Nocatee Town Center: Northeast Florida's Next Downtown?
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/4112687109_rzwq9DL-L.jpg)
In 2008, Metro Jacksonville ran a story revealing plans for the Nocatee Town Center. Readers were asked for their opinions on if the development would truly become the urban downtown core of a new city. Since that time, Nocatee has become the third fastest growing master planned community in the country. Now that seven years have passed, Metro Jacksonville takes a visit to Nocatee Town Center.
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-jun-nocatee-town-center-northeast-floridas-next-downtown
The houses seem nice but the town center has zero appeal to me. At the rate it's being developed Nocatee will just be another huge housing development. Nothing more.
Was the developers goal to make it look as generic as possible? If so, they certainly succeeded.
Sure looks like any other new development these days.
That whole community is very emblematic of modern Jacksonville.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on June 09, 2015, 08:33:02 AM
Looks idyllic and pretty and all, but just not somewhere I'd want to live. I'd rather spend about the same, maybe get a little less square footage, and live in San Marco, Riverside, Ortega, or Avondale. Unless you work in St. Johns County, I can't imagine why you'd want to live there.
Although I agree with you, it's a much better place to raise a family. The schools are unquestionably better, the area is drastically safer and traffic isn't really a problem anywhere in PV aside from TPC week. Between the water park, beach, Davis park, and tight knit social system for "soccer moms" it's the logical choice for "the best place to raise your kids".
For people like us who enjoy the urban feel of the neighborhoods you mentioned, PV seems like an oddball, far away, boring place. To families with slightly more income it's a safe nest away from all of the "bad", old and more diversified neighborhoods.
As someone who grew up in PV I can say first hand that the perception people have of downtown and it's surrounding neighborhoods is not good. In some of my first posts here I talked about how wrong my preconceptions about Jacksonville's urban areas were. Unfortunately, I'm one of few to realize that. The vast majority of millennials / 2000's kids from their would much rather move to the town center or the beaches because they're newer, more hip and the places your familiar with since they're close by.
Nocatee initially got hit hard by the crash and they changed directions quite a bit. I can't remember the exact number, but they made a substantial number of modifications to the originally approved PUD (50+ IIRC). It's a much less cohesive development now, basically a scattered area of subdivisions, instead of an interconnected community.
Since the market started coming back a few years ago, it has exceeded expectations and had a ton of homes built. In the short term, the alteration of their original plans may have made sense, but I think over the long term, I believe it will prevent Nocatee from ever being a truly special community. Its basically Eagle Harbor East, but closer to the beach, St. Augustine, and with more conservation area.
All that said, the continued rapid growth of Northern St. Johns County should be a wake up call to Jacksonville. You could revitalize all of Springfield and Murray Hill (and probably more) with the amount of people that have built in Nocatee. Durbin Crossing and other Northern St. Johns County developments are also doing well. Reasons: 1. Schools. 2. Better Parks and Recreation 3. Minimal crime 4. Affordability. Big factors Jax has in its favor: 1. Better food. 2. Better shopping. 3. More culture. 4. Cooler neighborhoods. 5. Jobs.
Four of the things Jax has in its favor can be accessed by SJC residents (with a commute). Three of the things SJC has in its favor can't be accessed by Jax residents. So essentially you can live in SJC in a crime free area, send your kids to better schools, and pay less for more, and simply drive a little more to work, or to a night out. COJ has to start investing more in its schools, parks, and reducing crime if it wants to start tipping the scale back the other way.
Reminds me of the Truman Show.
I have an old work colleague who moved here from Charlotte who settled there. I don't see how you can buy a home there with any hope of good resale since they will be building in that place until at least 2025.
Quote from: fsquid on June 09, 2015, 09:18:54 AM
I have an old work colleague who moved here from Charlotte who settled there. I don't see how you can buy a home there with any hope of good resale since they will be building in that place until at least 2025.
That's the thing, most people who move there aren't planning to sell within the next 10 years. They either move there with younger kids or with the intent of having kids soon.
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on June 09, 2015, 09:15:21 AM
Reminds me of the Truman Show.
I was just about to say that...
Anyone here been to ION, SC? It's a similar, planned development (TND) near Charleston SC. Scratching my head wondering why ION looks
so much better than this.
Seriously, go to a Google image search for 'ION South Carolina' and have your mind blown at the difference.
I'd rather someone shoot me than move to Nocatee.
Quote from: fsquid on June 09, 2015, 09:18:54 AM
I have an old work colleague who moved here from Charlotte who settled there. I don't see how you can buy a home there with any hope of good resale since they will be building in that place until at least 2025.
