30,000 acre development. Planning dept. says NO. Waterways says YES at the 2/12/14 Jacksonville Waterways Commision meeting. Legislation moves forward.
Anyone?
Can you provide more information? Right now, it's pretty hard to understand whatever situation you're trying to get across. For starters, what is the 30,000 acre development?
There was a Public hearing at the 2/11/14 Jacksonville city council meeting. It was all lumped together.
2014-49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
Then the next day at Waterways the Planning Dept. is NO and Waterways is YES. A lot of people were absent at Waterways. Lisa Rinaman our St. Johns Riverkeeper was in the house in the front row and never recognized. Not good.
I'm more confused. What exactly is the 30,000 acre development? Is it existing or already proposed? So the planning department said no to the development and the waterways said yes?
.. and what do those proposed ordinances/rezonings/resolutions/whatevers do?
^Great questions. Has there been any news in the TU, Folio, Business Journal, any news station? Somebody just make a phone call. Don Redman and Scott Wilson are the Chairs of Waterways. Good luck 630-1394. Just paraphrasing but when you hear if you think you have algae blooms now just wait.
I agree. And let's then remember that it began at the 2/12/14 sparsely attended meeting of the Jacksonville Waterways Commission with key no shows and key people never even being recognized. Legislation continues to move forward. And maybe the reason is that this is all positive.
Quote from: Noone on February 17, 2014, 06:07:33 AM
^Great questions.
Then why don't you answer them?
It's clear you are passionate about whatever is going on. Unfortunately no one us going to take your posts seriously because they are almost completely incoherent.
Acme54321, With all due respect. Just one person make a phone call. I am just Joe Q. Public sitting in a meeting. Lisa Rinaman our St. Johns Riverkeeper was there the whole meeting in the front row and did return my email. She has concerns. Don Redman is the Chair of Waterways.
Maybe it is just me and I'm incoherent. But Planning said NO and Waterways said YES. And our St. Johns Riverkeeper was never recognized.
Perhaps if you gave us some idea of what you are talking about, and what we should say in "just one email" we might be able to help you. We don't know what those bills are about. Sure we could look them up, but you are the one asking for action on them, so you should summarize them.
I second that. Noone, we're all John Q public and whatever this is, it's obviously important to you. Thus, the ball is in your court to least better explain, whatever is on your mind.
Quote from: Noone on February 17, 2014, 07:40:36 AMMaybe it is just me and I'm incoherent. But Planning said NO and Waterways said YES. And our St. Johns Riverkeeper was never recognized.
LOL
YES and NO about what? The saga continues.... what will happen next? No one has a clue.
Hey, I am all for improving the waterways, but I will have to admit, there have been some recent random posts by "Noone", especially digging up some really old threads with incomplete information in them.
The "Headwaters of Julington Creek" reach pretty far and the basin alone stretches well past I-95.
I don't have issues sending an email or making a phone call, but if you need advocacy, you are going to have to spill something out in more detail than a random thought here and there.
^spuwho, you are right about the basin stretching well past I 95.
As for advocacy. From Rising Tides or any group or individual the next time you see or talk with Lisa Rinaman our St. Johns Riverkeeper just ask her about the 2/12/14 Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting. I thank Lisa for returning my email less than 24 hours after the meeting. She has concerns.
As for advocacy. Allow me to show you a new Downtown zone of super restricted Public Access and Economic Opportunity in a newly created 3 mile riverfront boundary that will just crush the Public Trust. Weather and tides look good to kayak and fish under the brand new No Fishing signs that was never before Waterways and make a scene, and provide a spark.
I am Downtown and why you aren't.
I''m done. If you can't explain what you are advocating, you can't expect others (well, at least me) to help you in that advocacy. Why should we bother Ms Rinaman to find out what you want us to do? Seems quite an imposition on her, when you should just tell us what has you all wound up.
It can't be that big of an issue if five minutes of time can't be spent sharing the basics advocacy to people being requested to help. Why would anyone take time off from work to sit in a random meeting to ask someone about something they don't even know the right question to ask about? Heck, it's totally unprofessional to show up and drill people with questions on issues you haven't taken the initiative to research beforehand. For all one can know at this point, there could be no problem at all.
