DDRB to Evaluate Revisions to Brooklyn Retail Project

[thelakelander]

I was told Roland said 'If they don't build this thing now, nothing will get built there for a very long time'.

LOL at that one!

Hmm. I'm not like Savannah. She's beautiful, her breast are perky, her hair is long and her ass is firm.  I'm Jacksonville.  Yes, he throws me down the stairs every once and a while but without him , nobody would want me....

Also heard that Hallmark did not want a grocery building's wall facing their apartments.  Personally, Id rather look at a building instead of a parking lot.

Classic cause and effect. Because we have a strong history of accepting lower standards, Hallmark knows they'd be facing a blank wall, loaded with half empty pallets, broken shopping carts and dumpsters.  Assuming we'd grow a backbone, we'd end up with something like the stuff below and Hallmark would have no problem.

Downtown Fort Myers Publix (this is the rear)


Downtown West Palm Beach Publix (surface parking in rear of store)


Downtown San Diego Ralph's

[simms3]

Brooklyn doesn't have the density to support a pedestrian focus. If more people worked/lived nearby, then they wouldn't need cars to get there.

I am no fan of another cookie cutter strip, but if the planned tenants can't justify their existence without some sort of drive up ability, then they won't come.

That is why a lot of urban centers have mixed use developments to kick start renewal in a transition space. High density living driving pedestrians into the retail mix that came with it. That would usually bring in surrounding retail etc.

Don't ask these guys to build a garage, the psf costs to support the higher CAM would scare away the prospective tenants.

You can't have it both ways. But you have to start somewhere.

I think these are good points.  I do agree with Lake, though, that the site can accomodate drive in traffic and still be better integrated with a planning thesis that the neighborhood will one day be "walkable" (still deson't mean there will actually be consistent foot traffic).  Fuqua is an aggressive developer...he worked on the Riverside deal, actually, when he was with Sembler, and he split off to go his own route 2 years ago in a very highly publicized rift in local (Atlanta) development circles.  He has been pushed back consistently and aggressively by two other cities for bad plans that don't embody sound development principles for the areas specific to their proposals, and so I would hate for him to start picking on a smaller city with no backbone and no plan in place such as Jacksonville.

Otherwise, I agree with you...have to start somewhere.  If you look at Midtown Atlanta, which is now finally turning into a dense walkable urban area (like literally just now even after 20+ buildings have gone up), there are strip center type developments scattered about from previous eras as the city was growing up, and residents do walk to them.  It's very hard to make the reverse conversion from auto orientation to pedestrian orientation, politically, financially, time-wise, and let's face it - it's still a newish phenomenon with a lot of kinks to work out and a lot of best practices that have yet to be shared or mastered.

Even if all 600 units get built, the Y, this retail, and maybe a few other things, the foot traffic will still be almost nonexistent.  That much I can promise, even if some of the more optimistic posters want to debate and share that their experiences tell them otherwise.  I have worked on the investment side on these kinds of deals...nobody is relying or going to rely on foot traffic, and we'd all think they're smoking crack if they did.  In fact, I wonder if Hallmark even underwrote all of its retail component at 225 Riverside.  Not sure how their capital stack is working and what kind of overall return they are going for, but it wouldn't surprise me if they downplayed their reliance on the lease-up of their own retail (there are "altruistic" developers out there, and those with flexibility to experiment).  I know of larger tower deals in Atlanta that aren't directly on Peachtree where 20-30,000 SF retail was built as part of the local code, but the underwriting did not even consider any cash flow (so any lease-up would just be a nice little unexpected pop), and this in a much more walkable area with 15,000-20,000 ppsm and much better demographics, etc etc.

[simms3]

Downtown Fort Myers Publix (this is the rear)

This is very doable.  It's sad the city isn't at least requiring this.  In fact, there should be language in zoning/code documents that describe this sort of thing (I would be surprised if there weren't?).  Some of the other stuff is pie in the sky for Jax for at least another generation (unless we turn into Austin overnight).

[fieldafm]

Fuqua is an aggressive developer...he worked on the Riverside deal, actually, when he was with Sembler

He was with Sembler at the time, but not involved in Five Points Publix. 

[simms3]

10-4

[thelakelander]

Even if all 600 units get built, the Y, this retail, and maybe a few other things, the foot traffic will still be almost nonexistent.  That much I can promise, even if some of the more optimistic posters want to debate and share that their experiences tell them otherwise.  I have worked on the investment side on these kinds of deals...nobody is relying or going to rely on foot traffic, and we'd all think they're smoking crack if they did.

Tell this to Orlando or Charlotte.  Heck, go tell this to RAP.  Downtown Jacksonville is screwed if we don't make sure all of our infill developments (both large and small) are designed to be pedestrian friendly.  This doesn't mean you have to build parking garages or vertical leasable space but it's not too much to ask that your project positively interacts with the sidewalks and land uses surrounding it.  We're really smoking crack if we thing we can create any type of vibrant urban atmosphere while totally ignoring the pedestrian.

