Haydon Burns RFP Thread

[RiversideGator]

But, even if Atkins never sells 50% of the condos and never builds (which I doubt), they will still have paid over 3 times more to the City for the library. So, either way, the City comes out ahead with Atkins. No other proposal promises as much cash for the City or as much density/activity for downtown. I think it is likely also that more people would visit Atkins theater/Barnes and Noble than would visit the chocolate factory. And, I think the people who would visit the Atkins project would likely be older (i.e. 20s and up) and would be more likely to spend money elsewhere downtown at a restaurant and bar. On the other hand, the people who would visit a chocolate factory would be (1) school tours during the day and (2) families. These groups, while nice and wholesome, would do little to spur the development of other businesses downtown.

As to the Peterbrooke supporters, I get the distinct impression that at least half of them could care less about chocolate but are really motivated by the desire to save this strange building.

[bobliocatt]

^ I think the letter writer does address that. He is claiming that Atkins and Main Branch are financially unviable proposals that will either go unbuilt/vacant/need incentives/etc. all resulting in embarassment or frustration for the city.

I guess so, but its a pretty weak claim. Financing between mixed use and a single tenant aren't an apples to apples comparison, especially when its well known that just about every condo development anywhere will need to be around 50% sold to get financing.

There is certainly valid reason to suspect financial hurdles (expensive $per/sqft, some lack of preleases, no secured or even tentative financing) whereas Peterbrookes financing is secured. But he doesn't have proof of unviability for the other two. However, everyone here should take a deep breath and remember this ... we can't prove (or even offer concrete, non speculative evidence) that Atkins or Main Street won't suffer from the problems he lists.

Very true. But by the same token, we can't prove that Peterbrooke has the experience or know how to turn a factory into a bustling tourist attraction or even sell the amount of chocolate a plant the size of the Haydon Burns would produce.

Ostensibly, that's why there has been a 1 month delay. It will be the committee's job to flesh out these concerns and find the facts through more detailed presentations. If that letter writer's concerns are wrong, the presentations will make it clear - and Atkins supporters should have nothing to worry about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think I should go ahead and submit a financially sound proposal for the building. I'll offer $10k in cash today, to transform the library into my personal 100,000sf loft. I'll promise to contribute to downtown's economy, by moving in a family of four, that will eat at the nearby dining establishments and bank at the local financial institutions. I can also move in the quickest.....in a day if needed. Eventually, after several trips to Lowe's, I'll personally subdivide the upper floors into lofts and give the spaces away to Urban Planet forumers, free of charge, to fill the void of affordable housing in downtown. What the heck, if a grocery or retail wants to come in, I'll give them some street level space for free, as well, no strings attached. I can also accomodate Peterbrooke, by selling them the basement for $10k. After all its still 3 times the size of their existing facilities. Now we got mixed use and Peterbooke into the building. Where do I sign the papers?

Oh well, enough of my pointless rant ........back to work.

[Captain Obvious]

^ on that note ... instead of beotching all day about which one of three RFP's are superior ... who wants to just go ahead and build their own damn 70 unit condo tower w/ single screen movie theater?

Does a construction loan still only require 10% down and 50% presales? Piece of cake. All we'd need to do is raise about $4-5 million dollars and we're set.

[arcgator]

Living on second street in Springfield, I know I would love it to be a chocolate museum, I mean...who needs a gorcery store, a theater, or shops, or more residents downtown?

What we really need is chocolate.

[crazy cuban]

I found the GOLDEN TICKET!!!!!!!!! now i get to ride the peterbrooke-vator??

PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[arcgator]

I found the GOLDEN TICKET!!!!!!!!!  now i get to ride the peterbrooke-vator??

PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hear the plans are actually to put a dome surrounding it.

[Viper]

I may try to chop up my earlier letter and see if it can get published.

[merlin]

Will there be fizzy lifting drinks? Will they be able to be served until 4 am?