Your right Charles. Everything is Positive.
Do you all remember that we have all given up asking you know who about you know what.
RAM dock is only open when RAM is open. 4 years later. Not good.
Palms Fish Camp- A million bucks next to a FIND project and you never even open the door. Sign me up!
2013-384- Armory for a buck and zero Access to Hogans Creek.
The $15,000,000 Southbank Riverwalk and never before Waterways.
My favorite- The Jim Love, Kevin Kuzel, 26' Berkman Floating Dock Compromise( Shipyards III) Misrepresented by OGC during the 2013 FIND grant application process.
No Shoes
No Shirt
No Money
No Problem -2009-442
Visit Jacksonville!
So many more examples of the crushing of the Public Trust.
An imposition on her? That is why she wasn't recognized?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on February 18, 2014, 06:42:22 AM
I''m done. If you can't explain what you are advocating, you can't expect others (well, at least me) to help you in that advocacy. Why should we bother Ms Rinaman to find out what you want us to do? Seems quite an imposition on her, when you should just tell us what has you all wound up.
So is the 30,000 acre development for Housing, offices, mixed use, roadways or something else that can be boiled down to a similar one or two word phrase for a type of development?
What in the hell is going on here.
What a bizarre thread.
Piecing together the different threads, Noone must be talking about the development along SR 9B, between Philips and Baymeadows.
This SNL skit wraps up NOONE...
(http://thumbnails.hulu.com/938/50013938/124615_512x288_generated.jpg)
http://vimeo.com/36788443 (http://vimeo.com/36788443)
Quote from: TheCat on February 18, 2014, 09:54:57 AM
This SNL skit wraps up NOONE...
(http://thumbnails.hulu.com/938/50013938/124615_512x288_generated.jpg)
http://vimeo.com/36788443 (http://vimeo.com/36788443)
;D
^Inspirational, DIA Board meeting tomorrow at 5pm 1 st floor city hall. Can't wait for the next Jacksonville city council meeting. I'm thinking of expanding this to the Duval County School Board.
I'm really saving the big show for the Commissioners of FIND.
We are so LOST?
Visit Jacksonville!
Fantastic The Cat!
Quote from: Noone on February 18, 2014, 11:01:38 AM
^Inspirational, DIA Board meeting tomorrow at 5pm 1 st floor city hall. Can't wait for the next Jacksonville city council meeting. I'm thinking of expanding this to the Duval County School Board.
I'm really saving the big show for the Commissioners of FIND.
We are so LOST?
Visit Jacksonville!
I am beginning to think this is just auto spam...
We should vote on this right away. Perhaps if waterways sees a no then we can move forward.
I am Jacksonville are you?
908763b
400321ace
777555blink
FIND is good Jacksonville is LOST but I'm all in downtown and why you aren't scared to death at the Waterways meeting 3 days out anyone going to a Downtown Destination River Activity under the brand new No Fishing sign on the Historic Promised 680' Downtown Public Pier over our St. Johns River an American Heritage river a FEDERAL initiative 2014-22 2010-95. Visit Jacksonville.
Translation: Jacksonville is LOST as to what Noone is talking about.
^+1 Let's hope our elected legislative representatives are listening and reading.
Quote from: Noone on February 18, 2014, 02:59:43 PM
^+1 Let's hope our elected legislative representatives are listening and reading.
I'm sure they are just as confused as anyone else.
+2^ There is zero communication and it was again highlighted by Councilmembers Boyer and Crescimbeni. Have a message in for councilman Redman. Did have an email back from Lisa Rinaman.
Three days and 32 posts ... and we still don't know what this is about.
By the way, there is another thread that actually talks about those cryptic bill numbers, under a title that would apply here, "Anyone know what is going on here?":
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,20826.msg365428.html#msg365428
One day out from a full Jacksonville city council vote. What happened in LUZ? Did the Riverkeeper show up? Anyone in opposition? The planning dept said NO. Waterways said YES.
Here is what Nooney was referring to - the Cypress Bluff development near 9B.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542334
These properties are along Big Davis Creek that flows into Julington.