You'd be surprised. In my neighborhood of Austin Park, (which is completely built out, a smaller neighborhood, and directly across from the new K-8), resales are booming. Houses are under contract in less than two weeks. Yes, I drive 45 minutes downtown everyday, but when I get home, I'm 10 minutes from the beach, my kids are in great schools, and they have multiple places to swim and play. I moved to Nocatee in 2010 when it was really a ghost town, after living in East Arlington for 7 years.
Quote from: CityLife on June 09, 2015, 09:14:00 AM
Nocatee initially got hit hard by the crash and they changed directions quite a bit. I can't remember the exact number, but they made a substantial number of modifications to the originally approved PUD (50+ IIRC). It's a much less cohesive development now, basically a scattered area of subdivisions, instead of an interconnected community.
So did they have to have their PUD re-approved? If not, it seems that the first approval was obtained under false pretenses.
"Yeah, we're going to built a cohesive, interconnected development. Oops, we can't do it now, so we're just going to build another bland subdivision instead. Sucker."
Quote from: finehoe on June 09, 2015, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: CityLife on June 09, 2015, 09:14:00 AM
Nocatee initially got hit hard by the crash and they changed directions quite a bit. I can't remember the exact number, but they made a substantial number of modifications to the originally approved PUD (50+ IIRC). It's a much less cohesive development now, basically a scattered area of subdivisions, instead of an interconnected community.
So did they have to have their PUD re-approved? If not, it seems that the first approval was obtained under false pretenses.
"Yeah, we're going to built a cohesive, interconnected development. Oops, we can't do it now, so we're just going to build another bland subdivision instead. Sucker."
In St. Johns County (and many other places) you can modify PUD's by small adjustment, minor modification, and major modification. Small adjustments are very minor and can be approved by staff, minor modifications can be approved by the Planning Board, major modifications have to go before the County Commission. The developers of Nocatee made numerous tweaks through these means, completely legally. However, when you look at the original PUD and what it is now, it has had so many tweaks done it is drastically different from what was originally approved.
Quote from: bigcraiginjax on June 09, 2015, 09:38:47 AM
Quote from: fsquid on June 09, 2015, 09:18:54 AM
I have an old work colleague who moved here from Charlotte who settled there. I don't see how you can buy a home there with any hope of good resale since they will be building in that place until at least 2025.
You'd be surprised. In my neighborhood of Austin Park, (which is completely built out, a smaller neighborhood, and directly across from the new K-8), resales are booming. Houses are under contract in less than two weeks. Yes, I drive 45 minutes downtown everyday, but when I get home, I'm 10 minutes from the beach, my kids are in great schools, and they have multiple places to swim and play. I moved to Nocatee in 2010 when it was really a ghost town, after living in East Arlington for 7 years.
Yeah, selling a house in this area is not an issue. There's a lot of demand.
Quote from: ben says on June 09, 2015, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on June 09, 2015, 09:15:21 AM
Reminds me of the Truman Show.
I was just about to say that...
Anyone here been to ION, SC? It's a similar, planned development (TND) near Charleston SC. Scratching my head wondering why ION looks so much better than this.
Seriously, go to a Google image search for 'ION South Carolina' and have your mind blown at the difference.
I'd rather someone shoot me than move to Nocatee.
I was there a few years ago. I'on is nowhere near as big as Nocatee, land wise at least. The neighborhoods in I'on were looked very Charleston style. Small street grids, narrow streets, houses close together with alleys and whatnot. The neighborhood was a lot more established so it had larger trees and they had preserved a lot of big oaks. Plus it was built right in the middle of Mount Pleasant rather than out in BFE. So yeah long story short it is a lot more inviting/cozy than Nocatee, which is spread out all over the place and the neighborhoods for the most part are treeless.
I'on: https://goo.gl/maps/VAMtd
My oldest friend moved out to the Fruit Cove and Julington Creek areas back when it was the Nocatee of its time. We used to joke that to live there you had to love your white bread and driving 20 minutes to get it.
These types of places will always be attractive to a good portion of home buyers. St. Johns County has built a strong brand as the go-to place for well-to-do suburban families seeking the same. The county's painting itself into a corner, though. You can't tie all of your revenue to new residential development. When - not if - the housing booms slow down, and as infrastructure and housing stock starts to age, you've got to have a wider tax base to cover it all. A single Publix strip mall amid 40000 houses isn't going to cut it. Just try maintaining all those A-rated schools off that.
