Metro Jacksonville

Is Riverside/Avondale Ready For Mellow Mushroom?

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1813156030_JsHCSW8-M.jpg)

Mellow Mushroom has announced they will begin construction of a new location in Avondale.  Instead of replacing two non-contributing structures, they have opted for an impressive adaptive re-use project that aims to serve as a future model for the community at large.

The benefits of a unique re-use project are wide ranging.  They minimize waste of good building materials, preserve neighborhood character, contribute to job creation as dollar for dollar these projects provide more funds to the local work force than a new construction project and provide an economic benefit to the neighborhood as surrounding property values increase when an abandoned building has been re-purposed.

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-apr-is-riversideavondale-ready-for-mellow-mushroom

Great article Mike. Love the comparisons. Good luck with the legislation.

The parking situation is becoming an issue.  The Avondale Merchant's Association, at the recommendation of Jim Love, has issued an email requesting that all retail and restaurant businesses tell their employees not to park in front of the shops on the strip.  In fact, the request specifies that they park down by Van Wert along Boone park because "it's only three minute walk".  The retail shops and the restaurants interest's diverge here.  The shops, for the most part, shut down by 5pm while the restaurant employees leave late at night.  Safety is my main concern here by having these individuals walk down dark streets late at night.  Really, the problem is not the employees, it's the unlimited amount of seating being added.  Has anyone but myself not noticed the gridlock that occurs on any given night on the stretch between Talbot and Ingleside, along Riverside ave any night of the week?  I am absolutely amazed that the residents and property owners have not been more vocal in opposition to  the changes in the overlay that has taken place over the past few years.  I think the MM addition and fantastic for the area, but, at some point someone, somewhere, is going to have to put the brakes on this Mushrooming (sorry, it is too easy) problem.

I am the only one who wouldn't givea damn how many people parked in front of my house? As long as I can give in and out of my driveway, who cares???? Maybe I feel that way because I've lived in a real city with much bigger parking issues? Four years in Charleston and a year in NY really put this into perspective.

When the Avondale Town Center was created, Ingleside was to have been a 4-way stop. For some reason the city decided to revert back to the stop light. A 4-way stop there would be a great way to slow down traffic. I have spoken with the Town Center folks in the city who thought that even closing Ingleside at Riverside Ave in the evenings would be a great solution, because it turns that area into a giant parking lot and makes the area more pedestrian friendly.

Yesterday I saw a Mojo's employee walking from down the street, Edgewood/St. Johns, apparently she had parked down that far and walked, I know, WALKED down to her employer a few blocks. Our city is full of obese people, and perhaps we could all use a bit more walking to become a healthier place to live, I know, walking a few blocks is so hard on the couch potato.

QuoteIs Riverside/Avondale Ready For Mellow Mushroom?

Did I just find out that Riverside is located within the Shoppes of Avondale? Perhaps we could leave out the Riverside in this piece, unless we think parking will stretch down to the Riverside area.

QuoteOur city is full of obese people, and perhaps we could all use a bit more walking to become a healthier place to live, I know, walking a few blocks is so hard on the couch potato.

Yes, its amazing what a little extra walking will do for someone's health.  I also agree with the concept of a four-way stop sign instead of a more expensive traffic signal.  The four-way stops would also be a great idea for half of downtown's intersections.

QuoteThe four-way stops would also be a great idea for half of downtown's intersections.

Just not Adams, Forsyth, or main, as I like synchronized lights to allow me to rapidly move through downtown.

One example I forgot to include:

Harlem Tavern has contributed to the resurgence of Frederick Douglas Blvd, which has now been dubbed 'Harlem's Restaurant Row'

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UKr9URsCkeE/TG58Ud0xGyI/AAAAAAAALF8/uIqqsKVs3Cg/s1600/IMG_4841.JPG)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EjQtOIiVjiE/Tg76IMsWoGI/AAAAAAAAPbI/jbriYdYzP04/s1600/IMG_5433.JPG)

(http://newyork-travel-guide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/wpid-818.fd_.harlem_tavern11.jpg)



Biergarten Loreley compares very favorable with Riverside's own European Street beer garden conversion, itself a former service station.

(http://timeoutnewyorkkids.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/timeout_492x330/images/slideshows/album-6608/59.ea.loreley_13_0.jpg)


(http://global-arch.com/images/Mary%20-%20Bauhaus%20-%20Loreley%20Biergarten.JPG)


(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/771404632_oxuiG-M.jpg)

For comparison, E Street has about 22 parking spaces to Mellow's proposed 14-15 spaces.

In fact, San Marco also has good examples of service station re-uses

(http://s3-media4.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/mXLLTK9Cg13CjjhljueHlA/l.jpg)

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-5235-p1110023.JPG)

QuotePerhaps we could leave out the Riverside in this piece, unless we think parking will stretch down to the Riverside area.

The concepts of better management of parking(supply is not the problem) and alternative transportation modes is something that applies to both Riverside and Avondale.

People need to learn to walk, and furthermore when areas such as these become busier and more people go out and parking is less available, you should start to see taxis.  I take a cab to go out to eat, and of course drink, quite often.  An article was done on the Va-Hi neighborhood a few months ago, which has more businesses, far more bars/restaurants, denser housing, and far less available parking.  I went there this weekend and parked half a mile away and cabbed back...and then walked about 1.5 miles from my condo to pick up my car the next day.  This is how life should be.  If it were NYC, a car would not even be in the picture, but that's not a fair comparison.

People in Jax need to make the transition of taking cabs out.  Get a group to meet at house, call a cab (there are texts and apps now), group cab into Avondale, eat, then drink, then hail a cab back (or in Jax's case get the bar to call a cab).  Simple.

Meeting tonight at 7:00 PM at Grace Church, corner of Herschel and Edgewood to discuss parking and growth in the Avondale area.

Mellow Mushroom will eliminate about 15 parking spaces around the service station building that now serve the area, and, natch, create a need for many more spaces. The only place the cars can go is into the surrounding residential streets. I'm a few blocks away and hopefully insulated from having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Most of the restaurants and shops in the Shoppes are small storefronts, and I for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

That's my biased opinion. What's yours?

QuoteI for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

Are you advocating attempting to zone out or prohibit certain certain restaurants due to the class of people they attract?  Not sure that is the best solution.

QuoteYesterday I saw a Mojo's employee walking from down the street, Edgewood/St. Johns, apparently she had parked down that far and walked, I know, WALKED down to her employer a few blocks.

I have head that the management of Mojo's has been proactive about getting their employees not to park in front of the store.  I would imagine other restaurants could do the same with their employees.

If we get anything that looks like the Double Wide Grill, expect riots in the streets. I'd far prefer to see something like Leon's Full Service . . .

Everyone with an opinion--pro or con--should attend tonight's meeting at Grace Avondale Church at 7 pm. CM Jim Love and representatives from RAP will be there to record suggestions and concerns.

Quote from: cline on April 26, 2012, 08:23:26 AM

QuoteI for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

Are you advocating attempting to zone out or prohibit certain certain restaurants due to the class of people they attract?  Not sure that is the best solution.

I don't think that would accomplish what this person is saying on their post. I think what needs to be done is have the shops walled off and gated on each end. Therefore whoever wants to go there has to pass through the gates and can be screened so that only the right people get through. Obviously those who eat at low class places such as Mellow Mushroom are really only there to cause havoc and ransack the neighborhood, and we should all fear that.

QuoteMellow Mushroom will eliminate about 15 parking spaces around the service station building that now serve the area

Based upon the conceptual design that was presented, Mellow will be adding b/w 14 and 15 legally defined on-street parking spaces (closing off the old station's driveways creates additional stall space, and additional parking stalls will be added behind the building). 

Which 15 spaces will be eliminated?

Quote from: grimss on April 26, 2012, 08:41:54 AM
If we get anything that looks like the Double Wide Grill, expect riots in the streets. I'd far prefer to see something like Leon's Full Service . . .

I had a chance to see their preliminary plan earlier this week and I think you'll be impressed.  It won't look like the Double Wide Grill.  I'd wager to say, it may be one of the most impressive products to come to the Avondale strip over the last decade.  They appear to be going above the required minimum, which is pretty refreshing.

Leon's Full Service rocks. If Mellow's gas station conversion can be like that, we have a complete winner on our hands. who is doing the design?

QuoteI have spoken with the Town Center folks in the city who thought that even closing Ingleside at Riverside Ave in the evenings would be a great solution, because it turns that area into a giant parking lot and makes the area more pedestrian friendly.

That is indeed correct.  In fact, if you dig up the Town Center conceptual plans the closing of Ingleside was discussed before the city actually implemented the streetscape improvements a few years ago. 


I didn't include it... but I absolutely agree with you that this area would benefit greatly from the implementation of pedestrian crosswalk measures like they have in:

St Armands
(http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/TRO2722.jpg)

St Augustine
(http://www.staugustinegovernment.com/the-city/featured-stories-archive/images/2-fotos-web-c.jpg)

Quote from: zedsdead on April 26, 2012, 08:56:11 AM
Leon's Full Service rocks. If Mellow's gas station conversion can be like that, we have a complete winner on our hands. who is doing the design?

QuoteValentino has teamed up with architecture and interior design firm D Coop who have worked on such buildings as the new Black Sheep Restaurant being constructed in Five Points, Uptown Market in Springfield and Pulp in San Marco.

Is it just me or do most of the people who live in places like Riverside, Avondale and Springfield just think living in an Urban environment would be cool, but they really do not want to do it?  After all, these places are only sort of urban.  Many have driveways for their cars, the vast majority still drives wherever they go. 

I know that in Springfield, the "cool kids" always said they wanted this walk-able and busy Main Street corridor with all these big named franchises here, but as I see how the residents of Riverside and Avondale reacts to real potential growth, I know Springfield would be exactly the same.  This brings to mind the question of if an area has lost it's basic features needed to be truly walk-able, meaning in my mind, the mass transit, the density to support it without driving, then perhaps walk-able development needs to be redefined for today?  That parking and driving must be an integrated function of modern urban development?

For instance, the Dancy Terrace area at Springfield.  That cool cottage community everyone wants to save.  It can be saved, but it will be nothing but low income without parking.  Really low income.  Then, of course, people will do nothing but complain about that.  Including the ones that lead the fight to save it.  So, unless parking is part of the plans, no one will be happy and the chance of truly saving the community will be less likely.   Doesn't the same issue apply to the commercial areas? 

I suspect places like Avondale and parts of Riverside are going to be the guinea pigs for what will be needed, but Springfield with it's current, well pretty much nothingness, is ripe for new ideas.

Well, as a residnet of Springfield I don't have a driveway and I would for one welcome dense clustering of retail along Main St. Luckily for Springfield traffic and parking I think would be less of an issue. Main St is a US highway with ample capacity to handle all kinds of new development. Throw in a streetcar and we would be set. Springfield has great connection for ingress and egress throughout the community. 8th St and Main St give the neighborhood a great advantage with easy access to I-95, 21st Expressway (MLK) and Downtown.

QuoteI didn't include it... but I absolutely agree with you that this area would benefit greatly from the implementation of pedestrian crosswalk measures

Agreed.  It is a very easy and low cost solution that could be implemented almost immediately.  These crosswalks are all over Florida. 

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 08:16:30 AM


Mellow Mushroom will eliminate about 15 parking spaces around the service station building that now serve the area, and, natch, create a need for many more spaces. The only place the cars can go is into the surrounding residential streets. I'm a few blocks away and hopefully insulated from having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Most of the restaurants and shops in the Shoppes are small storefronts, and I for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

If we let people eat $10 pizza they're going to corrupt our children and steal our women!  NOOO!  FBC, save us!!

I believe the 15 'spaces' you are referring to are the ones that are currently on the Shell station's private property.  It is just an act of kindness on the owner's part that anyone can park there in the first place.  Any business that takes the place of the shell station has a right to remove those parking places if they see fit.  What many other tenants wouldn't do is provide for alternative forms of transit and create a public space like Mr Valentino is doing.  I think Avondale is lucky to have him as a business owner and the other owners should follow suit. 

Fortunately I only live about a half mile from the strip so I can walk to my favorite watering holes.  I have walked home down Van Wert a number of times between 11 pm and about 2:30 am and have never felt unsafe.  The only unsavory building or area on that whole route is the apartment building right next to the edible arrangements building. 

I was in Decatur last month and had a chance to check out both the Brick Store and Leon's Full Service and they are both great.  Brick store had hundreds of beers and some of the tastiest food I have ever had.  I'm still thinking about the Grit Cakes.  I didn't dine at Yeah Burger, but I got to see it and it looked great.  unfortunately I made the mistake of eating at Taco Mac.  Fail.

Quoteunfortunately I made the mistake of eating at Taco Mac.

Its that particular Taco Mac that is the issue, the one at Virginia and Highland rocks!

This article is hysterical (funny), I suspect when the real issue is brought to the front things will skew more towards hysteria. 

The question is not whether it is "fun" to have high density places (really - Brooklyn and Harlem comparisons?) spring up in Avondale but rather why well funded corporations (of any type) should be granted exceptions so they do not have to providing parking spaces required under existing zoning regulations (i.e. for non contributing structures)? 

Is this not prejudicing the small business who would also like the benefit of similar zoning exceptions, but lack the lobbying dollars to put on a PR campaign and hire the "right" lawyers?  How many more similar exceptions are going to be sought and granted?  What is the point then of zoning?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 26, 2012, 07:09:25 AM

QuoteOur city is full of obese people, and perhaps we could all use a bit more walking to become a healthier place to live, I know, walking a few blocks is so hard on the couch potato.

Yes, its amazing what a little extra walking will do for someone's health.  I also agree with the concept of a four-way stop sign instead of a more expensive traffic signal.  The four-way stops would also be a great idea for half of downtown's intersections.

Yep, agree. I always park a couple blocks away when going to Five Points/Avondale if I'm driving, especially during lunch hours or weekends. It's not a big deal & I always think "you idiots are here fighting like cats & dogs for a primo space. You couldn't just walk a little & not have to do this??" I think honestly its just the mentality of a car-centric town. People want to treat the core like they do the suburbs where they can just park next to the door. Obviously it doesn't work that way.

Anyways, this sounds like a good argument for more bike/pedestrian networking & public transit to me. Because this WILL get worse.

Quote from: AvonD on April 26, 2012, 10:37:55 AM
The question is not whether it is "fun" to have high density places (really - Brooklyn and Harlem comparisons?) spring up in Avondale but rather why well funded corporations (of any type) should be granted exceptions so they do not have to providing parking spaces required under existing zoning regulations (i.e. for non contributing structures)? 

except that the current codes don't require providing additional parking when renovating existing structures in this part of ASondale

Have you looked at intensification of existing use?

Well written, Mike. Short of knocking down buildings for parking lots or artificially restricting new business, Riverside-Avondale really has no choice but to embrace alternative transportation solutions.

AvonD, could you direct us to the specific requirement you believe results in a parking exception for this project to go forward?

I would have preferred a 7-11 at that location.

QuoteRiverside-Avondale really has no choice but to embrace alternative transportation solutions.

I remember a line from the citizens that states, "when you pry it from my cold dead hands".....This is a car-centric town, but Avondale could change that, for the better.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 08:16:30 AM
Meeting tonight at 7:00 PM at Grace Church, corner of Herschel and Edgewood to discuss parking and growth in the Avondale area.

Mellow Mushroom will eliminate about 15 parking spaces around the service station building that now serve the area, and, natch, create a need for many more spaces. The only place the cars can go is into the surrounding residential streets. I'm a few blocks away and hopefully insulated from having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Most of the restaurants and shops in the Shoppes are small storefronts, and I for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

That's my biased opinion. What's yours?

Perhaps you take care of your house, have a defined driveway, some landscaping, etc etc.  Unfortunately and especially on the Riverside Ave side of the Shoppes, too many homeowners take crap care of their homes and some even look abandoned.  That's just an invitation for blocking driveways and littering.  I contend that even the lowest of the low people recognize when not to block a used driveway or trash an occupied home.

And I still have never had to park more than half a block away.  Avondale is just not that crowded/busy yet.


And I agree with everyone else that there exists a mentality of people wanting to "live urban" but not do urban.  Avondale is not even "urban" in the true sense of the word, and there's hardly an inconvenience to living in even the most crowded of places in Jacksonville.  Urban is not all ups and it is a balance whereby people have to learn to live practically on top of each other and get along, and they have to be used to visitors.  There are pros AND cons.

I'm not pro-MM (actually I have only been twice and did not like either time), but I am a fan of a thriving and successful commercial district.  7-11 probably would have been a better use in terms of serving more locals and employees, but it wouldn't have added to the feel that is the Shoppes of Avondale.

QuoteMeeting tonight at 7:00 PM at Grace Church, corner of Herschel and Edgewood to discuss parking and growth in the Avondale area.

The Gracers as I call them are notorious for blocking people's driveways along Edgewood, their pastor does not care and I'd be happy to see them all leave. They would not know growth at Grace if it bit them in the rear! Just a bitch session, like they all have over zoning notices, then no one shows up at the City Meetings.

Quote7-11 probably would have been a better use in terms of serving more locals and employees, but it wouldn't have added to the feel that is the Shoppes of Avondale.

Yeah, walking seven blocks to the AP station is so taxing on the fat lard butts who would have used the 7-11. May we all die of heart clogs because MM makes it easier to raise our cholesterol. The 7-11 would not have put enough money in the pocket of the merchants, so it was better to have it at the AP station.

Here is the section in the Overlay that addresses parking for commercial buildings in a defined commercial area:

(2) Parking Requirements.
(a) Retail sales or service establishments and single family residential uses located in contributing structures within an identified commercial character area shall have zero(0) parking requirements. Any expansion of contributing structures, after the date of the adoption of this Subpart shall provide 50% of the required parking for the expansion pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use. Additionally, zero (0) parking shall be required of new structures when such structures are built to the same or less than the square footage of a non-conforming structure if
that structure is being replaced. However, all adjacent on street parking shall be brought into compliance with Section656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4. Otherwise, the number of
spaces for retail sales and service establishments and multifamily uses shall be 50% of the required number of spaces pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use, provided there are no additional parking credits applied under Section 656.607(d) of the Zoning Code. However contiguous on-street parking may be provided consistent with Section 656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4.

I'd argue that beyond the parking requirements, which this building will appear to go above and beyond meeting, this re-use fits in with the purpose and intent of the Overlay and goes even further by developing a public square and bicycle parking for possibly as high as 60 bikes to be shared by the entire commercial district(something the Overlay does not presently require, but should). 

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1813359010_zgCNJMk-M.jpg)

As a point of referance, the picture above showing potential underutilized overflow parking along Van Wert, underutilized off street parking that can be converted to stacked parking arrangments durring off peak hours and the bikes tied to such things as street signs and trees... were all taken b/w 7:45 and 8:00PM. 

Captain Zissou, thank you for the chuckle.

As for the topic at hand, you guys should be safe as long as it's not a dreaded car wash. You're... you're just not ready for that yet!

Quote from: fieldafm on April 26, 2012, 02:25:41 PM
Here is the section in the Overlay that addresses parking for commercial buildings in a defined commercial area:

(2) Parking Requirements.
(a) Retail sales or service establishments and single family residential uses located in contributing structures within an identified commercial character area shall have zero(0) parking requirements. Any expansion of contributing structures, after the date of the adoption of this Subpart shall provide 50% of the required parking for the expansion pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use. Additionally, zero (0) parking shall be required of new structures when such structures are built to the same or less than the square footage of a non-conforming structure if
that structure is being replaced. However, all adjacent on street parking shall be brought into compliance with Section656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4. Otherwise, the number of
spaces for retail sales and service establishments and multifamily uses shall be 50% of the required number of spaces pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use, provided there are no additional parking credits applied under Section 656.607(d) of the Zoning Code. However contiguous on-street parking may be provided consistent with Section 656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4.

I'd argue that beyond the parking requirements, which this building will appear to go above and beyond meeting, this re-use fits in with the purpose and intent of the Overlay and goes even further by developing a public square and bicycle parking for possibly as high as 60 bikes to be shared by the entire commercial district(something the Overlay does not presently require, but should). 

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1813359010_zgCNJMk-M.jpg)

As a point of referance, the picture above showing potential underutilized overflow parking along Van Wert, underutilized off street parking that can be converted to stacked parking arrangments durring off peak hours and the bikes tied to such things as street signs and trees... were all taken b/w 7:45 and 8:00PM.

If the service station is a 1964 building (per the article), how is it then a contributing structure and how would the above reference apply if it is non-contributing?

Two points on the photos - Van Wert parking (Boone Park) is only allowed until 10PM.  The other photo shows a private parking area behind stores owned by other landlords, this is not municipal parking being depicted and is not available for legal "overflow" parking absent consent of the owners.

I guess we will hear more tonight.

Since when was parking a human right?

I could not have said it better myself.  This may very well be the catalyst for improving mass transit in the core.  Transit trackers are essential in allowing potential customers of the JTA to access the system and utilize it's product and benefits.

Quote from: mtraininjax on April 26, 2012, 01:32:48 PM

QuoteRiverside-Avondale really has no choice but to embrace alternative transportation solutions.

I remember a line from the citizens that states, "when you pry it from my cold dead hands".....This is a car-centric town, but Avondale could change that, for the better.

Quote from: JFman00 on April 26, 2012, 06:26:14 PM
Since when was parking a human right?

And what right does a business have to tell private citizens (their employees) where they may park on public streets?  And what liability does said businesses assume, in the event of an incident or assault?  Can these business tell their employees where to shop?  Who to vote for?

It's amazing what can come from adaptive re-use.

9th & Main is another example. Former Goodyear shop, turned into dining & entertainment venue. (too bad COJ is sitting on it.....)

Quote from: Bill Hoff on April 26, 2012, 06:35:34 PM
It's amazing what can come from adaptive re-use.

9th & Main is another example. Former Goodyear shop, turned into dining & entertainment venue. (too bad COJ is sitting on it.....)

That's not quite the entire story of why 9th and Main failed...but that's for another thread...

Quote from: ben says on April 26, 2012, 06:58:07 AM
I am the only one who wouldn't givea damn how many people parked in front of my house? As long as I can give in and out of my driveway, who cares???? Maybe I feel that way because I've lived in a real city with much bigger parking issues? Four years in Charleston and a year in NY really put this into perspective.

Yes Ben, I suspect you might be.  For my part, I do.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 26, 2012, 06:34:53 PM

Quote from: JFman00 on April 26, 2012, 06:26:14 PM
Since when was parking a human right?

And what right does a business have to tell private citizens (their employees) where they may park on public streets?  And what liability does said businesses assume, in the event of an incident or assault?  Can these business tell their employees where to shop?  Who to vote for?

I work downtown.  My business tells me what levels in a six story parking garage that I can and can not park in.  They assume no liability if a towing incident pops up from not following directions.  For those of us who choose not to park in the garage, the city tells us how long and where we can parallel park on public streets while private entities provide similar rules for their lots.

Quote from: mtraininjax on April 26, 2012, 07:04:11 AM


Did I just find out that Riverside is located within the Shoppes of Avondale? Perhaps we could leave out the Riverside in this piece, unless we think parking will stretch down to the Riverside area.

Some customers will take a hike,some would not.

Cycling and those inclined to walk will fill some seats ( the cycle racks are a light hook,living just blocks from the Shoppes I can not recall when I last went to Brick,Biscottis,Fox,Bluefish via bike.Probably a necessity in the future)

A Parking train wreck,if there is one,will ultimately affect retail.

Field's piece notes 'parking' contribution,but not total seating needs,unless I missed it.

I've just returned from the Town Hall Meeting. The overwhelming majority were opposed to MM - possibly more opposed because of its size. Size matters.

I do have a nicely maintained home on Richmond St. and can and do walk to the Shoppes. The problem is the hordes from outside the 'hood who come here and clog the streets. And I'll bet it's not the locals who leave beer cans and other rubbish on the curbs, in the streets, in the yards, etc. So walkability is not the point. The point, as the owner of Biscotti's put it to the assembly is "don't try to put 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound box."

Like I said this morning. something smaller would be nice.

Quote from: AvonD on April 26, 2012, 06:09:51 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on April 26, 2012, 02:25:41 PM
Here is the section in the Overlay that addresses parking for commercial buildings in a defined commercial area:

(2) Parking Requirements.
(a) Retail sales or service establishments and single family residential uses located in contributing structures within an identified commercial character area shall have zero(0) parking requirements. Any expansion of contributing structures, after the date of the adoption of this Subpart shall provide 50% of the required parking for the expansion pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use. Additionally, zero (0) parking shall be required of new structures when such structures are built to the same or less than the square footage of a non-conforming structure if
that structure is being replaced. However, all adjacent on street parking shall be brought into compliance with Section656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4. Otherwise, the number of
spaces for retail sales and service establishments and multifamily uses shall be 50% of the required number of spaces pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use, provided there are no additional parking credits applied under Section 656.607(d) of the Zoning Code. However contiguous on-street parking may be provided consistent with Section 656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4.

I'd argue that beyond the parking requirements, which this building will appear to go above and beyond meeting, this re-use fits in with the purpose and intent of the Overlay and goes even further by developing a public square and bicycle parking for possibly as high as 60 bikes to be shared by the entire commercial district(something the Overlay does not presently require, but should). 

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1813359010_zgCNJMk-M.jpg)

As a point of referance, the picture above showing potential underutilized overflow parking along Van Wert, underutilized off street parking that can be converted to stacked parking arrangments durring off peak hours and the bikes tied to such things as street signs and trees... were all taken b/w 7:45 and 8:00PM.

If the service station is a 1964 building (per the article), how is it then a contributing structure and how would the above reference apply if it is non-contributing?

Two points on the photos - Van Wert parking (Boone Park) is only allowed until 10PM.  The other photo shows a private parking area behind stores owned by other landlords, this is not municipal parking being depicted and is not available for legal "overflow" parking absent consent of the owners.

I guess we will hear more tonight.

The point being made (besides how similar adaptive reuse projects have greatly contributed to the quality of life in their respective neighborhoods.. Yes neighborhoods like Wicker Park, Virginia Highland, etc share many of the same charestics as Riverside/Avondale) is to explore alternatives and allowing for density bonuses that encourage things that benefits the neighborhood.  Other similarly built environments do utilize off street parking for stacked/tandem parking through the use of valet services on private property, modify existing public parking areas to allow for overflow parking during specific hours, reduce stall dimensions for compact car parking, allow for variances provided certain transit programs are funded by the developer and allow for things such as substituting bike parking for a pre-defined portion of automobile parking. 

Regardless of your personal preferance for Mellow Mushroom, sticking your head in the sand is not a prudent course of action. 

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 09:31:06 PM
I've just returned from the Town Hall Meeting. The overwhelming majority were opposed to MM - possibly more opposed because of its size. Size matters.

I do have a nicely maintained home on Richmond St. and can and do walk to the Shoppes. The problem is the hordes from outside the 'hood who come here and clog the streets. And I'll bet it's not the locals who leave beer cans and other rubbish on the curbs, in the streets, in the yards, etc. So walkability is not the point. The point, as the owner of Biscotti's put it to the assembly is "don't try to put 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound box."

Like I said this morning. something smaller would be nice.

I don't remember seeing many public garbage cans, if any, at Shops, Five Points, or San Marco.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 09:31:06 PM
I've just returned from the Town Hall Meeting. The overwhelming majority were opposed to MM - possibly more opposed because of its size. Size matters.

I do have a nicely maintained home on Richmond St. and can and do walk to the Shoppes. The problem is the hordes from outside the 'hood who come here and clog the streets. And I'll bet it's not the locals who leave beer cans and other rubbish on the curbs, in the streets, in the yards, etc. So walkability is not the point. The point, as the owner of Biscotti's put it to the assembly is "don't try to put 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound box."

Like I said this morning. something smaller would be nice.

Would be curious to know how many times beer cans and rubbish has made it down to Richmond St.  It doesn't seem likely that parkers are going 3 - 4 + blocks toward the river to park on Richmond St which has awkward on street parking.  In fact the times I have walked there in the evening I rarely see more than 1 - 2 cars parked street side and those are home owners.  Also, I don't know of any restaurant at the Shoppes that sell beer in cans, that you can walk out with other than West Inn liquor store, and I see more local residents buying there so I might look to blame locals for that.

I live on Riverside near Boone Park.  Have never had an issue with trash or cans on my street other than big events like XMas in Avondale and that was one can left on the curb.  In fact, the worst thing about parking on my section of the block is that a few neighbors have more cars than legal drivers and they don't have driveways. 

I am excited about Mellow Mushroom.  Will walk over when I want a pizza and my kids with love it.  Never once have I had a problem walking at night, even as late as 10:00 PM - 12:00AM.  I say the solution is to be a leader in transit options.  Maybe even a bus/fake trolley circular like a college campus that connects the Shoppes, Park and King, and Five Points to connect the whole area.  Also additional JSO patrols, ON FOOT or BIKE, would be a great addition to all 3 areas.

^^Great.  That's proof in the pudding and all so true.  And the biggest danger to having something happen to your house as I said before is the owner his or herself (if you don't take care of your home).

I don't foresee transit anytime soon, but as has been discussed I can only picture a streetcar making a one-directional loop between downtown/Brooklyn and Riverside, Park and King, and Avondale.  Having a fake trolley is just not such a good idea.  I contend that cabs are always a good thing as long as they are heavily regulated so that people don't get ripped off.  Cabs need to be in use a lot more.  When I come to the Shops to drink when I'm in town, I do not want to see a bunch of cars parked around and a bunch of drunks stumbling to their cars at 2.  That's just disaster waiting to happen every weekend.  I would rather see a line of cabs.

 AvonD:   If the service station is a 1964 building (per the article), how is it then a contributing structure and how would the above reference apply if it is non-contributing?

Once an area is made a historic District, everyone, unless the property is specifically excluded from the district, has to follow the rules that govern that Historic District.  http://www.coj.net/departments/planning-and-development/docs/community-planning-division/default/riverside-avdale-district-map.aspx 

A building built in 1904, 1964 or even 2004,  has the same basic rules to follow.  Without the overlay, the rules would be both the Historic Guidelines and the regular old zoning codes, which are more in line with the needs of suburbia.  The overly simply makes an attempt at changing those zoning codes to be a bit more urban, at least that is the theory.

The main difference between redoing a 1904 building and one like this one built in 1964 would be tax credits are not available and obviously they have  more freedom in style.

If I had been at that meeting about this, I believe the most common thing I would have seen would have been fear.  Fear of change, fear of who might come into their community, fear of finally having to realize they live in a real urban setting, with the bad that comes with that as well as the good they want. 

Quote from: JFman00 on April 26, 2012, 10:59:03 PM

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 09:31:06 PM
I've just returned from the Town Hall Meeting. The overwhelming majority were opposed to MM - possibly more opposed because of its size. Size matters.

I do have a nicely maintained home on Richmond St. and can and do walk to the Shoppes. The problem is the hordes from outside the 'hood who come here and clog the streets. And I'll bet it's not the locals who leave beer cans and other rubbish on the curbs, in the streets, in the yards, etc. So walkability is not the point. The point, as the owner of Biscotti's put it to the assembly is "don't try to put 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound box."

Like I said this morning. something smaller would be nice.

I don't remember seeing many public garbage cans, if any, at Shops, Five Points, or San Marco.

There are at least 8 garbage cans at the Shoppes that I know of.

Surprised so few comments post MM presentation last night?  There were over 200 in attendance. The developer presented their plan and lo and behold they will be seeking exceptions to zoning to address parking deficiencies (and perhaps other issues) via a PUD process.  From MM's lawyer's presentation, they do not have sufficent parking spaces under the current zoning code and overlay. So this will fall squarley in the hands of the city council now.

The developer's plan shows 14 parking spaces, and they will need many more.  Of note, none of these spaces appear to be net new spaces, they are just moving 10 from the interior of the lot to the street (Ingleside and St Johns) by eliminating the curb cuts (the other four are spaces in the back alley).

A "traffic study" is being proposed (which will only be partially paid for by the developer, the rest by CoJ) in an effort to find a "solution" to the "problem" and some suggestions offered were permit only parking, more no parking signs in front of residences, making some streets around Avondale one way only, moving the fence at Boone Park to allow 90 degree parking the whole length of Van Wert and some kind of valet parking scheme.

The developer here could have chosen to propose a smaller plan that would not require any special treatment and that complies with existing zoning and overlay criteria, but they have not (i.e. the 'town space is 84 seats existing now). Of note, the developer would not answer directly the many requests from the audience to consider a smaller scale operation.

So the question remains - is it fair to allow exceptions to developers to solve "problems" that only are created by their own site plans and business intentions?  Is it fair to have the existing business and residential community bear the burden of these exceptions?  Is it fair to then deny the next developer's request for exceptions?  If so, why?

So stay tuned, the PUD process will be interesting to follow.

I'm confused, though that's normal, but isn't the parking lot that everyone keeps referring to private property?

Isn't it only being used a parking lot because there's not currently a tenant?

Why are those 'parking spots' being counted against the developer when the previous owners could have very well fenced off the property and not allowed anyone to park there from the beginning?

Quoteis it fair to allow exceptions to developers to solve "problems" that only are created by their own site plans and business intentions?

I don't think it's really fair to blame these "problems" on the MM site plan.  The perceived parking "problems" have not been caused by MM (after all, they haven't even opened yet)- they are ongoing.  Might MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.  However, every business and merchant in the Shoppes helps to contribute to the parking issue- whether they be a boutique or whether they are a restaurant. The last one in should not bear the burden of everyone. (fair-share comes to mind).

I'm with Simms though.  This helps to illuminate the imperative need for other forms of transportation.  We can't keep making decisions based on auto capacity and parking.  It's not sustainable.

I was at the meeting last night.  Someone made a really interesting statement saying that basically we don't need revitalization.  I thought that was odd.  I would rather see the gas station "revitalized" into something that contributes rather than have it sit the way it is.  But maybe that's just me.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 27, 2012, 09:50:58 AM
I'm confused, though that's normal, but isn't the parking lot that everyone keeps referring to private property?

Isn't it only being used a parking lot because there's not currently a tenant?

Why are those 'parking spots' being counted against the developer when the previous owners could have very well fenced off the property and not allowed anyone to park there from the beginning?

YES.  It is only because the property owner is a saint that anyone can park there in the first place.  However, it's the rallying cry of the citizens that oppose MM.  The real situation is that MM is adding 14 spaces, bike racks for the whole strip, and a public plaza.  What other business owners on the strip have done that??  MM will be no more of a burden to the strip than the Brick, who has done nothing to help in any way.  Brick just has tenure so it gets overlooked.

This is just the opposite of the city's old concurrency system.  The first person to build on a street pays the price, and the rest just enjoy the free ride.  Now, the first ones in get all the free parking and the last one is responsible for the tab.  Why are biscotti's, the brick, mojo's, and Casbah not equally responsible for the parking problem??

I don't understand how this wouldn't fit with the overlay as it stands? They don't seem to be adding beyond the buildings that are there.

In the end there are only so many ways this can go, in Avondale as in other parts of the core: knock down buildings for parking lots, artificially restrict businesses and keep buildings shuttered, or think smart and start work on alternative transportation solutions. Bike racks and better utilizing existing parking is a good short term start; public transit will be a good long term solution, but only if we start thinking about it now instead of tying our own hands.

So many thoughtful opinions have been expressed in this thread.  Now, fast forward 12 months and imagine what parking will be like with an additional 100 cars in the area.  I wonder how many of these opinions will be changed.

How hard would it be to use the parking facilities at FCSJ Thurs - Sat after 8:00pm with a dedicated shuttle?

There is both garage parking and open lot. 

I'm not sure how you could handle funding, but we're talking hundred of parking spots less than 1.5 miles away.

Quote from: cline on April 27, 2012, 09:58:30 AM

Quoteis it fair to allow exceptions to developers to solve "problems" that only are created by their own site plans and business intentions?

I don't think it's really fair to blame these "problems" on the MM site plan.  The perceived parking "problems" have not been caused by MM (after all, they haven't even opened yet)- they are ongoing.  Might MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.  However, every business and merchant in the Shoppes helps to contribute to the parking issue- whether they be a boutique or whether they are a restaurant. The last one in should not bear the burden of everyone. (fair-share comes to mind).

Any residential household with a car parked in public ROW also is a contributor to the perceived problem because the historic district wasn't designed for cars to serve as the dominant transportation choice.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 27, 2012, 10:14:52 AM
So many thoughtful opinions have been expressed in this thread.  Now, fast forward 12 months and imagine what parking will be like with an additional 100 cars in the area.  I wonder how many of these opinions will be changed.

Well, people had their reservations about Mojo moving in and that died off.  I would imagine the MM concern will fade as well.  Next up....Monty's, when that opens up (revitalizes) as a restaurant.

Quotemight MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.

Possibly!!?? Absolutely

Quotethe historic district wasn't designed for cars to serve as the dominant transportation choice.

The Historic District was hardly designed at all - that's why you have duplexes or larger apartment buildings across the street from very expensive houses. To the extent that transportation was a consideration when the District was built, the car was - and still is! - the primary desired means of transportation. Residents close by may walk to a MM, but folks in Ortega, Murray Hill, East Riverside, Lake Shore, Cedar Hills, and other areas are NOT going to incur the significant expense of a taxi to get there - or anywhere else; and they won't like the idea of a shuttle. Jacksonville is just not like large cities in which public transportation is the norm.

Why should MM take care of the parking problem when the other restaurants or other merchants did not have to do anything? BECAUSE MM came along after the jelly bean jar was full and wants to try to cram another 100 jelly beans into a jar that its predecessors filled up.

Someone observed that this problem won't affect me because my house is too far away. That's right even if MM gets what it wants. But what about when a buyer of West Inn gets the same benefit? And besides, as I walk the neighborhood, I'd like to not be dodging all the cars - moving or parked, and I am sympathetic to the plight of friends on Pine Street who will bear the brunt of the problem.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 27, 2012, 10:22:02 AM
How hard would it be to use the parking facilities at FCSJ Thurs - Sat after 8:00pm with a dedicated shuttle?

There is both garage parking and open lot. 

I'm not sure how you could handle funding, but we're talking hundred of parking spots less than 1.5 miles away.

There are plenty of parking spaces in the Roosevelt Mall, and there's also room there for the Mellow Mushroom.