[simms3]

^^^Omg, Lake, we're just having another communication breakdown.  Clearly, if you read my post, we're on the same page in that we need better design.  I agree we should plan as if the area will be walkable and we need to give developers set guidelines to follow that move in that direction.  That doesn't mean that ~600 units (IF all actually get built), a rebuilt Y, and a Fresh Market will equate to people actually walking around in quantifiable numbers.  Heck, look at the density of units along Brickell or in Midtown Atlanta and what little foot traffic each still generates...it takes A LOT to get a real walking foot traffic environment.  What's going on in Brooklyn is a big step for Jax, but it's amateur hour still.  It's small time.  It's not going to all of a sudden make for a pedestrian oriented environment - that's decades away when this is multiplied by 100-200 across a large area, and as you say, connected via a usable transit system.

[thelakelander]

We're on the same page.  However, I have to lay things out in a different manner for others following the conversation. 

For example:

That doesn't mean that ~600 units (IF all actually get built), a rebuilt Y, and a Fresh Market will equate to people actually walking around in quantifiable numbers.

This is true.  However, this isn't why the city should have a backbone to demand pedestrian friendly projects.  The concept of pedestrian friendly design is a instrumental incremental step in building a long term overall walkable environment.  If we don't do certain things incrementally, we'll never achieve the desired end result.

[spuwho]

I like the layouts Lake posted. Great alternative to the wall/dumpster/flattened boxes typical of rear retail.

If COJ had some sort of strategic plan for Brooklyn, something they could plan around for the next 15-20 years, then they would have guidance on how to vote on these props.

But the cynic in me, that see Mobility plans reversed based on the words of a couple of lobbyists convinces me that we are one desperate child and will take just about any suitor offering a 15 cent ice cream.

Brooklyn's gain is Jacksonville's gain. Not perfect, but the beginning.

I still have a wild hair and think COJ should create large parcel blocks and bid them off to developers to come up with some original planning.

[thelakelander]

But the cynic in me, that see Mobility plans reversed based on the words of a couple of lobbyists convinces me that we are one desperate child and will take just about any suitor offering a 15 cent ice cream.

Unfortunately, I can't debate this one.  We are a desperate child when it comes to downtown.  The problem with being too desperate is you tend to forget or overlook what type of development patterns incrementally lead to a vibrant atmosphere.  We should understand this by now. We've spent billions in downtown since the 1980s and we still don't have a decent cluster of pedestrian scale development with foot traffic.  That's a direct result of accepting anything for the sake of visual development, even when it flies in the face of accommodating the pedestrian as a priority.

Brooklyn's gain is Jacksonville's gain. Not perfect, but the beginning.

Some said the same about the "revitalization" of LaVilla.... 20 years later, it remains a shell of itself.

I still have a wild hair and think COJ should create large parcel blocks and bid them off to developers to come up with some original planning.

I'd actually prefer COJ to not do this.  COJ has never been great when it comes to the land development business.  We'd be better modifying policy to make the environment easier for pedestrian scale private development of all sizes and getting out of the way.  Successes like CoRK and King Street tend to happen with limited or no city involvement.  When the city gets too involved, we've ended up with our largest failures, such as LaVilla and the shipyards.  I think the public realm is where the city can play a better role.  Clean, well lit streets, maintained/programmed parks, reliable/attractive mass transit, two-waying streets, facilitating facade grant programs, etc. are where the city can have a quick significant positive impact.

[thelakelander]

Downtown Fort Myers Publix (this is the rear)

This is very doable.  It's sad the city isn't at least requiring this.  In fact, there should be language in zoning/code documents that describe this sort of thing (I would be surprised if there weren't?).  Some of the other stuff is pie in the sky for Jax for at least another generation (unless we turn into Austin overnight).

When I speak of designing to engage the pedestrian in an incremental process, this is the type of stuff that I envision.  I'm not talking about forcing projects like this to be vertical, include structured parking or be densities the market can't support.

These developers can make their projects engage with the public realm surrounding their properties and still accommodate the needs of the chains they're going after.  I know, because I've helped create site plans for hundreds of projects like this, over the years.

To a degree, I think we may have some with influence on the approval process who may not truly understand the difference between retail site selection criteria and incremental pedestrian scale design.  You can have all the surface parking in the world and still create a decent layout that's also pedestrian scale.


Boise, ID - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=149418

Locally, we have isolated examples so I've never really understood the tendency to cave in and accept the lowest standards of design.


Entrance at Oakleaf Town Center.

This is one of the reasons I'm a huge proponent of having a form-based zoning code, not just in downtown but for most of the city.

[spuwho]

I'd actually prefer COJ to not do this.  COJ has never been great when it comes to the land development business.  We'd be better modifying policy to make the environment easier for pedestrian scale private development of all sizes and getting out of the way.  Successes like CoRK and King Street tend to happen with limited or no city involvement.  When the city gets too involved, we've ended up with our largest failures, such as LaVilla and the shipyards.  I think the public realm is where the city can play a better role.  Clean, well lit streets, maintained/programmed parks, reliable/attractive mass transit, two-waying streets, facilitating facade grant programs, etc. are where the city can have a quick significant positive impact.

Lake, I think we agree. By COJ spinning off all the empty parcels they own, they essentially are getting out of the development business. That is what I was thinking of.

Like the US bidding out spectrum to carriers, set up the parcels as packages that can be bid on. COJ gets cash, developers get a parcel to develop on with some mixed use teeth and COJ reverts to its role in code,  planning, streets and public infrastructure services.

[thelakelander]

Gotcha.  At first, I was under the impression you were advocating COJ take control over more privately owned property (ex. the LaVilla experience).  Yes, I do agree with COJ getting rid of the underutilized parcels already owned.