Its funny how many people I know that have moved to Nocatee or other like developments thinking oh this would be a great place to raise my family. Then they realize after a year or two how devoid of culture those areas are and while there children receive a good education in school, there after school and weekend lifestyle is bane suburban existence and then they move to another city.
Looks like the suburbs.
I'm sure it's ideal for some people but I spent some time out there when my ex still lived with her parents and there was nothing for us to do out there. She would get mad at me sometimes because she said I was always out doing things and I was... In riverside I can meet friends for food/drinks in 5 minuets. Out there you still have to drive to get anywhere and there is no nightlife.
Here's the thing that I don't understand with these types of developments: Their propagating this idyllic live/work/play 'community', but where's the 'work'?
Last I checked, a barista at Starbucks doesn't make the kind of money to afford a $400k mortgage, 2 car payments, etc...
Maybe after the min. wage increase..... ;)
Quote from: jaxjaguar on June 09, 2015, 09:32:35 AM
Quote from: fsquid on June 09, 2015, 09:18:54 AM
I have an old work colleague who moved here from Charlotte who settled there. I don't see how you can buy a home there with any hope of good resale since they will be building in that place until at least 2025.
That's the thing, most people who move there aren't planning to sell within the next 10 years. They either move there with younger kids or with the intent of having kids soon.
I guess no chance of relocation with companies, etc.
Difference is ION, SC fetches almost triple the psf as Nocatee.
Btw, Advanced Disposal relocated their headquarters from Baymeadows to Nocatee a few months ago.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 09, 2015, 01:05:32 PM
Btw, Advanced Disposal relocated their headquarters from Baymeadows to Nocatee a few months ago.
And how many of their employees can afford to live there?
Quote from: Tacachale on June 09, 2015, 10:30:33 AM
These types of places will always be attractive to a good portion of home buyers. St. Johns County has built a strong brand as the go-to place for well-to-do suburban families seeking the same. The county's painting itself into a corner, though. You can't tie all of your revenue to new residential development. When - not if - the housing booms slow down, and as infrastructure and housing stock starts to age, you've got to have a wider tax base to cover it all. A single Publix strip mall amid 40000 houses isn't going to cut it. Just try maintaining all those A-rated schools off that.
Thing is most of SJC's growth is recent, which means it didn't have a large workforce historically, which means a low pension burden relative to its size. Also, as a relatively affluent community (2nd wealthiest county in the state I believe) with minimal crime and public safety issues, it also has a big advantage over Jacksonville in terms of cost to provide services. Through impact fees and recreation requirements for new development, it has also somewhat offset the cost of sprawl.
As SJC captures more of NE Fla's middle to upper middle class, the county will be able to start throwing around its weight a little more for economic development, like when the county outbid Jax for Advanced Disposal. Commercial and office will follow the rooftops eventually.
A few thoughts. I distain suburbs, so take it for what it's worth....
- As a neighbor who was thinking about leaving SPR for for Nocatee told me, "Why would I drive 45 minutes away to live 8 feet from my neighbor, when I can do that here?".
- I don't buy the schools argument for 2 reasons. First, it's not very difficult to get your child into a Magnet School in Duval County if you try. Second, it's not the actual schools that are different, it's the student population. They didn't discover the secret formula to good education there, they simply have fewer students/families who don't care.
- This is mostly just white flight. People wanting to escape the "horrors" of Jax, and would rather live in a generic Disney World free of socioeconomic diversity than an authentic community. The further away from the real world they are, the less they need to care about it.
Some people prefer neighborhoods over sprawl, those people will always choose urban options. Some people raised in suburbs only know suburbs. let's hope we see more people come to Jax who want urban options.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 09, 2015, 10:30:33 AM
My oldest friend moved out to the Fruit Cove and Julington Creek areas back when it was the Nocatee of its time. We used to joke that to live there you had to love your white bread and driving 20 minutes to get it.
These types of places will always be attractive to a good portion of home buyers. St. Johns County has built a strong brand as the go-to place for well-to-do suburban families seeking the same. The county's painting itself into a corner, though. You can't tie all of your revenue to new residential development. When - not if - the housing booms slow down, and as infrastructure and housing stock starts to age, you've got to have a wider tax base to cover it all. A single Publix strip mall amid 40000 houses isn't going to cut it. Just try maintaining all those A-rated schools off that.