QuoteThe Historic District was hardly designed at all - that's why you have duplexes or larger apartment buildings across the street from very expensive houses. To the extent that transportation was a consideration when the District was built, the car was - and still is!

Actually, Avondale was designed.  It was designed by Telfair Stockton.  And the streetcar was also part of the design.  You might want to check out this thread.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2008-feb-urban-neighborhoods-avondale

How about just more angled parking along the sides of the park at the west end of the Shoppes?  Short walk you could put a lot of street side parking (not a surface lot) along both of the streets that front the park there.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 27, 2012, 11:14:55 AM

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 27, 2012, 10:22:02 AM
How hard would it be to use the parking facilities at FCSJ Thurs - Sat after 8:00pm with a dedicated shuttle?

There is both garage parking and open lot. 

I'm not sure how you could handle funding, but we're talking hundred of parking spots less than 1.5 miles away.

There are plenty of parking spaces in the Roosevelt Mall, and there's also room there for the Mellow Mushroom.

Or just build a wall around Avondale and issue keys to residents and 'desirables'.   ::)

How about leaving it as it is, and letting the overlay control the scale of future development?

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on April 27, 2012, 11:26:37 AM
Or just build a wall around Avondale and issue keys to residents and 'desirables'.   ::)

Avondale is not an exclusionary neighborhood, not by any measure.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 27, 2012, 11:07:46 AM

Quotemight MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.

Possibly!!?? Absolutely

Quotethe historic district wasn't designed for cars to serve as the dominant transportation choice.

The Historic District was hardly designed at all - that's why you have duplexes or larger apartment buildings across the street from very expensive houses. To the extent that transportation was a consideration when the District was built, the car was - and still is! - the primary desired means of transportation. Residents close by may walk to a MM, but folks in Ortega, Murray Hill, East Riverside, Lake Shore, Cedar Hills, and other areas are NOT going to incur the significant expense of a taxi to get there - or anywhere else; and they won't like the idea of a shuttle. Jacksonville is just not like large cities in which public transportation is the norm.

Why should MM take care of the parking problem when the other restaurants or other merchants did not have to do anything? BECAUSE MM came along after the jelly bean jar was full and wants to try to cram another 100 jelly beans into a jar that its predecessors filled up.

Someone observed that this problem won't affect me because my house is too far away. That's right even if MM gets what it wants. But what about when a buyer of West Inn gets the same benefit? And besides, as I walk the neighborhood, I'd like to not be dodging all the cars - moving or parked, and I am sympathetic to the plight of friends on Pine Street who will bear the brunt of the problem.

More people would use public transportation if we had better public transportation - especially in the urban core. More short term, if more people in the neighborhood biked or walked to the strip it would reduce overall parking demand vis a vis the people who live too far away to do so. These seem like better solutions than artificially clamping down on infill and vibrancy and keeping buildings shuttered.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 27, 2012, 11:28:08 AM
How about leaving it as it is, and letting the overlay control the scale of future development?

I still don't see how this would violate the intention of the overlay if it's just adapting already existing buildings.

Quote from: stephendare on April 27, 2012, 11:37:25 AM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 27, 2012, 11:28:08 AM
How about leaving it as it is, and letting the overlay control the scale of future development?

because the overlay itself is a fundamentally flawed blueprint.

If you don't like the overlay then go ahead and try to change it.  In the meantime, it's the only guidepost that we have.

Does the Shoppes of Avondale Merchants Association have any say in this matter? I hate to see another place that size go in over there, especially pizza. If these guys went into Springfield they would fill an enormous hole in a neighborhood that would welcome them with open arms. There is a large hospital over there that has thousands of well paid employees who supplement the residents as potential customers.

I realize the MM guys are making a ton of money at their other locations, I personally do not see this as a good fit.

QuoteThe Historic District was hardly designed at all - that's why you have duplexes or larger apartment buildings across the street from very expensive houses. To the extent that transportation was a consideration when the District was built, the car was - and still is! - the primary desired means of transportation. Residents close by may walk to a MM, but folks in Ortega, Murray Hill, East Riverside, Lake Shore, Cedar Hills, and other areas are NOT going to incur the significant expense of a taxi to get there - or anywhere else; and they won't like the idea of a shuttle. Jacksonville is just not like large cities in which public transportation is the norm.

Like Cline said, Avondale was a real designated neighborhood, even a grid, with 4 primary streets running North South (Talbot, Edgewood, Challen and Avondale). One of the MAIN reasons we have duplexes and apartments came as a result of World War II, when the men went to fight the war, the wives had to figure out a way to bring in money (other than the secret service way), and they took in boarders and setup homes to act as duplexes and multi-family. Sure some apartments were built, but you'd be hard pressed to find any apartments on these 4 main streets in the Avondale area. Dr. Wood's Architectural History of Jacksonville shows the details of the development when it was created in the 20s.

There IS bus service right out in front of the Brick, so people can get there, if they so choose. Valentino could have setup shop in the old Harry's near the Roosevelt Mall, yeah, plenty of parking, but there is not a lot of restaurant traffic there and the retail is hit or miss, unless you need a mattress or some party items. Not exactly the same as being in Avondale.

QuoteWhy should MM take care of the parking problem when the other restaurants or other merchants did not have to do anything? BECAUSE MM came along after the jelly bean jar was full and wants to try to cram another 100 jelly beans into a jar that its predecessors filled up.

What about when Biscotti's expanded? Went from 2 store fronts to 3, did people moan over it? We have a new sushi restaurant, yeah Sushi in Avondale, they are a GREAT addition, and people welcome them, just as we will for MM, because we WANT them there.

QuoteSomeone observed that this problem won't affect me because my house is too far away. That's right even if MM gets what it wants. But what about when a buyer of West Inn gets the same benefit? And besides, as I walk the neighborhood, I'd like to not be dodging all the cars - moving or parked, and I am sympathetic to the plight of friends on Pine Street who will bear the brunt of the problem.

OK, here is what my grade school teacher taught me, Look both ways before crossing the street, and my parents told me not to play in the street because of the cars. Why not apply both? Eventually the area will need more people walking and biking because the density will become too great. Imagine Avondale as Town Center during Christmas season.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 27, 2012, 11:07:46 AM

Quotemight MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.

Possibly!!?? Absolutely

Good God, you would think they were trying to open a strip club the way some of you are acting. It's a Mellow Mushroom. People aren't going to come flocking in from all sides of town to eat there. There's already three other locations throughout the city, it's not exactly an exclusive landmark or some major dining experience. If anything The Brick and Biscottis already contribute to "the problem" of people like me driving over there and parking my car in the neighborhood because I can't get that kind of food just anywhere.

QuoteDoes the Shoppes of Avondale Merchants Association have any say in this matter? I hate to see another place that size go in over there, especially pizza. If these guys went into Springfield they would fill an enormous hole in a neighborhood that would welcome them with open arms. There is a large hospital over there that has thousands of well paid employees who supplement the residents as potential customers.

There is absolutely not enough retail traffic in Springfield for this to work. Remember the average MM costs between 1.7 and 2.5 million to start, and Valentino has gone to the local banks for 1 million in renovations. He has done his homework, is working with Jim Love, the councilman for District 14, they are working with RAP, this is a win-win-win for everyone involved.

I like Bluefish, Brick, Biscottis, Ginjo Sushi, 'town, Mojo's and I will love MM when they get there as well.  I may never see San Marco again. Not much need. This will bring in more money for all the merchants, who were originally skeptical, but Mojo's has proven to bring more people into the shops. It is a win-win-win.

Springfield needs more density of people shopping along Main Street, but Main is a mess with boarded up buildings and a stigma that the area is dying, not growing. Would you spend 2 million on a franchise in a dying area?

Quote from: Bewler on April 27, 2012, 11:50:10 AM
Good God, you would think they were trying to open a strip club the way some of you are acting. It's a Mellow Mushroom. People aren't going to come flocking in from all sides of town to eat there. There's already three other locations throughout the city, it's not exactly an exclusive landmark or some major dining experience.

I agree that yet another pizza restaurant is hardly worth bothering with. 

MM should find a way to fit in, and not ask to change the rules just so that they can make a pile of money for themselves.

No they should ask to change the rules so that we can get past this notion that Avondale having Oakleaf style parking is feasible. It is not so lets move on to just discussing the alternative transit solutions that can be implemented in Riverside.

Quote from: mtraininjax on April 27, 2012, 11:53:19 AM

QuoteValentino has gone to the local banks for 1 million in renovations. He has done his homework, is working with Jim Love, the councilman for District 14, they are working with RAP, this is a win-win-win for everyone involved.

I like Bluefish, Brick, Biscottis, Ginjo Sushi, 'town, Mojo's and I will love MM when they get there as well.  I may never see San Marco again. Not much need. This will bring in more money for all the merchants, who were originally skeptical, but Mojo's has proven to bring more people into the shops. It is a win-win-win.

The issue remains - why would a developer, having done his homework, choose to propose a development knowing they will need an exception to make it work?  None of the other restaurants you list appear to have requested an exception.  It is not about restaurant vs retail, it is about who can and should get exceptions to zoning and how those decisions are made, now and in the future.  I have not seen any comment regarding why an exception is appropriate for the developer in this case nor why a smaller conforming project would be so bad?

QuoteThe issue remains - why would a developer, having done his homework, choose to propose a development knowing they will need an exception to make it work?  None of the other restaurants you list appear to have requested an exception.  It is not about restaurant vs retail, it is about who can and should get exceptions to zoning and how those decisions are made, now and in the future.  I have not seen any comment regarding why an exception is appropriate for the developer in this case nor why a smaller conforming project would be so bad?

If you are asking why one gets one and another does not, look at the green stuff in your wallet. Its all about the money. Fair, hell no, but this development will help everyone who is invested in the Shoppes of Avondale.

If you don't like it, you can always go to Town Center and enjoy.

QuoteThe reality is that these developments make the neighborhood more walkable, push land value up and return the neighborhood to is original vibrancy.

+1

QuoteWhat these antics on the part of the 'anti' crowd are going to accomplish are far more troublesome.

First they perpetuate further dependency on the car, with no regard whatsoever as to the people that come after their generation.

Our generations version of the Trillion Dollar debt crisis, I like it!

QuoteSecond they are going to lead to the destruction of the historic stock by forcing more parking spaces than are necessary.

Not proven yet, we will see. There is the empty lot just west of Avondale Gift Boutique that the city used as staging for the Town Center project, why not turn it into parking?

QuoteThird they are going to make it such a pain to get a place open in Riverside that the only people who will be willing to afford the fight will be the mega corporate chains.  This present course is a way of destroying any possibility of a locally originated economy.

I read that you think that Avondale will eventually turn into Mandarin with the over population of chain "hell", I don't see that happening. And also remember that behind every chain is a local business person with an investment who pays taxes and money into our local economy. So careful with slinging the chain word around as a bad one. MM is a chain, but John and his family own the rights to this area. Still better pizza, to me, than Papa Johns or Dominos or Al's.

QuoteThe only people left are the ones that they used such extreme measures to harass and bully.

Is this where we throw a pity party and we cry over life is not fair?

QuoteThe Kill all Walkable Retail entity was displaced by the destruction of SPAR, and has floated over to Riverside Avondale.

SPAR made their choice to be who they have become. Life is all about choices, RAP made theirs, SPAR made theirs as well. Which one is thriving and which one is continuing to struggle?

Quote from: stephendare on April 27, 2012, 12:08:35 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 27, 2012, 11:58:34 AM

Quote from: Bewler on April 27, 2012, 11:50:10 AM
Good God, you would think they were trying to open a strip club the way some of you are acting. It's a Mellow Mushroom. People aren't going to come flocking in from all sides of town to eat there. There's already three other locations throughout the city, it's not exactly an exclusive landmark or some major dining experience.

I agree that yet another pizza restaurant is hardly worth bothering with. 

MM should find a way to fit in, and not ask to change the rules just so that they can make a pile of money for themselves.

huh?

thats a little bizarre, dan. 

What's bizarre about asking them to follow the rules?

Quoteactually i like regional chains, but I also like one of a kind restaurants and shops where you can actually meet the owners. I'm trying to get across that the present course will completely bar all but a handful of the small time locals from being able to participate.

Stephen, I agree with you 1 gazillion percent. I can walk in to the Brick and see Steve the owner or his wonderful wife, when there, or visit with Richard at Bluefish and discuss life with Frank there too. My friends, the McAfee's own the barber shop, this is their 2nd location with one in PVB. Carmen is friendly if you see her in Biscotti's, Meghan was great to see at 'town. Deb Fewell is fantastic at Cowford Traders, and you can see the Underwood ownership whenever you walk inside.

If you spend time in this area, you get to know the owners and the managers and you learn that most of the people employed, live in the area. Its great to see the owners of European Street down at Bluefish one night, or when you see Brian Miller and his family eating out at Mojo's. Or when Ben from Intuition shows up for a meal at 'town. All the people we discuss and their places are all eating, living and enjoying the area, I don't see a Petsmart coming in and opening shop there. I don't see McDonalds opening up in Avondale. Perhaps that was the stigma against the 7-11, people did not want a large chain in the shoppes of Avondale. It worked.

QuoteOr simply pushed aside.

For the most part, they have been.

QuoteYou may find a future ten years down the road when a mcdonalds at the corner of St. Johns and Talbot is having free coffee day for the walgreens employees across the street, and the Chipotle is renovating the old Brick Restaurant, if this anti business madness isn't curtailed

I hear what you are saying, but having lived there for 10 years, and having grown up in Mandarin during the 80s, the comparison is apples to oranges. There is no way that Avondale will turn into a Mandarin with chains and car washes on every other block. People are drawn to live there for the stupid building codes and the charm of the old homes. They know they can go to Durbin Creek for frames thrown together with stucco/mud within 90 days, but they choose something that is close to being a century old.

I don't see a big chain being able to survive, not because they don't have the money, the upper management of any chain only sees cookie-cutter buildings. There are none in Avondale, and no cookie-cutter solutions, and chains want easy, 90-degree angles, they won't put up with the drama, again, one reason I think 7-11 bailed.

Anytime you want to come on down and listen to Frank and Richard at Bluefish, amen, come on down, I love their happy hour outside on the patio, and my dog loves it too, she loves her Uncle Frank. He was telling us the other day when the Davis' used to own the Bluefish space, and the dress shop that was the 2nd floor. The layout of Avondale was a wee bit different, but then, as now, it was still a desired place to live. There are a LOT of the Jaxport and government folks who live in the area, and I see them in the shops, just neighbors saying hello to neighbors, outside the fast pace of work.

Tons of great posts/rebuttals.  Everyone's entitled to opinion, but the real obvious statement is that Avondale still has enough parking whereby you can park closer to your destination in Avondale than you can at Saint Johns Town Center on any given day of the week.  Until you literally cannot find parking (and I don't mean you have to park a full block away and walk), then there is a problem that can probably be solved by alternative transportation options (bikes, cabs, streetcar, increased bus service, shuttles, etc).  Avondale is not even at that point yet.  At Christmas in Avondale parking is still like a block or two walk at most, which is shorter than a walk from parking to destination in similar neighborhoods in other cities (because there literally is NO parking).

And taxis are not the answer?  I know the stupid residents in Ortega wouldn'd dare "stoop so low" from their supposed high and mighty positions of influence and wealth to take a cab to the Shops, but certainly all the out of neighborhood visitors who are just looking for a good time in charming Avondale would be happy to cab.  They all carpool already anyway and the only thing stopping them from cabbing vs driving is the fact that there are no cabs in Jax and no push to get to that point where people consider cabs as a transportation option.

And MM is ok food at best, and it is a chain with 3 other locations in town, but it will be a net positive for the area.  MM will do a good job with the renovation/conversion of the gas station, and they are benefiting the district by funding that plaza.

I'm tired of the blatant hypocrisy regarding Avondale.  It's not really that urban, so for all of you worried about parking and overcrowding - are you opposed to densification of Jax or just Avondale?  And why live in Avondale?  Is it for the charm?  Convenience to friends and family?  Small town feel?  Older homes?  Heck if we can extend the Shops down Ingleside over to Park and then expand the Park and King District, and of course have random businesses interspersed throughout, Avondale would really be hopping.  Get some more duplexes and quadplexes and townhomes, maybe a small-footprint mid-rise here and there, a streetcar loop, etc etc.

At present density a streetcar is not really an option imo.  If we want to make a streetcar work, we need to increase housing density and business density.  Everything now is detached SFR and 1-story shops over 2 blocks with parking out front, behind, and all around the block.

Thanks for the aweome history Stephen.  All before my time :)

1. Change the name of Roosevelt Mall to Avondale Town Center.
2. Put the pizza place where Harry or CVS used to be.
3. Problem solved!

QuoteI have not seen any comment regarding why an exception is appropriate for the developer

There were three concepts discussed that are applicable to this specific situation:

How adaptive reuse structures have contributed to quality of life in similar neighborhoods

The expressed goal of the Overlay is: The standards set forth in the subpart were designed to maintain the historical development pattern while encouraging infill and redevelopment that protects, preserves and enhances the unique character of the communities within the Riverside/Avondale Zoning Overlay Area..

All of these examples were infill projects that have contributed to the fabric of the communities they serve.

Parking management practices

Stacked parking is a legitimate way to maximize parking efficiency for the underutilized/hidden parking supply that exists now.  Valet services could be arranged during peak evening hours among the present off street parking facilities.

There's even an Iphone app/game called 'parking dash' that shows you how this arrangement works:

(http://p.playfirst.com/static/1306276366000/874/img/game/parking-dash/iphone/parking-dashScreen1.jpg)

Furthermore, it can be shown that potential overflow parking along Van Wert is vastly underutilized. 


The conepet of a density bonus

Densit bonuses(used in cities like Seattle, Austin, Portland, etc) are a tool used to guide the characteristics of the community in the direction the citizens desire.

A density bonus program can encourage public plazas, LEED buildings, specific transportation projects, improved streetscapes or historic preservation.  This is a tool that can contribute to sustaining a vibrant community where people want to live.

In this case, such a variance can allow this development to expand beyond parking while enhancing the broader context of the neighborhood, namely encouraging alternative transportation(bike storage) and creating a focal point for the neighborhood(a public plaza).  This is the kind of tool that can be used across the neighborhood to further enhance sustainable living conditions(open spaces, connectivity, multi-modal transit).




In summary, a parking management problem exists presently... not a parking supply problem.

Bonus densities are effective tools used in other cities that 'encourage responsible growth' (a direct quote from the Overlay). 

Adaptive reuse projects, such as the ones shown in the article, have served to successfully  'encourage infill and redevelopment that protects, preserves and enhances the unique character of the communities ' (another direct quote from the Overlay). 


I don't stand behind all of the anti-RAP rhetoric going on in this thread.  I am a proud member of RAP.  I think the organization provides an immeasurable benefit to our community and I am especially fond of the many inspiring people I have encountered within the organization.  The issues here all revolve around answering the question 'how do we make our community a better place to live?' and that's a conversation well worth having. 

I steadfastly believe that there are alternatives that need to be explored to make the neighborhood an even better place.  These alternatives are in line with the stated will of the community, a community desire so prevelant that the exact language I am quoting has been made law.   

QuoteI don't understand how this wouldn't fit with the overlay as it stands? They don't seem to be adding beyond the buildings that are there.

The parking issue is b/c the building is a non-contributing structure:  Otherwise, the number of spaces for retail sales and service establishments and multifamily uses shall be 50% of the required number of spaces pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e) for any type of office use, provided there are no additional parking credits applied under Section 656.607(d) of the Zoning Code.   

If it was knocked down and rebuilt with the same square footage then 'Additionally, zero (0) parking shall be required of new structures when such structures are built to the same or less than the square footage of a non-conforming structure if that structure is being replaced.' which seems counterintuitive to the expressed goal of 'encouraging infill and redevelopment that protects, preserves and enhances the unique character of the communities within the Riverside/Avondale Zoning Overlay Area.'

QuoteIn the end there are only so many ways this can go, in Avondale as in other parts of the core: knock down buildings for parking lots, artificially restrict businesses and keep buildings shuttered, or think smart and start work on alternative transportation solutions. Bike racks and better utilizing existing parking is a good short term start; public transit will be a good long term solution, but only if we start thinking about it now instead of tying our own hands.

The Overlay also seeks to 'Encourage responsible growth',  'Manage continued development along corridors to harmonize such development with existing historic development patterns and structures', 'Calm traffic throughout the district' and 'consider streetscape on major pedestrian corridors and around core retail areas' .  All of which are being proposed here.

What parking problem? I go here for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and fourth meal (getting bombed). I have literally never had a problem finding a parking space. There are always spots in front of Edible Arrangements, so absolute worst-case scenario is a 2 block walk to get your lazy butt from your car to your destination. I also highly doubt that anyone has ever parked past Riverside or Pine.

And who cares if people park on the street in front of your house? Did you move a block from a commercial corridor not realizing there were businesses there? And the person talking about beer cans on their lawn on Richmond Street?!!?!? Unless you live on Richmond Street, just about everybody else doesn't know it exists. You can't legally leave a bar with a beer can, so beer cans on your lawn aren't the bars fault. Its the underage kids that live in your neighbors house that are drinking down by the river. Or its me, driving in from a couple blocks away in Riverside, parking ON your lawn, drinking a 30, and throwing the cans at your house. For that I'm sorry, but I'm just outdoorsy.

Seriously, I can walk there easily, bike even easier still and, though I hate myself for driving unnecessarily, I drive down most of the time when I want to hit up the ""Shoppes." There is no parking problem. Mellow Mushroom will be cool. Its basically the only "chain" in the world that would not knock down the gas station.

I live in the neighborhood and I want more like this, because I want my house to go up in value. I hope the neighborhood is overflowing with cars, so that people actually realize the value in fixed transit (Amen, Ocklawaha! blessings and praise be upon him). The guy on Richmond probably isn't worried about that because his house is, I'm just guessing, quite expensive already.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on April 27, 2012, 03:00:07 PM
What parking problem? I go here for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and fourth meal (getting bombed). I have literally never had a problem finding a parking space. There are always spots in front of Edible Arrangements, so absolute worst-case scenario is a 2 block walk to get your lazy butt from your car to your destination. I also highly doubt that anyone has ever parked past Riverside or Pine.

And who cares if people park on the street in front of your house? Did you move a block from a commercial corridor not realizing there were businesses there? And the person talking about beer cans on their lawn on Richmond Street?!!?!? Unless you live on Richmond Street, just about everybody else doesn't know it exists. You can't legally leave a bar with a beer can, so beer cans on your lawn aren't the bars fault. Its the underage kids that live in your neighbors house that are drinking down by the river. Or its me, driving in from a couple blocks away in Riverside, parking ON your lawn, drinking a 30, and throwing the cans at your house. For that I'm sorry, but I'm just outdoorsy.

Seriously, I can walk there easily, bike even easier still and, though I hate myself for driving unnecessarily, I drive down most of the time when I want to hit up the ""Shoppes." There is no parking problem. Mellow Mushroom will be cool. Its basically the only "chain" in the world that would not knock down the gas station.

I live in the neighborhood and I want more like this, because I want my house to go up in value. I hope the neighborhood is overflowing with cars, so that people actually realize the value in fixed transit (Amen, Ocklawaha! blessings and praise be upon him). The guy on Richmond probably isn't worried about that because his house is, I'm just guessing, quite expensive already.

+1

Well said

I attended the meeting last night and thought it was an embarrassing display.

Made me more of a supporter for Jon and Mellow after witnessing how he was treated.

I was ashamed and I am still very angry.

Quote from: simms3 on April 27, 2012, 02:13:15 PM
And taxis are not the answer?  I know the stupid residents in Ortega wouldn'd dare "stoop so low" from their supposed high and mighty positions of influence and wealth to take a cab to the Shops,

Yeah, take that Oteegans! That'll teach you to uh... live over there.

Wait sorry what I meant to say was, SIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMS! (Shakes fist)

QuoteI attended the meeting last night and thought it was an embarrassing display.

Ageed.  It devolved from a "meeting" into a bitch-fest.

Quote from: Intuition Ale Works on April 27, 2012, 04:24:41 PM
I attended the meeting last night and thought it was an embarrassing display.

Made me more of a supporter for Jon and Mellow after witnessing how he was treated.

I was ashamed and I am still very angry.

That's exactly how the first Kickbacks meeting went as well. 

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 27, 2012, 03:29:47 PM

Quote from: Kay on April 27, 2012, 02:22:18 PM
Ock:  What's the cost of this car?

Birney Street Car #636. This is a very historic and unique car. New comparable units are going for $900,000! Beautifully maintained and presently leased and operating in a revenue service. Car is in great mechanical condition and is air conditioned.

Located in Texas

Price: $222,000

(http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/1/2/6/4/7/ar131393988774621.jpg)
Here is another style for sale, the ubiquitous PCC.

There you have it Kay, would that any one of us could actually walk into Mayor Browns office and lay this on his desk. I also know of a double ended PCC car for sale for $60,000. The PCC is a very early attempt at streamlined 'modern' streetcars, something Jacksonville missed out on for selling out to General Motors, oh, I mean 'Motor Transit Company' a division of 'National City Lines.' Instead we got 'modern' buses and the groundwork for our dysfunctional mass transit system was in place.

God, if you're up there, I would love to see a streamlined beauty like that gliding around Riverside/Avondale/Downtown within my lifetime!

Quote from: L.P. Hovercraft on April 27, 2012, 04:42:10 PM
God, if you're up there, I would love to see a streamlined beauty like that gliding around Riverside/Avondale/Downtown within my lifetime!

I must say, those refurbished PCCs looked good when I saw them test running in San Diego last summer.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1423003465_gZCj5t7-M.jpg)

QuoteI attended the meeting last night and thought it was an embarrassing display. Made me more of a supporter for Jon and Mellow after witnessing how he was treated. I was ashamed and I am still very angry.

Was John in fact there? Can't wait to catch up with him over a beer. He's heard it before, he heard it when he was scouting places on King Street. People hate change.

So the meeting turned into a bitch-session? Can't say I am shocked, I changed a property on Mayflower from single family residence to multi family residence, and people sent nasty calls to Planning, yet for each of the 3 meetings I had to drop everything and attend, not one single person showed up to protest. Lots of hot air and venting. This will soon be forgotten, just as Mojos brew-ha-ha was forgotten.

Cline - I tell those damn Gracers when they try and block my driveway or view as I am pulling out, nicely mind you, to please pull back and allow me room to back out of my driveway. Most are kind, its when the Gracers allow out of towners to rent the hall, that these people with EXPEDITION SUVs, which were never even a dream at the time Avondale was created, are so high and so long, that I have to go into the Church and make a public announcement that some one in the RED EXPEDITION is about to be towed because I cannot get out of my driveway.  But hey, its my right to tow it if it blocks my access to the roadway.

I may have missed this earlier, but has anyone suggested that the Riverside Trolley extend its hours, include Avondale in its route and add Sunday? Seems like a good "in-between" plan.

EDIT: Trolley Schedule now: http://www.jtafla.com/Schedules/showPage.aspx?Sel=101 (http://www.jtafla.com/Schedules/showPage.aspx?Sel=101)

If the streetcar came back in Jacksonville, that means it would finally become alive. And what city leader in Jacksonville wants that!!!???

Quote from: Anti redneck on April 28, 2012, 05:49:30 AM
If the streetcar came back in Jacksonville, that means it would finally become alive. And what city leader in Jacksonville wants that!!!???

Maybe getting some of our fearless leader's to buy land along the route would gaurintee success? If RAP could just get their heads around the idea that THIS IS A PARKING SOLUTION THAT INCREASES HOME VALUES, the project would surge forward.

As a resident who will be directly affected by MM consider this: we live here. Yep, we've made large investments to enjoy living 24/7 in this community. MM intends to make virtually no compromises in its suburban business model to reflect the Avondale area. 250 seats (minimum for full bar), music 7 nights a week, happy hour (10 pm to 2 am every night) But the residents are being asked to absorb plenty of changes. Here are their self-indulgent parking proposals: How about we one-way Talbot and another street? How about we pull out your tree-lined median on Ingleside and put in angle parking? How about we reconfigure Boone Park to add parking spaces--move the fence, cut down some trees. All for pizza and beer. MM is in it for the money they don't give a crap about the residents.

Quote from: outofhere on April 28, 2012, 02:13:23 PM
As a resident who will be directly affected by MM consider this: we live here. Yep, we've made large investments to enjoy living 24/7 in this community. MM intends to make virtually no compromises in its suburban business model to reflect the Avondale area. 250 seats (minimum for full bar), music 7 nights a week, happy hour (10 pm to 2 am every night) But the residents are being asked to absorb plenty of changes. Here are their self-indulgent parking proposals: How about we one-way Talbot and another street? How about we pull out your tree-lined median on Ingleside and put in angle parking? How about we reconfigure Boone Park to add parking spaces--move the fence, cut down some trees. All for pizza and beer. MM is in it for the money they don't give a crap about the residents.

Then why did they host that community meeting if they do not give a crap about the residents?

As far as I can see, the purpose of the meeting was to talk the community into accepting a new set of rules that the applicant is not yet ready to present. 

With regard to hours of operation, public safety, security, or basic sanitation, I did not hear anything conciliatory that was said on behalf of the applicant.

Quote from: outofhere on April 28, 2012, 02:13:23 PM
As a resident who will be directly affected by MM consider this: we live here. Yep, we've made large investments to enjoy living 24/7 in this community. MM intends to make virtually no compromises in its suburban business model to reflect the Avondale area. 250 seats (minimum for full bar), music 7 nights a week, happy hour (10 pm to 2 am every night) But the residents are being asked to absorb plenty of changes. Here are their self-indulgent parking proposals: How about we one-way Talbot and another street? How about we pull out your tree-lined median on Ingleside and put in angle parking? How about we reconfigure Boone Park to add parking spaces--move the fence, cut down some trees. All for pizza and beer. MM is in it for the money they don't give a crap about the residents.

Consider for a moment what Mellow Mushroom could have done:

Move most seats indoors, increasing seating capacity inside(where there would be zero parking requirements b/c the Benham building is a contributing structure), knocked down and rebuilt the existing gas station(non contributing structure) the same size as it is currently and turning the existing service station lot into a large stacked/tandem surface parking lot filled with cars to be used only by Mellow customers via valet services instead of creating 14 net new on street parking spaces for the area. 

What you would wind up with is a development that completely crossed every 'T' and dotted every 'I' of the Overlay... and the community would be stuck with a horrible product.

Instead, a blighted vacant site is being reused/repurposed within the historically defined commercial district (something the Overlay seeks to encourage) and you have a developer that is willing to work with the community and develop such things as a public square and what might very well be the largest bike parking facility in the entire city.

I guess I just have a difference in opinion when people say that this developer is forcing a 'suburban business model' into the neighborhood when you really examine the alternatives.   

QuoteHow about we one-way Talbot and another street?

I'm sorry to say, that wasn't Mellow that came up with the idea.  It was actually several residents that proposed that a few years ago. 

QuoteHow about we pull out your tree-lined median on Ingleside and put in angle parking?

Just as residents(not a developer) also once proposed this very idea along King Street as well.

QuoteWith regard to hours of operation, public safety, security, or basic sanitation

How are any of those things applicable to the Overlay?

None of those words appear in it's 60+ pages.

Who cares about the overlay?  The applicant?

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 28, 2012, 03:08:48 PM
Who cares about the overlay?  The applicant?

I don't get your question DD?

My understanding is that the applicant wants a PUD so that the overlay becomes irrelevant.

The concerns that were raised by the community pertained to public safety etc, but I don't recall any response to those concerns on behalf of the applicant, except that the applicant has a fiduciary responsibility to sell cheap drinks at certain hours of the day.

QuoteMy understanding is that the applicant wants a PUD so that the overlay becomes irrelevant.

This belief that an exception means you're going against the zoning overlay is misunderstood.  Zoning codes in any city in the country can't possibly cover every nuance and address every impacted site within a designated area equally.  That's why there is an exception process that allows for unique projects to be evaluated on an individual basis. 

In this case, a product is being developed that is better for the community.  The project could take advantage of the current hole in the Overlay as the example described above would do... or things such as a unique reuse of the building(something that similar historic neighborhoods have embraced and which the Overlay specifically encourages) and a public square (who is really against that?) could be potential outcomes. 

The proposal presented thus far including a public plaza and bike parking would seek to extend a 'legitimate public purpose', would it not?

How would that not result in a better product for the community?

This is what a variance process is meant to accomplish... to create a final product that appeases everybody. 

In fact, there a many examples of variances that have been given around Jacksonville which resulted in some great cornerstone-type products. 

QuoteThe concerns that were raised by the community pertained to public safety etc, but I don't recall any response to those concerns on behalf of the applicant, except that the applicant has a fiduciary responsibility to sell cheap drinks at certain hours of the day.

I have to respectfully reinforce my opinion that this has nothing to do with zoning requirements, which is truly what this process is all about.  However long a business operates operates a happy hour is completely irrelevant from the Overlay. 

It would be ashame to allow fear to control that process. 

Originally this thread was about a new restaurant in Avondale.  Now it's nearly irrelevant.

Let's hope that MJ as a whole fares better.

I can't wait to bring my two sons over and enjoy a pizza when Mellow opens.  Hopefully, 7-11 can find a space too, so we can enjoy a slurpee afterwards while we loiter in the public park Mellow wants to construct.  Looking forward to seeing more people on the sidewalks and streets.

Come on over!  Hungry Howie's is already open.

What has the history of the area got to do with a solution to the problem to be faced with people intensive development? We have what we have, and the reason for it just doesn't matter. However, it is not conceivable that Avondale and points west would have been created at all without the car to get residents to the central business district.

For those of us opposed to MM in the size proposed and the parking problem it will create, I say let's give our district Councilman a first-hand example of it. This coming Saturday night, let's all park cars in front of Jim Love's home and then go get them about 1:30 AM on Sunday.  He lives on the corner of Riverside and Edgewood.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 29, 2012, 09:03:41 AM
What has the history of the area got to do with a solution to the problem to be faced with people intensive development? We have what we have, and the reason for it just doesn't matter. However, it is not conceivable that Avondale and points west would have been created at all without the car to get residents to the central business district.

For those of us opposed to MM in the size proposed and the parking problem it will create, I say let's give our district Councilman a first-hand example of it. This coming Saturday night, let's all park cars in front of Jim Love's home and then go get them about 1:30 AM on Sunday.  He lives on the corner of Riverside and Edgewood.

You're right. Let's rip out these antiquated streetfront developments and make them replace half their lot with parking lots. Or better yet, raze the houses of people complaining to build a surface lot. Make a Riverside/Avondale version of SJTC.

History matters in this case because people seem to be unable to grasp the idea that there was a world before cars and parking lots.

I am aware of at least 2 other projects, totaling at least 200 additional seats, that have been put on hold pending the outcome of the MM approval.  Rest assured, this is just the tip of the iceberg. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 10:08:44 AM
I am aware of at least 2 other projects, totaling at least 200 additional seats, that have been put on hold pending the outcome of the MM approval.  Rest assured, this is just the tip of the iceberg. 

Hopefully, it is the tip of the iceberg.  There's a ton of infill and adaptive reuse that can naturally occur.  That's why many continue to state the need for long term multimodal solutions, just not for Riverside, but the entire community as a whole.

Quote from: stephendare on April 29, 2012, 09:17:34 AM
And if RAPs transportation committee has its way, I doubt people will have many cars in the neiborhood, as there will be a parking permit fee charged for every resident who want to park in the area.  Apparently the fees are usually regressive so that if your household has more than one car, each additional fee goes up.

A house with three cars could end up paying thousands annually in parking permit fees.

And of course, once such a tax was established for riverside Avondale, the locals would lose the power to set or prevent further hikes in the fee later on.

But at least it would kill the businesses of the area.

I believe this is the idea being floated out of Dashing Dan's committee, although of course they haven't thought through the consequences or potential unintended side effects.  It might be coming from some other part of RAP, but the harebrained 'neighborhood parking decals/permit' and Taking of the public right of way is the main 'solution' being tossed around.

Where did you hear this?  I've heard rumblings of looking into residential parking permits but not anything on how such a concept would work or cost here.  Also, would something like this have to be approved by the rest of the city, considering everyone shares in on the cost of public infrastructure and its maintenance?  In cities that do have residential parking permits in certain areas, how much do they typically cost annually and where does that money typically go?

RAP can only influence, the City would have to act on this. RAP can tie themselves to an anchor and throw it in the gulf stream with this parking permit issue.

I'm not sure why RAP hasn't started on a proactive campaign to mitigate the current effects of the parking issues through education and awareness, instead of trying to dictate every bit of development within the district?

RAP and the Merchants could come up with a campaign to promote better coexistence between the people parking in the neighborhood and those who live there.   In addition to getting the city to expand the amount of garbage cans and ensure they get collected, way finding signage like the one in the picture on the far right (See below) could be used to welcome people to the district and remind them to be kind etc.

I also think educating people on the parking options in the area could really help as well.  Once again think signage.  I guarantee many people who patronize the district, would park at Boone Park along Van Wert and walk to the Shoppes if they knew it was a designated parking area. 

Of course this is based on the assumption that most in the area don't mind cars on their street, but they just don't like the inconsiderate / ignorant / immature patrons who litter, block driveways, or worse. 


(http://www.ocala.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=OS&Date=20120423&Category=ARTICLES&ArtNo=120429873&Ref=AR&MaxW=728&logo=/images/watermark.gif&logoxpos=0&logoypos=0%5D)

These tortured arguments attempting to nuance an argument as to what the intention was 100 years ago leave us with no answer to the problem at hand today.  MM 250 seats, a beer garden across the street with 150 seats, doubling the size of a sushi place, and there will be more when something happens with the old Monty's space.  Additionally, there are also rumblings of  Indian and Mexican restaurants yet to come.

QuoteLakelander said:

I can't wait to bring my two sons over and enjoy a pizza when Mellow opens.  Hopefully, 7-11 can find a space too, so we can enjoy a slurpee afterwards while we loiter in the public park Mellow wants to construct.  Looking forward to seeing more people on the sidewalks and streets.

No need to wait. 3 locations are open and ready to serve you. Be sure and take you  sons during the "family friendly" 10 pm to 2 am happy hour.

Attended the Thursday mtg and couldn't believe how MM stretched the truth. At one time Valentine said he was used to working w/ neighborhoods because the beach location is in a neighborhood. HAH! A neighborhood of commercial establishments maybe but not homes.