[vicupstate]

Here's a letter today's paper in favor of Peterbrooke, that was written in response to my letter that favored the other tow proposals.

PETERBROOKE: Proposal is a unique opportunity

The triumph of modernist architecture that is the old Main Library need not be sacrificed to fulfill a potential need for movie theaters, restaurants, gourmet grocery stores and 800-square-foot condominiums priced at $250,000.

The two mixed-use proposals from the Atkins Group (which wants to raze the library building) and Main Branch LLC (which wants to mutilate it) should be rejected for numerous other reasons, three of which are highlighted here:

Success of the Atkins and Main Branch proposals is contingent upon the future vitality of an already-saturated downtown condominium market.

Jacksonville has a unique opportunity to preserve a remarkable example of modernist architecture and simultaneously open the door for a unique downtown tourist attraction.

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._19143731.shtml

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I want to know were the 800 sft/$250,000 info. came from. That contradicts what forumer Jacksonvillian posted. Are those numbers in the proposal? Jacksonvillian stated that sq. footage would start at 1500 and prices in the 200,000s.

On what does the author base the statement that the condominium market downtown is saturated? ALL of the condo projects downtown have been well received by the market. It is very likely that the Strand will convert to condos before it even finishes construction.

I sent the T-U a letter last Friday, in support of either the Main Branch or Atkins porposals. I guess I should have thrown in some inaccuracies if I expected them to print it.

Exactly what awards has the Burns Library won? The architect calls it a "masterpiece" , on what does he base that no-doubt unbiased opinion?

It is so ironic to me that Jacksonville has finally "got religion" on preservation after decades of destruction of scores of architecturally significant buildings. All in the name of saving a building that itself leveled a beautifal and significant building (old City Hall). These same people better speak up if the Marble Trio is threatened with demolition.

I have a suggestion: If the Peterbrooke bid wins, stipulate that they must pay the difference between their offer (1.5mm) and the appraisal (4.5mm) if the level of visitors and the accompanying economic impact do not match their "conservative" estimates. That would make an excellent "clawback" for the taxpayer subsidy.

[BosTech]

Someone has high interest to promote Peterbrook,like I said before wouldn't suprise me to see some conspiracy,seems like everything on Northside is getting delayed or underdeveloped which to me raises value of Southbank where Paytons own property.

From Landing,Library,old library,Shipyard,Courthouse,Bay street is getting delayed and all having problems.....

[bobliocatt]

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._19176317.shtml

OLD MAIN LIBRARY: All proposals should be rejected

This is in reference to the proposed sale of the old Main Library building.

On Friday, the city of Jacksonville's Competitive Sealed Proposal Evaluation Committee will make a final decision by selecting one of the three remaining proposals or bids.

In the best interests of the citizens of Jacksonville, it is my hope the committee will reject all three proposals. I offer the following reasons:

1. Over 200 "Requests for Proposals" were mailed out by the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission to various entities throughout the nation. Only five proposals were received. They were from local groups, which is an indicator there was no interest by companies outside of Jacksonville.

2. None of the three groups remaining in the competition offer a cash equivalent to the appraised value of the building. Only one bid comes close to the present value, but this proposal called for demolishing the building.

3. The economic impact and business plans are somewhat vague. We should not equate the chocolatier's comparison to the Hershey Museum located in the heart of the Amish country in Pennsylvania. This area has long been known for its family-oriented tourist attractions.

4. The projected revenue from property taxes, if based on the actual sales price of the building, will do very little to enhance the ad valorem tax base in downtown Jacksonville.

There is plenty of time for future plans as the new Main Library is now scheduled for opening in November 2005 or even a later date.

As a possible alternative to the city selling the building, I offer the following suggestion: The city should keep this magnificent structure, which contains 112,000 square feet of marble floor space. It could easily be converted to a multi-service educational center.