Thanks riverkeepered for clearing up the most bizarre thread on MJ. I was beginning to think (and still do!) that noone is a bot.
As long as the developers pay for 100% of their development, it's infrastructure needs, the mobility fee to offset increased traffic in the city and for any environmental impact to be mitigated sounds good.
In Noone's defense here, we've kayaked together and worked on several projects together. Our friend is an inexhaustible dynamo of applied energy.
Just a theory, and I hope it doesn't piss my friend off, but there are those among us with dyslexia, or visual memory disfunction, or immediate auditory memory disfunction (think auditory dyslexia), various forms of ADHD and myriad other handicap's that have ZERO reflection on ones intelligence or sincerity. So of the greatest minds in the world have had similar issues. I have found friend Noone's 'circular speech' interesting, and find myself constantly seeking ways to get a clear view of his intent. I would think in this enlightened age, especially considering the number of well educated people that frequent these threads, we could make that little leap to boost his posts along with information that may be otherwise lacking. One thing I'm certain of, Noone is NOT PLAYING GAMES with us.
I too suspect this is about the Davis Ranch development. It would be nice to see more on what those plans consist of and how that might effect Julington or Durbin Creek.
Quote from: JeffreyS on March 02, 2014, 11:15:18 AM
As long as the developers pay for 100% of their development, it's infrastructure needs, the mobility fee to offset increased traffic in the city and for any environmental impact to be mitigated sounds good.
This is one of the developments (developers) that are rumored to be behind Bill Bishop's bill to amend the Mobility Fee to allow developers to get credit against the Mobility Fee for building their own internal roads.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on March 02, 2014, 02:12:30 PM
Quote from: JeffreyS on March 02, 2014, 11:15:18 AM
As long as the developers pay for 100% of their development, it's infrastructure needs, the mobility fee to offset increased traffic in the city and for any environmental impact to be mitigated sounds good.
This is one of the developments (developers) that are rumored to be behind Bill Bishop's bill to amend the Mobility Fee to allow developers to get credit against the Mobility Fee for building their own internal roads.
I've heard the same rumor.
It's not a rumor.
Quote from: riverkeepered on March 01, 2014, 05:24:50 PM
Here is what Nooney was referring to - the Cypress Bluff development near 9B.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542334
These properties are along Big Davis Creek that flows into Julington.
Thanks for posting. So what was the position of the St. Johns Riverkeeper on this project? Was this ever on the St. Johns Riverkeeper radar? Did JU way in on this project? I became aware of this like most of us in that there was a Public Hearing on this at a city council meeting and I don't recall anyone speaking. The next day there is a presentation given at a Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting that was so sparsely attended.
Vince Seibold- Environmental Ethics
So our Planning Dept recommends NO. Waterways votes YES and our St. Johns Riverkeeper is sitting in the front row and was never recognized or spoke to the presentation. The planning dept and just paraphrasing but given the vastness of the flood plain and if you think you have seen algae blooms in the past.
So today 3/3/14 there will be a celebration in the northern part of Duval county that will celebrate the Preservation of a sensitive ecosystem and at the same time lets all celebrate what just happened in the southern part of Duval county with the Preservation of another sensitive ecosystem.
Quote from: Noone on March 03, 2014, 01:04:45 AM
Quote from: riverkeepered on March 01, 2014, 05:24:50 PM
Here is what Nooney was referring to - the Cypress Bluff development near 9B.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542334
These properties are along Big Davis Creek that flows into Julington.
Thanks for posting. So what was the position of the St. Johns Riverkeeper on this project? Was this ever on the St. Johns Riverkeeper radar? Did JU way in on this project? I became aware of this like most of us in that there was a Public Hearing on this at a city council meeting and I don't recall anyone speaking. The next day there is a presentation given at a Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting that was so sparsely attended.
Vince Seibold- Environmental Ethics
So our Planning Dept recommends NO. Waterways votes YES and our St. Johns Riverkeeper is sitting in the front row and was never recognized or spoke to the presentation. The planning dept and just paraphrasing but given the vastness of the flood plain and if you think you have seen algae blooms in the past.
