Haydon Burns RFP Thread

[cracklow]

Man they're pouring in the the FTU.

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

One thing I've noticed, is because of the lack of information giving on the Atkins proposal, most of these letters lead me to believe that these people think it only includes expensive high rise condos.  Not many, if any recognize (or care) this as a mixed use project that has the potential to be a big catalyst in the enchance of fo downtown's residential, entertainment, retail, dining, and nightlife sectors.

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._19313161.shtml

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lakelander~ I don't know if telling them that would help

If they have no vested interest downtown, why would they drive there to do dinner and a movie?

Even so, for those who live elsewhere, high dollar condos is all this design is-more things built for folks with lots of money.

[Urban_Legend]

I feel so bad for Atkins. Can't they just build in peace? If all these preservation people really cared for this building, they should've voiced their opinions BEFORE the RFP!!!! ARGH!

When I was at the Burrito Gallery, which had a good crowd, I was thinking how nice it would be to have the shops and all the items Atkins proposes across the street. It would be a good night spot.

I had those same sentiments when I ate there too! lol

[crazy cuban]

allow me to be that angry person that wants to state the obvious and something that most people on the board don't realize, it's too late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! where the hell were all these letter writers about a year ago, wait make that 2 years agai when the first RFP for the old library came about and all included tearing it down!... yeah, let's chain ourselves to the building as the bulldozer drives down the street!! all for some media attention, face it>>> some people are media wh*(^s>> yeah you know!! as we all know>> i am a modernist and think the building is a fine example of that era and that we should save it, and have been saying that since the debate started! but i know when the battle is lost, and so now i say, build the condos so we can get more people downtown! and honestly folks, once you've been to a chocolate factory once, why go again>> just ask augustus>>> anyways, as has been said before, what needs to be done is what is best to continue the downtwon redevelopment. and it doesn't matter who writes the letters, whether you live downtown or not>> it is one big city folks and everyone has a voice, remember a thing that happened in the 60's called civil rights!!! so if it means that for us to get some more life downtown, we have to demo a modern building, i say rev her up!!! now, who is for demo-ing the Landing!!! and get to building on the parking lots.!!! because that much undeveloped land downtown is just down right pathetic!

[Lunican]

DONT DEMOLISH THE LANDING!! ITS TOO HISTORICAL AND UNIQUE!! IT REPRESENTS MID 1980's SHOPPING MALL ARCHITECTURE THAT WILL BE LOST FOREVER!!

i can hear it now.

[Captain Obvious]

If all these preservation people really cared for this building, they should've voiced their opinions BEFORE the RFP!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They DID. Both the historical society and hardwick have been lobbying city leaders for years to make sure they save the building. Just because city leaders have been ignoring them so far, doesn't mean that they somehow don't deserve to keep pleadng their case. I somewhat enjoy hearing the preservationist's arguments, because most of them have utterly nothing to do with Atkins vs. Peterbrooke. It's about a much larger principle - which makes for a much more interesting debate - and is really one of the first examples of how cities might deal with the preservation of modernist design in the future.

Let's face it, if Peterbrooke had won the JEDC committee, many of you would be complaining and writing letters asking the mayor to ignore the JEDC and select Atkins (as would be your right). But just because the Atkins proposal won, people here are complaining that the preservationists are wrong for continuing to argue their case!!

But I've been hearing rumors that if Atkins is rejected, it won't just be because of preservation issues. Apparently some people in city hall consider the project's financials to be weak. In other words, they doubt the developer's ability to pull off what they claim to be able to pull off. But right now there are only a couple of council members who are apparently anti-Atkins, so anything would probably require action by the mayor first, and he has yet to take a stance.

[bobliocatt]

^Actually, I beg to differ. If Peterbrooke had won this thing out right, based on the merits of their plan, I would be pissed, knowing downtown got short changed, but I'd respect the process and get over it, instead of trying to undermine everything, before Atkins can even get to the table to see if they can finance this project.

If anything, what bugs me the most about whats going on now is the level of backwardness and the general ignorance of urbanism being displayed in the city. We claim we want to grow to be a world class city with a vibrant downtown, but when its time to put something in place that can help get us there, we don't want it.

Anyway, if the building is "preserved", then what? Main Branch radically alters the structure and Peterbrooke guts the insides out into an industrial plant, both of which rob the building of whatever architectural integrity it has (other than the fins).