The center could be known as the Jacksonville Museum of History with exhibits being made available by our historical society, maritime museum, military and education institutions, sports hall of fame and many others. Displays by our local manufacturing companies would also be of interest to our visitors.

Additional amenities could include an arcade for a small theater, a bookstore, delicatessen and coffee shop, branch pharmacy, branch post office, gift shop and other convenience shops.

The city could lease these spaces to private operators, which would produce new sales tax revenues.

Such a facility would be a great boost for downtown, not only for visitors but for families throughout greater Jacksonville.

This center could truly be a place symbolizing Jacksonville's great heritage.

LOUIS H. RITTER

Ponte Vedra Beach

[BosTech]

Ah not another museum,if anyone is thinking of turning downtown into DOWNTOWN should stop suggesting stupid ideas of more museums,spliting courthouses in multi buildings,ugly garages and other useless ideas that got nothing to do with downtown and urban life.

Downtown needs RESIDENTIAL and ENTERTAINMENT projects,places were you can live,able to work in DT and where night life can flourish.

Museums work between 9-5 at best,simple coffeebar can generate more taxes by being open 8am-4am,not to mention bigger clubs,bars,resturants etc.

Then again maybe we should turn old library into educational centar...the one that will teach people how to develop and maintain urban life.

[crazy cuban]

dear mr. bostech>>> teach the ones that don't understand! preach brother, preach!

the last thing j-ville needs is another museum, we have what we can support and they work perferctly fine. let's get some life into the downtown area, bars.. restaurants.. shops>>> but you know what that is going to take>> people going there and spending money. so open the taps until 4am, and when the FBC-patrons start parading down the street preaching and imposing there moral standards upon us, share a toast with me and wish them the best>>> as for the library, whether you love or hate the building, keeping it as some sort of government runs historical society is a complete waste. whether Main Bracnh wins and restores and adds on, or Ocean Square wins and it goes to rubble.... they will both be better than the DT wonka world! i think i have reached the point of rambling, but the point has been made.... all i ask is that people think.

[bobliocatt]

Two more letters to the Editor

Focus on financial strength

Friday will be a real test for the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission and its commitment to the citizens of Jacksonville.

There are now three finalists making presentations again for the Main Library building.

Mayor John Peyton seems to want efficiencies with this complicated arm of government. But despite a vigorous strategic plan and new vision that addresses the business conduct of the JEDC, there's another black cloud hanging in our sky.

The highest score went to the Atkins Group, which proposes a true mixed-use development that incorporates residential, retail, restaurants and entertainment aimed at creating pedestrian traffic downtown.

Its $5 million bid was the highest, and it is not requesting city incentives in any form. Scoring second and third were chocolatier Peterbrooke and Main Branch LLC, respectively.

Look at what makes the best business sense based on facts. Look at the financial strength in all proposals. If the powers that be take this approach, they will not please everyone, but they will be able to honestly look the taxpayers in the eyes and say that they made the best business decision for both the city and this new project.

MICHAEL SEALY

Jacksonville

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OLD MAIN LIBRARY

Keep building intact

At least two articles have been published in recent weeks regarding the fate of the old landmark Main Library.

The first showed images from several developers' proposals to the city, indicating their intent for the building. These ranged from inspired to insulting. Inspired uses included both commercial and residential uses. The latter proposed demolition of the library building to make way for other uses, which should have been enough to disqualify the developer without further consideration.

The most recent article described a short list -- the final contenders -- as determined by the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission. The commission came to the improbable conclusion that saving this landmark for a new use was of no more value to Jacksonville than destroying it for construction of a graceless apartment building.

How can it be that the criteria for judging proposals regarding the fate of this building give no bonus points for saving it? Where is the input from the Landmarks Commission? Where is input from the Architectural Design Review Committee?

This remarkable Taylor Hardwick design is a significant part of our cultural and architectural heritage; we must keep it intact.

If the criteria being used to evaluate this library building had been applied to the St. James Building, there would be a parking lot in its place.