So today 3/3/12 there will be a celebration in the northern part of Duval county that will celebrate the Preservation of a sensitive ecosystem and at the same time lets all celebrate what just happened in the southern part of Duval county with the Preservation of another sensitive ecosystem.
I'm trying to catch up. What does Vince have to do with this? He's now with InBev: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/vincent-seibold-p-e-mba/22/537/8a
(https://www.linkedin.com/pub/vincent-seibold-p-e-mba/22/537/8a)
Also, Julington Creek is impaired for
fecal coliform, not nitrogen/phosphorus. This is due to the numerous failing septic systems along Julington Creek and Pottsburg Creek:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/tmdls/final/gp2/fecaltmdl_2265b_2351.pdf (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/tmdls/final/gp2/fecaltmdl_2265b_2351.pdf)
The path to clean water for Julington Creek is to replace septic systems with sewer infrastructure, not stopping this development. Just want to help you rant about the project in a better way. :D
What happened to my post?
nitrogen phosphorus was discussed and lets all see the minutes at the 3/12/14 Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting at 9 am in council chambers.
Quote from: southsider1015 on March 09, 2014, 08:39:05 PM
The path to clean water for Julington Creek is to replace septic systems with sewer infrastructure, not stopping this development. Just want to help you rant about the project in a better way. :D
You can't argue that the stormwater runoff from this development won't adversely impact the creek. To what extend I can't answer.
^Big Plus 1
A river of discharge.
I am unaware of any new developments with septic tanks. I suspect new developments will be on sanitary sewers.
Quote from: Overstreet on March 10, 2014, 03:24:33 PM
I am unaware of any new developments with septic tanks. I suspect new developments will be on sanitary sewers.
I'm unaware of any as well.
Quote from: acme54321 on March 10, 2014, 08:32:32 AM
Quote from: southsider1015 on March 09, 2014, 08:39:05 PM
The path to clean water for Julington Creek is to replace septic systems with sewer infrastructure, not stopping this development. Just want to help you rant about the project in a better way. :D
You can't argue that the stormwater runoff from this development won't adversely impact the creek. To what extend I can't answer.
Technically I could, given my knowledge and experience in the subject matter. One could argue that the development would reduce the amount of natural habitat for critters, thereby reducing the amount of coloiform in the waters. But really, I just want to make sure people understand about why these particular waters are impaired. The development is just icing on the cake for something to rant about. The two issues of clean water and urban sprawl are really just that: two issues.
If Jacksonville were serious about cleaning up Julington Creek, we'd see JEA constructing sewer systems and forcemains.
Moving up stream Julington creek passes a couple of industrial parks and ends in that tirangle formed to the north by Baymeadows, to the east by I-95 and the west by Philips Hwy.
So you are saying that this development will not increase nutrient levels in the waterway via runoff? Given your knowledge and experience in the subject matter of course.
I'd love to hear the technical stuff. Does anyone remember Dana Morton? Vince Seibold? Ed the guy in the planning Dept. was sharing 3 categories of a flood plain or zone. Don't have the notes in front of me. But yes to a future nutrient increase that could then be trapped and I buy into the logic if you think you have algae blooms now.
Nobody was there. And are there any news stories anywhere about the guesstimates of these future nutrient point source discharges?
Quote from: southsider1015 on March 11, 2014, 07:23:52 AM
.......If Jacksonville were serious about cleaning up Julington Creek, we'd see JEA constructing sewer systems and forcemains.
Many of the businesses on Philips have been connected to sanitary. Many of the houses on the creek side of Julington Creek road from St Aug to San Jose built on side streets or before the 90s are likely on septic.
Quote from: Overstreet on March 11, 2014, 11:18:46 AM
Quote from: southsider1015 on March 11, 2014, 07:23:52 AM
.......If Jacksonville were serious about cleaning up Julington Creek, we'd see JEA constructing sewer systems and forcemains.
Many of the businesses on Philips have been connected to sanitary. Many of the houses on the creek side of Julington Creek road from St Aug to San Jose built on side streets or before the 90s are likely on septic.