You'd be surprised how far CFD revenues go. 40-80+ year bonds to pay for ongoing maintenance, 72" water lines, schools, fire stations, etc etc. Much will eventually pay back the developers after certain obligations have been met, and some will be set aside for ongoing work/maintenance. People in Nocatee pay a separate tax rate to cover the bond that was issued. And it probably varies even within Nocatee. And if the original bond doesn't cover what it needs, there are a lot of finance gimmicks that can be used. Oversimplifying here, but SJC is no stranger to paying for new infrastructure, and it has been maintaining this inefficient suburban infrastructure fine for decades now. There will come a point, but I don't think the county is even close to that now (so many suburban counties of primarily residential development built within the last 30 years and containing more people than Duval County ring so many cities in this country already).
Resales will absolutely not be a problem in this neighborhood. I can guarantee you that both developers (of the lots/infrastructure) and the homebuilders they sell raw to finished lots to are paying a lot of attention to resales and view those as competition. Developers and homebuilders *want* the resales to sell really really well because their whole model is totally contingent on what would likely appear to be unrealistic home price appreciation on paper (probably double digit home price growth YoY for at least the next few years...with homebuilders requiring something like an 8-10% profit margin on the sale of homes, which depends on what they buy the lots for).
I digress, the modern homebuilding/development scheme, even if suburban, is actually just a more sophisticated "analysis heavy" way of doing *exactly* what Telfair Stockton did in Avondale and Ortega. Modern families have different wants and needs, and there is a different planning process, let alone a zoning legal structure that just didn't even exist then (plus labor and materials cost structures are way different than in 1920s), so what you end up with is something that looks different than Avondale and Ortega, but at the end of the day, the profit structure, process, player pizza chart, etc etc are all basically the same.
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 09, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Some people prefer neighborhoods over sprawl, those people will always choose urban options. Some people raised in suburbs only know suburbs. let's hope we see more people come to Jax who want urban options.
There's a lot of movement in all directions. But what I have seen across many markets across the country is that there is often a reversal in mentality and wants depending on what one has been accustomed to, and thus grown tired of. Many people who grew up or have lived recently and for a while in urban environments (truly urban, which is not offered anywhere in Jax, not even remotely close) grow tired of that lifestyle, as it can be exhausting. They'll trade the pluses of this lifestyle for increased road traffic/longer commutes, often in a heartbeat, to get into a cookie cutter pristine suburban area such as this. This desire to trade out amplified exponentially with kids.
Lots of people who grew up suburban or have never given the urban lifestyle a shot and have recently heard all about it (maybe have friends that have given it a go) decide to move to an urban location/urban city, from a more suburban location/suburban city. Most of the young set in NYC, SF, and Chicago are indeed transplants, many of whom come from Los Angeles at most urban to random points of the south/midwest. I am actually a living example of this, and I can see myself wanting a quieter, more suburban lifestyle at some point in my life if I choose to have kids and settle down.
Jax is a bit more stereotypically "southern" in that there is a larger demographic of less traveled people. So there is more of an element of people sticking with what they know (Ortegans stay in Ortega, suburban people stay in their little bubble, and so on and so forth). This is perhaps not surprisingly more common in Jacksonville than many other cities. Therefore, it stands to reason that downtown has that as an exacerbated obstacle relative to some other cities.
Jacksonville also has a stronger competition with the Beach as a desired place to live and have an office and shop. Atlanta, Charlotte, Austin, and Nashville do not have a beach.
I think a lot of the negative commenters are 1) Envious and bitter that they cannot live in Nocatee themselves, or 2) have never actually even been to Nocatee but want to make a negative comment anyways.
I was born and raised in Jacksonville - and though my heart belongs to Jacksonville, I LOVE NOCATEE too. I get the wonderfulness of Jacksonville within a fairly short drive but get to live in a peaceful, quiet, clean, beautiful, green, low-crime, family-friendly, brand new area. Is it a place for everybody? NO! And that's okay! But don't put down the community and those of us who do love living here...especially if you've never even been to Nocatee.
Bold (Low Crime!) New City
The unveiling of Nocatee was a "surprise" to most- a calculated move to establish vested rights while the 'Gettin was good during an era when some figured such a proposal would never 'fly' in the future.
Just part & parcel of militant anti Duval narrative,will play an important role in accommodating white flight.
Shucks,if I was moving "here" about now,I would be inclined to move there......
Instead,lucky I guess,to have been a member of certified "Enviro" during Nocatee emerge.Florida Wildlife Federation Board member.Attorneys. Depositions. We (FWF) worked ardently to thwart the Southeast Landfill,little did we know.
I got an early jolt,predictive capability via reviewing obscure future roadway proposals- St Aug Road extension et al.About a year before The Announcement.
A file of mine regarding sludge dump and "Preservation Area" might be worth looking for.
Nocatee was a driver in the creation of Florida Wildlife Federation Regional Office,and an impressive chain of "wins" for the general public and community.
