QuoteAtlantic North LLC, owned by Toney Sleiman, is applying for mobility credits, a newly available alternative to paying mobility fees charged by the city based on a development's predicted impact on local traffic.
The company could use the credit to pay off the $3.8 million mobility fee assessed for its proposed development near Atlantic and Kernan Boulevards. It could use the leftover credits to offset future projects' mobility fees or sell them to other developers.
The company's application, which seeks credits for a road it already built and another it plans to build, passed two City Council committees last week, but not without scrutiny.
Council members wanted to know why the city should waive some of its eligibility requirements to issue the credits to Sleiman and whether the city's former planning director had problems with the plan prior to his abrupt resignation last week.
Meanwhile, Sleiman is angry the city isn't giving him a higher amount of credits for the road project, which his company says will improve traffic for thousands of residents by allowing them to bypass Atlantic and Kernan Boulevards.
The plan is now ready for a vote at Tuesday's City Council meeting.
Full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2015-03-08/story/jacksonville-city-council-consider-11-million-credit-sleiman-owned
So, under the newest gutted version of the mobility fee, the developer can design and build a new road that makes his development work and as long as he can convince the city that it could possibly be used by the public and help traffic in some small way, he can get a credit for what he says it costs and never have to pay the mobility fee ever again. And if he happened to build that road, which was obviously needed to make his development work, before said credits were actually available, the city will still give them to him just because he asked. And of course, the developer complains he still isn't getting enough.
Please note that even the good ones like Lori Boyer realized fighting was useless and probably too costly to them politically and gave in. The battle was lost long ago. Very sad actually.
Quote from: strider on March 09, 2015, 08:33:32 AM
...the developer can design and build a new road that makes his development work and as long as he can convince the city that it could possibly be used by the public and help traffic in some small way,...
Who bears the cost of the upkeep of the road?
I'm pretty sure that the maintenance costs required far outweigh the initial build costs, but I don't know in what kind of timeframe that actually occurs.
Right now, the property appraiser still shows this road as being privately owned. But yeah, it's a bastardization of the original intention of the mobility fee and plan. Hopefully, another city can look back on Killingsworth's work and apply the original strategies to their community.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on March 09, 2015, 08:43:18 AM
Who bears the cost of the upkeep of the road?
I'm pretty sure that the maintenance costs required far outweigh the initial build costs, but I don't know in what kind of timeframe that actually occurs.
maintenance costs are not considered as part of concurrency impacts....state law makes it purely fro capital costs.
and to the question above, if one can show that providing additional network connections (even if on-site) offsets the impacts to the existing transportation network, than yes, credits can and should be available. While it may not help further the goals of the mobility plan, the option has long been part of state concurrency rules.
It also hurts that we never got around to altering our zoning regulations to better integrate land development with transportation infrastructure investment. Regardless of what happens with Abess Boulevard and Sleiman's development, Kernan is still being widened between Atlantic and Monument and the Atlantic/Kernan interchange was completed a few years ago.
What will be interesting to see play out is the ultimate number of similar scale projects like this that can be built and the amount of credits that will add up and be made available for purchase for other developments. Roads are pretty expensive, so that number could possibly get pretty high (given the amount of land mass we're working with) and thus, the idea of slowing the proliferation of unsustainable sprawl and encouraging infill is damaged. In order to facilitate that critical original goal (why bother with a fee at all if it's not the intention anymore?), credits for reinvesting in established areas of the city will need to be greatly enhanced.
A quick look on google maps shows what appears to be a service road running behind the complex with signals at either end.
Is that seriously the road that he's attempting to claim credits for?
I understand that there's another in the works; does anyone have the site plan for the new one?
The main thing we need is for our leaders to learn the word "no". If you're asking for $11 *million* in credits, you better make sure your plans fit the goals of the mobility plan, no exceptions.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on March 09, 2015, 10:59:34 AM
A quick look on google maps shows what appears to be a service road running behind the complex with signals at either end.
Is that seriously the road that he's attempting to claim credits for?
Yes, every decent sized shopping center or suburban mixed use development has one. That's why it will be interesting to see how quick the amount of available credits, to sell to other developers, build up.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on March 09, 2015, 10:59:34 AM
A quick look on google maps shows what appears to be a service road running behind the complex with signals at either end.
Is that seriously the road that he's attempting to claim credits for?
not really.
If you look at the aerial you will see that Abess Blvd. is stubbed out and the service road is listed for now as "Abess Blvd". It is clear there will be a new Abess Blvd. further back. Also note that Marketplace Drive is also stubbed out and will extend back as well.
The extension will go through the west side of the property, basically forming a nearly identical version of what exists on the east side of the property today. It will help make parcels on the northside of the overall parcel accessible to Atlantic and Kernan Blvds. It does not appear that it will take cars off either road though, since there is nothing else to connect with. However, it could pull some traffic this development generates, from being forced to use the Atlantic/Kernan interchange.
