Author Topic: The District wants $26 million in public incentives  (Read 22170 times)

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #75 on: January 13, 2018, 12:32:53 PM »
In the meantime, Broadstone continues to go up next door to the District without incentives. Structured parking garage and all.

When I see the online presentation of the District, I do like the attempt to create an urban village that could set a precedent for (or inspire) other urban-village style projects throughout the urban core.  Personally, I like that style for Jax versus randomly-placed big block projects and nothing really tied together to feel communal.  Having said that, I don’t think Elements was honest in the JEA bid process, and I hate how they’re handling the PR in the wake of releasing the proposal.  Sending an email out to your good ole boy network just because City Council forms a committee to study a complex transaction, especially after the disasters of the early 2000s with the Shipyards, is wholly inappropriate.  Rummell has a lot of f—�ing nerve.  I want to know the names on that email distribution. 

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28134
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #76 on: January 13, 2018, 12:59:53 PM »
LOL at that TU editorial. The best way to protect the taxpayer is to let Elements do what they said they were originally going to do. That would have been best for the Shipyards too, even if it would have become more shipping and logistics related, which was the original intended use two decades ago. We would have had a private company creating logistics jobs, the property would have been on the tax rolls and the millions in tax money burned could have went to better use in the heart of the city. Jumping in this deal is simply more of the same. If Elements bit off too much than they can chew, taxpayers shouldn't be assuming the risk to buy the dream that's been sold for this site over the last three or four years.

When I see the online presentation of the District, I do like the attempt to create an urban village that could set a precedent for (or inspire) other urban-village style projects throughout the urban core.  Personally, I like that style for Jax versus randomly-placed big block projects and nothing really tied together to feel communal.

I've learned over the years to not get caught up in conceptual development proposals. Much of the stuff we've been shown with the District and Shipyards is all smoke and mirrors. People assume what's in the pretty pictures will actually be built and built at record speed. In reality, it would take decades for the local market to support what's shown. Throw in economic recessions and changes in the market and probably 80% of what's shown in those conceptual sketches never happens. As for the "urban village", the precedent was set back in the 19th century. It's the downtown Northbank and its street grid. The bones are already there. The design guidelines are already in place. We just have to stick with them for infill, while also enhancing the things we already have.

The Laura Trio, Barnett, 20 West Adams, Hotel Indigo are all much smaller projects. However, they'll have twice as much positive impact on downtown, its vibe and image because they are being built in that original urban pedestrian scale setting.

Quote
Having said that, I don’t think Elements was honest in the JEA bid process, and I hate how they’re handling the PR in the wake of releasing the proposal.  Sending an email out to your good ole boy network just because City Council forms a committee to study a complex transaction, especially after the disasters of the early 2000s with the Shipyards, is wholly inappropriate.  Rummell has a lot of f—�ing nerve.  I want to know the names on that email distribution.

The bold part is the worse part of this whole thing. The lack of transparency really smells. When deals smell, it's usually the taxpayer that ends up getting fleeced.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2018, 01:03:34 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #77 on: January 13, 2018, 01:34:01 PM »
LOL at that TU editorial. The best way to protect the taxpayer is to let Elements do what they said they were originally going to do. That would have been best for the Shipyards too, even if it would have become more shipping and logistics related, which was the original intended use two decades ago. We would have had a private company creating logistics jobs, the property would have been on the tax rolls and the millions in tax money burned could have went to better use in the heart of the city. Jumping in this deal is simply more of the same. If Elements bit off too much than they can chew, taxpayers shouldn't be assuming the risk to buy the dream that's been sold for this site over the last three or four years.

When I see the online presentation of the District, I do like the attempt to create an urban village that could set a precedent for (or inspire) other urban-village style projects throughout the urban core.  Personally, I like that style for Jax versus randomly-placed big block projects and nothing really tied together to feel communal.

I've learned over the years to not get caught up in conceptual development proposals. Much of the stuff we've been shown with the District and Shipyards is all smoke and mirrors. People assume what's in the pretty pictures will actually be built and built at record speed. In reality, it would take decades for the local market to support what's shown. Throw in economic recessions and changes in the market and probably 80% of what's shown in those conceptual sketches never happens. As for the "urban village", the precedent was set back in the 19th century. It's the downtown Northbank and its street grid. The bones are already there. The design guidelines are already in place. We just have to stick with them for infill, while also enhancing the things we already have.

The Laura Trio, Barnett, 20 West Adams, Hotel Indigo are all much smaller projects. However, they'll have twice as much positive impact on downtown, its vibe and image because they are being built in that original urban pedestrian scale setting.