It's still amazing to me how such vast current event news and information escapes a forum like this,well past page 1.
On the other hand,so many 'on the ground' could care little of column inch "News".
You outa' see what's on the horizon! 8)
I've both been to nocatee and can afford to live there. It's just very unappealing to me. There's no tress, and in my opinion, no charm.
I've read some horror stories on the city-data forums about the quality of the houses, not all builders but one in particular.
It will be interesting to see the values of these homes in 10-20 years when the kids there become teenagers and the mischief starts.
Just goes to show ya' that when white folk move in,the place goes downhill
8)
What we see today is far from what future Units will aspire to. "New & Improved Nocatee".
Nocatee considered positioned more favorably than Inland "Dark Horse" Oak Leaf. For instance.
I recall the negotiations, the assumed ideal "Cluster" narrative- group the development,and spare the rest (much of which undevelopable anyway, yet proudly "preserved").
Wild lands gone. The entire Nocatee area could have been state conservation lands purchase,enhancing NE Florida appeal in it's own right.
There is apparently great demand for five acre +/- parcels,a large land area swath truly guaranteed rural/semi rural, truly different community centers. Too bad that scenario did not play out.But the development profit potential would have been dashed.
When Nocatee jumped out, seemingly by surprise, many realized this would be a definitive Stamp on the landscape, representing the outlook of a region then dangling between past and future.Here's looking at Then! ;)
No taco bell there either.
Know Growth, were you loaded when you wrote those two last posts?
The best thing about Nocatee is that it takes some of the "heat" off of Mandarin and St Johns on this forum.
I'm personally happy to see Nocatee doing well because I worked with Robert M Angus & Associates back in 2004-05 when they were the contracted Land Surveying company for the entire development. Fighting off commercial airline sized mosquitos, pygmy rattlesnakes, and pulling out ticks on a daily basis from surveying endless wetlands and pine-forests provided me a lot of cash for college.
I know the general opinion for most people in this forum leans heavily towards Urban Core development where you can walk or bike to everything. But for people with families, crowded urban-core living is typically the last thing on their mind. While working at Deutsche Bank, we communicated on a daily basis with our Derivatives team in the Chicago office. Out of 10 colleagues, not a single one of them lived in downtown Chicago. They all commuted an average of 1.5 hours from the suburbs.
For Jacksonville, it's the same scenario. Families don't want to live in a small, cramped living space just for the sake of being able to be in an urban living environment (Granted, only Riverside really offers a hint of that type of living). When my wife and I have kids, we will look at living in an area that is safe, provides plenty of living space, good school system, and an overall great environment for kids to grow up in. The core of Jacksonville provides none of that. So if that means "white flight" to Nocatee, then so be it.
St Johns County is to Jacksonville what the Alpharatta / Marrietta area is to Atlanta. Those are very strong communities that won't be going away any time soon. Nocatee is on the fast track to becoming the center piece for SJC.
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of The Oaks.
Not sure what your comments are meant to mean, but I will stand by that one being truly 'unique' in the overall development pattern of the early,mid 2000's.
We did our best to keep fairly large lots and relatively large setbacks (25' if I remember correctly) and when clearing the property, I was there personally tagging several old growth oaks and hardwoods that have been the feature of that neighborhood that you rarely see in any new development.
It's far from perfect, but it was, IMO, a positive addition even though it's still not a place I chose to live.
If Jacksonville had been Mad Men's backdrop/setting, Nocatee might have been Don Draper's destination on the 5 o'clock train (assuming JAX had light rail, lol).
As much as I've spent the better part of my professional career commuting ~2 hours daily, I now work from home & travel frequently. The hardest adjustment for me was actually relinquishing the quiet time for myself to relax, prep for the day, take inventory of happenings/developments along my route, listen to whatever I want on the radio, and ultimately unwind on the trip home. Nowadays, it's more of an instant grind with really no transition into family mode in the afternoon(s). So for me, I prefer some distance between where I live & work (in addition to everything else mentioned above specific to environment, schools, etc.). Perhaps it's a bit selfish (like Don), but it's all personal preference and discipline.
Also, I contend that there's more to these planned communities than just stay at home Soccer Moms - I'd be curious to see the average age/occupancy - specifically retirees.
^There's an entire age restricted retirement community within Nocatee, called Del Webb Ponte Vedra. It is projected to have 2k residences at buildout. Has its own 37,000 square foot clubhouse, pools, fitness center, parks, and a 10' multi-use path through the whole development. The whole thing is surrounded by preserve.
http://nocatee.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Riverwood_Master_-5-2013.pdf
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Actually finehoe, Nocatee has more recreational opportunities for kids than just about anywhere in Jax. I'd say the Beaches or Nocatee is where people who want their kids to have an active physical/recreational lifestyle should live.
