Reductions in parking aren't just based on whims or random articles on the internet. They are founded on data and analysis. Sometimes a parking demand statement will show that when the ITE parking generation standards are applied to a site, they result in a lower demand than required by the code. Sometimes a municipality can create reductions in parking in a defined area based on oversupply of on-street or public parking (Downtown's case) or when public transit reduces dependence on the automobile. Sometimes (in larger mixed use developments) reductions in parking can be granted when internal uses have different peak demands, shown through a shared parking analysis.
It's unlikely that any of those type of arguments can be made on the site. Also, due to the site's irregular geometry and need to preserve at least 2 buildings, it's unlikely and maybe impossible to design any kind of parking deck. You probably don't even have room to ramp up to rooftop parking on a new building either. Not that that is a good solution anyways.
From a quick eyeball of the site, the only real option to intensify the project in today's autocentric world is to create a stacked parking structure with three lifts (which triples surface parking and is half the price of a garage), or arrange an off-site parking agreement. However, there are virtually no surface lots nearby and nobody would want to encumber surface parking with high land values in the immediate area.
Not sure how prevalent stacked parking is in Jacksonville today, but is becoming an increasingly popular alternative to parking decks in areas with high redevelopment value. The problem is you essentially have to have permanent valet surface to operate them and they do not work in high turnover retail environments. So probably not an ideal solution here. Long story short, adding intensity to the site is a challenge.