It's time to insist that the JEDC consider more than just numbers in its evaluation of the proposals it has received.

This is not simply a question of cost; it is a question of value. Our architectural heritage has value. We should respect it.

DAVID LAFFITTE, architect, Jacksonville

[Viper]

So we have someone from the far suburbs (I kno you work in the area Lake, forgive me) and an architect. One who doesn't live DT ore even near it and the other would have psychological objectives to demolition.

Both want to sacrifice additional residency and entertainment for the sake of culture and historical value.

Noble but not worth invalidating proposals that don't intend to keep the building intact.

Cultural Jax is fine and already getting better. What's not fine is the lack of vibrancy in downtown and I'll accept the wrecking ball approach if it means working towards enhancing that vibrancy.

[vicupstate]

Then again maybe we should turn old library into educational centar...the one that will teach people how to develop and maintain urban life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

^^ Great idea, only it would be too small to hold the thousands of students that need to enroll.

dear mr. bostech>>>  teach the ones that don't understand!  preach brother, preach!

the last thing j-ville needs is another museum, we have what we can support and they work perferctly fine.  let's get some life into the downtown area, bars..  restaurants.. shops>>>  but you know what that is going to take>>  people going there and spending money.  so open the taps until 4am, and when the FBC-patrons start parading down the street preaching and imposing there moral standards upon us, share a toast with me and wish them the best>>>  as for the library, whether you love or hate the building, keeping it as some sort of government runs historical society is a complete waste.  whether Main Bracnh wins and restores and adds on, or Ocean Square wins and it goes to rubble....  they will both be better than the DT wonka world!  i think i have reached the point of rambling, but the point has been made....  all i ask is that people think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

^^ Amen to that. I didn't see anything listed in Lois Ritter's musuem idea that doesn't already exist, albeit not in one location. I wonder if this is the SAME Lou Ritter that was MAYOR of Jacksonville prior to consolidation.

[RiversideGator]

I wonder if this is the SAME Lou Ritter that was MAYOR of Jacksonville prior to consolidation.

I was wondering this also. Wasnt he Mayor when this eyesore was built and doesnt he therefore a vested interest in keeping it around? And, why should we care what someone in St. Johns County says? I dont go down to St Augustine and tell them how to do things.

[BosTech]

As it is ,none is going to downtown after 6PM,I don't see point of "preservring" buildings where no people will be coming to see it.

We need projects that will bring life and people to create true urban life,otherwise will have same thing we alredy have...empty downtown.

Look at my hometown.population of 250,000 but it looks more urban then Jacksonville which has 1.3 milion people...counting metros.

So its just matter of organization and will to create urban life,no dumb ideas and bilions of dollars.

[vicupstate]

Littlepage endorses Atkins Group

The decision comes today, supposedly.

[Viper]

Testing my luck again with a different letter but it seems if the final answer to the question comes today, my letter will have no force.

What makes a home? Is it the superficial exterior or the occupants inside?

"Save the Haydon Burns building," is a mantra I read all too often these days. Noble but if the outside is preserved but the inside is not, then you have won only half the war.

I read of requests to save a piece or architectural history yet they all seem to fail one simple fact. This edifice that they are so intent on saving will be occupied by a tenant not worthy of inhabiting a structure deemed historically valuable.

Save it so that a chocolate factory can rot it from the inside out? Brilliant. An idea based upon that logic. Let's save every building we can and infest them with lowest common denominator of tenant. Who cares what's in it, right? It's the American infatuation with superficial exteriors that counts, right? Wrong.

What made the Haydon Burns building so valuable has moved down the road a few blocks.

Had the building truly been that important, our library would continue to remain addressed at 122 North Ocean Street.

We need something to implant itself in that location to interject life back into downtown and I can think of a few things better than chocolate.

[Captain Obvious]

Littlepage endorses Atkins Group

The decision comes today, supposedly.