I personally had an opportunity to buy in Nocatee at a 15% discount (family member works for a builder) and wasn't interested (not my cup of tea), but the parks, preserves, trails, pools, and recreational opportunities are the one thing that did interest me. Anyone that disagrees should look at the parks and outdoor/nature sections on the Nocatee website.
http://nocatee.com/amenities/
I get where you are coming from on the other stuff, but not when it comes to things to do for kids.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:24:31 AM
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of Oak Leaf.
Not sure what your comments are meant to mean, but I will stand by that one being truly 'unique' in the overall development pattern of the early,mid 2000's.
We did our best to keep fairly large lots and relatively large setbacks (25' if I remember correctly) and when clearing the property, I was there personally tagging several old growth oaks and hardwoods that have been the feature of that neighborhood that you rarely see in any new development.
It's far from perfect, but it was, IMO, a positive addition even though it's still not a place I chose to live.
Oakleaf is unique? That's a joke right? Hopefully it is...Exurban sprawl is hardly unique. Part of the reason Blanding traffic sucks as much as it does. But hey, at least the FCX is coming through the neighborhood. Saving a few trees doesn't make up for what was destroyed in the process. In the words of KG...Onward!
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Finehoe, I am a gay living in San Francisco. I personally cannot fathom a place like Nocatee. But, I do work on many such developments myself. I can guarantee you that in many many cities, these new suburban communities end up far more racially diverse than the yuppified intown neighborhoods we all praise. A big rather undiscussed trend going on today is that the urban cores of many cities are becoming less and less diverse while the newer suburbs are becoming very very diverse. This may not be the case in SJC in particular, but it is not a reflection on Nocatee, but rather the County and the region overall (it would hint that there isn't A LOT of diversity moving to NE FL...if there were, and if NE FL follows trends of other cities/metros, then that diversity would actually be heading to Nocatee, not to Avondale or San Marco or Riverside).
In terms of having to be driven everywhere. Let's not kid ourselves, this is Jacksonville. If you are *that* wanting of an urban lifestyle/carless lifestyle, you would not be living really anywhere in FL, if that is your top criteria. Riverside is less dense and more car oriented than many of the furthest out burbs of many of this autocentric country's largest cities. Let's not forget that!
And if I want the most homogeneous neighborhoods I can think, perhaps not entirely by race, but of people who have never really left Jax, I can guarantee myself that in the intown neighborhoods where all the "locals" and "local families" with "history" in the area live. Talk about a group, whether black or white (and you won't get anything else, and A LOT more white) that is without exposure outside of their little Jacksonville bubble!!!! I can guarantee you that Nocatee is chalk full of not only more diversity than you are probably aware of, but filled with transplants from all around the country who have lived elsewhere and can appreciate taking up new roots near other people just like them who moved from somewhere else and know nobody.
It's sad we don't build neighborhoods like Avondale, San Marco, or Ortega anymore. But these are not dense, urban neighborhoods, but rather streetcar neighborhoods that could be 30 miles outside a city center in a larger metro. The truly urban cities are becoming phenotypic paradises for professionals, those making big bucks eating at good restaurants and shopping at trendy stores. The big cities are all pricing out the poor immigrants who don't adapt and think up ways to remain in the city. And where are they going? The suburbs!
Quote from: cline on June 10, 2015, 02:04:54 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:24:31 AM
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of Oak Leaf.
Not sure what your comments are meant to mean, but I will stand by that one being truly 'unique' in the overall development pattern of the early,mid 2000's.
We did our best to keep fairly large lots and relatively large setbacks (25' if I remember correctly) and when clearing the property, I was there personally tagging several old growth oaks and hardwoods that have been the feature of that neighborhood that you rarely see in any new development.
It's far from perfect, but it was, IMO, a positive addition even though it's still not a place I chose to live.
Oakleaf is unique? That's a joke right? Hopefully it is...Exurban sprawl is hardly unique. Part of the reason Blanding traffic sucks as much as it does. But hey, at least the FCX is coming through the neighborhood. Saving a few trees doesn't make up for what was destroyed in the process. In the words of KG...Onward!
Sorry for the confusion... No. Oak Leaf is not unique. It's the typical, suburban live/work/play (all lies) complex that I would never move my family into.