Btw, where did you hear the news about Atkins having financial problems? I've ran across a poster on the FTU site, that mentioned this, but that person has been in bed with Peterbrooke for months. So until they actually sit down with the city, I'd be very skeptical of some of the information being tossed around, concerning the Haydon Burns.

[jjoshjl]

You know, I thought about the same thing Lake...

If Main or Peterbrooke won (both of which I still think should be located downtown.), the only that that would realy remain of the Hardwick Building would be PART of the exterior. Main was proposing some serious changes even to the outside as well... How is that preservation....

It reminds me of the buildings in the old west that had a fasade on the front so that they look 'Nicer', look at the building form the side, and you can see the buidling was nothing more than a big box.

Anyway... Dispite all of the venom going back and forth, 1) if peterbrooke won, would of been like.. arg... but ok... still kinda cool. 2) if main won, i would have been even more ok because it still brings people downtiwn.., finally...

I firmly beleive these guys should be downtown. i WANT these guys to be downtown. However, i think peterbrook would be more suited for a large parcell in the Landing, and have Main do something similar to what they wanted in the parking lot across the street from Ocean. If they realy like hardwicks design, and its fine if they do because they have a right to that opinion, I am sure mr hardwick would love to design it for them...

Cheers

[RiversideGator]

The Peterbrook and library preservation people remind me of the old Communists who would say anything, including lies, in order to get their way. They are now out there acting as if this hunk of crap is "historic" and are slandering the Atkins people by saying that they are not financially viable. My counterpoint to that would be: Atkins is paying $5 million UP FRONT. If their project never comes to fruition, the city will still be $5 million richer and that monstrous building will still, unfortunately, be in existence. So, how would the City be harmed in this scenario? The upside, if Atkins does what they say they will, is that the City will be rid of an eyesore (and a joke to out of town visitors) and will gain a new, attractive highrise which will add residents and entertainment options downtown. I dont see the problem.

[bobliocatt]

Although Atkins has offered to pay $5 million, I believe a portion of it would go to the city after condo presells. Nevertheless, if all this is about someone paying the most cash of the project up front, then all they need to do is cut a check $1 dollar more than what Peterbrooke or Main Branch offered......right? But its not, its just one of a long list of slandering excuses being thrown out right now to get the Mayor to ignore the RFP results.

[jacksonvillian]

Just to clearify this point for everyone...

Atkins is offering $5 million in cash ALL UP-FRONT at closing. There are no contingencies with pre-sales or any other conditions.

This rumor has been circulated by the Peterbrooke/Jenkins/Save-the-Library crowd.

Let me know if you guys have any other questions.

- J

[bobliocatt]

Great. The quicker this deal gets done, the better.

[Viper]

Just to clearify this point for everyone...

Atkins is offering $5 million in cash ALL UP-FRONT at closing. There are no contingencies with pre-sales or any other conditions.

This rumor has been circulated by the Peterbrooke/Jenkins/Save-the-Library crowd.

Let me know if you guys have any other questions.

- J

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is great to hear.

My question: I personally cannot forsee anything other than success for Ocean Square. That in mind, does the Atkins Group have any plans, even if nothing formal, for any other developments?

[Captain Obvious]

The Peterbrook and library preservation people remind me of the old Communists

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Last I checked, it's the Atkins supporters on this forum lauding the decision (actually, a non-binding suggestion) of an unelected economic planning committee ... while ridiculing the potential intervention of elected officials. Sounds pretty damned authoritarian to me.

[jacksonvillian]

That is great to hear. 

My question: I personally cannot forsee anything other than success for Ocean Square.  That in mind, does the Atkins Group have any plans, even if nothing formal, for any other developments?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know they have other things going... as to downtown I don't think so, but I heard Riverside Ave/Convention Center area mentioned as possible future areas to expand if possible. I know they are also looking at Southside/Gate Parkway area for something as well.

[RiversideGator]

it's the Atkins supporters on this forum lauding the decision (actually, a non-binding suggestion) of an unelected economic planning committee ... while ridiculing the potential intervention of elected officials. Sounds pretty damned authoritarian to me.

The committee was appointed by elected officials and given the authority to render an impartial verdict as to which proposal was best under certain criteria. Peterbrooke/Save the Haydon Burns lost (twice). End of story. We all knew the rules at the outset. Game over. Now let's get the City Council/Mayor to ratify this (quickly) and move on.