As for the attendance at the mtg. The neighbors were respectful. There were a few outbursts and I remember some applause on both sides but no booing. It seemed like a typical neighborhood mtg. But I guess by MJ standards neighbors are to be seen but not heard.

No neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets. Nor should they be expected to have the fabric of their neighborhoods torn apart. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong w/ neighbors opposing commercial intrusion. But on this thread you'd think there was. 

Isn't the proposed Mellow Mushroom in a commercial district?

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 12:14:11 PM
These tortured arguments attempting to nuance an argument as to what the intention was 100 years ago leave us with no answer to the problem at hand today.  MM 250 seats, a beer garden across the street with 150 seats, doubling the size of a sushi place, and there will be more when something happens with the old Monty's space.  Additionally, there are also rumblings of  Indian and Mexican restaurants yet to come.

Your answer to the problem today is simple:

1. Parking management to better utilize the existing capacity.

2. Promotion and implementation of alternative forms of mobility.

No need to make this more complicated than it has to be.

Nicely put.  Meanwhile, those of us who actually own properties and businesses on the Avondale strip are left to deal with the angry customers who have no place to park

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 12:41:25 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 12:14:11 PM
These tortured arguments attempting to nuance an argument as to what the intention was 100 years ago leave us with no answer to the problem at hand today.  MM 250 seats, a beer garden across the street with 150 seats, doubling the size of a sushi place, and there will be more when something happens with the old Monty's space.  Additionally, there are also rumblings of  Indian and Mexican restaurants yet to come.

Your answer to the problem today is simple:

1. Parking management to better utilize the existing capacity.

2. Promotion and implementation of alternative forms of mobility.

No need to make this more complicated than it has to be.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 12:52:32 PM
Nicely put.  Meanwhile, those of us who actually own properties and businesses on the Avondale strip are left to deal with the angry customers who have no place to park

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 12:41:25 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 12:14:11 PM
These tortured arguments attempting to nuance an argument as to what the intention was 100 years ago leave us with no answer to the problem at hand today.  MM 250 seats, a beer garden across the street with 150 seats, doubling the size of a sushi place, and there will be more when something happens with the old Monty's space.  Additionally, there are also rumblings of  Indian and Mexican restaurants yet to come.

Your answer to the problem today is simple:

1. Parking management to better utilize the existing capacity.

2. Promotion and implementation of alternative forms of mobility.

No need to make this more complicated than it has to be.

This isn't a me or you situation.  The neighborhood isn't gated.  In my case, I'm a customer.  To be honest, I haven't gotten angry yet.  I've never had to park more than a block from my desired destination and half the time I do choose to park further away because I enjoy the walk.  The only inconvenience I've had in the strip is waiting in line for breakfast at the Fox.  However, a local business being successful does not anger me.

Quote from: outofhere on April 29, 2012, 12:16:09 PM
No neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets. Nor should they be expected to have the fabric of their neighborhoods torn apart. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong w/ neighbors opposing commercial intrusion. But on this thread you'd think there was.

Last time I checked, DUI was against the law in Jacksonville. The addition of a restaurant, where beer containers cannot legally be taken from the store should have zero effect. If someone wants to get trashed, there is an ABC store just down the street, and ample bars and clubs.

Isn't this an adaptive reuse of a GAS STATION? Like a gas station is a charming historically correct neighborhood feature? REALLY? Have you ever wondered what historical building/s bit the dust when that snappy gas station was built? Would you have supported that? I think I speak for the whole MJ team (and 2 of us are planners) when I say, this is a golden opportunity for the neighborhood to come together with the MM (or anybody else) and assist them in developing a historically correct business. But to do so you would need fixed rail transit.

The point of all of this historical argument is that commercial blocks were designed into the original community, designed to be accessed primarily by streetcar. If you go back to that model, your parking problems go away.

Dan's position that "Avondale is the antithesis of a streetcar community," is somewhere beyond silly, considering his position and bias, it's irresponsible. The streetcar jogged from St.Johns to Herschel to better pierce THE HEART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, and thus become it's spine, where all of the residents would be equidistant from the tracks. Stockton was one of the owners of the streetcar company and Ingle was it's president, they would have lasted about 2 minutes in a boardroom when they explained how they built this community to 'reject' the streetcar.

Streetcar for Riverside is part of the COJ'S Mobility Plan, but certain elements in this city heavily invested in gasoline, asphalt and concrete are apparently willing to mislead the public to keep their tin lizzies paramount in your lives.

Mellow could easily turn the entire front of that gas station into stacked parking to accommodate a restaurant larger than 250 seats and still fall within the parking requirements of the overlay.  However, the end product would suck.  The idea of having a piece of the property turned into a centralized public square for the commercial strip should not be overlooked.  Instead of immediately picking up the artillery to tar and feather these guys, why not work together to create a final product that works for everyone while also being financially feasible for the owner?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 01:09:45 PM
Mellow could easily turn the entire front of that gas station into stacked parking to accommodate a restaurant larger than 250 seats and still fall within the parking requirements of the overlay.  However, the end product would suck.  The idea of having a piece of the property turned into a centralized public square for the commercial strip should not be overlooked.  Instead of immediately picking up the artillery to tar and feature these guys, why not work together to create a final product that works for everyone while also being financially feasible for the owner?

Gosh, I do not want to sound unkind or disagreeable, but your statement is laughable.

^Some of the opposing stereotypical fear based comments on people's businesses are pretty laughable as well.  However, at some point, it's best to resolve the perceived problems and move on.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 01:15:37 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 01:09:45 PM
Mellow could easily turn the entire front of that gas station into stacked parking to accommodate a restaurant larger than 250 seats and still fall within the parking requirements of the overlay.  However, the end product would suck.  The idea of having a piece of the property turned into a centralized public square for the commercial strip should not be overlooked.  Instead of immediately picking up the artillery to tar and feature these guys, why not work together to create a final product that works for everyone while also being financially feasible for the owner?

Gosh, I do not want to sound unkind or disagreeable, but your statement is laughable.

Don't worry Tony, you sounded more like 'dumb as a box of rocks' then you did unkind. Check out the photos in the article that started this thread, its ridiculous to suggest a Jacksonville business couldn't do the same things.

KAY, if your still watching, I give you Avondale... circa 2015...

http://www.youtube.com/v/T2wGe6GXIT8?version=3&hl=en_US

I have noticed a pattern on this site where a few users bully and name-call others who oppose them into submission .  These few users seem to have an opinion about everything and everyone, making tens of thousands of posts on this one site alone (2 users).   It is laughable that MM gives a flying mushroom about the parking nightmare they will be adding to.  They want their 250 seats.  Period.  Unless you guys are property owners in this strip, you cannot understand our perspective. 

^There was a recent article in the Jax Biz Journal that interviewed several property owners and businesses in the strip who were in favor.  In addition, there have been several nearby residents that have posted in this thread who are in favor of infill.  Why don't their opinions matter?  Why can't something be worked out to allow a positive project to move forward?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 02:54:49 PM
^There was a recent article in the Jax Biz Journal that interviewed several property owners and businesses in the strip who were in favor.  In addition, there have been several nearby residents that have posted in these thread who are in favor of infill.  Why don't their opinions matter?

They are in the minority.  Most of those interviewed in that article lease their spaces from those of us who actually own the real estate.  And most of the businesses are opposed to the MM project and the other pending additions yet to come.

Quote from: outofhere on April 29, 2012, 12:16:09 PM
Attended the Thursday mtg and couldn't believe how MM stretched the truth. At one time Valentine said he was used to working w/ neighborhoods because the beach location is in a neighborhood. HAH! A neighborhood of commercial establishments maybe but not homes.

Actually, they are pretty similar.  3rd Street is a linear commercial strip just like St. Johns.  The blocks on either side of 3rd are residential....just like St. Johns.  The only difference is, is that most of Jax Beach is autocentric.

QuoteAs for the attendance at the mtg. The neighbors were respectful. There were a few outbursts and I remember some applause on both sides but no booing. It seemed like a typical neighborhood mtg. But I guess by MJ standards neighbors are to be seen but not heard.

You posting on MJ makes you a member.  Several of your neighborhoods have posted here as well.  Some are in favor, so aren't.  That's urban living in general.  You'll never get 100% support either way.

QuoteNo neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets. Nor should they be expected to have the fabric of their neighborhoods torn apart.

What does this have to do with this project?  Is Mellow Mushroom known for generating drunks who pee and pass out in people's yards?  Is that the experience that Mellow is bringing to communities across the nation?

QuoteThere is absolutely nothing wrong w/ neighbors opposing commercial intrusion. But on this thread you'd think there was.

Luckily, this particular project is located in a commercial area in a building that was constructed as a commercial use in 1922.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 03:02:34 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 02:54:49 PM
^There was a recent article in the Jax Biz Journal that interviewed several property owners and businesses in the strip who were in favor.  In addition, there have been several nearby residents that have posted in these thread who are in favor of infill.  Why don't their opinions matter?

They are in the minority.  Most of those interviewed in that article lease their spaces from those of us who actually own the real estate.  And most of the businesses are opposed to the MM project and the other pending additions yet to come.

Then it seems like your best answer is to modify the zoning code to not allow anyone else to move or open a business in the area.  I don't know how that would hold up in court but that's the best way to tell others what they can/can't do with their property without pooling your finances together and buying up all the remaining property.

Well it could always be turned back into a full service gas station. Get a couple of good mechanic's and bring on the Edsel's. A couple dozen broken down cars in various state's of repair should be just what the doctor ordered. Conversely you could board it up and let it become the home to all sorts of interesting nighttime activity. Lastly, you could level it and create a really nice concrete surface parking lot, IMAGINE THE POSSIBILITIES.

Nobody is bullying anybody on this thread, though one did call Lakelander's ideas, (based on years of study and practice as an urban planner), "laughable." I simply matched his comment. This isn't a debate by a bunch of hysterical reactionaries, rather you are seeing a 'planner' for RAP, as well as some of the RAP board, debate the significance of a streetcar with another group of urban and railroad planners. Both historically as well as contemporarily, it is one simple answer to ALL of the questions. It's already in the mobility plan, and had the city council not placed an irresponsible moratorium on the plan, we would be nearing construction right about now.

That we can't, "understand our perspective." assumes that none of us at MJ have a stake in the community; we do. At least 3 of us own property or have relations living there. They may, "want their 250 seats.  Period." And if those 250 people boarded a streetcar in a remote parking lot at Roosevelt or somewhere downtown and rode to the site there would be no argument against the restaurant's plans.

Lakelander says:
Actually, they are pretty similar.  3rd Street is a linear commercial strip just like St. Johns.  The blocks on either side of 3rd are residential....just like St. Johns.  The only difference is, is that most of Jax Beach is autocentric.

The block directly behind MM at the beach is commercial save for 2 structures across the street which are rentals of some type. In Avondale houses back directly across the alley from the proposed MM.

You take everything MM says as the gospel. Do you even listen to neighbors? 10 pm to 2 am happy hour isn't neighborhood friendly.

As for the poster who said

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 29, 2012, 04:27:20 PM

QuoteLakelander says:
Actually, they are pretty similar.  3rd Street is a linear commercial strip just like St. Johns.  The blocks on either side of 3rd are residential....just like St. Johns.  The only difference is, is that most of Jax Beach is autocentric.

The block directly behind MM at the beach is commercial save for 2 structures across the street which are rentals of some type. In Avondale houses back directly across the alley from the proposed MM.

The block behind the MM beach location is 4th Street, which is residential.  However, the MM block is fully commercial.  To be precise, the MM beach location is an outparcel for a shopping strip behind it on the same block.  However, overall, it is a linear commercial strip with residential on the surrounding blocks.  The major difference is the beach strip is autocentric.  A shopping center with an outparcel would fit that definition.

QuoteYou take everything MM says as the gospel. Do you even listen to neighbors? 10 pm to 2 am happy hour isn't neighborhood friendly.

As for the poster who said

I typically try and stick with the extents of zoning and context.  With these things serving as a starting point, I then try find logical compromises.  Here, we're talking about reuse of a property that has been commercial since the beginning of the community's existence.  If there is dislike of the commercial product, address the zoning that allows it, not the product.

Quote from: stephendare on April 29, 2012, 04:37:52 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 02:46:38 PM
I have noticed a pattern on this site where a few users bully and name-call others who oppose them into submission .  These few users seem to have an opinion about everything and everyone, making tens of thousands of posts on this one site alone (2 users).   It is laughable that MM gives a flying mushroom about the parking nightmare they will be adding to.  They want their 250 seats.  Period.  Unless you guys are property owners in this strip, you cannot understand our perspective.

Ah, tony.  So I guess we should just shut the hell up, right?

We've been posting for 7 years now, and thats not going to change anytime soon.

Additionally, I am very curious  to hear about the magical qualities that avondale property ownership confers that are so godlike that us mere mortals simply cannot understand the divine perspective.

You are posting on a public policy and planning website incidentally.  Just thought you might want to know that.

Its not anyone's fault but dashing dan's that he is so terribly wrong about the history and importance of fixed rail transit in the neighborhood.  He has access to the same kind of fact checking that we do.  Perhaps looking up the factual elements of his posts first would have saved him the embarrassment of stubbornly digging in to a position of specious nonsense.

Well Stephen, I agree with 90% of what you post  (what I read anyway).  And it's interesting that my posts concerning transit are not what prompted you to make such an over the top and silly response.  There is nothing "godlike" about owning multiple properties or my concerns for what directly affects my street.  Im so sorry you choose to interpret my words so incorrectly.  I think your opinions matter as does anyone else who lives in this area.  It's just some of have a larger risk in this matter.

Additionally, I understand that you guys have been blogging for 7 years and that will not change.  We have been dealing with Avondale parking issues for 20 years and that will not change either.

In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:09:05 PM
Additionally, I understand that you guys have been blogging for 7 years and that will not change.  We have been dealing with Avondale parking issues for 20 years and that will not change either.

Hopefully, it will.  20 years is too long to circle the wagons without implementing a viable solution.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Quote from: stephendare on April 29, 2012, 07:03:37 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Wow.  Must be those godlike Avondale property ownership powers of perception at play.

It's not about that, it's about knowing from experience, from being there.  Witnessing what you see.  Hearing what people tell you on the spot.  These personal attacks are unfair.  Just stop this nonsense. 

It's not about that, it's about knowing from experience, from being there.  Witnessing what you see.  Hearing what people tell you on the spot.  These personal attacks are unfair.  Just stop this nonsense. 

I see your point but you were the one using the term "godlike", not me, long before I used the word "insane".  I also take issue with being called "dumb as a box of rocks".  So you have no issue with my being called that.  You made your point, can you see mine?  Just sayin.....

Tominchicago,

What's your solution?  Why hasn't it been implemented after two decades of dealing with it (as you described earlier in this thread)?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 07:33:24 PM
Tominchicago,

What's your solution?  Why hasn't it been implemented after two decades of dealing with it (as you described earlier in this thread)?

The city created this problem within the past two years by changing the overlay which has existed for decades.  Why is incumbent on me to find a solution for any further addition of seating in an area that already has major parking issues with whats here now.  You do not the whole story and it's way too much to type.

And what of the next large addition to the area?  Do I have a solution for that? No. One does not exist.  We will protect our interests in that area.  Sorry if it displeases.

Was there once a moratorium in place or was the market not to the point where projects popping up today made fiscal sense? 

What in the previous zoning code regulated seat size or the presence of restaurants in the commercial district?  Also, didn't the community work closely with the city in developing the overlay that exists today?

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:07:49 PM
And what of the next large addition to the area?  Do I have a solution for that? No. One does not exist.  We will protect our interests in that area.  Sorry if it displeases.

What large addition?  Aren't we still waiting for the first?  I was under the impression that existing commercial buildings were being reused.  Are you advocating for the shell station to remain vacant and the two selling property owners to not make good on their investment and move on?

Also, I don't have a problem with you or anyone "protecting" the area.   However, I fail to see how MM  going into existing buildings, one of which predates most of the residences in the area, endangers the surrounding community.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:08:31 PM
Was there once a moratorium in place or was the market not to the point where projects popping up today made fiscal sense? 

What in the previous zoning code regulated seat size or the presence of restaurants in the commercial district?  Also, didn't the community work closely with the city in developing the overlay that exists today?

Absolutely not, check with the residents, merchants, property owners.  They will tell you they were unaware of any change to the overlay.   

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:16:47 PM
Also, I don't have a problem with you or anyone "protecting" the area.   However, I fail to see how MM  going into existing buildings, one of which predates most of the residences in the area, endangers the surrounding community.

Because they are proposing putting 110 in the gas station.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:19:08 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:08:31 PM
Was there once a moratorium in place or was the market not to the point where projects popping up today made fiscal sense? 

What in the previous zoning code regulated seat size or the presence of restaurants in the commercial district?  Also, didn't the community work closely with the city in developing the overlay that exists today?

Absolutely not, check with the residents, merchants, property owners.  They will tell you they were unaware of any change to the overlay.   

RAP wasn't aware of the changes?

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:23:09 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:16:47 PM
Also, I don't have a problem with you or anyone "protecting" the area.   However, I fail to see how MM  going into existing buildings, one of which predates most of the residences in the area, endangers the surrounding community.

Because they are proposing putting 110 in the gas station.

What is the proper number of seats that you would like to see?

And how many people standing in a bar are actually seated?  So the actually tally on cars will be much higher than the seating plan reflects.   There was a 125 seat beer garden that filed for application across the street in the clock shop that has just been withdrawn and put on hold pending the outcome of MM.  And what of Monty's for sale?  What will go there?  Chili's?  Cheesecake factory?  We are talking about seating.  We are talking about a realistic solution.  After all, you cant park on a cloud.   

You obviously are not a fan of restaurants opening in the area.  I was just trying to figure out if you were basing that opinion on statistical data or not.  So if it safe to assume, the solution you envision is more about capping the number of restaurants/seats that can open than parking?

Btw, I can't wait to see what goes into Monty's.  That's a nice corner lot.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:34:11 PM
You obviously are not a fan of restaurants opening in the area.  I was just trying to figure out if you were basing that opinion on statistical data or not.  So if it safe to assume, the solution you envision is more about capping the number of restaurants/seats that can open than parking?

Correct, by maintaining the overlay that was in place for decades.   As to future additions, the is NO solution.

Quote from: stephendare on April 29, 2012, 08:35:28 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:29:11 PM
And how many people standing in a bar are actually seated?  So the actually tally on cars will be much higher than the seating plan reflects.   There was a 125 seat beer garden that filed for application across the street in the clock shop that has just been withdrawn and put on hold pending the outcome of MM.  And what of Monty's for sale?  What will go there?  Chili's?  Cheesecake factory?  We are talking about seating.  We are talking about a realistic solution.  After all, you cant park on a cloud.

Meh.  It won't even come close to the amount of traffic that was just around the corner when Docksides, Campus Corner,  grenamyersand the underground were all simultaneously open in the area back in 90.

Grenamyer's had more than enough parking to accommodate all their guests and more.  There was more than enough parking with Travis center p lot and the side streets for Eclipse.  Whats your point?

Understood.  Your view is different from RAP's, who was instrumental in getting the current Overlay put together and approved.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:43:28 PM
Understood.  Your view is different from RAP's, who was instrumental in getting the current Overlay put together and approved.

Do your research, RAP is opposed to any restaurant going from 87 seats to 250 seats even with the current overlay.   I cannot speak to how they influenced the overlay change prior to this time.

Quote from: stephendare on April 29, 2012, 08:44:17 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:39:51 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:34:11 PM
You obviously are not a fan of restaurants opening in the area.  I was just trying to figure out if you were basing that opinion on statistical data or not.  So if it safe to assume, the solution you envision is more about capping the number of restaurants/seats that can open than parking?

Correct, by maintaining the overlay that was in place for decades.   As to future additions, the is NO solution.

Because the ground is cursed or something?

Are you certain that you live in Chicago?

Again Stephen, personal attacks.  This is about Avondale and the lack of parking, not where I live.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:47:31 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:43:28 PM
Understood.  Your view is different from RAP's, who was instrumental in getting the current Overlay put together and approved.

Do your research, RAP is opposed to any restaurant going from 87 seats to 250 seats even with the current overlay.   I cannot speak to how they influenced the overlay change prior to this time.

Better yet, read the overlay that your community worked hard to get approved.  Here's a link:

http://www.riversideavondale.org/index.php?id=57

There's nothing in it that limits restaurants to 87 seats and it certainly doesn't cap these places from opening.  While I don't agree with your position, if you want to make it stick, you'll need to change public policy.  Rambling against MM won't amount to a hill of beans as long as the current Riverside/Avondale backed overlay allows these types of uses.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on April 29, 2012, 04:27:20 PM
Lakelander says:
Actually, they are pretty similar.  3rd Street is a linear commercial strip just like St. Johns.  The blocks on either side of 3rd are residential....just like St. Johns.  The only difference is, is that most of Jax Beach is autocentric.

The block directly behind MM at the beach is commercial save for 2 structures across the street which are rentals of some type. In Avondale houses back directly across the alley from the proposed MM.

You take everything MM says as the gospel. Do you even listen to neighbors? 10 pm to 2 am happy hour isn't neighborhood friendly.

As for the poster who said

My house in Jax Beach fronting 3rd Street had two businesses on either side of me.  Sorry to inform you, the commercial/residential mix of the two areas certainly share many characteristics. 

You do realize Mellow has family nights?  Their business does not resemble a 14 hour long frat party. 

Yet, happy hour specials still have nothing to do with he Overlay. 

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:55:21 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:47:31 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:43:28 PM
Understood.  Your view is different from RAP's, who was instrumental in getting the current Overlay put together and approved.

Do your research, RAP is opposed to any restaurant going from 87 seats to 250 seats even with the current overlay.   I cannot speak to how they influenced the overlay change prior to this time.

Better yet, read the overlay that your community worked hard to get approved.  Here's a link:

http://www.riversideavondale.org/index.php?id=57

There's nothing in it that limits restaurants to 87 seats and it certainly doesn't cap these places from opening.  While I don't agree with your position, if you want to make it stick, you'll need to change public policy.  Rambling against MM won't amount to a hill of beans as long as the current Riverside/Avondale backed overlay allows these types of uses.

Easily said by someone who is on the outside looking in.  Again, you absolutely know nothing of this issue.  I do.  I love pizza and surely look forward to MM opening.  Im just opposed to the amount of seating in their plan and, as a property owner, am worried about where all these people are going to park.  I can say with a great amount of certainty that most everyone in the hood agrees with the same concerns.  Can you say the same? 

Stop distorting my argument.  It wont work for you.   

^You don't know what I know but what I know is irrelevant to the situation causing you heartburn.  As long as you refuse to understand the zoning facts in regards to these issues, you'll be stressing out for another few decades as your cries fall on deaf ears at city hall.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Ate dinner twice in the Shoppes this week.  Had no problem finding legal parking (I don't expect to park at the front door of a restaurant any less than I expect to park next to the cash registers at Wal Mart).  On a third night at the Shoppes this week, I took the pictures you see in the article depicting inadequate bike parking and completely underutilized parking supply.  I also biked to the Shoppes this morning for breakfast, finding the lone bike rack already full I decided to bike to Bagel Love instead.   

That's about as first hand experience as you need

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:05:03 PM
^You don't know what I know but what I know is irrelevant to the situation causing you heartburn.  As long as you refuse to understand the zoning facts in regards to these issues, you'll be stressing out for another few decades as your cries fall on deaf ears at city hall.

Again, since your not involved, it does not matter.  I will keep you guys posted with the decisions of the relevant partners in this, merchants, property owners, residents, business owners, customers and RAP.  Continue the personal attacks, it does not count for a "hill of beans".

I'm just the guy (customer) you want to provide parking for and a resident of the city who pays taxes that goes to help fund your infrastructure (including that recent streetscape project).  That makes me involved.  Also, I don't do personal attacks.  Don't be so sensitive because I don't agree with your viewpoint.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:02:06 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:55:21 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:47:31 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:43:28 PM
Understood.  Your view is different from RAP's, who was instrumental in getting the current Overlay put together and approved.

Do your research, RAP is opposed to any restaurant going from 87 seats to 250 seats even with the current overlay.   I cannot speak to how they influenced the overlay change prior to this time.

Better yet, read the overlay that your community worked hard to get approved.  Here's a link:

http://www.riversideavondale.org/index.php?id=57

There's nothing in it that limits restaurants to 87 seats and it certainly doesn't cap these places from opening.  While I don't agree with your position, if you want to make it stick, you'll need to change public policy.  Rambling against MM won't amount to a hill of beans as long as the current Riverside/Avondale backed overlay allows these types of uses.

Easily said by someone who is on the outside looking in.  Again, you absolutely know nothing of this issue.  I do.  I love pizza and surely look forward to MM opening.  Im just opposed to the amount of seating in their plan and, as a property owner, am worried about where all these people are going to park.  I can say with a great amount of certainty that most everyone in the hood agrees with the same concerns.  Can you say the same? 

Stop distorting my argument.  It wont work for you.

With all due respect, the alternatives to what Mellow is proposing to do would be the exact opposite of what the Overlay seeks to encourage.  This is not a personal attack, but there are significant holes in the code that could be taken advantage of which would result in a horrible product for the neighborhood.  Perhaps you should familiarize yourswlf with the zoning code innits entirity before accusing someone of not knowing what yhey are talking about. 

Quote from: fieldafm on April 29, 2012, 09:09:06 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Ate dinner twice in the Shoppes this week.  Had no problem finding legal parking (I don't expect to park at the front door of a restaurant any less than I expect to park next to the cash registers at Wal Mart).  On a third night at the Shoppes this week, I took the pictures you see in the article depicting inadequate bike parking and completely underutilized parking supply.  I also biked to the Shoppes this morning for breakfast, finding the lone bike rack already full I decided to bike to Bagel Love instead.   

That's about as first hand experience as you need

That's now.  What about 6 months from now with 250 seats proposed and the 125 that was withdrawn across the street and Monty's.  Those will surely be back.  Think forward from here my friends.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:15:30 PM
I'm just the guy (customer) you want to provide parking for and a resident of the city who pays taxes that goes to help fund your infrastructure (including that recent streetscape project).  That makes me involved.  Also, I don't do personal attacks.  Don't be so sensitive because I don't agree with your viewpoint.

Im only sensitive because you know not of what you speak.  I do. I have lived it , been there.  Sorry

^I'm actually looking forward to seeing more businesses come in. I can't wait to see a walkable commercial strip blossom that's vibrant day and night that doesn't negatively impact the area's quality of life.

No need to apologize to me.  I'm not hurt and plan on getting a good night's sleep tonight and after MM and the next guy opens.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:17:23 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on April 29, 2012, 09:09:06 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Ate dinner twice in the Shoppes this week.  Had no problem finding legal parking (I don't expect to park at the front door of a restaurant any less than I expect to park next to the cash registers at Wal Mart).  On a third night at the Shoppes this week, I took the pictures you see in the article depicting inadequate bike parking and completely underutilized parking supply.  I also biked to the Shoppes this morning for breakfast, finding the lone bike rack already full I decided to bike to Bagel Love instead.   

That's about as first hand experience as you need

That's now.  What about 6 months from now with 250 seats proposed and the 125 that was withdrawn across the street and Monty's.  Those will surely be back.  Think forward from here my friends.

I think my thoughts on the matter regarding better parking management in the short term and viable alternative transportation modes in the long term are about thinking further.  What in your opinion is the way to move forward?

Tony is against the RAP backed overlay and wants to limit the amount of seats and number of establishments that can open.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 08:39:51 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 08:34:11 PM
You obviously are not a fan of restaurants opening in the area.  I was just trying to figure out if you were basing that opinion on statistical data or not.  So if it safe to assume, the solution you envision is more about capping the number of restaurants/seats that can open than parking?

Correct, by maintaining the overlay that was in place for decades.   As to future additions, the is NO solution.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:21:34 PM
^I'm actually looking forward to seeing more businesses come in. I can't wait to see a walkable commercial strip blossom that's vibrant day and night that doesn't negatively impact the area's quality of life.

No need to apologize to me.  I'm not hurt and plan on getting a good night's sleep tonight and after MM and the next guy opens.

Dont worry, Im not apologizing to you in any way.   Do you live within 3 block of this area???   Were you at the meeting at Grace church?  Did you listen the all the residents who voiced opposition to this at that meeting?  An issue that impacts their daily lives because they live within three blocks.  Why dont you find out how the neighborhood really feels before YOU form an opinion on an issue that does not affect your daily life.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 29, 2012, 01:20:45 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 01:15:37 PM
Gosh, I do not want to sound unkind or disagreeable, but your statement is laughable.

Don't worry Tony, you sounded more like 'dumb as a box of rocks' then you did unkind. Check out the photos in the article that started this thread, its ridiculous to suggest a Jacksonville business couldn't do the same things.

You simply said you didn't want to sound unkind, then went on to laugh at Lake's educated statement. I simply replied to your premise by saying you didn't sound unkind, rather it made you sound 'dumb as a box of rock.' How does that mean that I called you 'dumb as a box of rocks.' If that offended you I'm sorry, sarcasm is my spiritual gift!

Now about that streetcar need, demand, ridership, cost:

QuoteThe Truth-O-Meter Says:

Says "streetcars carry more people than buses … you attract more riders who don't ride transit now, and actually the operating costs are not any greater than the bus."
Charlie Hales on Sunday, February 12th, 2012 in an interview.

Do streetcars really beat out buses in capacity, ridership and cost?


Hales hasn’t advocated expanding the city’s system during his current campaign, but the subject keeps coming up. During an appearance on Oregon Public Broadcasting’s "Think Out Loud," Hales explained why he’s so keen on street cars.

It comes down to three things, he said: Because "streetcars carry more people than buses. Because you attract more riders who don't ride transit now. And actually the operating costs are not any greater than the bus. The trick is coming up with the very large capital cost."

These sorts of talking points get thrown around a lot by rail-system advocates. We thought it was high time we checked it out.

Our first call was to Hales’ campaign. His spokeswoman, Jessica Moskovitz, sent us a thorough e-mail outlining the support for the various pieces of the statement. Before we get to all that, though, let’s start with TriMet when spokeswoman Mary Fetsch.

On whether streetcars carry more people than buses, there is no ambiguity. Streetcars have a maximum capacity of 92 riders, according to Fetsch. That’s nearly double the 51 or so riders who can fit on a single bus. (It was clear during the interview that Hales was talking capacity here and not the actual number of riders.)

The next part was about whether streetcars have a smaller operating cost. Naturally, our minds went to the huge down payment a city has to make on tracks, whereas a bus can use existing roads. But Hales was careful to take that out of the equation by acknowledging the startup costs. It’s clear he was talking about day-to-day operation. On that point, he seems to be right again.

According to Fetsch, the streetcar operations cost $1.50 per boarding ride, while the bus costs $2.82. Now, there are a few important caveats here. Portland’s streetcar system is much smaller than TriMet's bus and MAX systems.

The last bit of important context here, too, is that the streetcar system requires fewer maintenance expenses: It’s younger and it runs at lower speeds, so it has less wear than the MAX and bus system.

That leaves us with the last bit: Do streetcars really attract riders who don’t typically take public transit?

Moskovitz, the spokeswoman for Hales, pointed us to a study by Edson Tennyson for the National Research Council on the issue of rail transit. Tennyson concluded that, all things being equal, "rail transit is likely to attract 34 percent to 43 percent more riders than will equivalent bus services."

TriMet, however, had two pieces of pertinent information.

First up, between 2000 and 2003, bus stops within a sixth of a mile of the streetcar saw ridership drop by 20 percent when the rail went online. Meanwhile, the streetcar ridership grew well beyond that drop, indicating the system was attracting more people than just those who would have ridden the bus. Second, according to a June 2011 rider study, 38 percent of occasional and infrequent riders exclusively used the MAX, while only 12 percent exclusively used the bus. Of course, the MAX is not the streetcar, but this fact seems to speak to the attractiveness of rail travel over bus for some transit users..

So that brings us to the ruling. Hales said "streetcars carry more people than buses … you attract more riders who don't ride transit now, and actually the operating costs are not any greater than the bus." Whether these arguments make a persuasive case for the necessity and usefulness of a streetcar system is, of course, up for debate. The statement itself remains factual. While, there’s some missing context, it’s nothing significant. We rate this claim True.

ARTICLE EDITED FOR BREVITY,  SOURCE: http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2012/apr/03/charlie-hales/do-streetcars-really-beat-out-buses-capacity-rider/

QuoteWhy streetcars are better than buses


Streetcars are big in planning circles right now. DC and Arlington have grand plans for them, as do many cities around the US. Every time the subject comes up, however, someone poses the question what makes streetcars better than buses?

It’s a valid question, and it has a series of valid answers. Here are the most important:

Streetcars are more affordable than buses. While it’s true that streetcars require a much larger initial capital investment than buses, that capital cost is offset by significant operational savings year-to year. In the long term, streetcars are more affordable as long as they are used on high ridership routes.

Streetcars have higher passenger capacity than buses (even bendy ones), which means that if there are lots of riders on your route, you can move them with fewer vehicles. Fewer vehicles means more efficient use of fuel and fewer (unionized, pensioned) drivers to pay.

Streetcar vehicles themselves are much more sturdy than buses, and last many decades longer. While buses must generally be retired and replacements purchased about every 10 years, streetcars typically last 40 years or more. For example, Philadelphia’s SEPTA transit system is still using streetcar vehicles built in 1947 (although they have been overhauled once since then).

Streetcars are much more comfortable to ride than buses. One of the big reasons why many Americans don’t like buses is that they are so rumbly. They jerk you up, down, side to side. They’re simply not comfortable. Streetcars glide along a rail much more smoothly, offering a vastly more comfortable ride. Less motion sickness, easier to hang on. This issue isn’t often discussed in transit circles, but it is a really big deal. Passengers gravitate towards the most comfortable ride.

Streetcar routes are easier to understand. In any big city, buses are confusing. There are so many criss-crossing and competing routes that it can be intimidating and difficult to understand. New users are turned off because they don’t want to accidentally get on the wrong bus and end up miles from their real destination. Streetcars, on the other hand, are easier to understand because the cost of constructing tracks inherently limits the size of the system. Instead of an incomprehensible jumble, you get a clean and easy to understand system map. Even if streetcar line names may be a little more complicated than “Red Line”, they’ll be a whole heckuva lot easier to figure out than “P18″.

Streetcars attract more riders than buses. Partially because of the above points, streetcars are always used by more people than buses when all other things are equal. They attract more passengers, which after all is the whole point of public transit.
Streetcars are economic development magnets. The presence of rail transit nearby is one of the best incentives for economic development in the world. Metro stations radically remade large swaths of the DC area, and streetcars can do the same (have done the same, in places like Portland and Toronto). Nobody ever built a condo building or shopping mall because a bus route stops nearby, but developers routinely follow rail investments with real estate ones. Indeed, the additional taxes generated by rail-oriented development can repay the initial capital investment.

Streetcars use electricity rather than gas. Although it depends how the electricity is generated, this potentially makes streetcars much more environmentally friendly than buses. And while it’s true that electric buses exist, they are almost never used in the US, and require the same overhead wires as streetcars.

Streetcars are much quieter than buses. Becuase they run on electricity, streetcars are very quiet vehicles. They are much less disruptive to neighborhood life than buses.

Streetcars are iconic. Trains are graphic symbols for the city in a way that buses simply are not. Every tourist knows about the DC Metro, the New York subway, and the San Francisco cable cars. Their trains are an indispensable part of those city’s brands, and streetcars will be too as soon as they’re running. Nobody ever sent a postcard featuring a picture of a bus.

SOURCE: http://beyonddc.com/log/?p=1733

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SEATTLE STREETCAR

QuoteSeattle: Streetcars are great!
How does riding the streetcar work?

Board at any of the 11 stops shown on the South Lake Union line map.  You can check arrival times on-line or at the station. You can purchase a ticket on the platform before your trip or on-board if you do not have an ORCA card or valid Metro bus transfer.

If you are using a mobility device or a stroller, you can choose to press the blue button marked with a wheelchair symbol to deploy the bridge-plate that bridges the small gap between the streetcar and the platform.

Press the yellow stop request strip to request your stop.  The next stop is announced by audio and shown on a digital message display.

Why streetcars anyway - why not a bus?

Streetcars can carry more riders per trip than a bus, and they tend to attract more riders because of their ease of access and ride quality.  They also help to catalyze and organize economic development.  This makes them a good choice for certain high-density corridors.

What makes them different from light rail?

Streetcars are small light rail vehicles.  They can more easily fit into established urban neighborhoods because of their size, but they do not carry as many people as larger light rail vehicles.  Typically, light rail is built with its own lane, in a tunnel or elevated to provide a faster, more reliable trip.

How many people ride the South Lake Union line?

There were over 700,000 rides in 2011, and ridership is continuing to grow.  During peak summer months, ridership

EDITED FOR RELEVANCE,  SOURCE: http://www.seattlestreetcar.org/faq.htm

QuotePosted by: Tonyinchicago
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

Posted by: Tonyinchicago
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.

Tony, it has been proved over and over throughout the country that streetcars will draw riders where buses will not, in fact streetcar ridership is rising nationally while bus ridership has been declining for decades, moreover, the streetcar ridership gains in some cities have offset the downward ridership trends posted by the buses.

Buses will not, due to their 'highly advertised flexibility,' match rail transit as an economic engine. They also will not draw those 'choice riders,' in significant numbers, no matter how frequent, or tricked out. Most non transit planners believe as you do that first you must get the bus system running well enough to increase ridership, then build streetcars. Alas, this is not true, the streetcar will draw from places those buses will never reach, furthermore, the streetcar becomes an arterial or even a primary circulator that the weaker bus lines can link to.

Quote from: fieldafm on April 29, 2012, 09:23:23 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:17:23 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on April 29, 2012, 09:09:06 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 07:02:02 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 06:54:00 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
Ockalawa has posted some very pretty pictures of streetcars  I could not agree more that mass transit is the answer.  But before you start digging up streets for rail, the existing system that is already in place (buses) will need to show a significant increase in customers.  This is done by transit trackers.  Someone earlier in this lengthy thread stated that other cities that have this system only saw a 10% increase in ridership.  Hard to believe but the study may be factual.  You MUST have a bridge between customer and product in the form of transit trackers in this day and tech age.  I use mass transit every day here in Chicago and the trackers are essential to being at my stop and not freezing my ass off.  I can time my elevator ride down out of my building and arrive 1/2 a block away without any wait. 