I specifically meant the development of The Oaks at Oakleaf regarding the lot sizing and maintaining as much old growth as we could. There was very little clear-cutting used in that specific development.
Quote from: simms3 on June 10, 2015, 02:18:51 PM
I can guarantee you that in many many cities, these new suburban communities end up far more racially diverse than the yuppified intown neighborhoods we all praise.
This is a good point and quite true. I see it in Washington DC and its suburbs. It used to be that DC was "Chocolate City" and MD and VA were its "Vanilla Suburbs." Now Montgomery County, MD and Fairfax County, VA with their populations from literally all over the world are much more diverse than the inner core neighborhoods in Washington.
Nevertheless, for Nocatee, I suspect that isn't really the case (haven't actually seen the demographics, so I can't say for sure). But you are most likely also correct about the from/not from Jacksonville aspect of the place.
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
well it seems if you let your kids walk anywhere nowadays, people call the cops on you.
Quote from: fsquid on June 10, 2015, 02:39:50 PM
well it seems if you let your kids walk anywhere nowadays, people call the cops on you.
LOL. That's true. http://www.freerangekids.com/
Nocatee is 86% white as of 2010 which is what is in the Census. About par for Northern St. Johns I would say.
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 02:37:57 PM
Quote from: simms3 on June 10, 2015, 02:18:51 PM
I can guarantee you that in many many cities, these new suburban communities end up far more racially diverse than the yuppified intown neighborhoods we all praise.
This is a good point and quite true. I see it in Washington DC and its suburbs. It used to be that DC was "Chocolate City" and MD and VA were its "Vanilla Suburbs." Now Montgomery County, MD and Fairfax County, VA with their populations from literally all over the world are much more diverse than the inner core neighborhoods in Washington.
Nevertheless, for Nocatee, I suspect that isn't really the case (haven't actually seen the demographics, so I can't say for sure). But you are most likely also correct about the from/not from Jacksonville aspect of the place.
There are suburbs and then there are suburbs. Suburban neighborhoods in Arlington, much of the Westside, and old Southside & Baymeadows are diverse. St. Johns County, not so much. It will likely happen there as the neighborhoods age and new development moves elsewhere.
^^^I wonder what % white the glorified parts of Avondale, Ortega, San Marco, and Riverside are. Maybe even higher!
Most interesting to me would be what % of Nocatee is not even from the state of FL, and what % of the urban core of Jacksonville was born and raised in Jacksonville. I think "diversity" goes well beyond just plain old skin color or ethnicity (in fact there are ethnic European whites that bring a whole lotta non-Anglo diversity to America).
But yes, at the end of the day, SJC as a whole is one of the whitest counties in America. It shouldn't serve as a representation of suburban communities everywhere. I think that may actually reflect more on NE FL as a whole, because the suburbs are where immigrants and "diversity" really is headed if not already located in most of America, these days. And in my own experience, the intown neighborhoods of Jax are hardly diverse. Maybe NE FL just isn't attracting the Latin/Asian population that other FL/growing Sunbelt cities are, and so it's basically a bunch of white people that move to the area and perpetuate white suburbia, which makes it appear as if there is still actually "white flight" going on.
Quote from: simms3 on June 10, 2015, 03:10:40 PM
^^^I wonder what % white the glorified parts of Avondale, Ortega, San Marco, and Riverside are. Maybe even higher!
Most interesting to me would be what % of Nocatee is not even from the state of FL, and what % of the urban core of Jacksonville was born and raised in Jacksonville. I think "diversity" goes well beyond just plain old skin color or ethnicity (in fact there are ethnic European whites that bring a whole lotta non-Anglo diversity to America).
But yes, at the end of the day, SJC as a whole is one of the whitest counties in America. It shouldn't serve as a representation of suburban communities everywhere. I think that may actually reflect more on NE FL as a whole, because the suburbs are where immigrants and "diversity" really is headed if not already located in most of America, these days. And in my own experience, the intown neighborhoods of Jax are hardly diverse. Maybe NE FL just isn't attracting the Latin/Asian population that other FL/growing Sunbelt cities are, and so it's basically a bunch of white people that move to the area and perpetuate white suburbia, which makes it appear as if there is still actually "white flight" going on.
The suburbs are where much of the diversity is headed in Jacksonville too, particularly the areas I listed. We see fewer Asians and Hispanics than some places (and more than others) but a more diverse immigrant profile than average (a lot of them coming from Eastern Europe and the Middle East are categorized as "white"). I suppose it depends on how you count "diversity", but the urban core neighborhoods are the most "non-white" in the metro area, though probably not Ortega and parts of Avondale.
