1. Forsyth St. Parking Lot
This lot was obtained by the City in the Landing/Cameron Kuhn/Humana/City Land Swap deal back in 2006. Since then, Kuhn's empire has collapsed, Toney Sleiman hasn't begun renovations of The Landing, and the city still owns a half block parking lot on Forsyth St. With Laura St, The Florida Theatre, the Landing, and Hemming Plaza within a two block walk of the site, this would be a prime site for an RFP.
2007 Assessed Value: $1,034,787 (Plus 22 Historic Light Fixtures valued at $220,000)
1. Courthouse Site Extra Blocks
Despite the Judge's desire for a big, sprawled out courthouse, it is not needed (for an example of a inexpensive, efficient courthouse built in 2007, click here: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/648/). The City currently owns seven blocks for a future courthouse. One block is the courthouse garage that is already built, one is the old federal courthouse, and five are vacant. Keep one for a tower, and sell four blocks.
2007 Assessed Value (west four blocks) $8,178,735
3. Supervisor of Elections Site
This is the only of the five sites that actually has a structure on it. For you downtown historians, this was the Downtown Winn-Dixie before the Downtown Winn-Dixie moved to Market St. It currently serves as the offices for the Supervisor of Elections. Why does the Supervisor of Elections need their own office with a parking lot more than the Tax Collector or Property Appraiser? They don't - it should be sold off ASAP.
2007 Assessed Value $1,544,343
4. Main St Pocket Park
This one the city had the option of selling - and chose not to. Instead, they got FDOT money for parks and streetscaping and determined that it must be spent here instead of Confederate Park, Klutho Park, or Friendship Fountain. It is commonly filled with the homeless and the design makes it largely unusable for anything more than a $700,000 dog walk. Jacksonville - do us all a favor and sell this property.
2007 Assessed Value $1,006,675
5. LaVilla Union Street Site
This one may come as a bit of a surprise, it being disconnected from the core, but it makes the list for a few reasons. First, the $2 million mistake that is Sax Seafood is right next door. Second, Union and State Streets carry more traffic than any other downtown street, and based on traffic count alone, it could be a draw for a large retailer. It is also the biggest site, yet it is worth the least, making it friendly for potential workforce housing. Finally, given its location next to the Jacksonville Urban League and the Ritz Theatre (and I-95), it's probably downtown's best bet for some destination retail.
2007 Assessed Value $780,784
Why Now?
You may be wondering if this is the right time to issue an RFP to developers. Frankly, it's actually a good time. Aside from the fact that it would create more property on the tax rolls, it could potentially trigger large scale infill that our downtown is currently in need of. If you still have doubts, check out the responses to St. Petersburg's RFP for the Tampa Bay Rays existing ballpark here: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/761/
In a time with a tight budget, this may be an effective way to get dollars rolling into downtown without spending any of our taxpayer money.
Article written by Steve Congro
Share this article
RSS
vicupstate
April 23, 2008, 08:06:05 AMExcellent idea for a topic. I bet it wouldn't be too hard to find another 5 sites either. Look for smaller parcels that would make great infill projects.
I would hold on to at least one block of the courthouse parcel, for expansion or to sell once the courthouse project is done. In fact it might be best to build the courthouse first then sell the extra blocks.
The State/Union parcel will not get much attention IMO from private sector though. The traffic is a high-speed freeway configuration. Unless that can be changed, it has limited appeal for much of anything. That is not a retail destination, and it will take more than one retailer to make it one. Still, it doesn't hurt to try.
thelakelander
April 23, 2008, 08:34:27 AMI don't know why we continue to sit on these properties. Another one that should be immediately sold is the Snyder Memorial Church on Hemming Plaza. It should be immediately sold "as is" and let the private sector deal with its renovation.
As for the block on Union Street, I believe the city has issued an RFP for it. It was mentioned a week or two ago that some developers and retailers have been interested in it. However, I would assume we would see something like a gas station, CVS or fast food restaurant go up there surrounded by surface parking, based on Sax Seafood's approved layout.
Steve
April 23, 2008, 10:12:30 AMNo, it wouldn't. I could probably have made the list 10 without much work at all.