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
In as much as this is about Avondale, I can say that the customers of the shops and F&B establishments for the most part will not use this form of transportation to go to Avondale.  But, the employees who mostly live in Rside will.  And that can help reduce the demand on spaces.  In a city like Jax, the buses are few and far between.  Those employees would benefit for knowing when the buses arrive and when they will arrive at work.

I don't know about that.  Places like Mellow and the neighborhood in general appeal to young professionals/transit choice riders.  The same young professionals that Jax has had trouble retaining.  However, regarding MM (and other short term projects), better utilization of existing on and off street parking capacity should suffice.  Fixed transit and modification of existing bus services is something that should be promoted now so that it's incrementally implemented by the end of the decade to help deal with long term issues.

That statement is insane.  Do you really want to ague with me about the problems of parking in Avondale now before any other businesses go in.  The parking situation is a nightmare.  I know first hand of the complaints from the customers and residents.  You know nothing of this.

Ate dinner twice in the Shoppes this week.  Had no problem finding legal parking (I don't expect to park at the front door of a restaurant any less than I expect to park next to the cash registers at Wal Mart).  On a third night at the Shoppes this week, I took the pictures you see in the article depicting inadequate bike parking and completely underutilized parking supply.  I also biked to the Shoppes this morning for breakfast, finding the lone bike rack already full I decided to bike to Bagel Love instead.   

That's about as first hand experience as you need

That's now.  What about 6 months from now with 250 seats proposed and the 125 that was withdrawn across the street and Monty's.  Those will surely be back.  Think forward from here my friends.

I think my thoughts on the matter regarding better parking management in the short term and viable alternative transportation modes in the long term are about thinking further.  What in your opinion is the way to move forward?

Again, it is not incumbent for me to offer solutions to hypothetical situations that do not yet exist.  The parking is saturated and there is no more.  Unless you can figure a way to park on clouds.   There is no more parking left. Period.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:21:34 PM
^I'm actually looking forward to seeing more businesses come in. I can't wait to see a walkable commercial strip blossom that's vibrant day and night that doesn't negatively impact the area's quality of life.

No need to apologize to me.  I'm not hurt and plan on getting a good night's sleep tonight and after MM and the next guy opens.

Dont worry, Im not apologizing to you in any way.   Do you live within 3 block of this area???   Were you at the meeting at Grace church?  Did you listen the all the residents who voiced opposition to this at that meeting?  An issue that impacts their daily lives because they live within three blocks.  Why dont you find out how the neighborhood really feels before YOU form an opinion on an issue that does not affect your daily life.

None of this sideshow diatribe really matters in a zoning case.  I could live on top of the shell station but if the zoning ordinance allows the use I hate, the problem is with public policy.  Lashing out at customers who don't agree with your position and perspective business owners aren't going to get you anywhere.  You're going to have to blow off a lot of unnecessary steam when the places you hate end up getting approved.

I just gave you my first hand parking and biking experiences over the last 6 days.  There is in fact parking right now.  You just asked me a 'hypothetical' about parking in 6 months from now and said we need to think forward.  Maybe I'm not following what you're saying.  Would you mind clarifying?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:35:08 PM

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:21:34 PM
^I'm actually looking forward to seeing more businesses come in. I can't wait to see a walkable commercial strip blossom that's vibrant day and night that doesn't negatively impact the area's quality of life.

No need to apologize to me.  I'm not hurt and plan on getting a good night's sleep tonight and after MM and the next guy opens.

Dont worry, Im not apologizing to you in any way.   Do you live within 3 block of this area???   Were you at the meeting at Grace church?  Did you listen the all the residents who voiced opposition to this at that meeting?  An issue that impacts their daily lives because they live within three blocks.  Why dont you find out how the neighborhood really feels before YOU form an opinion on an issue that does not affect your daily life.

None of this sideshow diatribe really matters in a zoning case.  I could live on top of the shell station but if the zoning ordinance allows the use I hate, the problem is with public policy.  Lashing out at customers who don't agree with your position and perspective business owners aren't going to get you anywhere.  You're going to have to blow off a lot of unnecessary steam when the places you hate end up getting approved.

And there you go folks, the word "hate" has emerged.  Not mine his.  So evidently you do not live within a  3 block area and are not impacted on a daily basis as we are.  I assume you were not at the meeting either.  Enough with you, you are irrational and do not put words in my mouth.

??? Are you okay? 

Hopefully, this isn't what Valentino is having to put up with when he's looking at dropping $1-$2 million on site that has been an eyesore for years.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 29, 2012, 09:18:55 PM
Again, since your not involved, it does not matter.  I will keep you guys posted with the decisions of the relevant partners in this, merchants, property owners, residents, business owners, customers and RAP.  Continue the personal attacks, it does not count for a "hill of beans".

Im only sensitive because you know not of what you speak.  I do. I have lived it , been there.  Sorry

This is absolutely hilarious, TonyinCHICAGO, is lashing out at people that LIVE in the Jacksonville, and have businesses, or family, in the neighborhood. Tony knows nothing of our ownerships, roots or involvement but from Chicago, he's telling everyone that we know nothing about it, as if he does. These assumptions are preposterous.

I'm thinking I should protest something in Chicago, around the block from Tony because I've been there, I've lived it...Sorry but this is too damn funny. Anything we can do to help you out my friend.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:57:03 PM
??? Are you okay? 

Hopefully, this isn't what Valentino is having to put up with when he's looking at dropping $1-$2 million on site that has been an eyesore for years.

Since when  does asking price and all of the assumptions driving such merit justice,reality ?

It has recently dawned on me that the chair I sat in for  haircuts for many years ( diverse community retail need!) has been replaced by the Towne Bar.

Casablanca sold out for a ton of $.
which = overhead for subsequent business plan,buyers,tenants.

only a certain 'business plan' ,assumptions could meet  escalting overhead, which apparently calls for 'franchise' and vastly expanded seating.

Seating = Parking.      ( Bicycle racks a ruse....reminds me of " Conservation/  wetland belt undeveloped lands during Beltway proceedings)

Ortega Boatyard/ Landing just down the street  is ready example of were this may go.
COJ Planning Department Parking element was an acknowledged joke.
The whle thing exploded, origional purchase price paid by speculators,which forced more reasonable ( in fact local, such as Bronson Lamb III ) buyers to stand back, was finally absorbed through bank foreclosure during the past months. Something on the order of 15 Million negative.

Y'all know that one of the first symptoms of a nervous breakdown if a belief that ones work is terribly important. I guess that winners never quit, but those that never win and never quit are idiots. And those people are alive just because it's illegal to kill them.

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 10:28:37 PM
Yeah this is hilarious. 

like that word Hilarious
Glad to see it so commonly employed

Certainly the residents of Riverside should have known it was an urban core neighborhood when they moved there. If they want suburban style parking we have all the Oakleafs, Julington Creeks and Nocatees a sprawlville parker could dream of.  I lived in Riverside a few times, own a buisness in Murry Hill and basically am around often, I haven't ever had to park more than 2 or 3 blocks away while visiting the shoppes is the parking there really worth talking about.  Quiet gated communities abound in Jax metro Riverside is not and hasn't been one of them. 

Quote from: Know Growth on April 29, 2012, 11:09:05 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:57:03 PM
??? Are you okay? 

Hopefully, this isn't what Valentino is having to put up with when he's looking at dropping $1-$2 million on site that has been an eyesore for years.

Since when  does asking price and all of the assumptions driving such merit justice,reality ?

It has recently dawned on me that the chair I sat in for  haircuts for many years ( diverse community retail need!) has been replaced by the Towne Bar.

Casablanca sold out for a ton of $.
which = overhead for subsequent business plan,buyers,tenants.

only a certain 'business plan' ,assumptions could meet  escalting overhead, which apparently calls for 'franchise' and vastly expanded seating.

Seating = Parking.      ( Bicycle racks a ruse....reminds me of " Conservation/  wetland belt undeveloped lands during Beltway proceedings)

Ortega Boatyard/ Landing just down the street  is ready example of were this may go.
COJ Planning Department Parking element was an acknowledged joke.
The whle thing exploded, origional purchase price paid by speculators,which forced more reasonable ( in fact local, such as Bronson Lamb III ) buyers to stand back, was finally absorbed through bank foreclosure during the past months. Something on the order of 15 Million negative.

The better question would be, why crucify perspective business owners who also live in the neighborhood for things that are beyond the extents of their projects and zoning applications?  If there is a problem with the zoning overlay, then why not address it?

QuoteIt has recently dawned on me that the chair I sat in for  haircuts for many years ( diverse community retail need!) has been replaced by the Towne Bar.

Retailers change over time as people retire, die, or move on to other things.  Btw, new chairs have opened up at the new barbershop at the intersection of St Johns and Talbot.

Quote from: JeffreyS on April 29, 2012, 11:31:45 PM
Certainly the residents of Riverside should have known it was an urban core neighborhood when they moved there. If they want suburban style parking we have all the Oakleafs, Julington Creeks and Nocatees a sprawlville parker could dream of.  I lived in Riverside a few times, own a buisness in Murry Hill and basically am around often, I haven't ever had to park more than 2 or 3 blocks away while visiting the shoppes is the parking there really worth talking about.  Quiet gated communities abound in Jax metro Riverside is not and hasn't been one of them.

.....and "Avondale" ?

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 11:40:24 PM

Quote from: Know Growth on April 29, 2012, 11:09:05 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 29, 2012, 09:57:03 PM
??? Are you okay? 

Hopefully, this isn't what Valentino is having to put up with when he's looking at dropping $1-$2 million on site that has

The better question would be, why crucify perspective business owners who also live in the neighborhood for things that are beyond the extents of their projects and zoning applications?  If there is a problem with the zoning overlay, then why not address it?

what does living in the neighborhood have anything to do with it??
Reinhold lives in the Beltway neighborhood..... A point that empowered the Beltway Boosters.

How low energy most of this is.


Retailers change over time as people retire, die, or move on to other things.  Btw, new chairs have opened up at the new barbershop at the intersection of St Johns and Talbot.

Quote from: Know Growth on April 29, 2012, 11:41:48 PM

Quote from: JeffreyS on April 29, 2012, 11:31:45 PM
Certainly the residents of Riverside should have known it was an urban core neighborhood when they moved there. If they want suburban style parking we have all the Oakleafs, Julington Creeks and Nocatees a sprawlville parker could dream of.  I lived in Riverside a few times, own a buisness in Murry Hill and basically am around often, I haven't ever had to park more than 2 or 3 blocks away while visiting the shoppes is the parking there really worth talking about.  Quiet gated communities abound in Jax metro Riverside is not and hasn't been one of them.

.....and "Avondale" ?

Is a pocket of Riverside that is a bit more vibrant than riverside as a whole.

Know Growth, I'm puzzled by your comment.  My simple question is what is the big deal about a new business opening up in an existing retail space that has been commercial use since 1922, especially if the use is allowed by the overlay most in the community support? 

It be one thing if we were talking about commercial intrusion into an existing single family residential area but this isn't the case.  I also don't know what the Outer Beltway has to do with this either?

QuoteHopefully, this isn't what Valentino is having to put up with when he's looking at dropping $1-$2 million on site that has been an eyesore for years.

The meeting at the Gracer's church was quite entertaining from what several RAP board members told me. Most of the grumpy-guses were folks opposed to change. It breeds fear and that was on display at the meeting.

The difference between the way John approached his situation and that of Steve's is that John approached RAP and Love and parties before announcing, Steve went head on like a bull in a china shop. Right or wrong, they have their advantages and weaknesses.

Quote from: stephendare on April 30, 2012, 11:13:40 AM
...pedantic and boring...

I highly doubt you were, but if you were referencing 'Family Guy', it's "shallow and pedantic".   ;)

Mtrain, I respectfully disagree with your characterization of how we approached our development.  We worked with the city, RAP and Jim Love for months before our project ever became public.  We also participated in a meeting very similar to the one at grace church way back at the beginning.  We approached RAP so early in the process, in fact, that we only had  the floor plans for the ground level finished.  I'm sure that even though not everyone agreed with our plans, Jim, Carmen, Kay and Laura will agree that "a bull in a china shop" couldn't be further from the truth.   

Quote from: stephendare on April 30, 2012, 11:35:59 AM

...one of my favorite words, right up there with 'lugubrious' ---that one only gets to use every now and then.

Now that, my friend, is a word! Not the cheeriest word in the English language considering the meaning, but a great word, none-the-less.

My attorney has sent me a copy of an application for an "exception" that the City Planning Commission is considering.  Some group wants to put a bar/resturant where the clock shop used to be.  Based on the diagram in the application it appears to seat 106 people, mostly on the outside patio. 

We don't believe that the application supports approval because it does not meet the requirements for "exception" based on parking and saftey concerns.

If you consider the parking problem we already have, plus the proposed Mellow Musroom and the West End Cantina which will eventually re-open as some type of restaurant, it will get much worse.

Is the clock shop a contributing building?  If so, what do they need an exception for (I assume serving alcohol or something?)?

If it is not a contributing building, what can the building ever be used for that would not require parking since it is pretty much boxed in?

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 30, 2012, 12:20:44 PM
My attorney has sent me a copy of an application for an "exception" that the City Planning Commission is considering.  Some group wants to put a bar/resturant where the clock shop used to be.  Based on the diagram in the application it appears to seat 106 people, mostly on the outside patio. 

We don't believe that the application supports approval because it does not meet the requirements for "exception" based on parking and saftey concerns.

If you consider the parking problem we already have, plus the proposed Mellow Musroom and the West End Cantina which will eventually re-open as some type of restaurant, it will get much worse.

I don't consider parking a problem right now.  This Friday night Boone Park had plenty of spots open, plenty of spaces on the mile between the shops and St Vincent's.  Riverside and Oak a mere 1 - 2 blocks off St Johns had open parking from Boone Park to Talbot.  Likely a few spaces near Edible Arrangements.  So where was the problem?

When/If it becomes a problem patrons will have to decide if they want to park 2+ blocks away to walk or not go to these restaurants.  What needs to happen is for people to get it in their heads that there is no Constitutional right to park right in front of the shop/restaurant you want to go to.  A little walking won't hurt you and if you live within walking distance then walk.

Also, please pass along these plans.  Would love to see what the future may hold.

Application # E.12-20

Quote from: thelakelander on April 30, 2012, 12:28:53 PM
Is the clock shop a contributing building?  If so, what do they need an exception for (I assume serving alcohol or something?)?

If it is not a contributing building, what can the building ever be used for that would not require parking since it is pretty much boxed in?

A Parking lot   ;)

Quote from: Gonzo on April 30, 2012, 12:17:16 PM

Quote from: stephendare on April 30, 2012, 11:35:59 AM

...one of my favorite words, right up there with 'lugubrious' ---that one only gets to use every now and then.

Now that, my friend, is a word! Not the cheeriest word in the English language considering the meaning, but a great word, none-the-less.

This whole thread has devolved in a classic case of schadenfreude.  ;)

Quote from: thehill on April 30, 2012, 12:45:27 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on April 30, 2012, 12:28:53 PM
Is the clock shop a contributing building?  If so, what do they need an exception for (I assume serving alcohol or something?)?

If it is not a contributing building, what can the building ever be used for that would not require parking since it is pretty much boxed in?

A Parking lot   ;)

Lol, so in other words, it will remain vacant because demolishing a small building for a couple of privately owned parking spaces is not economically feasible.  I'd be pretty pissed if I owned and paid taxes on a structurally sound property that was pretty much unusable due to a change in general zoning regulations.

Quoteome group wants to put a bar/resturant where the clock shop used to be.  Based on the diagram in the application it appears to seat 106 people, mostly on the outside patio. 

Perfect location for Taco Lu. Same with Monty's. The area needs a great place like the Lu.

Quote from: mtraininjax on April 30, 2012, 01:34:09 PM

Quoteome group wants to put a bar/resturant where the clock shop used to be.  Based on the diagram in the application it appears to seat 106 people, mostly on the outside patio. 

Perfect location for Taco Lu. Same with Monty's. The area needs a great place like the Lu.

Montys is a non-contributing structure built in the 60's.  Would have to dig to see if they have any existing parking waivers applied. 

Quote from: stephendare on April 30, 2012, 11:13:40 AM
There is only one alternative to this kind of sprawl, and that is densification of the municipal lands that have already been developed and returning to walk able, dense communities.

ah, but that is not true sir.....folks like north miami (know growth) have another option in mind.....close the borders and stop all growth!

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 12:53:09 PM

Quote from: Gonzo on April 30, 2012, 12:17:16 PM

Quote from: stephendare on April 30, 2012, 11:35:59 AM

...one of my favorite words, right up there with 'lugubrious' ---that one only gets to use every now and then.

Now that, my friend, is a word! Not the cheeriest word in the English language considering the meaning, but a great word, none-the-less.

This whole thread has devolved in a classic case of schadenfreude.  ;)

Why, yes it has.

Quote from: Tonyinchicago on April 30, 2012, 12:41:29 PM
Application # E.12-20

That isn't a separate proposal.  That's the application for MM. 

Edit: Tonyinchicago is correct in that this was a different proposal than MM.  It was for a beer garden. However, it was withdrawn because the building was non-contributing and off-street parking at that site wasn't possible.  It appears that building my be sitting underutilized for a while.

god i love this thread

Quote from: ben says on April 30, 2012, 02:56:46 PM
god i love this thread

This...
(http://i.imgur.com/fOeCY.gif)

And this...
(http://i.imgur.com/yLHRE.gif)

And mostly this...
(http://i.imgur.com/ioGaK.gif)

I just can't understand how area residents couldn't be happy with more dining options. It's mind-boggling.

^ Best post I've seen in a LONG time.

Yeah, the whole thing is mind boggling to me, too. I've said it once but I think it's worth saying again: I don't care if every single spot in Avondale is a restaurant. Restaurants are a sign of vitality, of people enjoying life, going out, living a little. Let Avondale be a little bit of foodie heaven in Jacksonville. Fine by me. Furthermore, re: parking. I live right by there. I've lived in cities. I've lived in places where you literally need to put signs in your driveway that read, "No parking or I'll shoot you." I'm FINE with that, too. The fact people are cramming into your neighborhood is a GOOD THING people!!! Let them come in droves. So you park a few blocks away one day...let's not cry over spilt milk...you live in a neighborhood cool enough where parking is even an issue! Congrats. Worst case scenario: you walk a little more. God forbid.

Quote from: outofhere on April 29, 2012, 12:16:09 PM
No neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets. Nor should they be expected to have the fabric of their neighborhoods torn apart. 

I’m sorry, I just read this and I can’t ignore it.

What world do you inhabit? I seriously want to know in what reality has this ever happened as a result of someone opening a Mellow Mushroom. What’s next? Someone tries to open a coffee shop and suddenly there’s drive by shootings?  Maybe a new sushi restaurant will cause a nuclear meltdown.

QuoteNo neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets.

Go back and find the threads on Mojo #4 coming to Avondale, the naysayers said the same thing then. We seem to have somehow survived.

My lawn could use some more fertilizer, come to think of it. I miss the burning of rubber at 3 AM. Bring back my Bestside!

Quote from: mtraininjax on April 30, 2012, 03:54:36 PM

QuoteNo neighborhood should be asked to absorb drunks peeing, passing out or throwing up in their yards or driving down their streets.

Go back and find the threads on Mojo #4 coming to Avondale, the naysayers said the same thing then. We seem to have somehow survived.

My lawn could use some more fertilizer, come to think of it. I miss the burning of rubber at 3 AM. Bring back my Bestside!

Not a bad idea. 

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=9556.0

Seems like the same arguments being made.  Was there a thread opened up when Biscottis expanded into the other storefront?

That's just fear talking and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

BTW,
These are actual Mellow Mushroom customers.  These are the people coming to pee on lawns and throw beer cans everywhere(nevertheless you can't leave a restaurant in town with beer anyway)


(http://www.bsbisynagogue.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/mellow-mushroom-kosher.jpg)

(http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4077/4875747902_1f0a6b9016_z.jpg)

(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-E9E0U_6KNwQ/TpX963Htj6I/AAAAAAAAGhE/H7LvZz6nt_Q/blogger-image--1646090038.jpg)

(http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4074/4875742720_a45a4351f8_z.jpg)

Just look at those eyes... they have the look of evil in them.

QuoteJust look at those eyes... they have the look of evil in them.

Yes, these folks will certainly stand out from the rest of the Avondale MM patrons, come one, come all.

Yeah, this thread proves that if your not intolerant, fanatical, and incredibly ignorant, your probably trying too hard to be accepted in Avondale. Being the ancient one here, I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!" If that wasn't bad enough, we repeated the performance when Anheuser Busch purchased extra real estate in the north side, sometime about a stupid "Gardens," concept...

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
Yeah, this thread proves that if your not intolerant, fanatical, and incredibly ignorant, your probably trying too hard to be accepted in Avondale. Being the ancient one here, I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!" If that wasn't bad enough, we repeated the performance when Anheuser Busch purchased extra real estate in the north side, sometime about a stupid "Gardens," concept...

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

Quote from: Tacachale on April 30, 2012, 05:07:04 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
Yeah, this thread proves that if your not intolerant, fanatical, and incredibly ignorant, your probably trying too hard to be accepted in Avondale. Being the ancient one here, I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!" If that wasn't bad enough, we repeated the performance when Anheuser Busch purchased extra real estate in the north side, sometime about a stupid "Gardens," concept...

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

There was a great deal of excitement when Disney hit Florida, and rumors were rife about dozens of locations. I don't think we'll ever really know what might have been. But I'm comfortably certain, had Ed Ball met with him on behalf of Jacksonville, Disney World would probably be somewhere south or west of town. At that time Baker, Clay, Nassau and St. Johns and huge swaths of Duval were barely populated. It would have been an easy sell, as Jacksonville had more transportation infrastructure then any other city in the state.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 10:21:01 PM

Quote from: Tacachale on April 30, 2012, 05:07:04 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
Yeah, this thread proves that if your not intolerant, fanatical, and incredibly ignorant, your probably trying too hard to be accepted in Avondale. Being the ancient one here, I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!" If that wasn't bad enough, we repeated the performance when Anheuser Busch purchased extra real estate in the north side, sometime about a stupid "Gardens," concept...

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

There was a great deal of excitement when Disney hit Florida, and rumors were rife about dozens of locations. I don't think we'll ever really know what might have been. But I'm comfortably certain, had Ed Ball met with him on behalf of Jacksonville, Disney World would probably be somewhere south or west of town. At that time Baker, Clay, Nassau and St. Johns and huge swaths of Duval were barely populated. It would have been an easy sell, as Jacksonville had more transportation infrastructure then any other city in the state.

Well, we should know better by the end of this year, when the Harrison Price archives at UCF become available for viewing, but there's just no way Disney would ever have chosen Jacksonville, if he ever even considered it (which I doubt). We had two major things that would have turned Disney off - a lot of people, and the coast. From early on he wanted to avoid the coast due to its limitations on development and probable competition from the beaches. And he wanted to avoid large cities because he wasn't just trying to build a park - he was trying to build an "Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow" of his own. It is known that Disney scouted Palm Beach County, but ultimately rejected it for those very reasons - too many people, too close to the coast. Orange County, on the other hand, was sparsely populated, centrally located, and well connected by burgeoning highways.

If Disney did ever try to meet with Ed Ball at St. Joe (which may or may not actually have happened), it would have been to discuss land in a rural area, presumably in the Panhandle. It seems unlikely that that would have come together either, due to the lack of road access.

Besides that, there are myriad reasons not to want Disney World in or near your city. Umberto Eco's "Travels in Hyperreality" contains many. Practically speaking, Disney World has totally dictated the way the Orlando area has developed since, such as it is, and due to the way it was allowed to dictate its own pattern of development, it's debatable whether it will ever make up for the titanic costs of its growth.

Sorry to get so off topic...

The proposed Mellow Mushroom development does not meet current legal requirements for parking.  It was the developer's choice to design the project knowing that he would not meet the required parking; he could reduce the scope of the project and we wouldn't be having any further discussion.   

The historic district zoning is EXTREMELY GENEROUS to restaurants who wish to come to the neighborhood, requiring between 50% and up to 100% fewer required parking spaces. 

The neighborhood would welcome a streetcar but that's many, many years in the future as is any decent public transport, so the parking issue must be considered with the current reality.

This same issue was the cause of Kickback's problems; planning on development that does not meet legal requirements and expecting the neighborhood to solve the problem.    Plan it but do it legally.   

It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

The theory espoused on this board is that by ramping up commercial development  and choking the community the powers that be will suddenly be enlightened and a streetcar will appear on the streets of RA. HAH!

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

Those of us who actually live in the RA community support the Shoppes---we walk there to buy gifts, eat, get a mani-pedi, buy wine, etc. It is part of the fabric of our everyday life. So is being able to let our kids ride their bikes in the streets, walk our dogs, and enjoy the economic investment (our homes) we have made in our community.

Quote from: tayana42 on May 01, 2012, 12:49:09 AM
The proposed Mellow Mushroom development does not meet current legal requirements for parking.  It was the developer's choice to design the project knowing that he would not meet the required parking; he could reduce the scope of the project and we wouldn't be having any further discussion.   

The historic district zoning is EXTREMELY GENEROUS to restaurants who wish to come to the neighborhood, requiring between 50% and up to 100% fewer required parking spaces. 

The neighborhood would welcome a streetcar but that's many, many years in the future as is any decent public transport, so the parking issue must be considered with the current reality.

This same issue was the cause of Kickback's problems; planning on development that does not meet legal requirements and expecting the neighborhood to solve the problem.    Plan it but do it legally.

How many parking stalls do you think MM needs above the 15 they are providing?

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

The theory espoused on this board is that by ramping up commercial development  and choking the community the powers that be will suddenly be enlightened and a streetcar will appear on the streets of RA. HAH!

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

Those of us who actually live in the RA community support the Shoppes---we walk there to buy gifts, eat, get a mani-pedi, buy wine, etc. It is part of the fabric of our everyday life. So is being able to let our kids ride their bikes in the streets, walk our dogs, and enjoy the economic investment (our homes) we have made in our community.

The poster who said they wanted a restaurant row lives in Avondale.  He's one of your neighbors that disagrees.  What makes your opinion more valuable than his?  Nevertheless, opinions don't matter when it comes to zoning.  The overlay allows the use.

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

The theory espoused on this board is that by ramping up commercial development  and choking the community the powers that be will suddenly be enlightened and a streetcar will appear on the streets of RA. HAH!

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

Those of us who actually live in the RA community support the Shoppes---we walk there to buy gifts, eat, get a mani-pedi, buy wine, etc. It is part of the fabric of our everyday life. So is being able to let our kids ride their bikes in the streets, walk our dogs, and enjoy the economic investment (our homes) we have made in our community.

Just to be clear the author of the article does not live in a gated community off 9A(nor does the owner of the restaurant in question). 

Please answer this question, would demolition or abandoned blight be a better option than the preservation of a building through a unique adaptive reuse, net new parking, a public square and the only sufficient bike parking facilities in the neighborhood?

Lakelander, Outofhere's opinion counts for more because it is the view of an overwhelming majority of us nearby residents.

NOTE TO OUTOFHERE: This Saturday night, park your car in front of Councilman Jim Love's home at the corner of Edgewood and Oak. Around 2 a.m. go get it and be sure to make a lot of noise doing so. You might even leave a beer bottle or can as a calling card.

Seems like a huge amount of parking would be created if a satellite parking lot (FSCJ or St.Vincents) for employees was set up with a shuttle to and from the shops.

Although none of this matters when community supported zoning allows the use, in your opinion, what's the for and against count, as well as the count's boundary limits?

QuoteOutofhere's opinion counts for more because it is the view of an overwhelming majority of us nearby residents.

And how do you know this as fact?

QuoteAnd those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

This happy hour keeps getting brought up.  Monty's has a happy hour that lasts from something like 11am until 7pm everyday where beers are $1.  That's quite a long time to suck down $1 beers but no one complains about that.  Other restaurants in the area have happy hour as well.

Well Avondalers need somewhere else to go for pizza since Moon River keeps kicking them out. Moon River post...defend yourself!!

I hear there will be retail space at the proposed 220 Riverside project, why not just have MM move there. If Avondale doesn't want it, then I am sure there are others that would welcome it!

Quote from: Tacachale on April 30, 2012, 05:07:04 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!"

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

I heard differently.  I was told that the cruise business was always a part of Walt Disney's business plan and that he wanted to be able to easily transport his guests from his parks and resorts to the cruise ships.  That made Jacksonville a better option than Orlando.  He supposedly sent teams to both Jacksonville and Kissimmee/Orlando to scout out properties.  He personally was pulling for Jax, but Orlando turned out to be the more viable option.

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

Deal.  I'll head to the location at the beach with my trusty camera and recorder to get some pictures and quotes from those late night heathens.  I'm sure they'll provide great soundbites of wanting to pee in your lawn and trash your house.  I'll also get a quote or two from the staff if I can.

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

The author of the thread lives less than a half mile from the shoppes, which I imagine is closer than many of those opposed to MM.  He is constantly involved in projects and events to help benefit the neighborhood and build its notoriety.  As for my credentials, I live less than a quarter mile from the shoppes on Herschel and I am a big supporter and close friend of many business owners in the area.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on May 01, 2012, 07:51:26 AM
Lakelander, Outofhere's opinion counts for more because it is the view of an overwhelming majority of us nearby residents.

NOTE TO OUTOFHERE: This Saturday night, park your car in front of Councilman Jim Love's home at the corner of Edgewood and Oak. Around 2 a.m. go get it and be sure to make a lot of noise doing so. You might even leave a beer bottle or can as a calling card.

I love the comment about the beer bottles and cans!!  What establishment in the Shoppes allows people to carry alcohol out? 

The only one I can think of is Monty's who has been there 40 years with little fanfare.

The fear mongering is laughable. 

I assume most who are against the expansion of commerce in the shoppes probably don't even patronize the restaurants in their neighborhood, they just drive their cars to the "Club"  for dinner and bemoan what has become of Avondale.

Quote from: fsujax on May 01, 2012, 09:15:57 AM
I hear there will be retail space at the proposed 220 Riverside project, why not just have MM move there. If Avondale doesn't want it, then I am sure there are others that would welcome it!

Those guys know their market.  This may be a case of the squeaky wheel making noise moreso than a community at large.   The same things were said about MoJo and they seem to be doing fine....validating the squeaky wheel comment.  With that being said, they want to do a unique adaptive reuse project.  That shell station and the commercial strip is as good as any.  Unless they are asking for some excessive exception that's not within the intent of the zoning overlay, they'll be fine in the long run.

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

The theory espoused on this board is that by ramping up commercial development  and choking the community the powers that be will suddenly be enlightened and a streetcar will appear on the streets of RA. HAH!

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

Those of us who actually live in the RA community support the Shoppes---we walk there to buy gifts, eat, get a mani-pedi, buy wine, etc. It is part of the fabric of our everyday life. So is being able to let our kids ride their bikes in the streets, walk our dogs, and enjoy the economic investment (our homes) we have made in our community.

If Avondale only had gates and an HOA it would be utopia!

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
It must be wonderful to opine (from the comforts of your gated complex off 9A) what what RA neighbors should accept in THEIR community.

And those pics from MM. Yeah, post something from the 10 pm to 2 am happy hour crowd and I'll be impressed.

People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

The theory espoused on this board is that by ramping up commercial development  and choking the community the powers that be will suddenly be enlightened and a streetcar will appear on the streets of RA. HAH!

One poster even suggested that it would be okay if the Shoppes was nothing more than a restaurant row. You know, a destination for those folks in gated communities who don't want to be bothered with noise, litter, etc in their communities.

Those of us who actually live in the RA community support the Shoppes---we walk there to buy gifts, eat, get a mani-pedi, buy wine, etc. It is part of the fabric of our everyday life. So is being able to let our kids ride their bikes in the streets, walk our dogs, and enjoy the economic investment (our homes) we have made in our community.

I love this comment because it reduces the entire debate to "true" Riverside-Avondale residents who oppose this restaurant and love parking, and evil 9A apartment dwellers who support Mellow Mushroom and freakin' hate parking. There can be no other types of people in the world.

^I think you have hit on something which is characteristic of most comments in this thread with a few notable exceptions - arguments reduced to terminology delivered with sledgehammer effectiveness and scorn. Not very persuasive.

I wish there was a website that covered Jacksonville without descending so quickly into personal attacks. 

At least there are one or two facebook pages that cover bicycle and pedestrian issues.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on May 01, 2012, 07:51:26 AM
Lakelander, Outofhere's opinion counts for more because it is the view of an overwhelming majority of us nearby residents.

NOTE TO OUTOFHERE: This Saturday night, park your car in front of Councilman Jim Love's home at the corner of Edgewood and Oak. Around 2 a.m. go get it and be sure to make a lot of noise doing so. You might even leave a beer bottle or can as a calling card.

You guys are seriously nuts.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on May 01, 2012, 07:51:26 AM
Lakelander, Outofhere's opinion counts for more because it is the view of an overwhelming majority of us nearby residents.

NOTE TO OUTOFHERE: This Saturday night, park your car in front of Councilman Jim Love's home at the corner of Edgewood and Oak. Around 2 a.m. go get it and be sure to make a lot of noise doing so. You might even leave a beer bottle or can as a calling card.

This is a joke...............right?

Quote from: fsujax on May 01, 2012, 09:15:57 AM
I hear there will be retail space at the proposed 220 Riverside project, why not just have MM move there. If Avondale doesn't want it, then I am sure there are others that would welcome it!

The city has guidelines in place that would support a good-sized restaurant in Avondale.  If MM wants to go beyond what those guidelines would support, then MM should seek an alternate location.

This thread is fun This thread is starting to scare me....I cannot believe the dissent from a f'ing restaurant trying to open up. INSANNNNNNE.

Dashing Dan, what is the max seating size that MM can go into that space without going beyond the guidelines, in your opinion?  Also, what formula are you using to determine maximum seating size for the two buildings involved?

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

Funny, I live on Hedrick and have not heard any of my neighbors from Pine state that there was an "explosion" of problems.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 11:09:13 AM
Dashing Dan, what is the max seating size that MM can go into that space without going beyond the guidelines, in your opinion.  Also, what formula are you using to determine maximum seating size for the two buildings involved?

At this point my opinion is irrelevant.  Those type questions should be addressed by the applicant and then presented to the city for review, with input from affected stakeholders.

Quote from: Kaiser Soze on May 01, 2012, 11:12:09 AM

Quote from: outofhere on May 01, 2012, 06:13:22 AM
People who live on Pine (directly behind the Shoppes) will tell you that problems exploded after Mojos arrived. But once again that must seem like silly talk to people who live in suburban communities with HOAs.

Funny, I live on Hedrick and have not heard any of my neighbors from Pine state that there was an "explosion" of problems.

Same experience here.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 11:15:10 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 11:09:13 AM
Dashing Dan, what is the max seating size that MM can go into that space without going beyond the guidelines, in your opinion.  Also, what formula are you using to determine maximum seating size for the two buildings involved?

At this point my opinion is irrelevant.  Those type questions should be addressed by the applicant and then presented to the city for review, with input from affected stakeholders.

What is the factual maximum number then?  I also assume if they meet these requirements then the opposition goes away?

Let's take some arguments from both sides that are untrue and/or silly and just remove them from this debate altogether so that we are not distracted:
1.) The people that are for Mellow coming into Avondale are local-resident-hating, poor, uncultured, lawn-peeing beer-smashers that want to see Avondale torn asunder by the combined powers of automobile traffic and chain dining.
2.) The people that are against Mellow coming into Avondale are uptight, old-money-having, progress-hating lost Ortegans that hate pizza, alcohol, and fixed transit.

Visitors from outside the neighborhood: Do you have difficulty finding parking? Do you ever park in front of residences? How often?

For the people that live in the immediate vicinity, do you have a lot of people parking in front of your home? How often? Are they disruptive? How close do you live to the strip? Do you have trouble parking your own car?

For those who are claiming trash in their yard in the morning, where do you live? How do you determine the source of the trash? If you do know the source of the trash, is Mellow Mushroom a reasonable comparison? I will occasionally have a bottle/can/cup or some other random trash in my yard (once a week let's say). I live in Riverside 2 blocks from Park/King. No one parks anywhere near my house, except during Luminaria. I don't believe I can blame this random trash on any bar. I think its just a random, inconsiderate walker or driver. What is the possibility that yours is due to the presence of the bar?

In my opinion, I do not believe I would have trash problems if a Mellow Mushroom were build on the corner nearest my home. I also don't think Mellow upsets the character of the neighborhood. If I had to pick a "chain" capable of moving in and adapting to the neighborhood, Mellow would be at the top of my list. There is a pic of the Mellow in Asheville, NC below. Its beautiful. Parking I can see as more of a legitimate concern. There certainly is the potential for more users of the Shoppes. The question is, is car congestion a good enough reason to restrict a business that appears to have good intentions and a good plan from investing in the neighborhood? As lake and Ock keep saying, isn't finding a better way to work these people into the neighborhood a more elegant solution than simply restricting the number of cars?

And as I said before, I don't think there IS a parking problem at this time, as I still drive to the Shoppes, never have a problem parking (have never parked off St Johns or the first block of Ingleside), and could easily get there without my car.

I don't believe more off-street parking is any kind of solution for my neighborhood, which I also don't think is commercially developed to its full potential. Some tracks with high-capacity, energy efficient "cars" on them might be the solution to all the problems here, however.

(http://www.mellowmushroom.com/public/img/stores/asheville/image1.jpg)

I am always picking up trash out of the front yard, sidewalk and street and I dont even live in Avondale.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on May 01, 2012, 11:26:57 AM

Visitors from outside the neighborhood: Do you have difficulty finding parking? Do you ever park in front of residences? How often?


For the people that live in the immediate vicinity, do you have a lot of people parking in front of your home? How often? Are they disruptive? How close do you live to the strip? Do you have trouble parking your own car?

When I lived in San Marco, never had a problem coming to Avondale. Never had a problem coming to Avondale even when I was in high school at Bolles and only have an hour to get there, park, get back. Now, I live in the immediate vicinity. No problems with trash, disruption, or parking.