[Captain Obvious]

Here are some Littlepage Gem's for your reading pleasure:

He suggests that the city should stop trying to lure new businesses and residents to Jax entirely. His idea: "New Jacksonville slogan: Jacksonville -- Where Florida Begins. Now Keep Going."

He says that they city is full of idiots for giving tax credits to Fidelity and Rayonier for moving their companies here (and generating millions upon millions in economic activity). His reason: "The apologists for corporate welfare argue companies wouldn't come to Jacksonville without the incentives. Baloney. Where else would they have it so good, even without the giveaways?" Yes, that's right Ron, our city government should completely abandon economic development programs, because the fortune 500 companies will, of course, move here anyway, even if we don't do anything.

"Hats off to City Councilman Reggie Fullwood ... the councilman was right on when he fought against city incentives for a proposed housing project in LaVilla that called for townhomes that would sell for $180,000. The so-called "affordable housing" was a bad idea from the get-go" ... yeah, $180k housing in LaVilla .. what a terrible idea. I'm glad they put a stop to that.

Actually, I was going to quote some more, but there are just too many. Just click on the 02, 03, 04 archives and search for topics with "corporate welfare" in the title. He was outraged because the Berkman developer actually made a profit on his development, and demanded that he should give it back to the city. He opposed incentives for the rehab of the old Barnett Bank building, claiming that if the 4 downtown redidential projects the city has so-far subsidized weren't enough to create critical mass, the city should give up!! The list goes on and on.

[vicupstate]

Littlepage's column might backfire.

Overall, Littlepage is this strange combination of a redneck-socialist blowhard who has basically made a career of complaining about most of the pro-downtown policies the city has ever had. His main focus is the environment, so he occasionally writes seemingly pro-urban editorials, usually in support of public parks and the riverwalk. But at his heart he's a class warrior who likes to scream "corporate welfare" at every opportunity, and people in city government generally don't like him one bit. Furthermore, almost every Republican voter in the city HATES Littlepage, and I'm sure many people will now support Peterbrooke simply because he's come out against it.

I'd have to go back and check, but I think Littlepage opposed the Vestcor rehabs, Berkman, the Strand and Peninsula, and even Fidelity coming here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've never kept a tally of how often I agree/disagree with Littlepage, but it's probably something like 57/43 one way or the other. Like a lot of folks in Jax, he needs a better understanding of what makes an urban environment work. Also, while I agree that incentives are often too excessive, they shouldn't be completely eliminated.

Basically, Littlepage can be classified this way:

1) He wants a vibrant downtown

2) He does think that #1 requires the taxpayers to pay 100% of the private costs

3) He is a strong environmentalist, particularly when it comes to the St. Johns

4) He hates corporate welfare and sees it as equally repugnant to food stamp fraud and the like. I've never understood why Republicans in general don't agree. I guess it's because corporate welfare benefits THEM.

5) He sees a lot of stupid and wasteful decisions by the local and state governments. He isn't bashful about describing them as such.

6) He strongly supports funding for public education.

I suspect that the city folks don't like him because of item 5. Hard partisans, whether they are Democrat or Republican don't like him because he is not 100% one or the other. They resent the fact that he doesn't hold firm to a single ideology. Today's political climate requires that everyone support their party/ideology without exception or reservation. Sounds like a cult to me.

Whether this column will backfire is hard to say. His point that the city is broke, and shouldn't leave $3.5mm on the table is a persausive one to make just a few hours before the decision.

[RiversideGator]

I agree with Littlepage about 25% of the time. He is right about the horrible Adams Mark building design and he is right about the Haydon Burns/Atkins proposal. He is wrong about most other things except for hunting, fishing and eating boiled peanuts. In the interest of full disclosure, he also goes to my church.

He hates corporate welfare and sees it as equally repugnant to food stamp fraud and the like. I've never understood why Republicans in general don't agree. I guess it's because corporate welfare benefits THEM.

