Author Topic: The District wants $26 million in public incentives  (Read 33441 times)

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29949
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #135 on: March 27, 2018, 05:08:40 PM »
Yes, it's intended to be a part of the loop CW Boyer has been working on over the last few years.
"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

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #136 on: March 27, 2018, 06:14:07 PM »
Here's my understanding of the new framework, based on the JBJ and T-U's reporting today:

1) Elements buys the land outright from JEA, at the $18.5 million originally agreed upon.

2) The city loans the DIA $26.4 million to spend on infrastructure for the project, specifically to develop parkland (a riverfront park up to 5 acres, a seperate park, a walking trail around the development), a half-mile extension of the riverwalk, roads, public parking, etc. Ownership of the public spaces would be transferred to the city. The DIA will pay the city back over the next 20 years, exclusively using revenue from the Southside TID.

3) A Community Development District is established for the project, with $30 million in bonds being issued to jumpstart development. Elements has a financial backer on board ready to put down the $30 million (the backer hasn't been identified, but has been in talks with Aundra Wallace for the last week or two).

4) The District would pay back the $30 million in bonds over the next 22 years, via a a 22-year REV grant from the DIA.

5) No clue if it's binding, but per the timetable given to the City Council, the entire project - 725 apartments, 147 hotel rooms, 200 condominiums, 25 townhomes, 125 marina slips, plus 134,600 square feet of retail space and 200,000 square feet of office space - would be built-out by 2022.

The City Council would need to agree to the loan to the DIA, and because the REV grant exceeds 15 years, the council would also need to sign off on that too.

Aside from the CDD aspect, and the switch back to Elements purchasing the property outright, I think the biggest difference I've seen here is the post-purchase transfer of ownership of the riverfront greenspace (4-5 acres) back to the city.

I love governmental fund accounting: "The City lends money to the DIA:)"  I mean, the DIA is essentially the City, no?  So how about, the City is spending 26.4 million on infrastructure, and expects a return on investment in the form of private property on the tax rolls yielding tax revenue.

I do agree with the City building urban infrastructure (including public waterfront space) on this plot of land, however, because the city should be in the business of building and upgrading infrastructure for the direct benefit of the city residents at large.  Frankly, this new infrastructure should be built in such a way that the it outlasts this entity called the Elements. 

Personally, I don't think the Elements will actually get this project done.  Given the time spent already, and the PR mess in December, I think these guys are above their skis.  But brand new infrastructure on a vast waterfront dirt patch should make this said dirt patch an  attractive piece of urban real estate to some developer somewhere out there.

« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 06:15:53 PM by jaxnyc79 »

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29949
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #137 on: March 27, 2018, 06:23:49 PM »
I think the market and economy will stop full build-out from happening by 2022. However, Elements will turn out fine. Most of the risky proforma budget blowing factors are being eliminated or greatly diminished. Elements sounds more like a master developer or land flipper to me.  Seems like other entities will come in and pay Elements for parcels to build their own financed projects on them.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 06:27:26 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

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #138 on: March 27, 2018, 07:11:19 PM »
I think the market and economy will stop full build-out from happening by 2022. However, Elements will turn out fine. Most of the risky proforma budget blowing factors are being eliminated or greatly diminished. Elements sounds more like a master developer or land flipper to me.  Seems like other entities will come in and pay Elements for parcels to build their own financed projects on them.

Let's wager a bit.  My prediction: Infrastructure gets built, then Elements fizzles/fades, and someone else brought in to get the hotel built.  Economic slowdown or real estate tapering puts everything on pause and then who knows.  Win-win for me.  If I'm right, I can celebrate being right.  If I'm wrong, that's good for downtown:). 

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #139 on: March 28, 2018, 09:38:55 AM »
I believe the walking path around the development will be part of a shared-use path through San Marco, the Southbank, and connecting with Riverside across the Fuller-Warren. It certainly can and will be used by anyone in the city.



Then I agree - no issue spending tax dollars on this as then that is truly something everyone can use. I didn't connect the dots.

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #140 on: March 28, 2018, 09:41:00 AM »
I think the market and economy will stop full build-out from happening by 2022. However, Elements will turn out fine. Most of the risky proforma budget blowing factors are being eliminated or greatly diminished. Elements sounds more like a master developer or land flipper to me.  Seems like other entities will come in and pay Elements for parcels to build their own financed projects on them.

I agree - I have no issue with the city funding infrastructure - lord knows we do it for master planned communities on the southside every day.

What skin does Elements have in the game besides Rummel and Munz's name?

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #141 on: March 28, 2018, 09:43:52 AM »
And.....now this:

Quote
Jacksonville businessmen Michael Munz and Peter Rummell’s names appeared Saturday in a full-page paid advertisement in The Wall Street Journal calling on lawmakers to support a package of gun law reforms.

