing does just fine.  Think how much better the landing will be looked upon by people if the Laura Trio was done.  Meanwhile, from the river view, the Berkman's send an eerie mixed message.

[FlaBoy]

What can the city do though to really incentivize a developer to come in and finish the thing?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

What can the city do though to really incentivize a developer to come in and finish the thing?

Demolish it.

[thelakelander]

Demolishing it and incentiving someone to finish it will probably cost taxpayers around the same.

[FlaBoy]

Demolishing it and incentiving someone to finish it will probably cost taxpayers around the same.

Does the city need to take control of it? I am guessing it is owned by a bank or financial institution.

[CCMjax]

I can think of a dozen other projects that city or government funds should be sunk into before the landing is torn down and "improved".  Berkman II is on that list.  It does no good to tear down and build new something that is producing and leave something that is a true determent and says we may not be worth investing in. As the "Gateway to Laura Street" the iconic Landing does just fine.  Think how much better the landing will be looked upon by people if the Laura Trio was done.  Meanwhile, from the river view, the Berkman's send an eerie mixed message.

Agreed.  The Landing is not one of those "has to happen now" projects.  It is still functioning, is not an empty shell of a building that speaks volumes about the city's recent economic struggles, and nobody can agree on what should go there.  So I think the Landing is lower on the list of priorities.

[FlaBoy]

^Yes.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Demolishing it and incentiving someone to finish it will probably cost taxpayers around the same.

I only scanned through the OSHA report a few years ago, but I seem to remember the failure was due to a combination of engineering issues and improper removal of supports.

What type, if any, structural testing/re-engineering did they do to the main structure or were they even needed?

[thelakelander]

Not sure. The structure that collapsed was a separate parking garage. A few months ago, there was a newspaper report stating that the shell of Berkman 2 was structurally sound. A developer was also interested in turning it into apartments (during Brown's term) but wanted incentives from the city.