Just googled and found this:
https://www.jea.com/JEA_and_the_Environment/Wastewater/The_St__Johns_River.aspx (https://www.jea.com/JEA_and_the_Environment/Wastewater/The_St__Johns_River.aspx)
Impressive, and given the efforts, hopefully we'll see Julington Creek come off the list.
Quote from: acme54321 on March 11, 2014, 08:38:58 AM
So you are saying that this development will not increase nutrient levels in the waterway via runoff? Given your knowledge and experience in the subject matter of course.
Without knowing exactly what the development proposes, I obviously can't say that. But I personally have performed nutrient loading calculations to determine pre and post loadings for a variety of development types, and its possible that this development could very well discharge less nitrogen and phosphorus than the predevelopment condition. The stormwater ponds and/or dry retention areas could be oversized (typically for more lake front properties) to handle the additioal loadings, and then some. I'm just saying that its possible, and not out of the question, as some here have suggested.
Quote from: Noone on March 11, 2014, 09:05:28 AM
I'd love to hear the technical stuff. Does anyone remember Dana Morton? Vince Seibold? Ed the guy in the planning Dept. was sharing 3 categories of a flood plain or zone. Don't have the notes in front of me. But yes to a future nutrient increase that could then be trapped and I buy into the logic if you think you have algae blooms now.
Nobody was there. And are there any news stories anywhere about the guesstimates of these future nutrient point source discharges?
I don't understand much of your post(s). I've met with Vince in the past, mainly when he was working on the Low Impact Development (LID) manual, which lost steam when he was fired.
Nobody was there? Where? I'm not aware of any news stories concerning this developments pollutant discharge. Probably because that story wouldn't sell many papers or clicks. But as with all development, the development will be required to meet SJRWMD's stormwater quality rules. The current rules allow the applicant to design the ponds under presumptive criteria, meaning that if the design incorporates specific design aspects, it is presumed that the outfall runoff will have less nutrients than the predevelopment condition. In specific watershed basins impaired for nitrogen and/or phosphorus, a more in depth analysis is typically required to determine pre and post loadings. This basin is impaired for fecal coliform, not N or P, however, and since the development will be connected to sewer systems, and not septic, no additional constraints are imposed for stormwater quality.
Quote from: riverkeepered on March 01, 2014, 05:24:50 PM
Here is what Nooney was referring to - the Cypress Bluff development near 9B.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542334
These properties are along Big Davis Creek that flows into Julington.
Dr. White with JU has a column in the TU today on wetlands.
Quote from: Noone on March 03, 2014, 01:04:45 AM
Quote from: riverkeepered on March 01, 2014, 05:24:50 PM
Here is what Nooney was referring to - the Cypress Bluff development near 9B.
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542334
These properties are along Big Davis Creek that flows into Julington.
Thanks for posting. So what was the position of the St. Johns Riverkeeper on this project? Was this ever on the St. Johns Riverkeeper radar? Did JU way in on this project? I became aware of this like most of us in that there was a Public Hearing on this at a city council meeting and I don't recall anyone speaking. The next day there is a presentation given at a Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting that was so sparsely attended.
Vince Seibold- Environmental Ethics
So our Planning Dept recommends NO. Waterways votes YES and our St. Johns Riverkeeper is sitting in the front row and was never recognized or spoke to the presentation. The planning dept and just paraphrasing but given the vastness of the flood plain and if you think you have seen algae blooms in the past.
So today 3/3/12 there will be a celebration in the northern part of Duval county that will celebrate the Preservation of a sensitive ecosystem and at the same time lets all celebrate what just happened in the southern part of Duval county with the Preservation of another sensitive ecosystem.
Next Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting in two days.
Has anyone seen an agenda?
They used to be emailed out so everyone would know what to expect?
Cuts down on the Backroom deals.
Will councilman Don Redman city councilman for Dist. 4 share with everyone the highlights of the 4/2/14 noticed meeting on New Docking Rules?
Using the Submerged Sovereign Land Lease for the greater good.
Vince Seibold-Environmental Ethics
2014-215 -REGULATORY COMPLIANCE DIVISION CHIEF
Visit Jacksonville!