Americans for Gun Safety Now! paid for the advertisement featuring the names of 21 individuals, including lawmakers, government officials, business leaders and professional athletes.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/munz-rummell-appear-in-ad-backing-new-gun-laws

I'm definitely not trying to start a gun debate here and yes, Rummell and Munz are free to do what they wish. With that said, what amazing timing - jump into a divisive issue like gun control when trying to get many millions out of a city government.....wow.

KenFSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3936
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #142 on: March 28, 2018, 02:51:26 PM »
^Some issues are more important than apartments and hotels.

Hats off to anyone willing to risk a business opportunity to stand up for what they believe in.

Feel the same way about Shad Khan, who is in a similar position of seeking public incentives from the city for the Shipyards, yet is still willing to take a strong stand on important social issues.

I'll take a strong, reasoned opinion (in either direction) ten times out of ten over something like Curry refusing to take any stance at all, or even sign, the HRO.

If our local politicians are willing to veto funds for new development in our city because they can't handle the developer holding the opinion that a person should have to be 21 years old and pass a rigorous background check to purchase a deadly weapon, or that bump stocks and armor-piercing bullets shouldn't be on the streets, then Jacksonville deserves to remain a backwards city.

For a city that's long been controlled by the churches and socially conservative to a fault, I'm glad to see some diversity of opinion finally start to emerge, particularly from the business community, in the last decade.

 

MusicMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1952
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #143 on: March 28, 2018, 04:40:45 PM »
AMEN!

JBTripper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #144 on: March 29, 2018, 02:06:29 PM »
So, what is the consensus around here now? Are we on board with public incentives, as long as they are used for parks and infrastructure?

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #145 on: March 29, 2018, 03:24:58 PM »
^Some issues are more important than apartments and hotels.

Hats off to anyone willing to risk a business opportunity to stand up for what they believe in.

Feel the same way about Shad Khan, who is in a similar position of seeking public incentives from the city for the Shipyards, yet is still willing to take a strong stand on important social issues.

I'll take a strong, reasoned opinion (in either direction) ten times out of ten over something like Curry refusing to take any stance at all, or even sign, the HRO.

If our local politicians are willing to veto funds for new development in our city because they can't handle the developer holding the opinion that a person should have to be 21 years old and pass a rigorous background check to purchase a deadly weapon, or that bump stocks and armor-piercing bullets shouldn't be on the streets, then Jacksonville deserves to remain a backwards city.

For a city that's long been controlled by the churches and socially conservative to a fault, I'm glad to see some diversity of opinion finally start to emerge, particularly from the business community, in the last decade.

 


That wasn't my point. My point is Jacksonville is a fairly split between Republican and Democrat (evidence being the last few Presidential elections. Regardless of whether or not I agree with his statement (or for that matter, the importance of the national debate), it seems like an odd choice to make a comment that likely, at best, 35% of the public won't agree with when you're trying to persuade a City Council to get land to develop at next to zero risk.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29949
    • Modern Cities
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #146 on: April 11, 2018, 06:03:32 AM »
Showtime (again) for The District

Quote
Can Jacksonville pull it off? That’s the question Downtown Investment Authority CEO Aundra Wallace hears from his counterparts in other cities when they react to the huge planned development called The District.

If actually built on the Southbank as proposed, The District would be larger than anything ever done in downtown Jacksonville with 950 residences, 147 hotel rooms, 134,600 square feet of retail space, 200,000 square feet of office space and a 125-slip marina.

The first attempt to pull together a development agreement disintegrated in January amid criticism about the city stepping in to buy the 30-acre tract as part of its financial support for the deal with Elements of Jacksonville, LLC.

The second attempt will officially start Wednesday when the Downtown Investment Authority board is scheduled to vote on terms that would stake the city to spending as much as $26.4 million for investments on public areas at the site. The financial framework also would enable the developer to get up to $56 million in property tax rebates over a 20-year period.

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/20180406/showtime-again-for-district
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

KenFSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3936
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #147 on: April 11, 2018, 01:58:56 PM »
^Was just unanimously approved by the DIA (8-0).

Will move to City Council for a vote.

MusicMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1952
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #148 on: April 11, 2018, 02:23:54 PM »
"$56 million in tax rebates to the developer."

How 'bout the rest of us?

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
Re: The District wants $26 million in public incentives
« Reply #149 on: April 11, 2018, 02:36:16 PM »
"$56 million in tax rebates to the developer."

How 'bout the rest of us?

lol, right?

Here's my thing: I don't love this package, but I'm better with this than the first one...in concept. I don't have fundamental issue with the city funding infrastructure, like roads, power/water, riverwalk, parks, etc. That's $26M

The rest is tied to what actually gets built. In other words, to receive all $56M thy have to build the entire thing (meaning all of the pretty pictures we've seen). That's my understanding, and I'm skeptical it happens.

Now, my question is...do they actually close on the properly by July 18th?