I have no difficulty finding parking I visit the are perhaps once a week during the day once a month at night. I sometimes park on the street in front of resident's houses maybe once a quarter. Not on the grass or blocking their driveway. BTW I do not urinate on anyone's property either.

I will be lazy and copy / paste what I said in 2 other posts in this thread:

First Post:

I live on Riverside near Boone Park.  Have never had an issue with trash or cans on my street other than big events like XMas in Avondale and that was one can left on the curb.  In fact, the worst thing about parking on my section of the block is that a few neighbors have more cars than legal drivers and they don't have driveways.

Second Post:

This Friday night Boone Park had plenty of spots open, plenty of spaces on the mile between the shops and St Vincent's.  Riverside and Oak a mere 1 - 2 blocks off St Johns had open parking from Boone Park to Talbot.  Likely, a few spaces near Edible Arrangements.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on May 01, 2012, 11:26:57 AM
Visitors from outside the neighborhood: Do you have difficulty finding parking?

Never. I’ve frequented Biscotti’s, Casbah, The Brick, and Monty’s on many occasions throughout the last 8 years and have never had a problem. Also I have never walked out of any of these establishments and left a beer bottle or can anywhere.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on May 01, 2012, 11:26:57 AM
Do you ever park in front of residences? How often?

Yes. Probably 20% of the time. Now someone will say that once MM opens this will increase. This could really be a different debate altogether, but from what I’ve seen, if you go to a historic district in any major city you’ll find many of the neighborhood streets lined with parked cars. It’s incredibly common, and as long as you’re not blocking a drive way or fire hydrant, perfectly legal.

I don't live in Avondale.  I've never had to park more than one block away from my desired destination.  Call me weird, but I've also purposely parked on one end to walk the entire strip just for entertainment and window shopping.  As a customer, parking is a non issue for me.  If you want to really see a parking problem, try finding a space in some of Washington DC's neighborhoods.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 12:08:23 PM
I don't live in Avondale.  I've never had to park more than one block away from my desired destination.  Call me weird, but I've also purposely parked on one end to walk the entire strip just for entertainment and window shopping.  As a customer, parking is a none issue for me.  If you want to really see a parking problem, try finding a space in some of Washington DC's neighborhoods.

+1.

Tried to park in Georgetown a few months back. Took an hour, 20 dollars, and a fat headache. Parking woes aside, nobody is bitching that Georgetown has changed in its flavor, appeal, or integrity.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 11:24:24 AM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 11:15:10 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 11:09:13 AM
Dashing Dan, what is the max seating size that MM can go into that space without going beyond the guidelines, in your opinion.  Also, what formula are you using to determine maximum seating size for the two buildings involved?

At this point my opinion is irrelevant.  Those type questions should be addressed by the applicant and then presented to the city for review, with input from affected stakeholders.

What is the factual maximum number then?  I also assume if they meet these requirements then the opposition goes away?

At that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 12:08:23 PM
Call me weird, but I've also purposely parked on one end to walk the entire strip just for entertainment and window shopping. 

So weird.  Why would you want to walk a pedestrian friendly commercial area?  Craziness.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 12:33:27 PM
At that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

Cool.

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective.  If you go so far as to have a public meeting to be transparent and open about the options available.. why be so uncommitted when asked to define what the number actually is?


Seems to me, the truth about the situation is the thing that would scare people the most... not this nonsensical smear campaign of racous panty raids coming to invade the neighborhood.

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 12:08:23 PM
I don't live in Avondale.  I've never had to park more than one block away from my desired destination.  Call me weird, but I've also purposely parked on one end to walk the entire strip just for entertainment and window shopping.  As a customer, parking is a non issue for me.  If you want to really see a parking problem, try finding a space in some of Washington DC's neighborhoods.

In DC I use the Metro and parking is always easy. Perhaps Riverside should put in streetcars.

In the past two weeks I have driven to the following Riveside locations and parked without issue:

Biscottis - Parked directly across the street on St Johns
Ooh La La Nail - Parked in front of Mojo's on St Johns
Tapas That - Parked at Lomax and Oak
Bark - Parked in front of Hawthorne Salon
Alpha Dog - On Park directly across the street

These were all at different times of the day, weekends and weekdays. There was no hassle parking at any of these places despite the "parking problems" that plague Riverside.

Quote from: Lucasjj on May 01, 2012, 01:08:13 PM
In the past two weeks I have driven to the following Riveside locations and parked without issue:

Biscottis - Parked directly across the street on St Johns
Ooh La La Nail - Parked in front of Mojo's on St Johns
Tapas That - Parked at Lomax and Oak
Bark - Parked in front of Hawthorne Salon
Alpha Dog - On Park directly across the street

These were all at different times of the day, weekends and weekdays. There was no hassle parking at any of these places despite the "parking problems" that plague Riverside.

Why aren't you walking or biking?   :)

Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 01, 2012, 09:30:17 AM

Quote from: Tacachale on April 30, 2012, 05:07:04 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!"

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

I heard differently.  I was told that the cruise business was always a part of Walt Disney's business plan and that he wanted to be able to easily transport his guests from his parks and resorts to the cruise ships.  That made Jacksonville a better option than Orlando.  He supposedly sent teams to both Jacksonville and Kissimmee/Orlando to scout out properties.  He personally was pulling for Jax, but Orlando turned out to be the more viable option.

If Disney ever actually considered Jacksonville, it would have been as only one of many possible sites around the Florida (and the entire eastern seaboard) they were looking at. We were almost certainly out of the running by the time they considered and rejected Palm Beach in 1960, as we had the exact same issues that made them reject Palm Beach - too many people, too close to the coast - and also a colder winter climate. The cruise ship thing didn't really start until the 1980s, long after Disney himself had died.

Quote from: Kay on May 01, 2012, 01:11:38 PM

Quote from: Lucasjj on May 01, 2012, 01:08:13 PM
In the past two weeks I have driven to the following Riveside locations and parked without issue:

Biscottis - Parked directly across the street on St Johns
Ooh La La Nail - Parked in front of Mojo's on St Johns
Tapas That - Parked at Lomax and Oak
Bark - Parked in front of Hawthorne Salon
Alpha Dog - On Park directly across the street

These were all at different times of the day, weekends and weekdays. There was no hassle parking at any of these places despite the "parking problems" that plague Riverside.

Why aren't you walking or biking?   :)

I see Lucas walking his dogs near King Street all the time.  Perhaps he doesn't bike more often b/c he also has the same problem as I had Sunday morning... no place to lock my bike up  :)

Quote from: Kay on May 01, 2012, 01:11:38 PM

Quote from: Lucasjj on May 01, 2012, 01:08:13 PM
In the past two weeks I have driven to the following Riveside locations and parked without issue:

Biscottis - Parked directly across the street on St Johns
Ooh La La Nail - Parked in front of Mojo's on St Johns
Tapas That - Parked at Lomax and Oak
Bark - Parked in front of Hawthorne Salon
Alpha Dog - On Park directly across the street

These were all at different times of the day, weekends and weekdays. There was no hassle parking at any of these places despite the "parking problems" that plague Riverside.

Why aren't you walking or biking?   :)

These were just the places I drove to. I walked to others. Biscottis was the weekend it was raining (we originally were going to walk to Cool Moose), and all the other places were stops on the way home from outside Riverside, so I was already in my car.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

Quote from: Tacachale on May 01, 2012, 01:14:39 PM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 01, 2012, 09:30:17 AM

Quote from: Tacachale on April 30, 2012, 05:07:04 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 30, 2012, 04:40:30 PM
I seem to recall that this is a long standing rite of passage in Jacksonville, what other American city would tell Walt Disney, "Jacksonville doesn't deal with carnival people!"

Plenty of places have fended off Disney's "carnival people" out of fear of what they'd do to their locality - notable examples are Prince William County, VA; Mineral King, California; and Knot's Berry Farm. And those are examples where Disney was actually interested in building - there was fortunately never any danger of Disney World being built here.

I heard differently.  I was told that the cruise business was always a part of Walt Disney's business plan and that he wanted to be able to easily transport his guests from his parks and resorts to the cruise ships.  That made Jacksonville a better option than Orlando.  He supposedly sent teams to both Jacksonville and Kissimmee/Orlando to scout out properties.  He personally was pulling for Jax, but Orlando turned out to be the more viable option.

If Disney ever actually considered Jacksonville, it would have been as only one of many possible sites around the Florida (and the entire eastern seaboard) they were looking at. We were almost certainly out of the running by the time they considered and rejected Palm Beach in 1960, as we had the exact same issues that made them reject Palm Beach - too many people, too close to the coast - and also a colder winter climate. The cruise ship thing didn't really start until the 1980s, long after Disney himself had died.

I know, but it was still a part of his vision.  I don't think anyone would deny that he was quite the visionary. 

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 01:46:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

::).  You're right... I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Does Planning 101 also include a chapter on playing up people's fears to distract everyone from the alternatives(which are quite gruesome)... b/c you're doing a phenomenal job at that.

Planning 101 with professor DOT, F.

I was in Avondale Saturday night and had no problem parking. The side streets were mostly empty and Boone Park has lots of parking.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 01:46:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

::).  You're right... I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Planners know that if a planning decision was either arbitrary or capricious, then it can be overturned in court. 

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:16:19 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 01:46:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

::).  You're right... I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Planners know that if it is determined that a planning decision was either arbitrary or capricious, then it can be overturned in court.

All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?  Dancing around the question is about as arbitrary as one can get. 

It still sounds to me that this project follows the intention of the overlay. Seems pretty open and closed to me.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:16:19 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 01:46:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

::).  You're right... I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Planners know that if it is determined that a planning decision was either arbitrary or capricious, then it can be overturned in court.

All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?  Dancing around the question is about as arbitrary as one can get.

As a professional planner I bill for my time.  Do you want to pay for it, or do you want a worthless opinion? 

Why not let just the process unfold as it should?

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:28:12 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:16:19 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 01:46:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 12:47:49 PM

QuoteAt that point there would be a normal process of give and take, as opposed to the so-called give and take that was attempted at the community meeting last week.

With all due respect, that sounds completely arbitrary and subjective. 

This is planning 101.  Bone up on the basics first, and then start posting again after that.

::).  You're right... I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Planners know that if it is determined that a planning decision was either arbitrary or capricious, then it can be overturned in court.

All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?  Dancing around the question is about as arbitrary as one can get.

As a professional planner I bill for my time.  Do you want to pay for it, or do you want a worthless opinion? 

Why not let just the process unfold as it should?

Brilliant non-answer yet again.  We wouldn't want facts getting in the way of the discussion.  Please continue with your muck-raking designed to affect someone's livelihood... I hope you are indeed billing someone for that.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
Please continue with your muck-raking designed to affect someone's livelihood... I hope you are indeed billing someone for that.

Nobody's paying me to work on this. Is somebody paying you? 

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:50:08 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:46:01 PM
Please continue with your muck-raking designed to affect someone's livelihood... I hope you are indeed billing someone for that.

Nobody's paying me to work on this. Is somebody paying you?

Not in the least bit.  I have been 100% transparent in the discussion.  You should try doing the same. 

Given the level to which this discussion has sunk, I'm embarrassed about just being a part of it.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM
All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?

Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM
All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?

Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

He's speaking for me as well, so that should qualify the use of the pronoun. now we can move on to you actually answering the question.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on May 01, 2012, 03:23:37 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM
All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?

Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

He's speaking for me as well, so that should qualify the use of the pronoun. now we can move on to you actually answering the question.

Once again, my answer is that I don't know, that my opinion doesn't matter, and that there are people out there who are being paid to find out.  Let them tell us, and then the planning process is supposed to give everyone an opportunity to respond.

My question was addressed to fieldafm. 

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Why not let just the process unfold as it should?

I agree with Dashing Dan on this point!

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 02:22:08 PM
All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?

Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Well, you were asked the question three times today... see here:

QuoteDashing Dan, what is the max seating size that MM can go into that space without going beyond the guidelines, in your opinion?  Also, what formula are you using to determine maximum seating size for the two buildings involved?


What is the factual maximum number then?  I also assume if they meet these requirements then the opposition goes away?

All we're asking is for you to publicly disclose how many parking spots Mellow is required to provide, that they are 'currently failing to meet' ?

QuoteOnce again, my answer is that I don't know, that my opinion doesn't matter, and that there are people out there who are being paid to find out.  Let them tell us, and then the planning process is supposed to give everyone an opportunity to respond.

I assumed since you said that Mellow isn't meeting the parking requirement... that you would have some opinion on what that parking requirement is.  Otherwise, why make a statement like that?

The whole back and forth about things like happy hour times are irrelevant, and you know it... and it's becoming clear to see that distracting those from the actual alternatives only serves to muddy the waters.

It's humorous to me, coming from New Orleans, to see such a furor over a single restaurant. Tulane (located in a quite wealthy part of town consisting almost entirely of single-family homes) just started on the process of building a 30,000 seat football stadium on-campus with a proportionate neighborhood reaction. Looking at the reaction here to what is about as small-scale a project as you can get, feels quite jarring.

Indeed, after living in the middle of Uptown literally across the street from 3 college bars, the concerns of residents here are laughable by comparison. Even then, the worst I had to deal with was hearing loud sorority girls and fratties walking back to their houses at night. Plus, despite open container laws, I never had to deal with beer cans or red solo cups in the morning. In terms of parking, the only time it was inconvenient to park in the neighborhood was during the day when campus parking at at capacity. Sometimes I even had to walk an entire block to get to Starbucks! Quelle horreur! Considering all this, why do Avondale NIMBYs think that they're in for worse?

Here's the real answer:  An exact maximum number of desired spaces can't be pinpointed because it's a moving target based on the number of seats.  Also, I'm not sure MM has even submitted an application for an exception at this point.

QuoteRiverside/Avondale Zoning Overlay 656.399.22 - Retail sales or service establishments and single-family residential uses located in contributing structures within an identified commercial character area shall have zero parking requirements. Any expansion of contributing structures, after the date of the adoption of this Subpart shall provide 50 percent of the required parking for the expansion pursuant to Section 656.604

QuoteSection 656.604 -  Restaurants â€"One space for each four seats in public rooms plus one space for each two employees.

If the buildings MM wants are contributing, no off-street parking would be needed.  It appears they aren't, so the 50% parking requirement would apply.

So you'll need 1 parking space/8 seats plus 1 parking space/two employees.  If you want 100 seats into the shell building space, it means you'll need 12.5 parking spaces plus 1 parking space/four employees.  Bike parking is a complete non-factor.

I wonder if it is possible to make a non-contributing building (that was completed before 1948), contributing by restoring its original facade?  Depending on how that is answered, in addition to simply turning the old pump area into a parking lot instead of a park and outdoor seating, an exception for number of parking spaces may not even be needed at all....even for 250 seats!

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 03:34:52 PM
I assumed since you said that Mellow isn't meeting the parking requirement... that you would have some opinion on what that parking requirement is.  Otherwise, why make a statement like that?

What? 

If I ever posted as my own opinion that MM isn't meeting the parking requirement, then I don't recall it, and I apologize for jumping the gun.

I do recall that the parking requirement was discussed at the community meeting, and that the applicant indicated that alternatives to meeting the requirement were being taken under consideration.

Quote from: tufsu1 on May 01, 2012, 03:33:04 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Why not let just the process unfold as it should?

I agree with Dashing Dan on this point!

I don't agree on this particular point if letting the process unfold means having people trying to open businesses being tar and feathered right off the bat.  However, if that means a real back and forth between the property owner and COJ in finding solutions that deliver a project within the intent of the zoning overlay, I do.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 03:34:52 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM
Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Well, you were asked the question three times today

So your answer is that you are speaking for yourself and for any others who posted more or less the same question to me that you did?

Quote from: thelakelander on May 01, 2012, 03:56:47 PM

Quote from: tufsu1 on May 01, 2012, 03:33:04 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Why not let just the process unfold as it should?

I agree with Dashing Dan on this point!

I don't agree on this particular point if letting the process unfold means having people trying to open businesses being tar and feathered right off the bat.  However, if that means a real back and forth between the property owner and COJ in finding solutions that deliver a project within the intent of the zoning overlay, I do.

So at least three of us agree on this.

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:58:02 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 03:34:52 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM
Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Well, you were asked the question three times today

So your answer is that you are speaking for yourself and for any others who posted more or less the same question to me that you did?

Yes, when more than one person asks the same question multiple times... that is the royal 'we' in which I am referring to. 

There seems to be this assumption that the number of people that will be frequenting MM is directly proportional to the number of seats they have. So if they were somehow able to build fifty thousand seats, that many people would show up every night. 250 seats was the initial plan? Sorry, but I’d be surprised if this Avondale location could really fill that many even on a Friday rush.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 04:32:34 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:58:02 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 03:34:52 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM
Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Well, you were asked the question three times today

So your answer is that you are speaking for yourself and for any others who posted more or less the same question to me that you did?

Yes, when more than one person asks the same question multiple times... that is the royal 'we' in which I am referring to.

So what you mean is Lakelander and yourself.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 04:32:34 PM
Yes, when more than one person asks the same question multiple times... that is the royal 'we' in which I am referring to. 

I'm also curious to know what he thinks the max amount of seat should be being that he already said he's a professional planner. What's the big deal about just throwing out a rough number based on estimation?

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 04:47:01 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 04:32:34 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:58:02 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 03:34:52 PM

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 03:06:14 PM
Besides yourself, who are you speaking for here?

Well, you were asked the question three times today

So your answer is that you are speaking for yourself and for any others who posted more or less the same question to me that you did?

Yes, when more than one person asks the same question multiple times... that is the royal 'we' in which I am referring to.

So what you mean is Lakelander and yourself.

Yes, and if you are trying to imply something else... you are barking up the wrong tree.  I speak for myself alone on this issue b/c it is the right thing to do. 

Quote from: Bewler on May 01, 2012, 04:50:45 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 04:32:34 PM
Yes, when more than one person asks the same question multiple times... that is the royal 'we' in which I am referring to. 

I'm also curious to know what he thinks the max amount of seat should be being that he already said he's a professional planner. What's the big deal about just throwing out a rough number based on estimation?

For the purposes of this discussion, whatever lakelander posted works for me too.

Quote from: fieldafm on May 01, 2012, 04:52:10 PM
I speak for myself alone on this issue b/c it is the right thing to do.

Are we both talking about a pizza restaurant? 

Quote from: Dashing Dan on May 01, 2012, 05:03:13 PM
Are we both talking about a pizza restaurant?

Wait a sec, Mellow Mushroom is a pizza restaurant? I thought it was an Amsterdam-style drug bar?
Nevermind then. I hope they turn the whole Shoppes of Avondale into a parking lot. I HATE pizza!

Quote from: stephendare on May 01, 2012, 05:17:04 PM
Lets play a little game called, "Which restaurant in the avondale shopping district does Tony in Chicago in own?

Bluefish...

Why would the owner of Bluefish give a shit about MM.........does MM serve oyster pizza? I'm confused...

As an aside, if Bluefish, Brick, Biscottis or any other restaurant oppose MM or a similar establishment, I will never, ever dine at their restaurant again and I will make sure I spread the word as to why I refuse to dine at their restaurant.

Quote from: ben says on May 01, 2012, 06:23:59 PM
Why would the owner of Bluefish give a shit about MM.........does MM serve oyster pizza? I'm confused...

Afraid of any competition I suppose.  I always figured competition was good.  Of course, I also assumed that Brick would up their game when Orsay and Mojo's moved into the neighborhood but they have kept the same measly two beers on tap and have not changed their menu in like 10 years.  Brick used to have a good happy hour crowd, especially considering they charge $6 for a draught beer and $8-$9 for a glass of wine.  Looks relatively sparse now.

Quote from: Kaiser Soze on May 02, 2012, 10:30:02 AM
As an aside, if Bluefish, Brick, Biscottis or any other restaurant oppose MM or a similar establishment, I will never, ever dine at their restaurant again and I will make sure I spread the word as to why I refuse to dine at their restaurant.

If this quote is accurate, I would say Biscottis is in opposition...

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 09:31:06 PM
I've just returned from the Town Hall Meeting. The overwhelming majority were opposed to MM - possibly more opposed because of its size. Size matters.

...The point, as the owner of Biscotti's put it to the assembly is "don't try to put 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound box."

Yeah, I knew Biscottis was opposed at the community meeting.  I meant more formal opposition.  Biscottis has gone downhill over the past 1-2 years anyhow.

I'm joining the pledge.  Any restaurant in my hood that wants to be anticompetitive and exclude other restaurants can do without my money and support.

QuoteLets play a little game called, "Which restaurant in the avondale shopping district does Tony in Chicago in own?

That may not be entirely correct. I know "Tony in Chicago" owns the building and the parking lot, but Richard Grenamyer owns the restaurant and is in charge of running the show. Yes "Tony in Chicago" is in person and helps place a swift kick in the butt to some of the people who need it now and then, but make no mistake, Richard G runs the show in the restaurant and its his dishes and his butt when the food line is out of whack.

QuoteAs an aside, if Bluefish, Brick, Biscottis or any other restaurant oppose MM or a similar establishment, I will never, ever dine at their restaurant again and I will make sure I spread the word as to why I refuse to dine at their restaurant.

KS - Really, you want to play this Chinese Standoff with the others in the block who will not play nice? Time heals all wounds, look at the rhetoric before and after Mojo's. What beats me is why Biscotti's tells the Business Journal how great it will be to have MM, then poo-poos them (literally) at the meeting?

I have a LOT of admiration to all the restaurant owners on the Avondale Strip, it was not easy to make it work, Brick has the same art and same items there, with a few variations, but its consistent, something people like, to know they can get what they want, when they want it. I don't see the Brick changing anything anytime soon. They mayor loves eating there with his staff, so you may rub elbows with Alvin sometime. That is, if you dare to enter a place that crosses the MM line.

QuoteBiscottis has gone downhill over the past 1-2 years anyhow.

You'd never know it on a Saturday night. Place is packed with people waiting for tables.

Jeez folks... let this play out.  Looks like after all the drama and vitriol a compromise occured with the Kickbacks expansion... the same will happen here.

Love me some Bluefish Happy hour and half price oysters... and cioppino... 8)

Quote from: mtraininjax on May 02, 2012, 11:33:46 AM
KS - Really, you want to play this Chinese Standoff with the others in the block who will not play nice?

Yes, I do.  To hell with them.

Quote from: mtraininjax on May 02, 2012, 11:35:23 AM
You'd never know it on a Saturday night. Place is packed with people waiting for tables.

Oh, I know people still go there and they do plenty of business.  People still pack LaNopalera regardless of the slop they serve.  Regardless, the quality of food at Biscottis is not as good as it was 3-4 years ago and I am not alone in thinking that.

QuoteQuote from: mtraininjax on Today at 11:33:46 AM
KS - Really, you want to play this Chinese Standoff with the others in the block who will not play nice?
Yes, I do.  To hell with them.
Quote from: mtraininjax on Today at 11:35:23 AM
You'd never know it on a Saturday night. Place is packed with people waiting for tables.
Oh, I know people still go there and they do plenty of business.  People still pack LaNopalera regardless of the slop they serve.  Regardless, the quality of food at Biscottis is not as good as it was 3-4 years ago and I am not alone in thinking that.

It takes all kinds of people to make the world go round. At least now, I will have a few more empty seats available thanks to the hotheads avoiding my favorite locations.

Quote from: mtraininjax on May 02, 2012, 11:33:46 AM

QuoteLets play a little game called, "Which restaurant in the avondale shopping district does Tony in Chicago in own?

That may not be entirely correct. I know "Tony in Chicago" owns the building and the parking lot, but Richard Grenamyer owns the restaurant and is in charge of running the show. Yes "Tony in Chicago" is in person and helps place a swift kick in the butt to some of the people who need it now and then

Quote from: mtraininjax on November 30, 2010, 01:01:00 AM

QuoteFrank (Bluefish) told me last week he has customers from Ponte Vedra that are tiring of the parking scene.

Frank is a tired old gasbag. He still owns the parking lot next to bluefish, and the buildings, but he lets Richard run the restaurant (which is awesome by the way). Frank will tell ANYONE and I mean ANYONE who will listen why his people coming in from Ponte Vedra won't come to Sterlings, er Bluefish, because they can't find a place to park.

QuoteQuote from: mtraininjax on Today at 11:33:46 AM
Quote
Lets play a little game called, "Which restaurant in the avondale shopping district does Tony in Chicago in own?

That may not be entirely correct. I know "Tony in Chicago" owns the building and the parking lot, but Richard Grenamyer owns the restaurant and is in charge of running the show. Yes "Tony in Chicago" is in person and helps place a swift kick in the butt to some of the people who need it now and then

Quote from: mtraininjax on November 30, 2010, 01:01:00 AM
Quote
Frank (Bluefish) told me last week he has customers from Ponte Vedra that are tiring of the parking scene.

Frank is a tired old gasbag. He still owns the parking lot next to bluefish, and the buildings, but he lets Richard run the restaurant (which is awesome by the way). Frank will tell ANYONE and I mean ANYONE who will listen why his people coming in from Ponte Vedra won't come to Sterlings, er Bluefish, because they can't find a place to park.

CZ, people change, and their priorities change. Maybe one day you and I will meet too, and my perception of you will change as well? One can only hope.

And now, new information that some of the owners are not happy to be losing parking spaces, wow, didn't they JUST say the same thing about Mojo's? Maybe we could tear down some of the ugly duplexes on Riverside Avenue, just north of the shops and replace them with parking lots? I'd like to see the rents rise a little more and the supply fall as well.

Still don't understand all this concern with parking. Isn't walkability one of the primary reasons people like to live in the Avondale/Riverside area? Plus you can always park in the streets, it's ok, reeeeeeally.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 08:16:30 AM
Meeting tonight at 7:00 PM at Grace Church, corner of Herschel and Edgewood to discuss parking and growth in the Avondale area.
I'm a few blocks away and hopefully insulated from having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Most of the restaurants and shops in the Shoppes are small storefronts, and I for one would prefer to keep it that way. Mellow, another growing chain operation with low to medium priced food, will be large, and will attract a class of diners less inclined to concern themselves with finding an appropriate place to discard their rubbish.

Concerned citizens, FEAR NOT!!!

I have assembled a team of engineers, attorneys, finance professionals, and experienced eaters of food to infiltrate this crowd of heathens and discern whether or not MM will destroy Avondale.  We will be attending both the Southside and Jax beach location of MM this evening armed with a camera and an audio recorder to try and get some intelligible responses out of this inbred fools.  If you have any pressing questions you'd like to know the answer to, please let me know.  If they plan to pee in your yard and destroy your home from the foundation up, we'll find out.  Article to follow.

QuoteIf you have any pressing questions you'd like to know the answer to, please let me know.

I am very concerned that MM pizza may cause uncontrolled urine flow.  This would ruin a perfectly good evening IMHO.  Could you please verify or debunk? 

@CZ

I would be more interested in finding out the cause of the spontaneous appearance of aluminum cans and bottles on lawns after the witching hour.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on May 04, 2012, 09:59:46 AM
@CZ

I would be more interested in finding out the cause of the spontaneous appearance of aluminum cans and bottles on lawns after the witching hour.

If you've already got that problem in Avondale, its not MM's fault. Inconsiderate people will still exist even if we remove all the businesses from the neighborhood. Then we'd still have trash on our lawns (which is in all likelihood from someone drinking apart from a bar), but we'd also have a boring neighborhood.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on May 04, 2012, 09:59:46 AM
@CZ

I would be more interested in finding out the cause of the spontaneous appearance of aluminum cans and bottles on lawns after the witching hour.

These must all get picked up before I walk my dog every morning because I don't see them.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 08:16:30 AM
... having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Ask them why they hate parking so much. What did parking ever do to them? At the Beach location, ask those hillbillies who ride their bikes why they didn't make a wholesome car trip like all good citizens are supposed to do.

QuoteInconsiderate people will still exist even if we remove all the businesses from the neighborhood.

+1, Had a real butthead almost run me over on the sidewalk with his F-ing bike last night and I had my dog with me, its these people who I wish would leave Avondale and never return.

Well I hate to say it but Captain Zissou posted his brave declaration on May 4th, its already the 9th and we still haven't heard anything from him. I think it's safe to say that he and his entire crew must have died during their dangerous excursion to MM.

Quote from: Bewler on May 09, 2012, 10:37:45 AM
Well I hate to say it but Captain Zissou posted his brave declaration on May 4th, its already the 9th and we still haven't heard anything from him. I think it's safe to say that he and his entire crew must have died during their dangerous excursion to MM.

Or still in jail after urinating in public and throwing beer cans/bottles around and general mischief that MM customers get into.

How typical of those parking-hating malefactors.

From the http://www.igetmellow.com/ (http://www.igetmellow.com/) blog:

QuoteThe Mellow team has been doing a little walking around the Avondale neighborhood, lately. Last week, we walked around with the City’s parking consultants â€" the people likely to be entrusted with a study to see how the pressure of parking might be alleviated, particularly in the streets  around the Shoppes of Avondale. We think we got a better understanding of the situation and were very interested in what the consultants had to say. We’ve been looking for options to minimize the impact our new restaurant will have on parking, so this was certainly helpful.


This week, we were walking again, this time to speak to retailers in the neighborhood to tell them about this blog as a source of information and encourage them to give us feedback on our  proposals  for the restaurant. We got some great feedback, strong expressions of support and a good chance to put names to faces. We did not have time to visit all of the retailers, but  will be back next week to finish off our introductions. We are also making special efforts to engage with our colleagues  from the restaurants in the area.

As always, we are doing our very best to be good neighbors and seek out solutions to  shared challenges.

(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m481wcn9Kj1qz80p9.jpg)

If they are serious, they will buy the lot down the street that was used by the Town Center initiative and turn the empty lot into a parking lot, to allow for the overflow. Eminent Domain time. Or bulldoze Boone Park and put in parking there.

Who are the City's "parking consultants"?

the picture shows Martha Moore and Mike Saylor...perhaps they'll be working on the study

Interesting.  Let's hope they do a good job!

Well well well.  Councilman Love has introduced bill 2012 339 which will require contributing structures converting to any kind of alchohol sales to provide 50% of required parking spaces instead of 0%. 

So is the building MM is going into considered a contributing structure?

Quote from: AvonD on May 19, 2012, 07:53:12 AM
Well well well.  Councilman Love has introduced bill 2012 339 which will require contributing structures converting to any kind of alchohol sales to provide 50% of required parking spaces instead of 0%.

This could do a few things:

A. Slow or stop the revitalization of Riverside/Avondale's commercial districts.

B. Reduce the value and usability of pedestrian scale commercial structures (structures built to the sidewalk).

C. Lead to non contributing structures (many of which are built before 1948) being demolished for parking lots.

I'd be careful with this one.  It has the possibility of backfiring with severe negative results on the character and scale of the neighborhood.  Hopefully, they'll get some real factual data and statistics on the pros and cons before pushing this through.

This proposal would not stop development in the RAHD, just put additional contraints on business that serve alcohol.  Am I understanding the proposed legislation correctly?

^For the most part, it will prohibit any type of restaurant or bar serving alcohol from opening in Riverside without finding a way to build a parking lot.  Basically, no more Mossfire Grills, Bricks, Al's Pizza's, Pele's, etc. without them providing off-street parking.  The easiest way (other than avoiding the neighborhood completely) to provide off-street parking in a district not originally built to autocentric suburban standards is to find and demolish non-contributing buildings to replace them with surface parking.

Quote from: AvonD on May 19, 2012, 07:53:12 AM
Well well well.  Councilman Love has introduced bill 2012 339 which will require contributing structures converting to any kind of alchohol sales to provide 50% of required parking spaces instead of 0%. 

I though the purpose of overlays that dealt with zoning for historic districts was to avoid this type of issue.  To allow for sensible development within the constraints of a historic/ walk-able/ urban district.  This seems to do the exact opposite.  It is fear driven and that is typically the worst kind of ordinance/ law.  At least this only deals with Riverside/ Avondale.

Perhaps it will come full circle and RAP and councilman love will be wanting the parking garages and expressways they were formed to fight.

Can't have people walking. Perhaps more drive thrus and larger min setbacks. Riverside can be be Oakleaf with a lot of effort and a little luck.

It is just not meant to be a quite hood with parking in front of every door. RAP please start educating the area that you are an URBAN core neighborhood and call out councilman love on his stupid idea.

Rap is supporting the bill as are many existing restaurants and i hear folks like Adam hollingsworth...

So is the check or checkmate for the mm fanboys?

Wait a minute. So to open up a restaurant in an existing building you'd be required to add parking that currently doesn't exist?

Lake is right, this would either artificially restrict infill, or force growth to take out existing structures for surface parking lots. No one seriously interested in the neighborhood's well being should support this.

Quote from: AvonD on May 20, 2012, 10:44:33 AM
Rap is supporting the bill as are many existing restaurants and i hear folks like Adam hollingsworth...

So is the check or checkmate for the mm fanboys?

MM should be fine.  In their situation, they have a whole non contributing gas station pump area they're working with.  Avondale may get a pretty ugly parking lot in the front instead of outdoor dining and green space but its doable.  What will get the shaft is historic buildings like the one Dahlia's Pour House and Salty Fig are going in on King Street. 

Considering we're in an economic recession, I'd hate to be an owner of a structure where what you can do with it is limited against your will.  Should it pass will their property tax rate be reduced to make up for this?

The timing of this ordinance proposal reeks of fear - fear of whom may come into their community, fear of the additional cars that may or may not be an issue, fear of trash that may or may not be an issue.  RAP more than likely campaigned for the easing of parking restrictions but now that a couple of higher level commercial developments have come along, they are now against the overlay provisions they helped write and are for restricted development and the possible loss of additional structures to accommodate those restrictions?  Fear based decision making seldom results in what anyone wants or what is best for the community. One would think that RAP would look at the past in places like Springfield where fear based programs were the norm for a decade.  Didn't work too well there and will not here either.  Looking to folks like Lake and several others for reality based solutions to the problems is the answer that will give everyone what they want and need in the future.

"RAP" did not campaign for more parking....Overlay proceedings simply reflective of a City that never could say no to "growth","consensus" and an always curious public participation/public 'workshop' process.

Quote from: stephendare

you are still wrong.
/quote]



Anyone should approach Issue Identification,Response with that possibility in mind.
KG

Is Riverside/Avondale ready for a streetcar or will the local residents protest against one? 

My guess is there is a crowd that would be against the concept and another crowd that would be for it.  Sort of like the whole parking thing.  In a diverse neighborhood, you're going to have opinions all over the place.

So the crowd against would like the wonderful neighborhood Riverside is and can be. The crowd for more parking is jealous of and hopes to make Riverside into an Oakleaf area.

They will say they don't want to be Oakleaf but if it quacks like a duck.

Quote from: AvonD on May 20, 2012, 10:44:33 AM
Rap is supporting the bill as are many existing restaurants and i hear folks like Adam hollingsworth...

I can understand a resident supporting this, but all but one of the existing restaurants want to close the door behind themselves. 

Where is the 50% on-site for Biscottis, Fox, Ginjo, West Inn, Casbah and Brick (who could claim contiguous)?  While this knee jerk bill successfully stifles the popularity of the Shoppes of Avondale to profitable restaurants, it could severely hinder current and future revitalization of other Commercial Character Areas. 

And is requiring one particular class of restaurant (those that serve any alcohol at all) to adhere to a different set of rules than any other retail or non-alcohol restaurant establishment legal?  From a zoning perspective, restaurants can serve beer and wine by right, but liquor requires approval.  This seems like a more palatable solution and more easy to defend.

Several weeks ago, Donovan Rypkema http://www.placeeconomics.com/about-us/who-we-are, spoke to a group on both sides of the fence in Avondale.  One of my take away's was that restrictive laws that are business specific should be avoided at all cost and the free market with organized group management should drive the train.

Parking on residential streets is an issue and one that needs to be addressed.  Business specific laws that single out and contradict a free market are for deed restricted neighborhoods. 

I can understand some people wanting to cap development in a specific area, but tying it directly to parking is a terrible way to go about it. What happens when one of the existing restaurants in contributing structures closes, and someone wants to "convert" it into another restaurant? Would the new restauranteurs have to add parking that doesn't currently exist? This is just adding unnecessary red tape.

I haven't seen the actual proposal but from the info garnered here, I think this is one of the more mal-intentioned proposals that I've heard recently.

You can build a restaurant in a contributing structure with ZERO parking regulations as long as you don't serve booze. 

It seems like JL is implying that we need a parking lot designated for drinkers only.  It's illegal to drink and drive, but if you do, we need you to park over here ------>.

Here's a suggestion, why don't we write some legislation that requires everyone with a BMI Index over 30 to park at least .5 miles away from restaurants that use butter.

John and other "merchants in Avondale" should buy the empty lot on the south side of St. Johns Avenue, just west of Dancy and turn this into parking. Simple and easy solution with a lot that is empty and just a uncontrolled area of weeds.

Quote from: Bewler on May 09, 2012, 10:37:45 AM
Well I hate to say it but Captain Zissou posted his brave declaration on May 4th, its already the 9th and we still haven't heard anything from him. I think it's safe to say that he and his entire crew must have died during their dangerous excursion to MM.

Sorry I haven't followed up on this. On May 7th I started at a new job that has kept me very busy. The MM fact-finding mission was a partial failure due to unforeseen circumstances. Those circumstances were that at about 60% of the tables (on a Friday night after 9), there were mainly children dining with one or two adults. I'm guessing a lot of kids were having sleepovers and their parents wanted to take the kids out to MM for some early evening tequila shots (obviously joking). By kids, I mean children who looked to be 12 or younger. If you were to have gone to the local Cici's pizza that night, I doubt you would have found more kids than were at MM. I didn't feel comfortable approaching these tables for pictures or quotes, so I didn't have much to report back. A large percentage of the remaining tables were college track athletes who clearly had just been at a meet at UNF. The final percentage was older people (50+) who were drinking wine and enjoying the pleasant evening weather. The only table that looked like it would fit the description of the hoodlums who are going to destroy Avondale if MM opens was our own. Our table was made up of an attorney, a law student, two coastal engineers, a financial analyst, and a sales manager at a medical company. We are all between the ages of 25 and 30 and all but one of us already live in Avondale. So....Hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your husbands....

Quote from: ben says on May 01, 2012, 06:23:59 PM
Why would the owner of Bluefish give a shit about MM.........does MM serve oyster pizza? I'm confused...