And, I dont see Atkins running around slandering other groups. I think those not chosen (excepting the Police Fund and Vestcor) are really showing their true colors as sore losers by refusing to play by the rules, lying about other proposals and generally spreading disinformation. For God's sake, we have lost to the wrecking ball FAR better buildings than this in Jacksonville with barely a peep from these "preservationists".

[bobliocatt]

Yeah, it would be nice to see these Preservationist ramp up their fight for a true building in need, like the crumbling 5 story First Baptist Church Office building next door to the old JEA Tower. Given its proximity to Hemming Plaza, the new library and JMOMA, maybe Peterbrooke should consider moving in it.

[bobliocatt]

OLD MAIN LIBRARY

Right decision was made

The appointed commission has rightly chosen the Atkins Group to improve the quality of life downtown. The old Main Library building does not improve the architecture of the city.

The structure should not be saved solely for historical purposes. The site has a better use. A contemporary building will be a welcome addition to the diversity of the existing structures.

Times change and a progressive city will accept necessary alteration to which it is accustomed. The existing building has served its purpose and its time.

Downtown must be fully utilized if it is to be regenerated, which has been -- and is -- the current policy of the city administration, its downtown development effort and the city's Chamber of Commerce.

The rules in accordance of which the Atkins Group won the competitive bid process should not be changed lest future competitions for city improvements will be less competitive, fearing that the rules will be changed under pressure by a few influential citizens and one or more misguided members of City Council.

ROBERT M. NIED, retired, Jacksonville

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stor..._19330463.shtml

[jacksonvillian]

From today's Times Union:

OLD MAIN LIBRARY

Abide by JEDC's choice

As a property owner and resident of Jacksonville for 42 years, I am compelled to respond to prior letter writers who expressed disappointment about the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission's recommendation to contract with the Atkins Group to redevelop the property that formerly served as our city's Main Library.

They are calling for the mayor and City Council to void the commission's recommendation or at least change, after the fact, the bid specifications to preserve the existing structure.

I think a fair bid process was properly followed to allow investors to bid on redevelopment of this property. The bid specifications developed by the JEDC did not require the preservation of the existing structure.

The appropriate time for those calling for the preservation of this structure should have been during the development of the bid specifications or, at the latest, after their publication.

After spending significant amounts of time and money on redevelopment designs based on these JEDC specifications, investors, such as the Atkins Group and Peterbrooke, submitted their bids in expectation of a fair bid process.

To their credit, the members of the JEDC performed their fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers of Jacksonville and chose the highest (significantly higher), "real" money bid by the Atkins Group for an exciting "highest and best use" commercial and residential development.

I think it would be inappropriate to void the commission's recommendation or change the bid specifications after the fact.

The consequences of this action would be to diminish the purpose of the JEDC and tarnish future property redevelopment bid requests. Potential investors for future property redevelopment would be reluctant to participate in such an uncertain bid process.

KENNETH B. KLEIN

Jacksonville

[jacksonvillian]

!! ALERT !!

Suzanne Jenkins (Peterbrooke's Advocate) along with the Jacksonville Historic Society are introducing legislation at City Hall to designate the Haydon Burns Library as a "Historical Landmark"... as such, it cannot be altered or certainly not torn down for re-development. Of course, Peterbrooke could move in as-is to make chocolate.

At the Council meeting last night, Jenkins made a statement on the record, that the JEDC's RFP process was flawed and should be thrown out. Her desire of course was to let Peterbrooke proceed with their proposal with the building protected under historical classification.

If you are as outraged by this blatent political bias and insult to the JEDC, Atkins, Main Branch and the taxpayers of Jacksonville, please email or call the Mayor, City Councilpersons and everyone else you can to voice your concerns. HELP!

Mayor John Peyton [email protected]

District Council Members

District 1: Lake Ray [email protected]

District 2: Lynette Self [email protected]

District 3: Richard Clark [email protected]

District 4: Suzanne Jenkins [email protected]

District 5: Art Shad [email protected]

District 6: Sharon Copeland [email protected]

District 7: Pat Lockett-Felder [email protected]

District 8: Gwen Yates [email protected]

District 9: Reggie Fullwood [email protected]

District 10: Mia Jones [email protected]

District 11: Warren Alvarez [email protected]

District 12: Daniel Davis [email protected]

District 13: Arthur Graham [email protected]

District 14: Michael Corrigan [email protected]

At Large Council Members

Group 1: Ronnie Fussell [email protected]

Group 2: Elaine Brown [email protected]

Group 3: Lad Daniels [email protected]

Group 4: Kevin Hyde [email protected]

Group 5: Glorious J. Johnson [email protected]

JEDC, Interim Executive Director

Jeanne M Miller [email protected]

[Captain Obvious]

Alert? There was an article in the newspaper several days ago talking about how they were going to do this.

