Deciphering JEA's Search: What's Best For Downtown?

[thelakelander]

Here are the finalist sites under consideration for the location of the JEA's new corporate headquarters. Although many believe the fix is in for a move to TIAA Bank Field, we're putting the politics and the unreleased financial details of each proposal and development group aside and taking a look at how each site can either help or hurt the continued revitalization of Downtown Jacksonville by using good old fashioned urban planning sense.

Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/deciphering-jeas-search-whats-best-for-downtown/

[Charles Hunter]

Excellent analysis.  I truly hope the "fix" isn't in, and they will choose a site that does not hurt downtown.  Lot J is NOT downtown!

[itsfantastic1]

I think all the options, except Lot J make sense for downtown. I like the Southbank transit connectivity and 95 visibility. I'm ok with the option to stay where they are, I just hope they could potentially keep/sell the existing tower to Atkins and add an additional story or two to make up for the horizontal square footage lost. The two Northbank towers are both good, but I think in terms of visibility and retail activation; the one overlooking the lawn of the courthouse is the better option but I wouldn't be displeased with the La Villa one. Considering the timeline JEA wants, I don't see lot J working unless we are ready to start paying for Lot J as we know we will have to, and personally I think the money could be spent elsewhere right now.

[Charles Hunter]

As I look at the discussions of each option, I wonder why it is important for the local utility provider to have high visibility from I-95?

[Tacachale]

Excellent analysis. However, we're kidding ourselves to think it's going anywhere but Lot J.

[thelakelander]

^That would really suck. It's one thing to be a place that has no realistic opportunity of having a chance to do something right development-wise. It's another when you get opportunities like this and you find ways to implement the worse possible outcome that actually sets you back.

[Tacachale]

^That would really suck. It's one thing to be a place that has no realistic opportunity of having a chance to do something right development-wise. It's another when you get opportunities like this and you find ways to implement the worse possible outcome that actually sets you back.

Welcome to Jacksonville! 

[jaxlongtimer]

Welcome to Jacksonville! 

If this decision goes to Lot J, we need to change our name to JAGSonville !

I agree with the analysis.  My last choices would be Lot J or tearing down the current tower to accommodate the new HQ's.  While I am good with any of the the other 3 choices, I agree that the Broad & Church street would serve Downtown best.  Next would be adjacent to the Courthouse. 

I suspect the change to delay the decision to after the elections is mostly to insulate Curry from accusations before the election that he is controlling JEA (stoking fears he will try to sell it after being re-elected) and and being controlled by Khan should the fix be in for Lot J.

[Steve]

The only two that make sense are the Church St and Adams Street Plans. The Southbank one in a box is a cool, but not at the expense of losing JEA from the core (they get a company from southpoint to move into that building and I'm thrilled

The Lot J one just makes absolutely no sense on so many levels.

[vicupstate]

Based strictly on helping (or not hurting) the Northbank, the only ones that would likely do that are #2 and #3.  The #1 site is probably just far enough from the Northbank eateries to cause them to lose business. With only an hour for lunch, an additional 1-3 blocks to traverse makes a big difference.

Architecturally, the #5 Lot J building is as bland as it gets. I like the #4 site building best from an architecture standpoint. If it were not for Khan's influence, I would bet #4 would win. Most of the decision makers probably live South of the river and have easiest access to that site, since it is right off of I-95 and no river to traverse.

     

[Steve]

I'd actually favor (slightly) the #1 site. My thought is that the site is a little less attractive to the private sector than the Adams street site. So, since JEA is down there anyway have the quasi-government entity take the less attractive site, leaving the nicer site for true private redevelopment.

[vicupstate]

I'd actually favor (slightly) the #1 site. My thought is that the site is a little less attractive to the private sector than the Adams street site. So, since JEA is down there anyway have the quasi-government entity take the less attractive site, leaving the nicer site for true private redevelopment.

A valid point to be sure. I doubt they are that benevolent in their thinking though.

[thelakelander]

My map has #2 and #3 reversed from the text, so I'll have to revise a little later.

With that said, only the Church Street and Adams Street sites provide max economic benefit downtown. Both keep JEA in the core and allow a new dense reuse of the existing JEA Tower. Consider it a two-for-one economic jolt. You don't get both with demolishing and rebuilding at the same site or relocating to Lot J or San Marco.

[Charles Hunter]

Proximity to the Skyway is touted as an advantage for that site.  How much of an advantage will it be when the Skyway is, first, shut down for 2+ years for the conversion to, second, the U2C mini-cars?  JEA should stay in the heart of downtown, at a site that does not involve tearing down the existing tower. I'm not so attached to the shorter building (old Ivey's store) on the site, so if a deal to replace it with a new mid-rise or taller, and leave the Universal Marion building for private development, that would be good, too.

[minder]

I don't really have a problem if it goes at Lot J. Yeah it would reek of a backhander, but someone else on here put it aptly. Brooklyn and the Sports Complex are each side of the "dumbbell" and as a result I think that'll fuel growth in the middle of the urban core more organically.