Quote
Having said that, I don’t think Elements was honest in the JEA bid process, and I hate how they’re handling the PR in the wake of releasing the proposal.  Sending an email out to your good ole boy network just because City Council forms a committee to study a complex transaction, especially after the disasters of the early 2000s with the Shipyards, is wholly inappropriate.  Rummell has a lot of f—�ing nerve.  I want to know the names on that email distribution.

The bold part is the worse part of this whole thing. The lack of transparency really smells. When deals smell, it's usually the taxpayer that ends up getting fleeced.

Question though: we’ve talked about all the property the city owns throughout downtown, and putting that to other uses, perhaps for residential infill.  What would be the structure of a land giveaway to these other uses?  In the case of the Landing, the city leased the property to development use (which is now a disaster of course).  But let’s say the focus of a land giveaway throughout downtown was going to be residential.  Maybe the city wouldn’t just assign title at the outset, but perhaps give out development rights while retaining ownership of the underlying property, and then transferring ownership once the property was satisfactorily developed?

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #78 on: January 13, 2018, 01:43:29 PM »
LOL at that TU editorial. The best way to protect the taxpayer is to let Elements do what they said they were originally going to do. That would have been best for the Shipyards too, even if it would have become more shipping and logistics related, which was the original intended use two decades ago. We would have had a private company creating logistics jobs, the property would have been on the tax rolls and the millions in tax money burned could have went to better use in the heart of the city. Jumping in this deal is simply more of the same. If Elements bit off too much than they can chew, taxpayers shouldn't be assuming the risk to buy the dream that's been sold for this site over the last three or four years.

When I see the online presentation of the District, I do like the attempt to create an urban village that could set a precedent for (or inspire) other urban-village style projects throughout the urban core.  Personally, I like that style for Jax versus randomly-placed big block projects and nothing really tied together to feel communal.

I've learned over the years to not get caught up in conceptual development proposals. Much of the stuff we've been shown with the District and Shipyards is all smoke and mirrors. People assume what's in the pretty pictures will actually be built and built at record speed. In reality, it would take decades for the local market to support what's shown. Throw in economic recessions and changes in the market and probably 80% of what's shown in those conceptual sketches never happens. As for the "urban village", the precedent was set back in the 19th century. It's the downtown Northbank and its street grid. The bones are already there. The design guidelines are already in place. We just have to stick with them for infill, while also enhancing the things we already have.

The Laura Trio, Barnett, 20 West Adams, Hotel Indigo are all much smaller projects. However, they'll have twice as much positive impact on downtown, its vibe and image because they are being built in that original urban pedestrian scale setting.

Quote
Having said that, I don’t think Elements was honest in the JEA bid process, and I hate how they’re handling the PR in the wake of releasing the proposal.  Sending an email out to your good ole boy network just because City Council forms a committee to study a complex transaction, especially after the disasters of the early 2000s with the Shipyards, is wholly inappropriate.  Rummell has a lot of f—�ing nerve.  I want to know the names on that email distribution.

The bold part is the worse part of this whole thing. The lack of transparency really smells. When deals smell, it's usually the taxpayer that ends up getting fleeced.

You make a great point about Shipyards use.  It’s sitting there fenced off and just adds to the perception of a forlorn downtown.  Is it too contaminated for people to even walk on it?  Like could a riverfront festival marketplace under tents take place there, even? 

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28134
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #79 on: January 13, 2018, 01:57:02 PM »


People park there for the Jags games. Every now and then, you'll find a person walking their dog out there. The waterfront is largely fenced off because the bulkhead work that a previous defunct developer was doing is incomplete.





"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

jaxnyc79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #80 on: January 13, 2018, 02:05:45 PM »


People park there for the Jags games. Every now and then, you'll find a person walking their dog out there. The waterfront is largely fenced off because the bulkhead work that a previous defunct developer was doing is incomplete.






So a version of the Riverside Arts Market here (with tents for shade)?  Is that a crazy idea?

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6953
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #81 on: January 13, 2018, 03:45:45 PM »


People park there for the Jags games. Every now and then, you'll find a person walking their dog out there. The waterfront is largely fenced off because the bulkhead work that a previous defunct developer was doing is incomplete.






So a version of the Riverside Arts Market here (with tents for shade)?  Is that a crazy idea?

No demand for that and no one to run it.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6953
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #82 on: January 13, 2018, 03:54:42 PM »
This isn’t similar to the Shipyards deal. In that deal, the city gave incentive money for the public use portions only. The developer later defrauded the city by kiting that money for other things. They should have paid up a lot more than they did, but the city did get the land in the fallout.