Bike Jax
April 23, 2008, 11:23:27 AMThe city isn't interested in selling the property they are sitting on. I have friends that have made multiple offers on city owned buildings in the downtown area. These building would not only have been restored to their former glory. They would have created a live/work for the new owners bringing not only much needed retail, but also full time and fully vested residents to the urban core.
All these offers were at and above current market value and were made within the last 6 months.
Lunican
April 23, 2008, 11:51:07 AMOffers were also made on city owned lots in Springfield that they refuse to sell (or maintain).
vicupstate
April 23, 2008, 11:53:00 AMAll these offers were at and above current market value and were made within the last 6 months.
This does not surprise me at all, I have first hand knowledge of similiar occurances. I don't understand the logic at all. If there is a decent reason, I wish they would share it.
Bike Jax
April 23, 2008, 12:16:05 PMMy friends offers were rejected with the statements from the city that their intended projects didn't fit in with the city's vision. They (the city) were unwilling to expound on what exactly their plan was/is. All we can assume is that single family residential, art and food is not part of whatever plan they have.
One friend by the way proposed a fine art gallery/studio in a couple of different buildings and the other a full service bakery.
thelakelander
April 23, 2008, 12:28:35 PMIf they do have a vision, its probably to let these buildings decay to the point where they fall in on themselves, leaving expensive overpriced dirt for large scale developers. Although, this does not explain why they refuse to sell isolated single family lots in Springfield.
Midway
April 23, 2008, 02:43:02 PMIt is much easier to transfer land to your political cronies or business associates when the time is right than to siphon off cash from the city treasury.
In real estate deals there are a lot of grey areas that no one thinks to look at, while if you steal cash, that's very easily spotted. So there is really no advantage in converting these properties into cash that the citizens of Jacksonville will only just demand spent on things like "parks" or "schools" or "police".
When the Mayor runs the city for the benefit and amusement of his family, selling that land suddenly does not look so good, from his standpoint.
So, just consider these properties as "patronage banks", that at some future time will grease the wheels of business. Unfortunately, it probably won't be the city's business.
vicupstate
April 23, 2008, 02:54:02 PMOne friend by the way proposed a fine art gallery/studio in a couple of different buildings and the other a full service bakery.
In that case, I can understand why the city didn't bite. The homeless don't have much use for such things.
raheem942
April 24, 2008, 03:55:28 PMwho would buy??? we cant even get a stadium name?
urbanlibertarian
April 25, 2008, 04:56:49 PMIf City of Jax needs an example of why you don't hold out for big developers they need look no further than Jax Beach. Downtown development began to take off there when the city backed off from big redevelopments after several failures and just improved infrastructure. At that point individual property owners began their own redevelopment. Also you can't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.
Steve
April 25, 2008, 05:00:22 PMWell, buying property is a bit different than buying a stadium name. With the stadium name, you are essentially buying a billboard for 10-20 years that will be shown on national TV a couple times a year. Buying real estate is different because you are doint it to make money directly off of the property.
sheclown
April 25, 2008, 05:37:57 PMThat is the most amazing line --
Radio Talk Show Host
April 25, 2008, 07:09:34 PMWhy must we have a courthouse in a central location downtown yet not a supervisor of elections? Honestly I might lean towards we need neither and find the cheapest property possible for a court warehouse/strip mall redo
Charles Hunter
April 25, 2008, 11:14:25 PMSo they can be accessible to most citizens in the county?
Downtown is more accessible than some abandon strip mall or warehouse elsewhere in the county. The bus system may not be the best, but most of the routes do go downtown. Riding the bus to some other part of the county would be more difficult - if the new location were even on a bus route. Or would we then have to extend - and improve - bus service to the new, non-downtown location?
Jax2024
July 08, 2008, 07:54:06 PMI know it is cliche but... What about the Jail or the School Board building? Doesn't the School board own abandoned or closed schools across the city that could be restored for a historic school board site? Also, with the boom of private jail contractors, the city could award a long term jail contract and avoid up-front construction costs. The proceeds from the sale of the Jail property could help offset current budget shortfalls. Thoughts? I completely agree with the other properties on the list, except my feeling is that selling the lavilla property will just encourage another il-advised stripmall project that is too close to the urban core.