The owner of Bluefish understood the importance of serving signature Bluefish first course; parking

Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 21, 2012, 12:29:36 PM

Quote from: Bewler on May 09, 2012, 10:37:45 AM
Well I hate to say it but Captain Zissou posted his brave declaration on May 4th, its already the 9th and we still haven't heard anything from him. I think it's safe to say that he and his entire crew must have died during their dangerous excursion to MM.

The only table that looked like it would fit the description of the hoodlums who are going to destroy Avondale if MM opens was our own. Our table was made up of an attorney, a law student, two coastal engineers, a financial analyst, and a sales manager at a medical company. We are all between the ages of 25 and 30 and all but one of us already live in Avondale. So....Hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your husbands....

But Captain, did y'all remember to take all of those beer bottles and toss them into the nearest unsuspecting yard? Opportunity missed I guess. Darn engineers will do it every time.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on May 21, 2012, 09:45:44 AM
I haven't seen the actual proposal but from the info garnered here, I think this is one of the more mal-intentioned proposals that I've heard recently.

You can build a restaurant in a contributing structure with ZERO parking regulations as long as you don't serve booze. 

It seems like JL is implying that we need a parking lot designated for drinkers only.  It's illegal to drink and drive, but if you do, we need you to park over here ------>.

Here's a suggestion, why don't we write some legislation that requires everyone with a BMI Index over 30 to park at least .5 miles away from restaurants that use butter.

Hahaha! +1
Seriously, is this bill about parking or is it about teetotalers? It seems to be the 2nd. Somebody doesn't want drinking in R/A. I'll tell you what, if the neighborhood goes dry, I'm moving to Murray Hill. I'd rather be in the Wild West than sober. :P

Quote from: Ocklawaha on May 31, 2012, 09:00:30 AM

Quote from: Captain Zissou on May 21, 2012, 12:29:36 PM

Quote from: Bewler on May 09, 2012, 10:37:45 AM
Well I hate to say it but Captain Zissou posted his brave declaration on May 4th, its already the 9th and we still haven't heard anything from him. I think it's safe to say that he and his entire crew must have died during their dangerous excursion to MM.

The only table that looked like it would fit the description of the hoodlums who are going to destroy Avondale if MM opens was our own. Our table was made up of an attorney, a law student, two coastal engineers, a financial analyst, and a sales manager at a medical company. We are all between the ages of 25 and 30 and all but one of us already live in Avondale. So....Hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your husbands....

But Captain, did y'all remember to take all of those beer bottles and toss them into the nearest unsuspecting yard? Opportunity missed I guess. Darn engineers will do it every time.

Guilty as charged. Unfortunately, we had to drive for 10 minutes to get to a house to throw the bottles in a yard, ya know, since southside isn't walkable like our fair neighborhood. We should be proud to have bottles thrown in our yard. Its the sign we live in a thriving, diverse neighborhood. Joking aside, Jim Love has lost my vote.

Edit: Anyone have a link to the proposed bill? Or could you post the text?
Edit edit: Nevermind. I was being lazy. http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/COJBillList.asp?Bill=2012-0339 (http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/COJBillList.asp?Bill=2012-0339)

Quote from: stephendare on May 30, 2012, 11:46:18 PM

Quote from: Know Growth on May 30, 2012, 11:08:42 PM

Quote from: ben says on May 01, 2012, 06:23:59 PM
Why would the owner of Bluefish give a shit about MM.........does MM serve oyster pizza? I'm confused...

The owner of Bluefish understood the importance of serving signature Bluefish first course; parking

Ah, back to your faux environmentalism again, eh North Miami?

That all 'ya got?

Frank's Sterlings placement parking angle was significant, more so than we could have imagined.

The only thing Faux was the assumption that Avondale would yield refuge from rediculous,predictable growth pressures,although admittably there has always been intuitive caution.
Took a bit longer to figure MJ out.

From the Mellow Mushroom Twitter account: Good info on what John is trying to bring to the old gas station:

http://www.igetmellow.com/post/25157363003/a-community-mellow-mushroom (http://www.igetmellow.com/post/25157363003/a-community-mellow-mushroom)

So if you have a liquor license you need to worry about parking, but if you do not no problem?  Great, let's put a gigantic Starbucks/Panera at the location where not only will parking be an issue, people will stay there for HOURS working because of the free WIFI.  MM should fence off the entire area and show that the current establishments who are already using their lot for free parking.  If they were SO worried about the parking situation they would have bought the lot earlier.  A parking solution is what needed, not more laws restricting business or creating new jobs.

Existing laws specify the amount of parking required for a restaurant in the historic district (much less than required in other neighborhoods) and prospective developers should design accordingly.  Simple as that. 

Instead, they ask for huge exceptions, effectively dumping the problem on neighboring businesses and residents. 

Just say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Quote from: tayana42 on June 18, 2012, 03:39:35 PM
Existing laws specify the amount of parking required for a restaurant in the historic district (much less than required in other neighborhoods) and prospective developers should design accordingly.  Simple as that. 

Instead, they ask for huge exceptions, effectively dumping the problem on neighboring businesses and residents. 

Just say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Existing laws also say that a developer could tear down both buildings, build a structure mirroring the same square footage of the two demolished buildings and flip a bird to the neighborhood by then not being legally required to provide ANY new parking.

So, what you have here is a developer that is trying to work with the neighborhood to build an adaptive re-use project that is contextually sensitive with its surroundings.

In zoning cases, this is exactly the kind of win-win situation you want to happen whereas a developer is willing to do the right thing by developing a great product.  The legal alternatives are written in such a way that could ultimately hurt the fabric of the neighborhood.  Thank goodness there is a developer that is willing to preserve and not destroy.

Requesting variances is perfectly legitimate. Especially when it allows you to preserve the buildings and create an interesting product. It's a win-win for the neighborhood.

Quote from: tayana42 on June 18, 2012, 03:39:35 PM
Existing laws specify the amount of parking required for a restaurant in the historic district (much less than required in other neighborhoods) and prospective developers should design accordingly.  Simple as that. 

Instead, they ask for huge exceptions, effectively dumping the problem on neighboring businesses and residents. 

Just say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Re read this thread you clearly aren't familiar with existing laws.

Now granted some are trying to change existing laws to make this project require additional parking but if passed those will be new laws.

Quote from: tayana42 on June 18, 2012, 03:39:35 PM
Existing laws specify the amount of parking required for a restaurant in the historic district (much less than required in other neighborhoods) and prospective developers should design accordingly.  Simple as that. 

Instead, they ask for huge exceptions, effectively dumping the problem on neighboring businesses and residents. 

Just say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Tayana-

Do you realize that most if not all of the restaurants in Riverside/Avondale have received exceptions?

Mellow Mushroom is not asking for an exception.

QuoteJust say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Say, do you work for the Mayor?

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 27, 2012, 11:07:46 AM

Quotemight MM contribute to the problem? Possibly.

Possibly!!?? Absolutely

Quotethe historic district wasn't designed for cars to serve as the dominant transportation choice.

The Historic District was hardly designed at all - that's why you have duplexes or larger apartment buildings across the street from very expensive houses. To the extent that transportation was a consideration when the District was built, the car was - and still is! - the primary desired means of transportation. Residents close by may walk to a MM, but folks in Ortega, Murray Hill, East Riverside, Lake Shore, Cedar Hills, and other areas are NOT going to incur the significant expense of a taxi to get there - or anywhere else; and they won't like the idea of a shuttle. Jacksonville is just not like large cities in which public transportation is the norm.

Why should MM take care of the parking problem when the other restaurants or other merchants did not have to do anything? BECAUSE MM came along after the jelly bean jar was full and wants to try to cram another 100 jelly beans into a jar that its predecessors filled up.

Someone observed that this problem won't affect me because my house is too far away. That's right even if MM gets what it wants. But what about when a buyer of West Inn gets the same benefit? And besides, as I walk the neighborhood, I'd like to not be dodging all the cars - moving or parked, and I am sympathetic to the plight of friends on Pine Street who will bear the brunt of the problem.

Why didn't the Avondale Merchants Association pool their money together and buy the old Shell Gas Station themselves?

QuoteWhy didn't the Avondale Merchants Association pool their money together and buy the old Shell Gas Station themselves?

According to the Pres. of the Association, some of the merchants cannot even afford to be members of the Association - or say they can't. What a scenario: A rather small parcel of land effectively owned by 20 or 30 different businesses, most of which rent the space where their business is located. Who would be the title holder? The Association? Nah! I would not expect the merchants, whose businesses could fail at the drop of a hat, to contribute to ownership of land that cost $800,000 or so to buy and then a bit more each year to insure, pay taxes on, maintain, etc. Not workable!

Quote from: WmNussbaum on June 22, 2012, 07:47:05 PM

QuoteWhy didn't the Avondale Merchants Association pool their money together and buy the old Shell Gas Station themselves?

According to the Pres. of the Association, some of the merchants cannot even afford to be members of the Association - or say they can't. What a scenario: A rather small parcel of land effectively owned by 20 or 30 different businesses, most of which rent the space where their business is located. Who would be the title holder? The Association? Nah! I would not expect the merchants, whose businesses could fail at the drop of a hat, to contribute to ownership of land that cost $800,000 or so to buy and then a bit more each year to insure, pay taxes on, maintain, etc. Not workable!

Thank You William

Can you imagine 20-30 Chiefs in one meeting? Disaster. Anyone who proposed this has obviously not sat in a meeting with 4 or 5 people who think they are in charge of the meeting, let alone 20-30.

Quote from: mtraininjax on June 19, 2012, 10:04:10 AM

QuoteJust say "no"; meet the legal requirements.  Period.

Say, do you work for the Mayor?

Great line. Are you sure a liberal didn't write that one for you? :)

Not sure if this has been addressed, but it is not the case that the bar/restaurants in Avondale are evening businesses and the shoppes are daytime businesses. The restaurants are busy at lunch all week and on the weekends. We had a birthday party for my daughter yesterday at the Florida Creamery, and the parking lots were FULL FULL FULL.

If large restaurants like Mojo 4 are pulling in cars from far away places like Orange Park, then that is the problem. Another giant restaurant like Mellow Mushroom, especially a national chain, will pull in more "outsiders" with cars. These "outsiders" will never take a bus to get here. They see the Shoppes of Avondale as just another Town Center to drive to. If Mellow Mushroom wants to be helpful, they should open in a real dead spot, not crowded little Avondale. What about opening next to the John Gorrie condos?

Had I been consulted I would have recommended the building that currently houses Yestarday's, the dive bar at the corner of Dancy and Park  St. It is for sale, large enough, has excellent parking, and is right next to one o the more established and respected restaurants already operating in Avondale, Orsay.

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 01, 2012, 08:04:40 AM
Not sure if this has been addressed, but it is not the case that the bar/restaurants in Avondale are evening businesses and the shoppes are daytime businesses. The restaurants are busy at lunch all week and on the weekends. We had a birthday party for my daughter yesterday at the Florida Creamery, and the parking lots were FULL FULL FULL.

If large restaurants like Mojo 4 are pulling in cars from far away places like Orange Park, then that is the problem. Another giant restaurant like Mellow Mushroom, especially a national chain, will pull in more "outsiders" with cars. These "outsiders" will never take a bus to get here. They see the Shoppes of Avondale as just another Town Center to drive to. If Mellow Mushroom wants to be helpful, they should open in a real dead spot, not crowded little Avondale. What about opening next to the John Gorrie condos?

Orange Park has it's own Mellow Mushroom. 
So with these Full parking lots you ran into I was wondering did anyone have to walk over a block to get to the Party?

Quote: :"They should open in a real dead spot....What about opening next to the John Gorrie condo's?"

While the John Gorrie is off to a very slow start, that area is not "dead." Unless you consider 13 Gypsies, Bold Bean, and Bakery Moderne ( plus all the other businesses in that lttle vintage commercial building)  to be "dead"
as well.

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 01, 2012, 09:05:44 AM
So with these Full parking lots you ran into I was wondering did anyone have to walk over a block to get to the Party?

I almost had to, but after circling the block for about 45 minutes, I finally found my spot next to the door.  I missed cake and ice cream, though.  :(

I really don't want to come off as argumentative but I have to ask. Why would you circle that long rather than park a block or two away?

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 02, 2012, 10:48:34 AM
I really don't want to come off as argumentative but I have to ask. Why would you circle that long rather than park a block or two away?

fa·ce·tious (Adjective): Treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor

I was dropped on my head as a child.

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 02, 2012, 11:25:58 AM
I was dropped on my head as a child.

:D  Did your mom later tell you she did it on purpose?  That was our last 'real' talk.   ;)

Quote from: MusicMan on July 01, 2012, 09:33:05 AM
Quote: :"They should open in a real dead spot....What about opening next to the John Gorrie condo's?"

While the John Gorrie is off to a very slow start, that area is not "dead." Unless you consider 13 Gypsies, Bold Bean, and Bakery Moderne ( plus all the other businesses in that lttle vintage commercial building)  to be "dead"
as well.

That's true. It's unfair to say the John Gorrie area is dead. I just got my jogging stroller tire fixed at Zen Cog for $11, which I though was an awesome price. But the Gorrie area would probably welcome development more eagerly than the Shoppes area.

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 02, 2012, 12:17:13 PM

Quote from: MusicMan on July 01, 2012, 09:33:05 AM
Quote: :"They should open in a real dead spot....What about opening next to the John Gorrie condo's?"

While the John Gorrie is off to a very slow start, that area is not "dead." Unless you consider 13 Gypsies, Bold Bean, and Bakery Moderne ( plus all the other businesses in that lttle vintage commercial building)  to be "dead"
as well.

That's true. It's unfair to say the John Gorrie area is dead. I just got my jogging stroller tire fixed at Zen Cog for $11, which I though was an awesome price. But the Gorrie area would probably welcome development more eagerly than the Shoppes area.

Yeah, they'd be more open to development in that area, but where exactly could a MM go? That strip is pretty much full...

The real questions at this point are:

Why is the Avondale traffic study being held up?
What is RAP's position on the application (it was submitted at 220 seats, a net increase of 113 seats to the commercial area)?

^^maybe there is no funding for the study and the planning department is running around trying to figure out how they are going to fund the study.

There's a block long strip for future infill development there (Stockton Street).  It was set aside as a part of the Gorrie project.  However, MM has already submitted their application for a project in Avondale.  I seriously doubt it can't be developed in Avondale under the current overlay.

Mellow Mushroom seems like a done deal.  My biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

It would be very cool in the old Fuel space in 5 points... 8)

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 02, 2012, 01:44:00 PM
Mellow Mushroom seems like a done deal.  My biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

Define less attractive.

Beauty is in the eye and all that....  Don't you think the new renovations of the old building stock will be... beautiful?

(http://www.yesterland.com/images-mainstreet/parkinglot_front.jpg)

Not meaning to pick on you, Jeffery, it's just that I'm in disgust with the whole situation and I don't see them (RAP, existing Merchant Assoc., Jim Love, etc...) making anything better - so backwards thinking.

QuoteMy biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

Mellow is not affected by the moratorium (the gas station has been purchased and the application has been submitted), but yes the legislation that may get voted on tonight does nothing to address the massive hole in the Overlay that encourages developers to tear down non-contributing structures (many built in the 1920s) to avoid parking requirements... and goes so far as to make it less attractive to use contributing strucutres for certain kinds of businesses even though current zoning laws do not (nor should) restrict their use.   

I dont think Love really fully grasps the "unintended" consequences his ordinance could have.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on July 02, 2012, 01:49:43 PM

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 02, 2012, 01:44:00 PM
Mellow Mushroom seems like a done deal.  My biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

Define less attractive.

Beauty is in the eye and all that....  Don't you think the new renovations of the old building stock will be... beautiful?

(http://www.yesterland.com/images-mainstreet/parkinglot_front.jpg)

Not meaning to pick on you, Jeffery, it's just that I'm in disgust with the whole situation and I don't see them (RAP, existing Merchant Assoc., Jim Love, etc...) making anything better - so backwards thinking.

I simply mean the incentive for using historic building stock would be less. If you are a restaurant evaluating sites in Riverside you get less benefit under the proposed law than under the existing overlay.

Quote from: BridgeTroll on July 02, 2012, 01:44:39 PM
It would be very cool in the old Fuel space in 5 points... 8)

That would have been great. Two of the Mellow mushrooms in NE FL are in the same parking lot as Movie Theaters and we like to go to MM before or after a flick.

I knew exactly what you meant, and when you construct the new building, you're going to have to make room somewhere to meet your parking requirement for the footage over the demolished structure.

So where do you put the parking lot? 

Where the buildings that no one wants to renovate anymore due to the stringent requirements for moving into existing space.

Quote from: fieldafm on July 02, 2012, 01:53:37 PM

QuoteMy biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

Mellow is not affected by the moratorium (the gas station has been purchased and the application has been submitted), but yes the legislation that may get voted on tonight does nothing to address the massive hole in the Overlay that encourages developers to tear down non-contributing structures (many built in the 1920s) to avoid parking requirements... and goes so far as to make it less attractive to use contributing strucutres for certain kinds of businesses even though current zoning laws do not (nor should) restrict their use.   

Yes, this is the scary by-product that we won't realize how bad it is until some high-profile project taking advantage of the loopholes smacks us across the face.  For those who think it can't happen, just look at Warren Motors.  That entire dealership, which takes up a full city block, is about to be demolished for a McDonald's and Family Dollar.  If it can happen on a property that large on State Street, it can certainly take place in Riverside.

Quote from: thelakelander on July 02, 2012, 02:12:27 PM

Quote from: fieldafm on July 02, 2012, 01:53:37 PM

QuoteMy biggest worry with the new restrictions is that they make using existing historic building stock less attractive.

Mellow is not affected by the moratorium (the gas station has been purchased and the application has been submitted), but yes the legislation that may get voted on tonight does nothing to address the massive hole in the Overlay that encourages developers to tear down non-contributing structures (many built in the 1920s) to avoid parking requirements... and goes so far as to make it less attractive to use contributing strucutres for certain kinds of businesses even though current zoning laws do not (nor should) restrict their use.   

Yes, this is the scary by-product that we won't realize how bad it is until some high-profile project taking advantage of the loopholes smacks us across the face.  For those who think it can't happen, just look at Warren Motors.  That entire dealership, which takes up a full city block, is about to be demolished for a McDonald's and Family Dollar.  If it can happen on a property that large on State Street, it can certainly take place in Riverside.

Consider something like the old First Guaranty HR building (CenterState HQ is on JTB/95 now, the King Street bldg will be just another branch and no longer the banks' HQ... meaning there is an incentive to sell unecessary buildings and/or land) being bought, torn down and replaced by a McDonalds... wouldn't that be awesome?  :o  No?  Well, it would be completely legal while other restaurants that would contribute to the fabric of the neighborhood would face unfair restrictions. 

That's the law of unintended consequences and it WILL (not IF) happen in Riverside/Avondale if this law passes (sadly it likely will).

Laws formed from knee jerk reactions instead of from the careful consideration of the facts and a study of the opportunities offered from sensible alternatives are very harmful to our community.  I am sorry to say, this moratorium is one of those laws.

This is a tough one but likely when the bad outcomes from this bill start RAP and the city council will move to correct. Sadly they have to put their hand in the door before they believe it will hurt when it is slammed.

You could understand if almost all of the contributing historic stock was already being made use of.

I think CM Love understands more than many are crediting him with....which is why he's responding to some very vocal constituents in his district by putting forth this legislation.

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 01, 2012, 08:04:40 AM
If large restaurants like Mojo 4 are pulling in cars from far away places like Orange Park, then that is the problem. Another giant restaurant like Mellow Mushroom, especially a national chain, will pull in more "outsiders" with cars. These "outsiders" will never take a bus to get here. They see the Shoppes of Avondale as just another Town Center to drive to. If Mellow Mushroom wants to be helpful, they should open in a real dead spot, not crowded little Avondale. What about opening next to the John Gorrie condos?

This seems to be the most misguided fear about this whole issue. People are not going to come flocking in from all sides of town to come to a Mellow Mushroom in Avondale.

That’s like saying “Hey did you hear about the Mcdonalds in Palatka? The one that’s completely and totally identical to all of the other ones across the nation? We should drive there and check it out!” No one far away from Avondale is gonna care about this MM. There’s already several throughout the city.

Orsay, The Brick, Biscotti’s, Town… these are the exclusive and unique restaurants that “outsiders” will actually make an effort to check out. These places have been established for a while now. Are they currently causing a problem? And not to mention... outsiders? Isn’t that kind of a archaic way of viewing things? Oh no. People are coming in from all over the place and giving their money to our local businesses. What a dilemma!

[/quote]
Orsay, The Brick, Biscotti’s, Town… these are the exclusive and unique restaurants that “outsiders” will actually make an effort to check out. These places have been established for a while now. Are they currently causing a problem? And not to mention... outsiders? Isn’t that kind of a archaic way of viewing things? Oh no. People are coming in from all over the place and giving their money to our local businesses. What a dilemma!
[/quote]

So glad somebody finally said the obvious.  There is a MM in Fleming Island, at the Beach and Southside.  Why would those folks drive in?

Quote from: Bewler on July 02, 2012, 03:39:20 PM

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 01, 2012, 08:04:40 AM
If large restaurants like Mojo 4 are pulling in cars from far away places like Orange Park, then that is the problem. Another giant restaurant like Mellow Mushroom, especially a national chain, will pull in more "outsiders" with cars. These "outsiders" will never take a bus to get here. They see the Shoppes of Avondale as just another Town Center to drive to. If Mellow Mushroom wants to be helpful, they should open in a real dead spot, not crowded little Avondale. What about opening next to the John Gorrie condos?

This seems to be the most misguided fear about this whole issue. People are not going to come flocking in from all sides of town to come to a Mellow Mushroom in Avondale.

That’s like saying “Hey did you hear about the Mcdonalds in Palatka? The one that’s completely and totally identical to all of the other ones across the nation? We should drive there and check it out!” No one far away from Avondale is gonna care about this MM. There’s already several throughout the city.

Orsay, The Brick, Biscotti’s, Town… these are the exclusive and unique restaurants that “outsiders” will actually make an effort to check out. These places have been established for a while now. Are they currently causing a problem? And not to mention... outsiders? Isn’t that kind of a archaic way of viewing things? Oh no. People are coming in from all over the place and giving their money to our local businesses. What a dilemma!

I said "if" cars are being pulled in from other neighborhoods. I don't really know if they are. How many people who go to Brick or Mojo 4 on a Saturday night just walk there from three blocks away and how many drive in from, say, Orange Park? Large chain restaurants with parking lots and national name recognition/marketing power are more likely to bring in non-locals which means cars, cars, cars.

I'm pro-development and pro-walkability, which to me means small stores and narrow streets. It means I can leave my house and do what I want without getting in a car or feeling like a car might run me over. It usually means small parking lots, too. If we have to build giant parking lots or parking garages in Avondale to accomodate people driving in from around Jacksonville, it will destroy the neighborhood. And locals aren't used to strangers walking through the streets in front of their houses late at night, to and from their parked cars. That is what "downtowns" historically were for. The Shoppes of Avondale is not downtown.

Maybe the answer is permit parking for residents, parking tickets for violators, and valet parking for those who need to drive in. When I was a teenager in Virginia trying to go out at night in Washington DC, this type of policy encouraged us to car pool, even though we all had cars.

QuoteMaybe the answer is permit parking for residents, parking tickets for violators, and valet parking for those who need to drive in. When I was a teenager in Virginia trying to go out at night in Washington DC, this type of policy encouraged us to car pool, even though we all had cars.

Another great example!  It is 2012, there are examples all over the country of how people overcome these issues.  I would rather have someone using the existing property and not tearing it down and building a 7/11. 

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 02, 2012, 04:28:41 PM
Large chain restaurants with parking lots and national name recognition/marketing power are more likely to bring in non-locals which means cars, cars, cars.

See, I don't think that's true. I wouldn't drive to the Mojo's in Avondale because I'm closer to the one on University. Just like how if I ever felt like going to Starbucks, I wouldn't drive to the one in Riverside because there's probably several other ones closer. Unique landmark type places are more likely to get people to drive across town.

Just ask Mayport.

If you do residential only permit parking on public streets, you definitely would need to charge the users something.  If you don't, you're passing the costs of implementing and maintaining the system on everyone else.

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 01, 2012, 08:04:40 AM
If large restaurants like Mojo 4 are pulling in cars from far away places like Orange Park, then that is the problem. Another giant restaurant like Mellow Mushroom, especially a national chain, will pull in more "outsiders" with cars. These "outsiders" will never take a bus to get here. They see the Shoppes of Avondale as just another Town Center to drive to. If Mellow Mushroom wants to be helpful, they should open in a real dead spot, not crowded little Avondale. What about opening next to the John Gorrie condos?

What bus? We've got a plan in place for a streetcar line and streetcars WILL get both outsiders and insiders out of their cars. The success of a streetcar, the vehicle that built the neighborhood in the first place, could be greatly multiplied with a terminus in a location with a fairly large parking facility. Sports district to FSCJ Kent or Roosevelt Plaza perhaps would be a good start...

OCKLAWAHA

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 02, 2012, 04:28:41 PM


I'm pro-development and pro-walkability, which to me means small stores and narrow streets. It means I can leave my house and do what I want without getting in a car or feeling like a car might run me over. It usually means small parking lots, too. If we have to build giant parking lots or parking garages in Avondale to accomodate people driving in from around Jacksonville, it will destroy the neighborhood. And locals aren't used to strangers walking through the streets in front of their houses late at night, to and from their parked cars.

You are most likely gonna be run over by one of your fellow Avondale/Riverside residents. ;)  They make the majority of the trips in your neighborhood.

Quote from: fieldafm on July 02, 2012, 01:12:51 PM
The real questions at this point are:


What is RAP's position on the application (it was submitted at 220 seats, a net increase of 113 seats to the commercial area)?

My guess is it is no longer a question of whether or not we are "Ready" or "Like" or "Dislike" a certain venue,  some will say "Know" to Avondale 'Growth',RAP and others will explore in depth a combo PUD Rezoning,Administrative Deviation & Zoning Exception that begs for further scrutiny,is likely better suited for an intense commercial corridor and is far from " Done Deal" Seal.

RAP and others can refer to existing rule,precedent.

For instance,regarding 220/113:
Apparently,under City Code MM would require 134 parking spaces,but is providing 21 spaces overall.
Some would say that other restaurants within the Shoppes are not held to this standard.

For many years,decades,available parking met increasing demand and acommodated a more viable commercial area.

A couple of years ago,1,600 sf/82 seat 'Town' (Application Number E-10-76) was approved. The Planning Department imposed certain conditions,including the concept that the proposed use would not harm the character and function of adjacent neighborhoods,proposed use precludes non residential traffic in to adjacent neighborhoods.(COJ FLUE 3.2.4)

At this point, a seemingly mere additional need for 113 spaces represents a looming critical deficiency;
the deficient 113 spaces is more than the total number of parking spaces currently striped in front of all the Shoppes between Talbot & Dancy.

There are standards and criteria to be met with zoning exceptions that could promote public health,safety,convenience,welfare.

Bike racks likely to offer little or no viable mitigation for this combo PUD/ZE/AD 6,000 /4,000 sf venue.

Now there is a name for a local brew,defiantly served: PUDZEAD

A nationally promoted "Best Place",such episodes could place R/A in the headlines. Will the coverage uplift,or detract??

Onward!

Stephen we need to remember the object here is to stymie economic progress not to build more parking.  Once the parking starts getting built to meet the new requirements RAP and the Council will likely rush to correct Mr. Love's error.  Particularly when historic stock is no longer as valued since you have to build parking anyway now. 

Quote from: Know Growth on July 06, 2012, 12:09:52 AM

Quote from: fieldafm on July 02, 2012, 01:12:51 PM
The real questions at this point are:


What is RAP's position on the application (it was submitted at 220 seats, a net increase of 113 seats to the commercial area)?

My guess is it is no longer a question of whether or not we are "Ready" or "Like" or "Dislike" a certain venue,  some will say "Know" to Avondale 'Growth',RAP and others will explore in depth a combo PUD Rezoning,Administrative Deviation & Zoning Exception that begs for further scrutiny,is likely better suited for an intense commercial corridor and is far from " Done Deal" Seal.

RAP and others can refer to existing rule,precedent.

For instance,regarding 220/113:
Apparently,under City Code MM would require 134 parking spaces,but is providing 21 spaces overall.
Some would say that other restaurants within the Shoppes are not held to this standard.

For many years,decades,available parking met increasing demand and acommodated a more viable commercial area.

A couple of years ago,1,600 sf/82 seat 'Town' (Application Number E-10-76) was approved. The Planning Department imposed certain conditions,including the concept that the proposed use would not harm the character and function of adjacent neighborhoods,proposed use precludes non residential traffic in to adjacent neighborhoods.(COJ FLUE 3.2.4)

At this point, a seemingly mere additional need for 113 spaces represents a looming critical deficiency;
the deficient 113 spaces is more than the total number of parking spaces currently striped in front of all the Shoppes between Talbot & Dancy.

There are standards and criteria to be met with zoning exceptions that could promote public health,safety,convenience,welfare.

Bike racks likely to offer little or no viable mitigation for this combo PUD/ZE/AD 6,000 /4,000 sf venue.

Now there is a name for a local brew,defiantly served: PUDZEAD

A nationally promoted "Best Place",such episodes could place R/A in the headlines. Will the coverage uplift,or detract??

Onward!

Worth repeating     Newzzzz

Quote from: thelakelander on July 02, 2012, 08:00:11 PM
If you do residential only permit parking on public streets, you definitely would need to charge the users something.  If you don't, you're passing the costs of implementing and maintaining the system on everyone else.

Lake,seems folks like you better than Stephen around these parts,but a few have wondered about your personal i interests.

Quote from: Know Growth on July 06, 2012, 01:20:34 AM

Quote from: stephendare on July 06, 2012, 12:39:45 AM

It is 1:30 am,do you have an alarm go off when I post?


Just Imagine!!!!
With MM open to 2 am we could meet,talk things over in Person.Yea Jacksonville!!!
Then hop on our bikes.........

Quote from: stephendare on July 06, 2012, 01:33:30 AM

Quote from: Know Growth on July 06, 2012, 01:20:34 AM

Quote from: stephendare on July 06, 2012, 12:39:45 AM


the neighborhood was mentioned in a list two years ago by the American Planning Association, Know Growth.  The very existence of the growing commercial areas---all five districts---- were specifically listed as a major reason for the designation.

It is 1:30 am,do you have an alarm go off when I post??

Here we swerve from the crux of my post.So be it.


Understood.
It is a question of balance,limits,and indeed "Planning" at stake.

Current events have drawn certain players in to the RAP,Citizen fold that could hardly be cast as (horrors!) anti growth,such as former Clay County Planner Susan Fraser. Susan played pivotal role during key Brannon Chaffee Sector Plan/Beltway proceedings.We had then a contentious relationship.Her current concerns with MM PUD/ZE/AD are welcome,and telling.

Almost as if a Carl Hiaasen script.....

Onward!

yes, onward with your parking lots and torches.  Don't look back.

Read and study more,Post less

I first fell in love with Mellow Mushroom when I was visiting Athens for a conference of college journalists.  Before making the trip from Douglas, I asked various schoolmates about the local flavor as I wanted to have a college town experience.  More than a handful of people recommended Mellow Mushroom and I knew where my first stop would be after my assistant editor Tom Costello and I checked into our hotel room.  Tom and I made a beeline to the Mellow Mushroom, where we had a very memorable dinner, made especially unforgettable, by our meeting Michael Stipe that evening.  That is the Mellow Mushroom that I want to remember.  Today, I believe the Mellow Mushroom has turned into the kind of chain that I would have been dissuaded from choosing if I were a college student today who was looking for something distinctly Athens.  Heck, there's even a Mellow Mushroom in...horrors... Gainesville!  I do not begrudge them the right to expand (or jump the shark) because we cannot live our lives expecting everything and everyone to live in suspended animation to give us a personal sense of continuity and comfort.  In a nutshell, the college me would have been too busy shouting 'sell out' for the 'grown-up' me to pick my battles.  How I learned to stop worrying and love the 'Mushroom.  Alas...

I've been to the Mellow in Athens (charicatures of famous UGA alums on the wall)....and I think it is very similar to many of the the restaurants in the chain....I tell people not to judge them solely based on the stores in Tinseltown or Fleming Island.

and, btw, the one in Gainesville closed a few years ago....but there is one now in Tally!

QuoteOnce the parking starts getting built to meet the new requirements RAP and the Council will likely rush to correct Mr. Love's error.

Jim Love is a good neighbor, literally, and a strong ally for growth in our area. He had to build a compromise between the owners of property around Kickbacks as well as MM. If you are under 100 seats, you don't have to pay for parking, but if you are above, you have to find a way to pay for 50% of the parking for your shop. Very simple, easy, and it helps place the burden of huge growth back onto the restaurant owner.

There was a great article in the Resident recently on what the Shoppes of Avondale started as, and what the purpose is with the diversity in the area. MM will happen, just as Kickbacks will happen, but other large seated restaurants may not, without finding a way to resolve parking.

I think Jim did a great job with this, and many people forget, he is located at King and College streets and is Steve Flores' neighbor, so he understands firsthand the parking issues.

Quote from: Know Growth on July 08, 2012, 10:11:09 PM
Read and study more,Post less

Says the guy that just posted 5 gibberish posts in a row

All that aside, here are some more adpative reuses that would be similar to Mellow Avondale:

Anaheim, CA

(http://www.oldgas.com/info/images/orange-v1.jpg)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-77Ck6sYqG0c/TtZGIblf91I/AAAAAAAADWc/719U-E8vLnw/s1600/DSCN0490.JPG)

KC, MO

(http://manseekingcoffee.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/fillingstationgarageinside.JPG.jpg)

(http://manseekingcoffee.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/fillingstationgaragefront.JPG)

Buffalo, NY

(http://www.buffalorising.com/3777660929_dfccaba12b_b.jpg)

(http://www.buffalorising.com/assets_c/2009/08/3777647567_48680dfe10_b-thumb-375xauto-4975.jpg)

(http://www.buffalospree.com/filling-station-home1.jpg)

(http://s3-media1.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/AM76xwBzKAFqAgBiTqeYeQ/ls.jpg)

(http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/c84.0.403.403/p403x403/601685_376056839124906_1852193742_n.jpg)

Winston Salem, NC

(http://www.winstonsalemmonthly.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/WS-Filling-Station.gif)

(http://creativekitchenadventures.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4th-Street-Filling-Station2-800x600.jpg)

Ron Littlepage weighs in:

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2012-07-11/call-would-help-parking-pensions#comment-form (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2012-07-11/call-would-help-parking-pensions#comment-form).

Seems if everyone would focus as much energy into discussing solutions instead of propaganda, the neighborhood can benefit.

Good editorial by Ron.

Perhaps I am naive, but I don't understand why these opposition groups and a neighborhood group like RAP won't meet with the developer? 

Seems to me that you get better outcomes when you work together?

The whole thing is very strange.  This isn't a round peg being fit into a square hole... you have a reuse that will be contextually sensitive to it's surroundings, a developer that has gone so far as to print his personal cell phone number in the Resident for anyone that has any questions (that's unheard of) and job creation in a stagnant economy. 

In regards to parking, there are alternatives... a legal one would be to tear down both buildings and rebuild with zero spaces (bad), another legal one would be to use the existing area near the old gas pumps as a huge stacked parking facility (bad), let the buidings sit and rot in (at least the case of the service station) their already blighted conditions (bad), introduce the concept of a density bonus for public squares and actual bike storage facilities (depending on how this is structured could be good or bad, however MANY other cities fund great community-driven projects through density bonuses) or better manage parking demand/supply (good).

I still haven't heard a convincing argument that leads me to believe the current course of action is a productive one in the present context.

I just spent a few days in Chicago's Lakeview last week.  That's a neighborhood that actually could say it has parking issues.  However, they've overcome them with a variety of solutions including a true network of bicycle facilities, four way stop signs on streets instead of traffic signals, mass transit, pedestrian amenities (ADA accessible sidewalks, allowing street trees to mature, pedestrian wayfinding signage, mixed-use zoning, etc.).  While they do have residential permit parking only on side streets, anyone is allowed to park on them between 6am-6pm. Several residential streets are only one way, which provides double the amount of on-street parking as well.  Maybe, I'm a little more urban minded than the average Jaxson when it comes to our core but this is the type of environment I've always envisioned for our older neighborhoods.  Here are a few pictures.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Lake-View/i-jzfZNS3/0/M/P1570366-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Lake-View/i-gKJhhCN/0/M/P1570393-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Lake-View/i-wbTC8D8/0/M/P1570409-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Lake-View/i-Czgk3Nj/0/M/P1570539-M.jpg)

Why should we look for real solutions Lake when we can just use the parking "solutions" that worked so well for businesses in Downtown.

BTW I love Lakeside but Wicker Park/Bucktown is better.

Glad you could check out Lakeview.  I think it really represents the perfect example for Avondale to learn from.

Wicker Park reminds me more of a transitional neighborhood into a Midtown setting like Five Points/Brooklyn.

Wicker Park....spent some time there too....

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-xj9RbCB/0/M/P1570444-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-TZWQ9hx/0/M/P1570450-M.jpg)
Had dinner at taco restaurant (housed in an old auto repair garage) who also had a food truck.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-pc85v4H/0/M/P1570476-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-rgRKBkD/0/M/P1570473-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-TZWQ9hx/0/M/P1570450-M.jpg)

That's Big Star, a reuse featured in the original article.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Development/Gas-Station-Adaptive-Reuse/i-JwWnTcD/0/M/DSC02882-M.jpg)

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Development/Gas-Station-Adaptive-Reuse/i-jZWCCVR/0/M/DSC02883-M.jpg)

Quote from: thelakelander on July 11, 2012, 01:18:54 PM
Wicker Park....spent some time there too....
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Chicago-Wicker-Park/i-TZWQ9hx/0/M/P1570450-M.jpg)
Had dinner at taco restaurant (housed in an old auto repair garage) who also had a food truck.

Yeah, that little spot rules! I was there two months ago and it was PACKED. The place is one block from a train stop that was bustling with the evening rush. Such a mix of people: kids & parents, tattooed youths, and folks in suits. IDEAL urban spot.

I know of a perfectly good space at 9th and Main that would easily fit a MM and wouldn't cause such controversy.