This is one of his more obnoxious positions. Usually "corporate welfare" is actually tax breaks. Since when is giving a company tax incentives (i.e. allowing them to keep more of their own money instead of forceably seizing it) to relocate here and generate jobs, economic growth and therefore additional tax revenue the equivalent of people defrauding the government?? As long as everything is out in the open and clearly defined, this is a good thing, obviously. Would he rather have Fidelity still in California? I think he is also anti-economic development because he doesnt want things to change and more people to move here. I can sympathize with this, but people will come anyway in a free society, so we may as well have people with some money move here.

[vicupstate]

This is one of his more obnoxious positions.  Usually "corporate welfare" is actually tax breaks.  Since when is giving a company tax incentives (i.e. allowing them to keep more of their own money instead of forceably seizing it) to relocate here and generate jobs, economic growth and therefore additional tax revenue the equivalent of people defrauding the government??  As long as everything is out in the open and clearly defined, this is a good thing, obviously.  Would he rather have Fidelity still in California?  I think he is also anti-economic development because he doesnt want things to change and more people to move here.  I can sympathize with this, but people will come anyway in a free society, so we may as well have people with some money move here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tax incentives are a necessary evil in today's world. Necessary because without them, any such city/county/state would be severely limited in it's economic growth. Evil because they represent a loss of revenue that would otherwise be received by government. Revenue that EVERYONE ELSE pays instead. Evil because these new or expanded companies receive a break and a competitive advantage that existing businesses that have been in the area longer don't get. Evil because they create a bidding war between states and localities. The cost of providing infrastructure to support the new development doesn't change, but the revenue to offset those expenses gets reduced by the incentives, which have escalated exponentially over the past few decades.

In the '60s and '70s the south experienced phenomenal growth via the migration of industry from the north. This was occurred because the south offered cheaper labor, land and taxes. Incentives were rarely given, about the only exception was extention of water or sewer lines. Now incentives also include buying the land, training workers are government expense, paying moving expenses, low interest loans, reduction of property taxes, and outright cash payments. The incentive for states and localities to keep taxes low and infrastructure in place for everyone (as a recruitment tool) is now gone. They can just sign away current and future tax revenues to keep themselves competitive.

Greensboro NC paid something like $80,000 per part time job to get a Fed Ex hub. The price tag keeps rising and it is past time that a line was drawn. At a minimum the benefits these companies receive should be subject to income tax liability.

Here in Greenville, the Natural Gas company asked for a property tax break to extend gas service to a less developed area of the county. Keep in mind, that no DIRECT jobs would be created. Also, keep in mind that this company was not about to relocate. The county was poised to say yes in the vein of "it will help attract new business". Fortunately, a public outcry caused the company to withdraw their request. They built the line anyway. They will be paying their property taxes at the normal rate. That makes me happy, because I pay at the normal rate too, and any economic benefit will still happen. It is the nature of business to always seek to reduce costs. It is the proper role of government to make sure everyone pays there FAIR SHARE of the cost of government.

Ideally, all states and localities would collectively ban all incentives. That isn't going to happen of course. In place of that, every effort should be made to pay incentives only when the overall benefit exceeeds the costs of servicing the new development, and the development would occur ONLY if the incentives are provided. Additionally, incentives should be weighed toward tangible things that benefit the general public as well as the receipient. For instance, widening a road, putting in water/sewer lines, parking garages, etc, as opposed to moving expenses, corporate tax refunds, etc.

Also, additional weight should be place on bring high paying jobs and revitializing distressed areas.

ANY tax paid by ANYONE could be classified as "forcibly seized" or worthy of being kept by the earner, instead of paid to support government.

Fidelity was unhappy in California. Would they have come without incentives, maybe. There package was small by comparision, so I would say it was well worth it. Is it worth $230mm in future revenues to let Landmar develop The Shipyards. I say no.