"Row Houses" on Stockton?

[acme54321]

Not sure how I feel about this, seems like a weird fit on this site.  Also, these are NOT row houses, just 5 houses that look the exact same set side by side

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/aug/20/rezoning-request-would-allow-for-row-houses-across-from-stockton-street-town-center-in-riverside/

[jax_hwy_engineer]

I like em. Granted, I would never buy one, but I like em.

They'll go for like $480k/ea, will have no dedicated parking, no garage, and are on a main thru-street, so they break several of the rules for what I want in a Riverside house. But hey, some new housing in Riverside will be nice, they're in a decent location, and not every new house needs to have parking and a garage. Plus, turning a vacant grass lot into housing is cool.

[jaxlongtimer]

Apparently, the original concept for this land was apartments/condos over retail, a la Tapestry Park.  Seems that would have worked well here and supported more living units, maybe at more affordable prices too.  Does anyone have an idea why that wasn't pursued?  Parking issues? Of course, decent mass transit service in the area could maybe overcome that issue.

[jcjohnpaint]

I think parking and back access

[Charles Hunter]

RE: Parking

minimum parking requirements for the project are provided by street parking along the west side of Stockton Street.

Aren't those spaces well-used by the commercial development on the other side of Stockton? Taking away five to ten - or more - spaces could hurt some of those businesses. Are the spaces in the John Gorrie lot immediately behind the proposed homes fully utilized? Couldn't these be used?

Also, it looks like two mature oaks on the south end of the parcel will be lost.

[Tacachale]

Lol, I like these, but that's not what "row house" means.

[Charles Hunter]

Lol, I like these, but that's not what "row house" means.

Their fees should be doubled if they misuse a term or geographic reference!

[jaxlongtimer]

No surprise, Planning Commission approves over neighborhood concerns by 6 to 0.  Not saying they made the wrong decision but the PC is a rubber stamp for development regardless of what it reviews or the concerns of a community.  Not sure why it exists other than to deflect some of the "blame" for controversial approvals from City Council members who can say the PC endorsed so we should too.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/aug/22/businesses-and-residents-say-no-to-row-style-houses-in-riverside/

[jcjohnpaint]

I think they meant all houses look the same like row houses.

[Captain Zissou]

No surprise, Planning Commission approves over neighborhood concerns by 6 to 0.  Not saying they made the wrong decision but the PC is a rubber stamp for development regardless of what it reviews or the concerns of a community.  Not sure why it exists other than to deflect some of the "blame" for controversial approvals from City Council members who can say the PC endorsed so we should too.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/aug/22/businesses-and-residents-say-no-to-row-style-houses-in-riverside/

I often disagree with the planning commission, but in this instance I think approval is the right move.  This parcel has always been planned for development. Retail would have been great, but that would put a greater strain on the parking.  Riverside/Avondale is one of our more successful and in demand neighborhoods, so infill development like this should be supported.  Like you said, mass transit is the only way to get ahead of what will be a growing parking issue as the area continues to develop.