Political Bias? As opposed to the political bias when the JEDC kicked off one of the committe members just because he was also a member of the historical society? That sounds a whole lot more shady than Jenkins, who has been clear and public with all her opinions and planned actions.

But yes, if you don't like it, don't vote for her (or any other council supporters) next time, and don't donate to the historical society. And you're right, you should send them emails telling them that. Though, I hope you had the integrity to mention who you work for when you wrote your emails.

[Viper]

Wow, she just loves her chocolate doesn't she?

It should be noted that if it is designated a historic landamark, an entirely new bid process should then be conducted. Simply giving it to Peterbrooke would be outrageous, not that her actions aren't already.

You people are late. You're supposed to try to label it historic before it's awarded for redevlopment. If it was so damn important, why did they not seek historic labelling before now? Was it not historic until your chocolate was beaten in a fair and "Square" process?

Save the old library, no save the JEDC RFP process, no save the chocolate, no save the Queen, no save me from this madness.

[jacksonvillian]

Alert? There was an article in the newspaper several days ago talking about how they were going to do this.

Political Bias? As opposed to the political bias when the JEDC kicked off one of the committe members just because he was also a member of the historical society? That sounds a whole lot more shady than Jenkins, who has been clear and public with all her opinions and planned actions.

But yes, if you don't like it, don't vote for her (or any other council supporters) next time, and don't donate to the historical society. And you're right, you should send them emails telling them that. Though, I hope you had the integrity to mention who you work for when you wrote your emails.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have made no secret of my relationship to Atkins, here or in any of my coorespondance to the City officals. Capt, why don't you get off your high horse and give a little respect to those who feel strongly about the integrity of the system. For some reason, you seem to be the only one on the forum that has issue with this perspective. You are intitled to disagree of course, but don't insult others by acusing them of not acting honestly!

[Captain Obvious]

It should be noted that if it is designated a historic landamark, an entirely new bid process should then be conducted.  Simply giving it to Peterbrooke would be outrageous, not that her actions aren't already.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

^ Actually, if it is designated an historic landmark, nothing prevents the city from still giving the project to Atkins. However, Atkins would then need explicit permission from the council to get a demolition permit (I think 13 votes). So the likely scenario would be that Atkins would drop out of the negotiations with the city. So, if Atkins dropped out ... well, why wouldn't you give it to the runner up? Wouldn't starting a new RFP display favoritism against the runner up? It's really quite a masterful plan, if it works. However, I doubt it will. These sorts of things usually fail. Jacksonville has never been a friend to preservation, I doubt it'll start now.

Also, just to be clear ... The Historical Society DID try to save the building beforehand. It passed a resolution a few years ago on that matter, and lobbied the city. The city didn't listen to them. It's only now, after enough people disagreed with the JEDC, that someone in the city (Jenkins) is finally trying to help them (even if her real concern is with Peterbrooke, not preservation). So say what you will about the politicians, but the Historical Soceity has done everything in its limited power that it could do, and at the appropriate times. They are hardly jumping in "late," and no law requires them to give up because of a non-binding committee ruling.

[bobliocatt]

Does anyone know what year the libary was built? If a historic designation is given, thus possibly eliminating the Atkins proposal, could the city face a lawsuit?

[Captain Obvious]

Capt, why don't you get off your high horse and give a little respect to those who feel strongly about the integrity of the system. For some reason, you seem to be the only one on the forum that has issue with this perspective.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I care quite a bit about the integrity of the system. And as you mention, I seem to be the only forumer here willing to examine this debate from a differnt direction ... dispite my not being a Peterbrooke supporter, as I've clearly stated numerous times.

What I believe, is that the situation is far more nuanced, and not nearly as absolutist as most people on this forum explain it. Consequently, I've exchanged arguments with nearly every regular on this forum, and I'm perfectly fine with that and I've never taken it personally (hope they haven't either). But, if you can't take a little heat from me and only me, I don't know what to tell you. Sorry? It's just the internet.