Just read this loooong article in a law journal on TILTs as a way to end NIMBYism:
http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/LEO/LEO_Schleicher_City_Unplanning.pdf

TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc. NIMBYs reject development that benefits the whole city because of fears that "new building reduces their property values by introducing nuisances, new supply, and new residents that compete for common-pool resources [like parks, schools, and restaurants]."

The proposed (somewhat libertarian) solution is to use TILTs: directly give local homeowners some of the new tax and parking revenues the city would realize resulting from development for a set number of years. Local homeowners would receive bonus checks or property tax rebates. Part of this involves ending free parking and hiking parking meter rates to reduce car congestion. Effects would be support from local home owners for increased development and parking and also increased non-car transit and lower housing costs. Local neighborhoods would still be able to vote to accept or reject development.

Anyway, just wanted to share TILTs as an interesting solution to our local development issue.

Quote from: BrooklynSouth on July 11, 2012, 03:17:20 PM
Just read this loooong article in a law journal on TILTs as a way to end NIMBYism:
http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/LEO/LEO_Schleicher_City_Unplanning.pdf

TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc. NIMBYs reject development that benefits the whole city because of fears that "new building reduces their property values by introducing nuisances, new supply, and new residents that compete for common-pool resources [like parks, schools, and restaurants]."

The proposed (somewhat libertarian) solution is to use TILTs: directly give local homeowners some of the new tax and parking revenues the city would realize resulting from development for a set number of years. Local homeowners would receive bonus checks or property tax rebates. Part of this involves ending free parking and hiking parking meter rates to reduce car congestion. Effects would be support from local home owners for increased development and parking and also increased non-car transit and lower housing costs. Local neighborhoods would still be able to vote to accept or reject development. 

Anyway, just wanted to share TILTs as an interesting solution to our local development issue.

Riverside/Avondale is moving towards TIF/BIDs instead of something like a TILT.  From the City's perspective, I couldnt see a TILT as being beneficial fiscally.  There are many capital improvement projects that could benefit from a TIF/BID type structure.  Riverside/Avondale doesn't have multiple revenue streams like parking fees (and can't benefit from the Mobility Fee for transportation projects b/c of the moratorium) to pay for these capital projects.
 
Rebating property tax revenues wipes out that which makes built mixed use environments like Riverside/Avondale so fiscally viable from a local gov't perspective. 

Furthermore, the neighborhood is just not dense enough for a TILT to be a viable solution. 

Without reading about the TILT model, it seems that it would be more attuned for new construction rather than infill and would probably be more akin to a residential area such as WGV or Nocatee or even Oakleaf as a way to incorporate actual commercial use in the neighborhood instead of having a cluster just on the outside.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on July 11, 2012, 03:50:22 PM
Without reading about the TILT model, it seems that it would be more attuned for new construction rather than infill and would probably be more akin to a residential area such as WGV or Nocatee or even Oakleaf as a way to incorporate actual commercial use in the neighborhood instead of having a cluster just on the outside.

The article seemed to really be about residential development, not business or commercial. Essentially, if I wanted to tear down my single family home and build a 4-story apartment building, I could be sure that under current zoning practices, the neighborhood would always find a way to stop it unless they could be compensated in some way, such as TILTs.

I thought the core idea of tax-sharing was interesting and might apply to non-residential development being blocked by residents: if Mellow Mushroom became a success and if all the free parking around the Shoppes area was converted to pay parking, then all homeowners within, say, 5 blocks of Mellow Mushroom would be entitled to a portion of the business taxes and parking fees for a period of, say, 5 years.

I'm usually skeptical of libertarian solutions as being too simplistic and under-counting how difficult collective action is, but this sounded solution sounded reasonable so I thought I'd post it.

Sounds like a tilt would have been a good tool for the old Jackson Square Developement. 

I agree with a neighbor that stickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away. We the residents and the store owners will find a way to co-exist and thrive. It may not be pretty, but we will find a way to solve the problem and compromise.

+1

Lake,

The "residents only after 6-7PM" was one of the solutions floated for the neighborhoods near the Shoppes of Avondale.  It was not followed because of issues about enforcement at night.

Do you know how it is working in that Chicago neighborhood?

Quote from: Dog Walker on July 12, 2012, 11:24:14 AM
Lake,

The "residents only after 6-7PM" was one of the solutions floated for the neighborhoods near the Shoppes of Avondale.  It was not followed because of issues about enforcement at night.

Do you know how it is working in that Chicago neighborhood?

Keep in mind:
Avondale has about 4,200 people per square mile, while Lakeview is in the neighborhood of 22,000 people per square mile.

I agree with this statement below, b/c parking decals will be a case of 'be careful what you wish for'.  I think a neighborhood with a still fairly suburbanesque-population density that hasn't really tackled parking management in a meaningful way nor provided trasnportation alternatives that summarily wishes to restrict business access by limiting customer access (in a commercial district that was largely there before most homes in the area) is going to kill that which makes the Shoppes unique and viable.

Quotestickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away.

Look at St Armands Circle(far bigger than the Shoppes) in Siesta Key(Sarasota).  They don't restrict on street parking among residential streets to residents only and are opposed to parking meters.

http://www.lbknews.com/2011/07/15/st-armands-circle-not-interested-in-parking-meters/ (http://www.lbknews.com/2011/07/15/st-armands-circle-not-interested-in-parking-meters/)

QuoteThe St. Armands Circle Business Improvement District (BID) declared this week that it does not want the parking meters the City of Sarasota recently installed downtown.

They realize that punishing those that visit and patronize neighborhood businesses is what makes places like Downtown Jax such a difficult place to do business. 

We ate at the brick for the forth of July and without having to circle the block or look around did what most people do. We parked in one of the open spaces directly in front and walked the 14 steps into the door.

What's the problem again?

Forget Mellow Mush-shrune, what hoidy toidy Avondale needs are a few Dollar Generals, a Tractor Supply, an Aarons rental, and a buy-here/ pay-here car lot at the corner of Dancy and Park.  Maybe the flea market currently located on Blanding, by the ole drive-in could find a new Avondale location.  How bout moving Shep's from Normandy to Avondale?  Bring some real character to the place.

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 12, 2012, 12:16:07 PM
We ate at the brick for the forth of July and without having to circle the block or look around did what most people do. We parked in one of the open spaces directly in front and walked the 14 steps into the door.

It was the Fourth of July. Avondale was empty because most people were at backyard barbeques.

To RMHoward: Your post indicates you have little idea what Avondale is. Yes, we have our multi-million dollar riverfront homes, but they are within a block of some 4-unit apartments (one with a limerock parking area in front), rental duplexes, and bungalows in the 5 figure range. It is what some of the gurus on this site would have to agree is eclectic. I can assure you that many of the not-so-hoity-toity are opposed to further nocturnal intrusion of inconsiderate parkers, whereas the riverfront owners probably don't care as much because they are further away.

No, we don't want crap businesses in the shopping area - places with the "character" you seem to think appropriate. The ambiance is fine like it is.

Once again, I see an example of someone who probably isn't directly affected by an issue telling those who are how to behave. Run or ruin your own neighborhood, but not mine, please and thank you.

QuoteRun or ruin your own neighborhood, but not mine, please and thank you.

Amen, if you don't live in Avondale, you really have no dog in this fight, thanks for your 2 cents, but we as neighbors can come up with our own solutions.

QuoteIt was the Fourth of July. Avondale was empty because most people were at backyard barbeques.

Not entirely true as you can find places to park all around the shopping areas, if you look. Patience is the key word here, no this is not St. Johns Town Center, but one day someone will realize that valet is not a bad word and setup an operation for people. Perhaps that is coming soon?

If there's one thing that I've started to realize from the arguments on this site is that no one wins. 

That being said, this is for you Avondale Parking Nazis (the rest of us already get it and don't need it explained at a 3rd grade level)

From the dairy case at the Roosevelt Publix to Zaxbys - a walk that many, many people make without even thinking about it, is the same as parking on Herschel to hit up the Shoppes.

Think about that for just a second....  The distance you walk if you park your car in an average spot at Target, go to Zaxby's for lunch, go shopping at Target and then get back in your car, you can park near Herschel and Van Wert, stroll through the park to the shoppes, not have the headache of 'circling the block' and you might not feel so GD guilty and order yourself a piece of pie after dinner.

What's the hurry anyhow?  West Wing has been off the air since '06/'07.... Isn't that what Netflix is for?

Quote from: goldy21 on July 14, 2012, 07:42:42 AM

Quote from: JeffreyS on July 12, 2012, 12:16:07 PM
We ate at the brick for the forth of July and without having to circle the block or look around did what most people do. We parked in one of the open spaces directly in front and walked the 14 steps into the door.

It was the Fourth of July. Avondale was empty because most people were at backyard barbeques.

Ate at Kickbacks last nigh at 7 parked across the street near walkers. About a one minute stroll to the front door. Drove by the brick about 8:45 several open parking spots. No this wasn't a busy time being a Monday night but imo all but a few hours on Friday and Saturday night aren't busy times. So why do anything to negatively impact the area because for a small amount of time during the week you might have to circle the block once to park and walk a few steps?

QuoteThink about that for just a second....  The distance you walk if you park your car in an average spot at Target, go to Zaxby's for lunch, go shopping at Target and then get back in your car, you can park near Herschel and Van Wert, stroll through the park to the shoppes, not have the headache of 'circling the block' and you might not feel so GD guilty and order yourself a piece of pie after dinner.

Not only that but if you're walking from Target to Zaxby's you're walking through a hot parking lot.  Park at Herschel and Van Wert and you can have a tree shaded walk to the Shoppes almost the entire time.

Quote from: cline on July 17, 2012, 01:36:11 PM

QuoteThink about that for just a second....  The distance you walk if you park your car in an average spot at Target, go to Zaxby's for lunch, go shopping at Target and then get back in your car, you can park near Herschel and Van Wert, stroll through the park to the shoppes, not have the headache of 'circling the block' and you might not feel so GD guilty and order yourself a piece of pie after dinner.

Not only that but if you're walking from Target to Zaxby's you're walking through a hot parking lot.  Park at Herschel and Van Wert and you can have a tree shaded walk to the Shoppes almost the entire time.

Until the knock out a building to put in parking, that is.

Wow, 33 pages and still going.

OK, I live in Avondale so I guess I have a dog in this fight. To me this isn't a parking issue, it's a density issue. Some people in and around the area are not used to a lot of on street parking and walking a few blocks to grab a bite to eat. I don't have an issue at all with Mellow coming into the neighborhood, i'm actually looking forward to it. if it ads to on street parking, big whoop, it's totally legal.

QuoteIf there's one thing that I've started to realize from the arguments on this site is that no one wins. 

Actually, we will win one way or another, John has purchased the gas station, so it is in his best interest to do something more with it, than letting it sit and rot, which was the other plan from the previous owner, who originally wanted 4 million for it.

TPC - I live over here next to Grace Church, we get parking issues every Sunday and when the Grace'rs lease out the building for other use. Somehow we survive the crush of parking on the street.  :o

Quote from someone earlier:
TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc

I added the bold print to point out that this author is simply uninformed:  Riverside Avondale is THE MOST LENIENT neighborhood in the city for new development, with 50% of the parking requirements needed in other areas of Jacksonville.   

Yes, we are opposed to developers who want even further reductions in parking.  But please stop this whining about how we are blocking growth.  Obey the law and we're okay, thank you.

Quote from: tayana42 on July 23, 2012, 11:13:02 PM
Quote from someone earlier:
TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc

I added the bold print to point out that this author is simply uninformed:  Riverside Avondale is THE MOST LENIENT neighborhood in the city for new development, with 50% of the parking requirements needed in other areas of Jacksonville.   

Yes, we are opposed to developers who want even further reductions in parking.  But please stop this whining about how we are blocking growth.  Obey the law and we're okay, thank you.

The issue here is that under the original overlay (law), Mellow Mushroom was not reducing the amount of parking.  That is why a new law was written increasing parking requirements to specifically block the type of growth Mellow Mushroom represented.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html)

The best way to handle this is to post the facts. Unfortunately, the facts support the idea that the current leadership in Riverside is indeed against new growth they deem unworthy or that they fear. 

Quote from: tayana42 on July 23, 2012, 11:13:02 PM
Quote from someone earlier:
TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc

I added the bold print to point out that this author is simply uninformed:  Riverside Avondale is THE MOST LENIENT neighborhood in the city for new development, with 50% of the parking requirements needed in other areas of Jacksonville.   

Yes, we are opposed to developers who want even further reductions in parking.  But please stop this whining about how we are blocking growth.  Obey the law and we're okay, thank you.

Your argument is based on the assumption that the entire city should have uniform density equal to that of Mandarin, Southside, etc...  Avondale requires fewer parking spaces than the Southside because Avondale was built in a time when people didn't fully rely on cars to get places.  It would be inappropriate and out of scale with the neighborhood to require the Southside's parking policies be enforced here.  While Avondale is easier for new development in terms of a parking requirement, it is far more strict in terms of design, scale, addressing the street, and fitting into the context of the neighborhood.  It is really an apples to oranges comparison that would only a simpleton would actually use/believe. 

This is a historic neighborhood that has previously supported much higher density than is currently in place and can support greater density in the future.  The main problems come from the city using southside-esque parking/traffic solutions in a historic neighborhood.  Even if MM doesn't come in, the parking situation will continue to get worse until we implement a greater diversity of transit options, including fixed rail.

Quote from: strider on July 24, 2012, 07:54:38 AM

Quote from: tayana42 on July 23, 2012, 11:13:02 PM
Quote from someone earlier:
TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc

I added the bold print to point out that this author is simply uninformed:  Riverside Avondale is THE MOST LENIENT neighborhood in the city for new development, with 50% of the parking requirements needed in other areas of Jacksonville.   

Yes, we are opposed to developers who want even further reductions in parking.  But please stop this whining about how we are blocking growth.  Obey the law and we're okay, thank you.

The issue here is that under the original overlay (law), Mellow Mushroom was not reducing the amount of parking.  That is why a new law was written increasing parking requirements to specifically block the type of growth Mellow Mushroom represented.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html)

The best way to handle this is to post the facts. Unfortunately, the facts support the idea that the current leadership in Riverside is indeed against new growth they deem unworthy or that they fear.

Strider, Unfortunately you have your facts wrong.  The proposed Mellow Mushroom development was not affected by the recent change to the Overlay.  First, the buildings are noncontributing structures so Mellow was always required to provide 50% of the parking.  Second, even if the structures were contributing, Mellow filed its applications prior to the legislation being introduced, therefore it wouldn't have affected them.

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 11, 2012, 11:02:09 PM
I agree with a neighbor that stickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away. We the residents and the store owners will find a way to co-exist and thrive. It may not be pretty, but we will find a way to solve the problem and compromise.

I saw this Harrisburg, PA last month (Resident Only Parking).  I thought this was a great idea.  You tow a few cars and it will change people's habits. 

Quote from: RMHoward on July 12, 2012, 05:15:16 PM

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 17, 2012, 02:56:38 AM

Quote from: WmNussbaum on July 14, 2012, 09:33:45 AM
Forget Mellow Mush-shrune, what hoidy toidy Avondale needs are a few Dollar Generals, a Tractor Supply, an Aarons rental, and a buy-here/ pay-here car lot at the corner of Dancy and Park.  Maybe the flea market currently located on Blanding, by the ole drive-in could find a new Avondale location.  How bout moving Shep's from Normandy to Avondale?  Bring some real character to the place.

QuoteRun or ruin your own neighborhood, but not mine, please and thank you.

Amen, if you don't live in Avondale, you really have no dog in this fight, thanks for your 2 cents, but we as neighbors can come up with our own solutions.

Your post indicates you have little idea what Avondale is.

Or it indicates that he was joking.

Quote from: KEGreene1 on July 24, 2012, 01:51:56 PM

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 11, 2012, 11:02:09 PM
I agree with a neighbor that stickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away. We the residents and the store owners will find a way to co-exist and thrive. It may not be pretty, but we will find a way to solve the problem and compromise.

I saw this Harrisburg, PA last month (Resident Only Parking).  I thought this was a great idea.  You tow a few cars and it will change people's habits. 

I wonder what the merchants thoughts are on Parking Permits.  At the meeting at Grace, the owner of Blue Fish stated that his patrons complain that they cannot find parking (which is odd considering he has his own lot).  I would find it hard to believe having permits would help this situation. 

Just ate in Avondale. Even with two fire trucks parked in the middle of the street at the shoppes we pulled into one of several open spots and walked the 40 or so steps into the restaurant.

The myth of the parking problems in Riverside have been grossly over stated.

Quote from: cline on July 24, 2012, 02:22:51 PM

Quote from: KEGreene1 on July 24, 2012, 01:51:56 PM

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 11, 2012, 11:02:09 PM
I agree with a neighbor that stickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away. We the residents and the store owners will find a way to co-exist and thrive. It may not be pretty, but we will find a way to solve the problem and compromise.

I saw this Harrisburg, PA last month (Resident Only Parking).  I thought this was a great idea.  You tow a few cars and it will change people's habits. 

I wonder what the merchants thoughts are on Parking Permits.  At the meeting at Grace, the owner of Blue Fish stated that his patrons complain that they cannot find parking (which is odd considering he has his own lot).  I would find it hard to believe having permits would help this situation.

The irony is that without better alternatives to address parking mgmt and supply, residential parking permits are going to kill the existing businesses.  One of those laws of unintended consequences people are just glossing over. 

Quote from: Kay on July 24, 2012, 10:26:33 AM

Quote from: strider on July 24, 2012, 07:54:38 AM

Quote from: tayana42 on July 23, 2012, 11:13:02 PM
Quote from someone earlier:
TILTs (Tax Increment Local Transfers) are a theoretical way that NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners can be bought off so that they stop blocking development via strict zoning, HOAs, lobbying city council, etc

I added the bold print to point out that this author is simply uninformed:  Riverside Avondale is THE MOST LENIENT neighborhood in the city for new development, with 50% of the parking requirements needed in other areas of Jacksonville.   

Yes, we are opposed to developers who want even further reductions in parking.  But please stop this whining about how we are blocking growth.  Obey the law and we're okay, thank you.

The issue here is that under the original overlay (law), Mellow Mushroom was not reducing the amount of parking.  That is why a new law was written increasing parking requirements to specifically block the type of growth Mellow Mushroom represented.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,15403.0.html)

The best way to handle this is to post the facts. Unfortunately, the facts support the idea that the current leadership in Riverside is indeed against new growth they deem unworthy or that they fear.

Strider, Unfortunately you have your facts wrong.  The proposed Mellow Mushroom development was not affected by the recent change to the Overlay.  First, the buildings are noncontributing structures so Mellow was always required to provide 50% of the parking.  Second, even if the structures were contributing, Mellow filed its applications prior to the legislation being introduced, therefore it wouldn't have affected them.

Thanks for correcting the fact of the non-contributing structures.  However, I am a bit confused by two things here.  The first is the part of the overlay posted below, originally posted by someone else as the part involving Mellow Mushrooms plans.

QuoteHere is the section in the Overlay that addresses parking for commercial buildings in a defined commercial area:

(2) Parking Requirements.
(a) Retail sales or service establishments and single family residential uses located in contributing structures within an identified commercial character area shall have zero(0) parking requirements. Any expansion of contributing structures, after the date of the adoption of this Subpart shall provide 50% of the required parking for the expansion pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use. Additionally, zero (0) parking shall be required of new structures when such structures are built to the same or less than the square footage of a non-conforming structure if
that structure is being replaced. However, all adjacent on street parking shall be brought into compliance with Section656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4. Otherwise, the number of
spaces for retail sales and service establishments and multifamily uses shall be 50% of the required number of spaces pursuant to Section 656.604 and Section 656.604(e)(3) for any type of office use, provided there are no additional parking credits applied under Section 656.607(d) of the Zoning Code. However contiguous on-street parking may be provided consistent with Section 656.399.23(2)(b)(i-iv) and Table 4.

The second is the fact that the new law's summary written by the city referenced the Mellow Mushroom's type (actually listed Kickbacks) parking issues as a reason for the law.  Makes one wonder why it was even written if Mellow Mushroom's plans were already within the bounds of the NEW law...

Yes, I was fully aware that the new law would not effect Mellow Mushroom.

Yep, I can certainly see whether Riverside's leadership is for or against (certain types of) new development or not.  Can you?

There are a variety of reasonable solutions to this issue, but they all require compromise by one or more parties. There is also a need for certain players to accept accountability for their choices and actions.

I live in the neighborhood, but do not live in the area immediately affected by traffic and noise created by the Shops. I love the neighborhood and choose to live here rather than any other part of town.

I find it disingenuous to claim that Avondale doesn’t already have a parking problem. It is also unrealistic to offer as a solution 50 seat restaurants â€" the economics simply do not work on that scale. The local property owners â€" both residential and commercial â€" deserve to be heard, but the neighborhood as a whole also must be considered.
Whether you like the MM concept is immaterial. We live in a free market society with laws governing private property and its uses. If the owner of the property MM wants to occupy wishes to lease space to MM or any other business then that is the owner’s right, pending any laws that prevent them from doing so. In this case MM is not bared from the area due to zoning or any other laws that I am aware of (I realize that there is an after the fact effort to limit the use but that is simply unreasonable to both MM and the property owner (s)). So if MM has the right to open a restaurant or car wash or pawn shop based upon the applicable laws then how can we deny them their rights? I think that MM has been very open and obliging to the community in their request for feedback and a sincere desire to provide information to the public.

The parking problem in Avondale is here today and needs a resolution. However, this strategy of “I am already here, it’s the next guy’s problem” isn’t going to work. I am shocked at the lack of forward thinking by those who claim to be the most affected parties. I hear nothing of substance from the shop owners or the residents immediately adjacent about the need to solve parking. I only hear MM is evil and they must be stopped. Hyperbole and witch hunts. I am starting to believe that this is an artifice for an anti-MM agenda. I have no idea why all parties wouldn’t seek a resolution to the parking problem for the benefit of all involved and the greater neighborhood.

The argument that MM will bring in a “party” crowd seems duplicitous to me. Surely these people have been into Monty’s or seen the activity outside of the Casbah late at night or even the Brick. I know the response will be something like “we don’t need any more of that type of people than we already have.” So now we are sitting in judgment of who should or shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy our neighborhood? What is the criterion for those activities or people that should be allowed in the neighborhood and who gets to determine the criteria? Should we base the criteria on appearance, their choice of entertainment, the way they dress? How many tattoos, piercings, buttoned down shirts, country club logos, short skirts, high heels or business suits are acceptable?

The claim that the Shops are now suddenly causing a decrease in property values or other gripes about the activities in the Shops by residential property owners are simply hypocritical. Those whose voice seems loudest are those who live adjacent to the Shops. I realize that the economic activity has grown in the Shops over the last few years, but those people bought with full knowledge of the proximity of the Shops to their homes. However, they should not be forced to endure blocked driveways or litter or any other unreasonable inconvenience due to their proximity to the Shops. I would wager that many bought BECAUSE of the proximity of the Shops to their property. These buildings have been there, were there and will be there. Empty or filled, which is preferable or best for the neighborhood? Which will most affect property values negatively?  What I hear these people saying is they want a certain type of economic activity that fits their narrow view of what is good for them. A free market doesn’t work that way.

Conversely the retail property owners are the ones who seem to have no voice. These people bought property as an investment believing their rights were protected and now find their freedom being curtailed and the value of their investment reduced due to the proposed moratorium on the use of their property.

I firmly believe that the economic impact of successful business on other nearby businesses is positive. Success begets success which in turn will only improve the whole. A thriving business environment in the Shops helps all those with a vested interest in Avondale.

I do not understand this “all or nothing” approach that some seem to be taking to growth or use. Whether its MM today or 7-11 tomorrow someone is going to utilize this space and when they do its going to be with the goal of making money and to make money businesses need customers. So any use of the space will increase traffic in our neighborhood. All of which brings us back to the idea that Avondale needs a long term plan to manage traffic and parking.

In my opinion the only realistic solution to the parking problem is to modify Boone Park. It goes largely unused other than the playground area. The remainder of the park between St Johns Avenue and Herschel Street is a creepy and over grown. In my mind a park should have trees, but it should also have sun light and room to throw a ball or have a picnic or fly a kite. Boone Park has none of these things as it is currently configured. Why not solve two problems? Get buy-in from the Shop owners, City and MM to fund a parking lot on the St Johns side of the park and rebuild a new and better playground and bright open area in the remaining 60% of the park? Charge money to park there and use that money to pay back the investors in the short term and to fund the park and other improvements to the Shops  long term. If properly landscaped, buffered and configured it could be a boon (sorry couldn’t resist the pun) to the entire neighborhood and solve the parking dilemma immediately.

I know some will want to protect the “natural” environment, but most of the trees are nothing but scrub pines and this is not how the park was planned originally. The park we have today is largely the result of zero management and nature reclaiming the land. It does not function well and it has no historical significance as configured. I see no other economically viable, historically acceptable solution given the limitations of the local geography than to modify the park. A parking garage simply will not work. Stopping growth is not possible. Tearing down houses to make way for a parking lot is not feasible or good for the neighborhood. So instead of attacking each other and looking for reasons not to adapt, let’s look for a solution that benefits the most people and the neighborhood as a whole and lets be fair and realistic while doing it.

I am not in favor or against MM as a member of the shops. That said I would go there if it were an option. I do believe in property rights, free enterprise and entrepreneurial people.  I also believe in being fair to the property owners, both immediately adjacent to the shops and throughout the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I have friends on both sides of the debate. As someone said earlier it’s no fun when it’s your ox is being gored. However, a few months ago everyone was up in arms that 7-11 was coming in to the Shops, today its MM, tomorrow it’s going to be something else. We cannot block economic evolution so we must adapt to it. Whether it’s a redefinition of Boone Park or a different solution, we must address the extant problem and plan for the future. I would rather work with MM today than face someone much less concerned with the fabric of the neighborhood who wants to impose their will on the Shops regardless of the impact on the neighborhood.

There seems to be much misinformation and confusion about many facets of the current debate. What is or isn’t being proposed, how big, how many seats, etc. I would hope someone would find a way to get the unembellished facts out to the public. Not a single side of the story, but the facts, the whole story. Maybe this responsibility should fall to Jim Love as he in effect represents all parties and the neighborhood.  I am 100% confident that people are reacting to false or misleading information on both sides that is created by ignorance and the “I heard…” or “Sally told Bob…”method of communication. Let’s figure out what the truth is and address that instead of arguing about gossip.

I don't believe Mr. Boone donated that land for a parking lot. I don't think moving the fence a little to accomadate parking is a bad idea. But a parking lot definitely is a bad idea.

QuoteThe claim that the Shops are now suddenly causing a decrease in property values or other gripes about the activities in the Shops by residential property owners are simply hypocritical. Those whose voice seems loudest are those who live adjacent to the Shops. I realize that the economic activity has grown in the Shops over the last few years, but those people bought with full knowledge of the proximity of the Shops to their homes.

This exact claim was brought up at the meeting at Grace.  In fact, it might have been Mark Anderson from the We Love Avondale group who said it- I don't remember exactly what the person's name was.  But basically, they said that they bought their house in 2005 or 2006, put money into it to fix it up and now it is not worth anywhere near what they paid for it.  They tried to make a connection that any increase in restaurants (seating) at the shop will cause more problems which will, in turn, cause their property value to drop further.  They made no mention of the fact that the home lost value because they paid too much to begin with.

QuoteI don't believe Mr. Boone donated that land for a parking lot. I don't think moving the fence a little to accomadate parking is a bad idea. But a parking lot definitely is a bad idea.

I'm not saying that Boone Park would be an ideal solution, but I'm pretty sure they did this same thing to provide parking for the playground in the northern part of Boone Park by the tennis courts.  A small parking lot was carved out.

This talk of parking at/near Boone Park is making me nauseous. 

What you're proposing is that I have to park at Boone Park, but I want to eat a Biscottis or Bluefish, and I'm vehemently against walking that far just to enjoy some mediocre food. 

Hell, I might as well park at Grace Baptist....   ::)

Wait a sec....   8)

Oxymaroon: Great post.  i share the majority of your view points.  I like the idea of adding parking at Boone Park, but in an angled parking or perpindicular parking set up.  What would be more important in my opinion is strengthening the link between the park and the Shoppes.  I live on the western edge of the park at Herschel and I have often walked to the Shoppes using the park.  The park itself is safe, as is Van Wert.  The only area where I feel unsafe is the sidewalk between Van Wert and the Shoppes.  I often just walk in St Johns to stay in the light.  If better lighting and sidewalks were put in place and the pedestrian link between the park and the retail area was established, I think people would natuarally start to park at the park.  If this happens, I think redesigning the parking facilities there to include angle parking on the entire stretch of Van Wert would be the next step.  I don't think a parking lot is needed.

In terms of redesigning the park, I agree 100%.  The area is useful for nothing but allowing your dog to relieve itself.  The pinestraw covered ground and lack of open space make playing games there dangerous.

Quote from: cline on July 25, 2012, 01:10:43 PM

QuoteThe claim that the Shops are now suddenly causing a decrease in property values or other gripes about the activities in the Shops by residential property owners are simply hypocritical. Those whose voice seems loudest are those who live adjacent to the Shops. I realize that the economic activity has grown in the Shops over the last few years, but those people bought with full knowledge of the proximity of the Shops to their homes.

This exact claim was brought up at the meeting at Grace.  In fact, it might have been Mark Anderson from the We Love Avondale group who said it- I don't remember exactly what the person's name was.  But basically, they said that they bought their house in 2005 or 2006, put money into it to fix it up and now it is not worth anywhere near what they paid for it.  They tried to make a connection that any increase in restaurants (seating) at the shop will cause more problems which will, in turn, cause their property value to drop further.  They made no mention of the fact that the home lost value because they paid too much to begin with.

So when they bought their houses were they unaware that the Shops existed?

Quote from: cline on July 24, 2012, 02:22:51 PM
I wonder what the merchants thoughts are on Parking Permits.  At the meeting at Grace, the owner of Blue Fish stated that his patrons complain that they cannot find parking (which is odd considering he has his own lot).  I would find it hard to believe having permits would help this situation.

I didn't know Blue Fish had that many patrons that parking would be a serious issue. Aside from brunch, it seems to be the "Brick's too crowded, let's go to that blue place" place.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on July 25, 2012, 03:13:32 PM

Quote from: cline on July 24, 2012, 02:22:51 PM
I wonder what the merchants thoughts are on Parking Permits.  At the meeting at Grace, the owner of Blue Fish stated that his patrons complain that they cannot find parking (which is odd considering he has his own lot).  I would find it hard to believe having permits would help this situation.

I didn't know Blue Fish had that many patrons that parking would be a serious issue. Aside from brunch, it seems to be the "Brick's too crowded, let's go to that blue place" place.

Pshhh- I like reheated Sysco food as much as the next guy, but the Brick is too pricey.  Blue Fish and Biscotti's are the best places on the strip for sure.

Quote from: Captain Zissou on July 25, 2012, 03:23:03 PM
Pshhh- I like reheated Sysco food as much as the next guy, but the Brick is too pricey.  Blue Fish and Biscotti's are the best places on the strip for sure.

Except for Mojos and Casbah   :P

Quote from: oxymaroon on July 25, 2012, 11:37:15 AM
There are a variety of reasonable solutions to this issue, but they all require compromise by one or more parties. There is also a need for certain players to accept accountability for their choices and actions.

I live in the neighborhood, but do not live in the area immediately affected by traffic and noise created by the Shops. I love the neighborhood and choose to live here rather than any other part of town.

I find it disingenuous to claim that Avondale doesn’t already have a parking problem. It is also unrealistic to offer as a solution 50 seat restaurants â€" the economics simply do not work on that scale. The local property owners â€" both residential and commercial â€" deserve to be heard, but the neighborhood as a whole also must be considered.
Whether you like the MM concept is immaterial. We live in a free market society with laws governing private property and its uses. If the owner of the property MM wants to occupy wishes to lease space to MM or any other business then that is the owner’s right, pending any laws that prevent them from doing so. In this case MM is not bared from the area due to zoning or any other laws that I am aware of (I realize that there is an after the fact effort to limit the use but that is simply unreasonable to both MM and the property owner (s)). So if MM has the right to open a restaurant or car wash or pawn shop based upon the applicable laws then how can we deny them their rights? I think that MM has been very open and obliging to the community in their request for feedback and a sincere desire to provide information to the public.

The parking problem in Avondale is here today and needs a resolution. However, this strategy of “I am already here, it’s the next guy’s problem” isn’t going to work. I am shocked at the lack of forward thinking by those who claim to be the most affected parties. I hear nothing of substance from the shop owners or the residents immediately adjacent about the need to solve parking. I only hear MM is evil and they must be stopped. Hyperbole and witch hunts. I am starting to believe that this is an artifice for an anti-MM agenda. I have no idea why all parties wouldn’t seek a resolution to the parking problem for the benefit of all involved and the greater neighborhood.

The argument that MM will bring in a “party” crowd seems duplicitous to me. Surely these people have been into Monty’s or seen the activity outside of the Casbah late at night or even the Brick. I know the response will be something like “we don’t need any more of that type of people than we already have.” So now we are sitting in judgment of who should or shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy our neighborhood? What is the criterion for those activities or people that should be allowed in the neighborhood and who gets to determine the criteria? Should we base the criteria on appearance, their choice of entertainment, the way they dress? How many tattoos, piercings, buttoned down shirts, country club logos, short skirts, high heels or business suits are acceptable?

The claim that the Shops are now suddenly causing a decrease in property values or other gripes about the activities in the Shops by residential property owners are simply hypocritical. Those whose voice seems loudest are those who live adjacent to the Shops. I realize that the economic activity has grown in the Shops over the last few years, but those people bought with full knowledge of the proximity of the Shops to their homes. However, they should not be forced to endure blocked driveways or litter or any other unreasonable inconvenience due to their proximity to the Shops. I would wager that many bought BECAUSE of the proximity of the Shops to their property. These buildings have been there, were there and will be there. Empty or filled, which is preferable or best for the neighborhood? Which will most affect property values negatively?  What I hear these people saying is they want a certain type of economic activity that fits their narrow view of what is good for them. A free market doesn’t work that way.

Conversely the retail property owners are the ones who seem to have no voice. These people bought property as an investment believing their rights were protected and now find their freedom being curtailed and the value of their investment reduced due to the proposed moratorium on the use of their property.

I firmly believe that the economic impact of successful business on other nearby businesses is positive. Success begets success which in turn will only improve the whole. A thriving business environment in the Shops helps all those with a vested interest in Avondale.

I do not understand this “all or nothing” approach that some seem to be taking to growth or use. Whether its MM today or 7-11 tomorrow someone is going to utilize this space and when they do its going to be with the goal of making money and to make money businesses need customers. So any use of the space will increase traffic in our neighborhood. All of which brings us back to the idea that Avondale needs a long term plan to manage traffic and parking.

In my opinion the only realistic solution to the parking problem is to modify Boone Park. It goes largely unused other than the playground area. The remainder of the park between St Johns Avenue and Herschel Street is a creepy and over grown. In my mind a park should have trees, but it should also have sun light and room to throw a ball or have a picnic or fly a kite. Boone Park has none of these things as it is currently configured. Why not solve two problems? Get buy-in from the Shop owners, City and MM to fund a parking lot on the St Johns side of the park and rebuild a new and better playground and bright open area in the remaining 60% of the park? Charge money to park there and use that money to pay back the investors in the short term and to fund the park and other improvements to the Shops  long term. If properly landscaped, buffered and configured it could be a boon (sorry couldn’t resist the pun) to the entire neighborhood and solve the parking dilemma immediately.

I know some will want to protect the “natural” environment, but most of the trees are nothing but scrub pines and this is not how the park was planned originally. The park we have today is largely the result of zero management and nature reclaiming the land. It does not function well and it has no historical significance as configured. I see no other economically viable, historically acceptable solution given the limitations of the local geography than to modify the park. A parking garage simply will not work. Stopping growth is not possible. Tearing down houses to make way for a parking lot is not feasible or good for the neighborhood. So instead of attacking each other and looking for reasons not to adapt, let’s look for a solution that benefits the most people and the neighborhood as a whole and lets be fair and realistic while doing it.

I am not in favor or against MM as a member of the shops. That said I would go there if it were an option. I do believe in property rights, free enterprise and entrepreneurial people.  I also believe in being fair to the property owners, both immediately adjacent to the shops and throughout the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I have friends on both sides of the debate. As someone said earlier it’s no fun when it’s your ox is being gored. However, a few months ago everyone was up in arms that 7-11 was coming in to the Shops, today its MM, tomorrow it’s going to be something else. We cannot block economic evolution so we must adapt to it. Whether it’s a redefinition of Boone Park or a different solution, we must address the extant problem and plan for the future. I would rather work with MM today than face someone much less concerned with the fabric of the neighborhood who wants to impose their will on the Shops regardless of the impact on the neighborhood.

There seems to be much misinformation and confusion about many facets of the current debate. What is or isn’t being proposed, how big, how many seats, etc. I would hope someone would find a way to get the unembellished facts out to the public. Not a single side of the story, but the facts, the whole story. Maybe this responsibility should fall to Jim Love as he in effect represents all parties and the neighborhood.  I am 100% confident that people are reacting to false or misleading information on both sides that is created by ignorance and the “I heard…” or “Sally told Bob…”method of communication. Let’s figure out what the truth is and address that instead of arguing about gossip.

Wow that is the most thought out and rational post that I have seen on either side of this 33 & 1/2 page discussion. I do not think that an entire parking lot is necessary and may not be feasible due to the regulations set out by Mr. Boone. I do think that a little TLC on the park could do wonders for the area. From what I understand, MM has been transparent in every step of the process to this point. The "telephone game", as you so eloquently put it, seems to be coming from the clandestine gatherings that arose shortly after the Town Hall meeting at Grace Church. Thank you for giving this topic a breath of fresh air and coralling the starburst back to the original topic.

Quotenoise created by the Shops.

Noise from the shops? I live at Edgewood and Herschel and get more noise from the burning tires at 3 AM, than I ever recall from the shops. Now if by noise you refer to drunkards who puke on the City right of way before they start the cars that burn the rubber on my block, I can see that happening, but they are polluting our area with noise at all levels. These are the same people who run through stop signs at 60 MPH because they are plastered from bar hopping at the local shoppes restaurants and bars.