Will someone please explain to me how this will further the goals of the Mobility Plan for the Arlington area (east and west) which has some real needs for safety, connectivity, and creating context sensitive redevelopment? That whole area is turning into strip malls.
As I remember Mr. Sleiman is the one who keeps making stabs at the mobility plan in order to kill it.
Quote from: Jumpinjack on March 09, 2015, 01:53:13 PM
Will someone please explain to me how this will further the goals of the Mobility Plan for the Arlington area (east and west) which has some real needs for safety, connectivity, and creating context sensitive redevelopment?
I think you're missing either the rhetorical or the sarcastic font. Someone might think you're actually asking a serious question.
Quote from: stephendare on March 09, 2015, 02:24:26 PM
Ennis: isn't it the Planning Department, with the Planning Director being ultimately responsible, who administers the Mobility Fee?
Seems like Council has final say so on approving mobility credits...making them "ultimately responsible". This will be the second. Eastland Timber was given $34 million for the proposed extension of R.G. Skinner Parkway, through their property, to SR 9B a few months back.
From the article:QuoteDuring a council committee meeting Monday, Councilwoman Lori Boyer asked a city attorney and planning department staff why it's taken more than four months to review the application and whether former City Planning and Development Director Calvin Burney, who resigned Feb. 27, had concerns about it.
Steven Smith of the city's planning department said there were several reasons for the delay, including an error in a state model used in the traffic study submitted by Atlantic North. Neither the city nor the company were at fault, he said. Smith said Burney's departure further slowed the process, which was being completed last week. He said he wasn't aware of any concerns Burney had.
Burney stepped down from his post, which paid $135,000 a year, to pursue personal interests after three years at City Hall. Efforts to reach Burney for comment were unsuccessful.
Boyer also expressed concerns about the waiver and said awarding credits to a project built before the city offered mobility credits could set a precedent counter to the intent of rules.
Herzberg said the company began discussing the road project in 2013 while the council considered changing the mobility fee rules. He said the company always planned to apply for the credits, but delays on the city's end caused it to be built sooner than the application process was complete.
"This is not a road built 10 years ago and is now seeking credits," Herzberg said.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2015-03-08/story/jacksonville-city-council-consider-11-million-credit-sleiman-owned
^Everything at COJ revolves around politics at the top. There's nothing competent leadership under a mayor or council can overcome as long as the boss isn't in agreement. All that does is end up with your resignation letter being prematurely accepted. It's the reason I cringe when people on this forum blame planners for what Jax has become today. There's no planners calling the shots in this place.
Quote from: stephendare on March 09, 2015, 02:24:26 PM
Ennis: isn't it the Planning Department, with the Planning Director being ultimately responsible, who administers the Mobility Fee?
yes....but the changes enacted in 2013 (championed by Paul Harden and Sleiman) allow for credits for "major" improvements not in the plan but deemed helpful to systemwide circulation/mobility....and the legislation required those credits to be voted on case-by-case by City Council.
And then we all worry about giving Khan some incentives to help revitalize downtown while we give this joker and the Eastland groups basically incentives for urban sprawl.
Quote from: edjax on March 09, 2015, 03:24:59 PM
And then we all worry about giving Khan some incentives to help revitalize downtown while we give this joker and the Eastland groups basically incentives for urban sprawl.
credits and incentives aren't necessarily the same thing....fact is Sleiman also wanted incentives to redevelop the Landing....and wanted the City to pay for infrastructure improvements (like removing the Main St bridge ramp) that made his project more viable.
I thought the whole purpose of the original Mobility Fee plan was to promote infill development and development in areas with existing infrastructure. It sounds like the credit plan actually promotes urban sprawl, as long as the developer pays for the costs upfront. And then developers can turn around and sell those credits to other developers to avoid paying their own fees or what?
Yeah. It is what it is. Some of the modifications made over the years have focused more on issues involving the old concurrency mentality than idea of changing Jax's growth patterns for the better. Unfortunately, that's what happens when you lose too much institutional knowledge too quick.
QuoteUnfortunately, that's what happens when you lose too much institutional knowledge too quick.
Perhaps that played a part, but I tend to believe that those with the power, developers, exercised it to put in place loopholes and exceptions that gave them what they wanted, without 'growth patterns' being a concern on their part.
Quote from: vicupstate on March 09, 2015, 06:04:15 PM
QuoteUnfortunately, that's what happens when you lose too much institutional knowledge too quick.
Perhaps that played a part, but I tend to believe that those with the power, developers, exercised it to put in place loopholes and exceptions that gave them what they wanted, without 'growth patterns' being a concern on their part.
The whole damn thing is a big joke. Ridiculous.