This deal appears to want incentives far beyond what the public use of the development will be. It’s up front about what the money will go to but it’s a huge ask.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6953
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #83 on: January 13, 2018, 03:56:50 PM »
Mayor Curry isn’t weighing in until DIA and council vets it. Meaning, he’s going to wait to see what the polls say.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28134
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #84 on: January 13, 2018, 04:16:24 PM »
This isn’t similar to the Shipyards deal. In that deal, the city gave incentive money for the public use portions only. The developer later defrauded the city by kiting that money for other things. They should have paid up a lot more than they did, but the city did get the land in the fallout.

This deal appears to want incentives far beyond what the public use of the development will be. It’s up front about what the money will go to but it’s a huge ask.
The details of the deals are different.  However, they both are similar in that the city got involved when it didn't have too. In the Shipyards example, the worse thing that could have happened by not getting involved is Spence buying that property and using it for industrial use. In this case, the worse thing that could happen is the Elements proposal dies and JEA ends up having someone else pay something less than +18 million for the land. 
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6953
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #85 on: January 13, 2018, 04:40:55 PM »
This isn’t similar to the Shipyards deal. In that deal, the city gave incentive money for the public use portions only. The developer later defrauded the city by kiting that money for other things. They should have paid up a lot more than they did, but the city did get the land in the fallout.

This deal appears to want incentives far beyond what the public use of the development will be. It’s up front about what the money will go to but it’s a huge ask.
The details of the deals are different.  However, they both are similar in that the city got involved when it didn't have too. In the Shipyards example, the worse thing that could have happened by not getting involved is Spence buying that property and using it for industrial use. In this case, the worse thing that could happen is the Elements proposal dies and JEA ends up having someone else pay something less than +18 million for the land.

The Spences didn't have the money or the ability to do anything with the site regardless of incentives. Otherwise they wouldn't have stolen the city's money in the mixed use project that did get approved. It would still be sitting there empty in their hands, or sold off (and probably still empty, without incentives). The only difference is that the city wouldn't have the land.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28134
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #86 on: January 13, 2018, 05:00:53 PM »
I was always under the impression the Spences purchased the property to build a warehouse and not a mixed-use development. They've built a few outside of downtown since. It's also not a major negative IMO if the city didn't own the contaminated property, if a warehouse was on it or if it were sold off and sitting empty in private hands. It's situated in the location that lends itself to not being the major redevelopment catalyst that everyone dreams of. If these types of proposals like the District fail to materialize, DT Jax won't suffer.

With that said, it's pretty interesting that the two large tracts of empty waterfront in DT are the two parcels owned by COJ and JEA, where we've been dreaming for 20 years for luxury condos and uses. Even Commodores Point, is a major economic plus with North Florida Shipyards and the other industrial uses paying property taxes and higher wages to their employees. It's not always a negative to not put the public at risk by dealing with entities to do projects they may not have the capacity to pull off.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2018, 05:14:14 PM by thelakelander »
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

MusicMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1606
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #87 on: January 14, 2018, 10:44:47 AM »
"With that said, it's pretty interesting that the two large tracts of empty waterfront in DT are the two parcels owned by COJ and JEA, where we've been dreaming for 20 years for luxury condos and uses. Even Commodores Point, is a major economic plus with North Florida Shipyards and the other industrial uses paying property taxes and higher wages to their employees. It's not always a negative to not put the public at risk by dealing with entities to do projects they may not have the capacity to pull off."

Agreed.

At this point Rummell has delayed the deal he agreed to beyond any reasonable expectation. Either he closes with the $18 million and then the city does what it has implied it will do, or move on. 

It is completely beyond my comprehension that this could go any further down the road with Elements not closing on a 3 year old deal.
The market has improved pretty dramatically since he signed. Imagine if you could agree to purchase a house in Riverside/Avondale/Springfield or San Marco 3 years ago, delay for 3 years, then expect to close on the price you negotiated 3 years ago. No Seller would agree to that.  If Rummell doesn't think it's worth the money, then he can find another parcel to develop.

MusicMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1606
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #88 on: January 14, 2018, 09:11:59 PM »
I have been going back through the public record of reporting on this debacle through the Business Journal and it is more and more a Twilight Zone story. Literally everything the developers said was BS. As if they knew they could string this out until the City decided to pay for it.  SAD.

From Dec 2015............

"They built the Empire State Building in 13 months. They were designing it as they were building it," Balanky said. "It's in our economic interest to build this development as quickly as possible."

"Elements did lose some points for the amount of time the developers said they would need to bring the project to closing: They requested 365 days of due diligence to review the property and 90 days to close, while RocaPoint Partners requested 60 days of due diligence with 30 days to close on the property.

"Time is money and we need to consider that," JEA board Chairman Mike Hightower said. "But the gentlemen at Elements want to get it right for the citizens of Jacksonville."

"Despite the 15 months the developers requested for due diligence and closing, they don't necessarily expect it to take that long, they said."

Checking my calculator we are over 1000 days into the process................. And now they have COJ paying for the land.