We were walking back from Bluefish Tuesday night and saw an X5, doing at least 60 come south on Edgewood, in front of the Honorable Jim Love's house, and blow through the stop sign at Riverside on its way to St. Johns, probably in an effort to get to the late night menu at some restaurant. Thanks JSO for patrolling only during the day.

Boone Park is more than just the 3 blocks from St. Johns/Van Wert/Herschel, it does go north of Herschel and has a nice open area for toss and catch, picnic tables and even a number of fantastic tennis courts, and more playground equipment there too, in fact, the 3 blocks and additional 5.5 blocks make it a major park in our area.

Murray Hill had a major park between Dellwood/Day/Green/McDuff, a major park that the family stated they did not want to have anything built on it for the 100 years after they donated it to the city. So what did the City do? They decided it would be a better drainage and retaining pond, not a park, as the family asked it to be, for people to enjoy, nope, a nice large drainage pond.  Thanks Warren Jones!

The owners of the shoppes are my friends and I am all about Capitalism and growing a business. We as neighbors and friends will find a way to co-exist, we did so before when there were few choices in Avondale and we all wished for better times, before the Brick, it was Sterlings (Bluefish) and Biscotti's, then you had Monty's at the other end, now we have so much more and gaining more still.

Avondale had its Phillips Mall moment and the neighborhood said, we will not go quietly into the night and with it have grown and expanded, and re-invented ourselves, just as was needed. I am proud of my neighbors and thankful to live in a progressive and conservative area. We can and will all get along.

Sorry for the longer than normal rant, but inaccuracies drive my drivel!

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 26, 2012, 09:05:06 AM
We were walking back from Bluefish Tuesday night and saw an X5, doing at least 60 come south on Edgewood, in front of the Honorable Jim Love's house, and blow through the stop sign at Riverside on its way to St. Johns, probably in an effort to get to the late night menu at some restaurant. Thanks JSO for patrolling only during the day.

So your anecdote to demonstrate how drunkards from the many (1-2) bars on St Johns are driving drunk and consistently screeching tires in your street late at night involves a vehicle heading in the direction of the shoppes that you assume was bound for one of the restaurants on the street? Case closed. Or are you just lamenting about the inadequacy of JSO?

QuoteBoone Park is more than just the 3 blocks from St. Johns/Van Wert/Herschel, it does go north of Herschel and has a nice open area for toss and catch, picnic tables and even a number of fantastic tennis courts, and more playground equipment there too, in fact, the 3 blocks and additional 5.5 blocks make it a major park in our area.

I agree, but I have often found that area to be waterlogged or muddy.  Some attention definitely needs to be paid towards the park.  I am not a landscape architect, so i don't want to speak on the subject, but I know it could be better designed and better utilized.

QuoteI agree, but I have often found that area to be waterlogged or muddy.

That creek is no wider than Hogan's Creek and the way the landscape is sloped, you get water from both sides. I'd leave it alone, let nature take its course, rather than the City come in and try and improve it, there are already JEA tanks on the south end of Boone Park, and if the City really thought they could do something, it would have been done under Overton's reign.  What muddiness? It has not rained in weeks, I'd say its OK to go there now.

I've lived here since 1999, if I was concerned about screaching tires or drunks throwing up in the right of way, or trash in the median from the inconsiderates (they know who they are), or the dog crap that owners leave in yards, I would have just moved to the Southside where there are so called "rational" families. I'm here for the long haul, but god forbid someone gets killed from the growth, it will all hit the fan. So with growth, comes more responsibilities, and the merchants know that growth comes with a cost, a real one for more police presence.

The Shoppes,and indeed "Avondale" have accommodated expanded growth for decades.

There are limits,and "growth" in awareness,outlook and citizen response to the "inevitable" narrative.

30 + page internet threads possibly way behind.

Quote from: Captain Zissou on July 26, 2012, 04:11:51 PM


I agree, but I have often found that area to be waterlogged or muddy.  Some attention definitely needs to be paid towards the park.  I am not a landscape architect, so i don't want to speak on the subject, but I know it could be better designed and better utilized.

Oh come on now.
The area is a "Park"/not developed because much of the Park it is a wetland storm water flow way,and therefore the pioneers granted "Park" status.Indeed the upland border a wee bit wider than granted nowadays.Pioneer days.
Catch up with the Pioneers.
Herschel street culvert blown out during Debbie or did no one here notice what actuaslly happened?

Any attempts or references  joining Boone Park with MM are simply hilarious and darn effective.
Keep it up!

Quote from: stephendare on July 28, 2012, 09:34:42 PM
know growth, you literally don't know what you are talking about on this.  Why not return to your theories on how sprawl is good for the environment and the 'coloreds' were bad for miami.

Keyboard double tap

Clean miss

Hilarious.

Meanwhile,slogging through the bottomlands,lots going on.

A wee bit of News & Info if one will

Citizens effectively engaged with Applicant,COJ process,monitoring and assessment
with much more on the horizon.

We may possibly see COA ( drawings,images) AUG 1

The 'ol gas station structure gone- moved towards St Johns.

Parking In Rear 

Roof Top Bar   

I'll have another PUD Ale!

                     *****   Previously scheduled August 7 LUZ meeting cancelled *****


The Applicant has agreed to defer request to withdraw the PUD until the end of August to allow more time for review/negotiation

Apparently the Applicant has already withdrawn application for Administrative Deviation (Gas Station parking requirement)

Could anyone with a general understanding of sentence structure please interpret kNOw Growth's ramblings?

Captain, Don't you mean his Delphic utterances? Trying to diagram any of those sentences would leave one cross-eyed.

I like that his edited posts still don't make any sense.

Quote from: Captain Zissou on August 07, 2012, 09:29:46 AM
Could anyone with a general understanding of sentence structure please interpret kNOw Growth's ramblings?

I was going to say something, but didn't want to offend, in case he was autistic or had some speech/writing issue  :o

and here I thought the purpose of this 35 page Mellow Mushroom thread was to offend someone given the comments about neighbors vs outsiders, the We Love Avondale group, parking, etc 

Pretty one-sided take on the 'parking woes' in Avondale by Ron Word in Folio today highlighting 'public urination, drunken outbursts, racing engines' in Avondale.  Really?  Must be a COMPLETELY different Avondale than I know. What a real shame about all the misinformation going around.

'Trash, cups and beer bottles picked up in yards daily'.  In Avondale???  There must be some underground rooms that pass out cans of beer to people smoking bath salts in Biscottis that I apparently don't know the password to get into that are causing all of this mayhem.  In the mornings I ride down Hedrick 4 times a week on my bike (I live a quarter a mile away).  I must not get up early enough (5AM).  Perhaps the lawn gnomes come to life at 4AM to clean all of this stuff up before I get a chance to see it.

Seeing as though I don't go to the The Brick much b/c it sucks so bad (overpriced pedestrian-at best-food with very poor cocktails)... I maybe need to start going there more often to see all of these drunks that leave and go piss on people's lawn.  The last time I was there both Wayne and Delores Weaver were in attendance along with Alvin Brown.  Are these the hooligans mitricating on people's yards?!?

This is SHAMEFUL. 

For what it's worth-the owner of The Brick is virulently against Mellow Mushroom moving into Avondale.

From what I understand, he's been telling people that "MM has everyone fooled" and "it's actually a nightclub" moving in who plan on "changing the face of Avondale"

Quote from: ben says on August 07, 2012, 03:35:14 PM
For what it's worth-the owner of The Brick is virulently against Mellow Mushroom moving into Avondale.

From what I understand, he's been telling people that "MM has everyone fooled" and "it's actually a nightclub" moving in who plan on "changing the face of Avondale"

Seriously? 

This would be the first MM in history to bring down a neighborhood!


Ignorance.   How sad.

I will say that the various descriptions about MM's operations are hilariously ignorant. MM is a national chain. For anyone interested in finding out how it really operates, just visit one of the other locations.

I wonder how these establishments would feel if some folks started a group "We Love Free Enterprise" and advocated boycotting establishments who are either worried about their illegal parking lot or worse having a little competition.

I find it amusing that the past 3 Resident newspapers have been devoted to this issue.  This has to be (and its sister threads) the most commented topic on this website.  It seems to me we are all be held hostage by a few vocal home owners and a couple of competing businesses who's only real argument I can see is "Because I don't wanna."  MM keeps trying to open dialogue or make changes and their only response is "I don't wanna, move some place else."  They sound like a 2 year old. 

Yes, I like MM and want it here.  However, their acting like a 2 year old makes me believe this is a bigger issue.  I keep asking: What is this group going to do when Monty's is sold?  How is this fight helping them sell their property (My guess: what value was there is dropping rapidly).  Doesn't having a vibrant Shoppes increase their home values?    Once you give in to a 2 year old, they know all they have to do is pitch a fit and they win.

Quote from: Timkin on August 07, 2012, 03:37:33 PM

Quote from: ben says on August 07, 2012, 03:35:14 PM
For what it's worth-the owner of The Brick is virulently against Mellow Mushroom moving into Avondale.

From what I understand, he's been telling people that "MM has everyone fooled" and "it's actually a nightclub" moving in who plan on "changing the face of Avondale"

Seriously? 

This would be the first MM in history to bring down a neighborhood!


Ignorance.   How sad.

Yes. Seriously.

How one can claim MM has 'secret aims' to 'change the face of Avondale' by 'moving in as a MM' yet 'really it's a night club' is beyond me...........yet, it happens, by Avondale shop owners!!

^... Who see the restaurant which by the way, has stellar food and atmosphere, as a threat.

It is ridiculous to state that it is secretly becoming a nightclub.  That is about the furthest statement from the truth of anything posted on the matter.

Quote from: Timkin on August 07, 2012, 05:55:30 PM
^... Who see the restaurant which by the way, has stellar food and atmosphere, as a threat.

It is ridiculous to state that it is secretly becoming a nightclub.  That is about the furthest statement from the truth of anything posted on the matter.

I wish the opposition would just be honest and state their true reasons for opposition.  Its one of the 3:

1. Current restaurants want less competition

2. A few residents think the Shoppes should be Rodeo Dr Junior and only allow high priced (and in my opinion overpriced in reference to clothing stores) shops and restaurants.

and/or

3. Residents who think everything must be strictly local to be hip.  MOJO's wasn't local enough, Sherwin Williams is a national brand and even though the owner obviously lives in Jax and it provide great, personal service, close to many residents it wasn't Bob's Paint Shop so not good enough.

I find it amusing that the past 3 Resident newspapers have been devoted to this issue.  This has to be (and its sister threads) the most commented topic on this website.  It seems to me we are all be held hostage by a few vocal home owners and a couple of competing businesses who's only real argument I can see is "Because I don't wanna."  MM keeps trying to open dialogue or make changes and their only response is "I don't wanna, move some place else."  They sound like a 2 year old. 

The latest Resident issue said there was an estimate for $60,000 for parking study.  Would rather Jim Love and residents push for WALKING/BIKING JSO patrols in the window of heavy nightly use, directing (through signs, word of mouth, whatever) drivers to use park and spots East/North (not sure of direction) of Shoppes on St Johns toward St Vincents, and coming up with valet solutions.  Funded by Shoppes, restaurants, customers or any combo of the 3.

Quote from: JHAT76 on August 07, 2012, 06:14:31 PM

Quote from: Timkin on August 07, 2012, 05:55:30 PM
^... Who see the restaurant which by the way, has stellar food and atmosphere, as a threat.

It is ridiculous to state that it is secretly becoming a nightclub.  That is about the furthest statement from the truth of anything posted on the matter.

I wish the opposition would just be honest and state their true reasons for opposition.  Its one of the 3:

I think it's a little bit of all three that you mention, plus many homeowners believe they own the public right of way and no one should be able to park in front of their home without express written consent of the homeowner.

Others have also pointed out that many homes have more cars than licensed drivers, including some multi-family properties.

I'm also glad to hear that I'm not the only one who thinks the Brick is way overrated.  It's crowded often, so I always wondered maybe I'm too critical, but Field's assessment hits the nail right on the head.    I always assumed it stayed busy with people who didn't want to drive over to the "Club" to have lunch or dinner -- mainly it's convenience for the people I know that frequent there. 

 

Quote from: cline on July 24, 2012, 02:22:51 PM

Quote from: KEGreene1 on July 24, 2012, 01:51:56 PM

Quote from: mtraininjax on July 11, 2012, 11:02:09 PM
I agree with a neighbor that stickers, or parking passes, or fees to park are all just taxes designed to drive people away. We the residents and the store owners will find a way to co-exist and thrive. It may not be pretty, but we will find a way to solve the problem and compromise.

I saw this Harrisburg, PA last month (Resident Only Parking).  I thought this was a great idea.  You tow a few cars and it will change people's habits. 

I wonder what the merchants thoughts are on Parking Permits.  At the meeting at Grace, the owner of Blue Fish stated that his patrons complain that they cannot find parking (which is odd considering he has his own lot).  I would find it hard to believe having permits would help this situation.

The Owner of Blue Fish could Double his parking spaces with some cash and http://www.katopark.com/majorlift.htm and parking at Blue Fish wouldn't be a problem anymore?

I've been reading MetroJax for a long time, but have only recently become motivated to "go legit" and actually sign up after reading this thread...  In the interest of full-disclosure, I know John Valentino, and have done a bit of fabrication work in the past for his other restaurants.  (I built the Bus at the beaches, and a couple of other "display pieces" for him.)  I like Mellow Mushroom's food, and enjoy the atmosphere in his restaurants.

Which leads to my point:  THEY'RE RESTAURANTS, NOT "NIGHTCLUBS".  If the criteria for being a "nightclub" is having a bar and playing music, then certainly The Brick, which does a smart business at their bar and plays music would have to be considered a "nightclub" as well, no?  And all this talk of "drunks running loose in the streets", and "rampant hooliganism" is absurd.  I would ask only that those who are so opposed to Mellow Mushroom GO AND VISIT ANY OF THE OTHER LOCATIONS.  Really, GO, and see for yourselves.  Go on a saturday night, late even, and what you'll find are nice folks chilling, probably eating (excellent) pizza, drinking a beer, watching a game on TV, and having a pretty MELLOW time.   It's not the Sodom and Gomorrah that the mouth-breather/NIMBY/competition-phobes would like to portray. 

Go.  See for yourselves.  Dare you.  Double Dog Dare you.

Pinky out.

(LOL - Double Dog *StephenDare* ya!!)

Quote from: Pinky on August 08, 2012, 09:24:41 PM
I've been reading MetroJax for a long time, but have only recently become motivated to "go legit" and actually sign up after reading this thread...  In the interest of full-disclosure, I know John Valentino, and have done a bit of fabrication work in the past for his other restaurants.  (I built the Bus at the beaches, and a couple of other "display pieces" for him.)  I like Mellow Mushroom's food, and enjoy the atmosphere in his restaurants.

Which leads to my point:  THEY'RE RESTAURANTS, NOT "NIGHTCLUBS".  If the criteria for being a "nightclub" is having a bar and playing music, then certainly The Brick, which does a smart business at their bar and plays music would have to be considered a "nightclub" as well, no?  And all this talk of "drunks running loose in the streets", and "rampant hooliganism" is absurd.  I would ask only that those who are so opposed to Mellow Mushroom GO AND VISIT ANY OF THE OTHER LOCATIONS.  Really, GO, and see for yourselves.  Go on a saturday night, late even, and what you'll find are nice folks chilling, probably eating (excellent) pizza, drinking a beer, watching a game on TV, and having a pretty MELLOW time.   It's not the Sodom and Gomorrah that the mouth-breather/NIMBY/competition-phobes would like to portray. 

Go.  See for yourselves.  Dare you.  Double Dog Dare you.

Pinky out.

Hello... Jx bch location is the closest one to me, and I love the old School Bus. Cool to know who did that ;)

Welcome !!

The parking challenges that the nearby residents of the Shoppes of Avondale are legitimate concerns to those residents.  Concerns that should be addressed, but not concerns that should be a surprise to those that purchased property so close to a shopping district. 

These challenges should be analyzed by a professional parking study and mitigated by the resulting, well thought out, solutions derived from that study.  Many of the potential solutions have been discussed on this thread.  Some could have immediate impact (valet, employee parking areas, "no parking" signs that are enforced), some short term impact (shuttles, shared parking) and some long term impact (fixed trolley lines).

Bill 2012-339 was a poor solution to the challenges the neighborhood faces.  It was a bill that tried to address legitimate neighbor concerns but pushed by vested interests (politically influential neighbors and currently operating restaurants) under the guise of being good neighborhood partners.

I apologize for the hyperbole, but it reeks of anti-trust.  The supporters of 2012-339 that spoke at Planning Commission and LUZ were either legitimately concerned neighbors or business owners who have benefited in the past from administrative deviations from parking requirements.

Mellow Mushroom or not, where is the solution to solve the challenge that exists today?  The bill may stop the bleeding, but the Planning Department and our Councilman need to find a proactive approach to avoid enacting these poorly thought out and reactive solutions.
   

Quote from: Allan D on August 09, 2012, 12:51:33 AM
The parking challenges that the nearby residents of the Shoppes of Avondale are legitimate concerns to those residents.  Concerns that should be addressed, but not concerns that should be a surprise to those that purchased property so close to a shopping district. 

These challenges should be analyzed by a professional parking study and mitigated by the resulting, well thought out, solutions derived from that study.  Many of the potential solutions have been discussed on this thread.  Some could have immediate impact (valet, employee parking areas, "no parking" signs that are enforced), some short term impact (shuttles, shared parking) and some long term impact (fixed trolley lines).

Bill 2012-339 was a poor solution to the challenges the neighborhood faces.  It was a bill that tried to address legitimate neighbor concerns but pushed by vested interests (politically influential neighbors and currently operating restaurants) under the guise of being good neighborhood partners.

I apologize for the hyperbole, but it reeks of anti-trust.  The supporters of 2012-339 that spoke at Planning Commission and LUZ were either legitimately concerned neighbors or business owners who have benefited in the past from administrative deviations from parking requirements.

Mellow Mushroom or not, where is the solution to solve the challenge that exists today?  The bill may stop the bleeding, but the Planning Department and our Councilman need to find a proactive approach to avoid enacting these poorly thought out and reactive solutions.

Could not have said it any better!

Would a food truck be allowed on the gas station property as it currently sits?  It would be nice to get some activity on that spot, it would get John a little bit of income from renting the space, and I'm pretty sure it would make the owner of the Brick furious.  I am in favor of all three of those things.

I hope that plan works, because my only other idea is to pelt the Brick with mushrooms nightly.

Quote from: Captain Zissou on August 09, 2012, 09:34:56 AM
Would a food truck be allowed on the gas station property as it currently sits?  It would be nice to get some activity on that spot, it would get John a little bit of income from renting the space, and I'm pretty sure it would make the owner of the Brick furious.  I am in favor of all three of those things.

I hope that plan works, because my only other idea is to pelt the Brick with mushrooms nightly.

Someone made the same comment on their FB page.  How about this food truck...

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/580929_10150929944977062_1424112184_n.jpg)

Quote from: Captain Zissou on August 09, 2012, 09:34:56 AM
Would a food truck be allowed on the gas station property as it currently sits?  It would be nice to get some activity on that spot, it would get John a little bit of income from renting the space, and I'm pretty sure it would make the owner of the Brick furious.  I am in favor of all three of those things.

I hope that plan works, because my only other idea is to pelt the Brick with mushrooms nightly.

How about putting up a Construction fence with Mellow Mushroom Logo around the whole area of the gas station to block off parking? http://www.fencescreen.com/configure/logo/about

Quote
This has gone on for thirty years, hopefully it is finally meeting some real pushback.

Good lord, Stephen, how far off can you possibly get. Look at Beach Blvd., Blanding Blvd., San Jose Blvd., Atlantic Blvd. and on and on and on. Development has always had its way in this city and those examples are what we have to show for it: thoroughfares that are ugly, overcrowded, and frequently traffic disasters. Who wants to live near to those places? Not me. And thank you very much, but I don't want St. Johns Avenue to go that way. Do you? Do you want rezoning to allow further commercial development of that roadway? That would seem to be okay with you, but not me or the majority of my neighbors.

^Right, because it's either endless suburban sprawl, or nothing.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on August 09, 2012, 12:28:56 PM

Quote
This has gone on for thirty years, hopefully it is finally meeting some real pushback.

Good lord, Stephen, how far off can you possibly get. Look at Beach Blvd., Blanding Blvd., San Jose Blvd., Atlantic Blvd. and on and on and on. Development has always had its way in this city and those examples are what we have to show for it: thoroughfares that are ugly, overcrowded, and frequently traffic disasters. Who wants to live near to those places? Not me. And thank you very much, but I don't want St. Johns Avenue to go that way. Do you? Do you want rezoning to allow further commercial development of that roadway? That would seem to be okay with you, but not me or the majority of my neighbors.

Hey maybe Mellow Mushroom Customers can park on Hedrick St, Van Wert and Little Van Wert. Ingleside ave and last but not least Richmond St?

JSO patrols Murray Hill with bikes, but they drive cruisers (3) three of them to a point, park, and then use the bikes in the neighborhood, so the cars would take up space somewhere in the neighborhood, unless we expect them to park at St. Vincent's and bike up and down St. Johns Avenue.

QuoteSherwin Williams is a national brand and even though the owner obviously lives in Jax and it provide great, personal service, close to many residents it wasn't Bob's Paint Shop so not good enough.

The owner of the building lives across the street from me, here on Edgewood, and he tells us that there used to be a paint store there, before the gallery, back in the 60s. So it was fitting to bring SW into the neighborhood, and I am happy to support the local store!

Sure Steve at the Brick is not happy with John's proposal, Steve cannot expand his restaurant, and he is happy with what he has there, and before anyone badmouths Steve, he and his partners did help resurrect Avondale, his project was the first to really get that corner area of Ingleside/St. Johns happening again. Love it or not, The Brick helped make Avondale a desirable area, so I appreciate Steve for his business.

John was making some coin from the Brick employees parking on the site, so while its not a fortune, the space does get used.

QuoteHey maybe Mellow Mushroom Customers can park on Hedrick St, Van Wert and Little Van Wert. Ingleside ave and last but not least Richmond St?

Maybe not if MM gets its way, but likely when someone with a similar development idea buys West Inn. Well, bring it on, I know how to turn my sprinklers on full blast.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on August 09, 2012, 02:01:59 PM

QuoteHey maybe Mellow Mushroom Customers can park on Hedrick St, Van Wert and Little Van Wert. Ingleside ave and last but not least Richmond St?

Maybe not if MM gets its way, but likely when someone with a similar development idea buys West Inn. Well, bring it on, I know how to turn my sprinklers on full blast.

LOL - Surely you'll have to, to help wash away the Rivers Of Vomit, Trash, Assorted Filth, Used Condoms and Undesirable Pedestrians which you predict will accompany any sort of restaurant opening anywhere near you. 

Pinkie, I never said it was as bad as vomit or condoms. Why do you put words in my mouth? Using exaggeration to discredit a valid position?

Hey, Pinkie, where do you live, and can I bring my friends by to muck up your neighborhood?

Quote from: WmNussbaum on August 09, 2012, 07:20:39 PM
Pinkie, I never said it was as bad as vomit or condoms. Why do you put words in my mouth? Using exaggeration to discredit a valid position?

Hey, Pinkie, where do you live, and can I bring my friends by to muck up your neighborhood?

I think he's exaggerating with this in mind:

Quote from: WmNussbaum on April 26, 2012, 08:16:30 AM
I'm a few blocks away and hopefully insulated from having to wake up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and move Bud Light beer cans, cigarette filters, and other rubbish from the street, but those living closer to the Shoppes can expect that on a regular basis.

Quote from: WmNussbaum on August 09, 2012, 12:28:56 PM

Quote
This has gone on for thirty years, hopefully it is finally meeting some real pushback.

Good lord, Stephen, how far off can you possibly get. Look at Beach Blvd., Blanding Blvd., San Jose Blvd., Atlantic Blvd. and on and on and on. Development has always had its way in this city and those examples are what we have to show for it: thoroughfares that are ugly, overcrowded, and frequently traffic disasters. Who wants to live near to those places? Not me. And thank you very much, but I don't want St. Johns Avenue to go that way. Do you? Do you want rezoning to allow further commercial development of that roadway? That would seem to be okay with you, but not me or the majority of my neighbors.

He wants to use the same buildings that are there!  How can you compare putting in a MM at a run down gas station and a former restaruant/high end store with those areas?!?!?  It is the outrageous Chicken Little statements like that one that make people like me extremely angry.  You sound like a crazy old man. 

Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2012, 09:55:34 AM
By the way, if you ever wonder why things have only gone so far in Jacksonville, and then stops just short of its potential, you are seeing the reason in progress as we speak.

^The most poignant statement written on this thread.

QuoteLittle groups of unreasonable arrogant people are able to grind the wheels to a halt because they shriek loud enough about the sky falling, and they are coddled by the an unwillingness to stand up to them and say enough is enough.

Absolutely has happened over and over again.

Quote

This has gone on for thirty years, hopefully it is finally meeting some real pushback.

We can only hope.

Quote from: stephendare on August 09, 2012, 08:04:10 PM
Surely we can all take a step back and notice that we are all neighbors and good people with good intentions.

I can vouch for Mr. Nussbaum, KEGreene (and I hope that he would vouch for me) that he is not a crazy old man, but in fact an attorney who has been an asset to his community his entire professional life.

This doesn't mean that he (or even I, or anyone else) cannot be tragically mistaken, as I believe the case to be in these present issues.  But he is due the same respect and civility that all of us would like.

That was actually my point (I like sarcasm and it doesn't often come off in print). IMO - a quiet period and/or a respect period would do everyone good.  While I meant it as sarcasm, I know I don't appreciate someone trying to compare a 6 lane stretch of roads that butt up to highways, to a two lane stretch in a mixed used area.  If that is the case I'm going to start saying I look like Tom Brady with a bank account like Bill Gates (I have sandy brown/blond hair and sell technology)  However, respect is a two way street and by providing a solid argument using facts instead of exaggerated statements earns not only my respect, but could sway me to your side.  Once you start saying things that you know are just not true, why should I believe anything you say? 

Quote from: WmNussbaum on August 09, 2012, 07:20:39 PM
Pinkie, I never said it was as bad as vomit or condoms. Why do you put words in my mouth? Using exaggeration to discredit a valid position?

Hey, Pinkie, where do you live, and can I bring my friends by to muck up your neighborhood?

Oh Wm...  Wm, Wm, Wm.  Take a pill; it was sarcasm.  It's humor Wm; look it up.

First of all Wm, you presume to have a "valid position", which I disagree with.  A pizza place opening in your neighborhood is NOT the end of civilization, nor will it lead to the sort of problems that I so comedically lampooned.  And really, for you to get all breathy about "someone using exaggeration to discredit a valid position" is hysterical, given the hyperbole, exaggeration and outright falsehoods contained in the "WeLove Avondale" position paper that we've all been having such a good laugh over.

And since you've asked: I live in the Churchwell Lofts at the corner of Market and Bay downtown.  PLEASE come on down, and I'll give you a tour of TSI, Marks, and The Dive Bar, all on my block, which are REAL ACTUAL NIGHTCLUBS, complete with loud music, and occasionally, actual rivers of vomit.  Then we'll jump in my car and head over to any of the Mellow Mushroom Restaurants for a comparison; your first round of crow is on me. 

Look Wm, clearly Avondale should address parking.  On some saturday nights it does get crowded over there.  But that shouldn't be a False Flag for a bunch of people who clearly have other agendas, nor does it justify the ridiculous crap being spewed in an effort to block the new MM. 

Stop throwing stones and go back into your glass house Wm; you're looking a little hypocritical here.

Pinky says it better.  I will shut up now. 

Quote from: KEGreene1 on August 10, 2012, 12:02:07 AM
Pinky says it better.  I will shut up now.

Oh great; now Stephen's gonna yell at *me* instead of you...   ;D

Quote from: Pinky on August 10, 2012, 12:09:19 AM

Quote from: KEGreene1 on August 10, 2012, 12:02:07 AM
Pinky says it better.  I will shut up now.

Oh great; now Stephen's gonna yell at *me* instead of you...   ;D

Nah... I usually am the one getting corrected ;)

Wanted to watch the LUZ committee meeting from last night and can not get it to play on my Windows Media Player.

Anyone else have similar issues?

FWIW, LUZ deferred on allowing Mellow Mushroom to withdraw their PUD application.

Reeks of politics...

QuoteFWIW, LUZ deferred on allowing Mellow Mushroom to withdraw their PUD application.

Reeks of politics...

+1

The site plan unfortunately has been compromised as well.  What was once a unique adaptive reuse project will now be something much less... in favor of MORE parking.  Great work We Love Avondale, you've managed to scrap a unique contextually sensitive plan so you can shove even more parking on the site.

When are we as a community going to stop taking the path of least resistance and start to eliminate the waste and inefficiency of constantly striving to increase parking supply in the neighoborhood instead of better managing existing parking supply?
 
There is a real void of a sensible, comprehensive parking and transportation plan in Riverside/Avondale and this simply perpetuates a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Is it not odd to anyone that the complaint of never having enough parking grows in direct proportion to the amount of parking supply provided?

Instead of creating a long-awaited solution, a group of business owners afraid of competition led this charge.  Now is that good for the neighborhood or just good for their bottom lines?

The blog, igetmellow.com, makes me want to cry.  You can see John and the Mellow crew trying so hard to meet the requests (however unfair they may be) of a few squeaky wheels.  They go SOOO far above and beyond what anyone on the strip has done to enhance the neighborhood, but it doesn't matter.  The liars ended up getting their way and now the development will not be anything close to what it could have been.  MM complying with weloveavondale's request has made it a worse use of the site with very little to offer the strip.  See below for the bastardization of what once was going to be an amazing project.

Quote• Mellow will now not pursue its original plan for adaptive reuse of the gas station, and has agreed to demolish it and build a new building on St. John’s Avenue with a brand new parking lot behind it;
• Mellow originally proposed outdoor dining and large landscaped open space; Mellow has agreed to reduce the outside dining and open space to accommodate on-site parking;
•After making the above changes, Mellow proposed outdoor dining on the roof of the new building to compensate for lost outdoor dining; subsequently, at the request of the opposition group,  Mellow has agreed to abandon plans to construct a second story outside dining area;
•Mellow originally proposed to maximize parking by removing a landscape island on St. Johns Avenue and relocating a tree; Mellow has agreed to restore the parking island (despite loss of parking involved) at the opposition group’s request;
•Mellow originally proposed “soft” covered outdoor dining at the corner of St. Johns and Ingleside; Mellow has agreed to constrict “hard” covered outdoor dining at the corner at the opposition group’s request
•Mellow has reduced seats from an originally conceived 250, to 210.

A good point was made earlier in the igetmellow blog that I would like to take one step further.  Town had 85 seats indoors and 25 seats outside, or 110. They were only using a portion of that building.  A new restaurant could have easily gone up to 200 or so seats without providing one parking space or utilizing the gas station site.  If any other tenant occupied the gas station, we would be over 220 average users with no increase in parking.  MM offered 13 spaces plus 80 bike spaces for 250 seats.  Tell me, which would be better for the neighborhood?

I hope that mellow is at least allowed to have exclusive use of their parking lot, as they are the only venue on the strip to be obligated to give up square footage for parking.  The MM will still be a wonderful addition to the strip and a great neighbor for those of us in the area.  They are still going to have a great space and a quality product.  They will do all of this with a smile because they are quality people who really care about the neighborhood and doing things with transparency and integrity.  I'm sure once the Brick starts to decline that John will even send over a few free pizzas to say 'No hard feelings'.

Quotehttp://www.igetmellow.com/

Working with the Community in Avondale



As you may know, the Mellow Mushroom Avondale team has been having discussions with opposition group “We Love Avondale LLC” and representatives of Riverside Avondale Preservation (RAP). During these discussions,  Mellow has made a considerable effort to be responsive and accommodating, and has agreed to a number of conditions:

• Mellow will now not pursue its original plan for adaptive reuse of the gas station, and has agreed to demolish it and build a new building on St. John’s Avenue with a brand new parking lot behind it;
• Mellow originally proposed outdoor dining and large landscaped open space; Mellow has agreed to reduce the outside dining and open space to accommodate on-site parking;
•After making the above changes, Mellow proposed outdoor dining on the roof of the new building to compensate for lost outdoor dining; subsequently, at the request of the opposition group,  Mellow has agreed to abandon plans to construct a second story outside dining area;
•Mellow originally proposed to maximize parking by removing a landscape island on St. Johns Avenue and relocating a tree; Mellow has agreed to restore the parking island (despite loss of parking involved) at the opposition group’s request;
•Mellow originally proposed “soft” covered outdoor dining at the corner of St. Johns and Ingleside; Mellow has agreed to constrict “hard” covered outdoor dining at the corner at the opposition group’s request
•Mellow has reduced seats from an originally conceived 250, to 210.
None of these decisions were easy to make, particularly the one to abandon adaptive reuse of the gas station, which we thought was in keeping with the way things should be done in an historic district. Nevertheless, we believe we owe it to our neighbors to do what we can address any local concerns.

“We Love Avondale LLC” and RAP  are also asking Mellow to agree to conditions relating to the operation of the restaurant.These conditions, which would apply only to Mellow and not to any of the other restaurants in the Shoppes of Avondale, make us a little uneasy.

Agreeing to them would restrict Mellow’s ability to compete for  customers and, given the close involvement of some local restaurants with “We Love Avondale LLC”, we are not at all comfortable that what we are being asked to do is reasonable or fair. These conditions include:

•Close up completely at midnight.
•No music or television sound played in any outside area after 9:00pm.
•No outside live music.
•No uses allowed in the parking lot area except parking, and deliveries between the hours of 9am and 5pm.
•Security provided to prevent nuisance behavior on Friday and Saturday evenings (Note: Mellow is willing to participate in any program organized by the neighbors and/or the Merchants’ Association but will not agree to provide this service alone).
Mellow has agreed to provide full food service during all times when alcohol is served and to prohibit live music after midnight.

We hope it is obvious that we have made ENORMOUS efforts to address local concerns - as we promised we would. We have tried hard not to be distracted from this by the  deeply unpleasant tactics of those opposing us and we will continue to concentrate on doing what is right.

Thank you very much for your support - you are a majority presence in our neighborhood and we will do our best to ensure that Mellow Mushroom Avondale is a place you can be proud of.

what a joke

I guess neighbors, like me, who where in favor of the original plan get a plain, could be in any neighborhood restaurant. instead of something original. I guess next time we'll have to hire the lawyers to drown out the few whiners.

Very disappointing.

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on August 22, 2012, 02:58:20 PM

Quotehttp://www.igetmellow.com/


Thank you very much for your support - you are a majority presence in our neighborhood and we will do our best to ensure that Mellow Mushroom Avondale is a place you can be proud of.

Innovative adaptive reuse is something to be proud of. 

Rolling over for a few whiny, politically connected individuals is disappointing, but John needs to succeed at making money.  If this is what it takes then good for him.  At least he tried to present an innovative solution.

So is the Mellow Mushroom going to proceed forward ?

I don't even care for Mellon Mushroom, and this upsets me to no end. Every time that RAP membership renewal form comes in the mail I always wonder why I continue to support them, but at least lately I have reasons to not renew in the future.

That sucks, I mean it's nice to see Mellow Mushroom taking into concern the neighborhood, but a few overzealous, litigants with some cash can go in and prohibit the same "don't tread on my business rights" that they champion everywhere else is ridiculous.

Well today, We Love Avondale is now opposing their own site plan at HPC.

This whole episode has gone from dirty to downright just rotten.

 

Quote from: fieldafm on August 22, 2012, 05:11:59 PM
Well today, We Love Avondale is now opposing their own site plan at HPC.

This whole episode has gone from dirty to downright just rotten.

You're kidding me...?  I hope this destroys their credibility and removes them from the picture.  This is honestly one of the most unbelievable situations I've ever seen.  The corrupt and hypoctritical parading around falsehoods and the city is just eating it all up. 

How can they oppose their OWN site plan? 

Quote from: Timkin on August 22, 2012, 05:20:20 PM
How can they oppose their OWN site plan?

The building, which they proposed, has 'too long of a store frontage'.

If you dig deep, you'll see what's happening... and it's certainly not on the 'up and up'

So am I understanding this right ?  We love Avondale is going to succeed in not letting Mellow Mushroom in... Is that about correct?

amazing how much bullshit some people get away with.

What a bunch of douche bags.

I hope they come to San Marco after the idiots in Avondale give them the boot!!!

I read the summary of Mellow's capitulations earlier and thought "I wonder what The Opposition" will come up with next...  Didn't take long to find out. 

At this point I think it's pretty clear that no amount of compromise and concession will satisfy the WLA-LLC crew. 

Shameful.

Quote from: acme54321 on August 22, 2012, 05:32:04 PM
I hope they come to San Marco after the idiots in Avondale give them the boot!!!

I vote for Downtown - Monster Mellow at the old Hayden Burns!! 

Sadly, I think that both San Marco and Downtown are both too close to the Southside location to make them appealing to Mellow Mushroom.  And really, when it's all said and done, Mellow will open in Avondale. 

They should buy Monte's too and just open up in there, leave the gas station vacant, put a ugly fence up around it and give the rest of them the finger.

Quote from: Pinky on August 22, 2012, 05:39:12 PM

Quote from: acme54321 on August 22, 2012, 05:32:04 PM
I hope they come to San Marco after the idiots in Avondale give them the boot!!!

I vote for Downtown - Monster Mellow at the old Hayden Burns!! 

I LOVE THAT IDEA ALOT !!!!!!!!   Good one, Pinky !

Quote from: acme54321 on August 22, 2012, 05:31:11 PM
What a bunch of douche bags.

+1.

Time to boycott The Brick and Blue Fish?? Assholes

Quote from: fieldafm on August 22, 2012, 05:25:53 PM

Quote from: Timkin on August 22, 2012, 05:20:20 PM
How can they oppose their OWN site plan?

The building, which they proposed, has 'too long of a store frontage'.

Weird.  The next block has continuous storefront frontage along the sidewalk for its entire length.  Interacting with the pedestrian and embracing the sidewalks are key characteristics of a walkable environment. Nevertheless, if that's the concern, the facade can be designed to look like anything.