Maple Street Opening in Riverside? Not So Fast!

[Metro Jacksonville]

Maple Street Opening in Riverside? Not So Fast!



Despite eliciting interest, two aging buildings in a prime Riverside location remain blighted. Are zoning laws in to blame?

Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2016-aug-maple-street-opening-in-riverside-not-so-fast

[bencrix]

Thanks for the thoughtful article that asks the tough question behind this neighborhood's never-ending development soap opera.

On balance RAP is a great organization and the overlay is a great document. Here and there, however, both fall short, for reasons that are understandable. Failure to solve re-occuring challenges, however, is the problem. 

I think Oak St. between Margaret and King is a great example.

In my opinion, the (generally great) thinkers behind RAP & the Overlay resent the zoning changes that led to commercialization of areas that were previously predominantly residential in Riverside.

The result was an overreach in areas like the Oak St. Corridor (designated "Residential Character"), which developed around a streetcar and accordingly has historic commercial, mixed use and multi-family uses along with residential.

Despite the best intentions, the Overlay has not succeeded to "restoring" the residential character of the corridor. Instead it is marked by underutilized properties (commercial & residential) such as those highlighted in the article.

Since spot zoning only generates controversy (and ultimately a de facto abrogation of the Overlay), I think it is in everyone's interest to amend the commercial development provisions of the overlay in the 3 or 4 critical corridors (e.g. Oak St.) where we know development pressures do and will exist.

[lowlyplanner]

I also appreciated this article's thoughtful approach.  However, a couple of points struck me:

1.  If no buyers can be found at the current price, maybe the price is the issue and not the zoning...  It seems like the owner is factoring uses that aren't currently allowed into the price.

2.  One of the goals of the overlay was to encourage the redevelopment of the more mediocre non-contributing buildings.  I think people would be very excited to a multi-story, mixed-use building with office or retail on the ground floor.

3.  The drive-through is a real issue for the neighborhood.  Drive-thoughs are tough on walkability.  Do we really need any more?

4.  If the City wanted to develop a plan to change this area from mostly residential and office to mixed-use commercial, with improved streetscapes and wider sidewalks, bike lanes, a unified system of on-street parking, etc. that might be one thing.  But I think neighbors are very concerned that the change will happen one re-zoned property at a time, and the public realm will never get upgraded to where it ought to be to support a mixed-use district. 

[alsjr18]

Sometimes it's not just the asking price. It, combined with whatever rehab and/or required abatement, makes the total costs astronomical.

I live in the neighborhood and there is a significant amount of residents (the "get off my lawn" types) who are vehemently opposed to nearly all forms of commercial development. Small doctor or law offices don't raise much of a fuss. Try to serve food, or heaven forbid a drink, and you'll have the whole neighborhood up in arms.

Yes, there are areas of Riverside that probably could use a good dose of scrutiny, but overall adding derelict and blighted buildings to the tax rolls should be a very good incentive to work with developers. I blame the city and especially JSO for not patrolling the areas with bars and restaurants to keep the noise and rowdiness down. The lack of public transit makes drinking and driving too common.

If the resistance to development continues Riverside will lose its well-earned development appeal and get supplanted by San Marco which is primed to explode in a good way. Those big home prices we're seeing in the neighborhood will pull back and the boom will be over.

Those buildings on Oak Street are an eyesore because the neighborhood chooses them to be. They want to wait for the types of businesses they'll approve of despite the blight.

[icarus]

First, I think you need to start with the review of the history of contentious zoning in the article. 

I mean after you meet RAP's desire for on site parking ... how big of a structure can you have.  I mean come on ... look at the narrative on every proposed development ... request for more on site parking .. no outdoor seating ... no music.

I live in the neighborhood and I want to be able to walk to even more places; I want to be able to sit outside; I would love live music even outside. I keep waiting for Armageddon but so far ... things just keep getting better.

Historic is not limited to preserving single family homes.  Look at the history of the area and consider the advantages of a walkable community.  There seems to be a big disconnect somewhere.

[bencrix]

If the City wanted to develop a plan to change this area from mostly residential and office to mixed-use commercial, with improved streetscapes and wider sidewalks, bike lanes, a unified system of on-street parking, etc. that might be one thing.  But I think neighbors are very concerned that the change will happen one re-zoned property at a time, and the public realm will never get upgraded to where it ought to be to support a mixed-use district.

Agree. But I'm not sure RAP, the neighborhood, etc. should wait for the City to develop a plan for this area, King St., the Avondale strip, etc. Conversely, no one should expect the current zoning to improve the area. Now is the time for some enlightened planning.

[mtraininjax]

The lack of public transit makes drinking and driving too common.

No, enforecement of the laws by the JSO makes drinking and driving too common. When was the last time you saw a DUI checkpoint in Riverside or Avondale? I've lived here 16 years and never seen one. Not once. You want to scare the hell out of drivers, set one up in a church parking lot along Park Street.

I live in the neighborhood and I want to be able to walk to even more places; I want to be able to sit outside; I would love live music even outside. I keep waiting for Armageddon but so far ... things just keep getting better.

One the bars on King Street, effectively killed outdoor music (of any kind), when they were blasting music from speakers after the outdoor music ordinance. Its always 1 that ruins it for everyone else. They were within ear shot of several prominent people within the City and that.....as they say, was that.

These buildings on Oak are too expensive. The people who own them want Doctor money for the buildings and Doctors are not eager to setup shop because, and you can see the empty dr buildings on Park Street too, the medical model has changed. Someone forgot to tell these owners. Its not feasible to operate most businesses in these spaces because they are too small and too expensive for the kind of store fronts the community needs. No we don't need another nail place, there are 5 down in 5 points, but the cost is the main issue, too damn expensive, I looked at these in 2013, and I did not want to pay what they wanted then, in a down market.

If the resistance to development continues Riverside will lose its well-earned development appeal and get supplanted by San Marco which is primed to explode in a good way. Those big home prices we're seeing in the neighborhood will pull back and the boom will be over.

The best way to beat "resistence" is to hire a damn good lawyer who can help a business avoid the landmines of the planning process. Steve Diebenow is assisting Roost and many others due to his time with Peyton, and knows how to work with the Planning groups. If anyone ever opens a restaurant in Riverside or Avondale, you should have him as your attorney.

I'd love to see more restaurants in Murray Hill.

[FlaBoy]

I think that RAP WANTS to push development more towards 5 Points and the Urban Transitional Zone and away from the neighborhoods. King St. is the trickiest area IMO nowadays with the bar scene vibrant, but homes literally 15 feet away.

[FlaBoy]

For sure. King St. is a destination, but an absolute mess at night which was RAP's fault with the street parking they pushed for. That area needed it. Avondale doesn't which is why they are even more particular.