Ortega is 98% white, San Marco 71%, Riverside 75%. Those are unofficial as they don't have CDP like Nocatee has.
And around the corner are neighborhoods that are 80% African-American or more.
I know of a (yepper; white) young couple with two children that moved from Riverside to Nocatee.Thrilled. School 'quality' one driver.
On another Nocatee angle, for a year or so leading up to the surprise Nocatee development push announcement, the FTU produced incessant articles on the Davis family consumptive water use permits,ostensibly for "Wildlife".
Meanwhile,future roadway/St Augustine Rd Extension was of no interest to the FTU editors.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 10, 2015, 03:47:43 PM
And around the corner are neighborhoods that are 80% African-American or more.
......and until fairly recently,80% or more 'white'.
White Flight/White Aversion has been key player in regional growth.
Quote from: CityLife on June 10, 2015, 02:03:24 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Actually finehoe, Nocatee has more recreational opportunities for kids than just about anywhere in Jax. I'd say the Beaches or Nocatee is where people who want their kids to have an active physical/recreational lifestyle should live.
I personally had an opportunity to buy in Nocatee at a 15% discount (family member works for a builder) and wasn't interested (not my cup of tea), but the parks, preserves, trails, pools, and recreational opportunities are the one thing that did interest me. Anyone that disagrees should look at the parks and outdoor/nature sections on the Nocatee website.
http://nocatee.com/amenities/
I get where you are coming from on the other stuff, but not when it comes to things to do for kids.
Excellent points.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:24:31 AM
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of The Oaks.
Not sure what your comments are meant to mean, but I will stand by that one being truly 'unique' in the overall development pattern of the early,mid 2000's.
We did our best to keep fairly large lots and relatively large setbacks (25' if I remember correctly) and when clearing the property, I was there personally tagging several old growth oaks and hardwoods that have been the feature of that neighborhood that you rarely see in any new development.
It's far from perfect, but it was, IMO, a positive addition even though it's still not a place I chose to live.
I recall a Brannon/Chaffee Sector Plan meeting where some citizen participants declared they would support development "if it can be like Riverside and Avondale". I was thinking to myself; carve a development out of basically raw acreage,live out there......on a tiny lot? :'(
Quote from: Know Growth on June 10, 2015, 09:59:48 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:24:31 AM
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of The Oaks.
Not sure what your comments are meant to mean, but I will stand by that one being truly 'unique' in the overall development pattern of the early,mid 2000's.
We did our best to keep fairly large lots and relatively large setbacks (25' if I remember correctly) and when clearing the property, I was there personally tagging several old growth oaks and hardwoods that have been the feature of that neighborhood that you rarely see in any new development.
It's far from perfect, but it was, IMO, a positive addition even though it's still not a place I chose to live.
I recall a Brannon/Chaffee Sector Plan meeting where some citizen participants declared they would support development "if it can be like Riverside and Avondale". I was thinking to myself; carve a development out of basically raw acreage,live out there......on a tiny lot? :'(
Then they missed the mark, lol.
Quote from: simms3 on June 10, 2015, 12:30:07 AM
Know Growth, were you loaded when you wrote those two last posts?
So glad to see anxiety
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:06:27 PM
Quote from: Know Growth on June 10, 2015, 09:59:48 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 10, 2015, 10:24:31 AM
KG, I was part of the original planning and building of The Oaks.
I recall a Brannon/Chaffee Sector Plan meeting where some citizen participants declared they would support development "if it can be like Riverside and Avondale". I was thinking to myself; carve a development out of basically raw acreage,live out there......on a tiny lot? :'(
Then they missed the mark, lol.
In fact,the Brannon Chaffee /Oakleaf future roadways, "Sector Plan" public input element was easily choreographed by the county planner, Susan Fraser, and Genesis. Genesis got tangled up nicely,later,during Lake Assbury Sector Plan Number 1 (of 2). But they prevailed,rather easily.
Note:Susan Fraser,during her tenure as Clay County Planner during key (Oakleaf) proceedings- was a resident of Riverside Avondale,where she remains today.... 8)
She once followed the TV news cameras to my work location. So what. (and we would eventualy end up meeting in the same room joining hands over Avondale Overlay issue/Mellow Mushroom)
One Clay future Roadways meeting element process saw public participation quickly dwindle. Others public engagements easily managed.Susan Fraser represented "County Desires" well.
Susan Fraser was replaced by a person who had by then played recent key role in St Johns County Growth Booster,Consultant matters (Prosser Hollock although forgive spelling,never did get it right)
I will never forget the blank stare and shrug when I directed a question to the Clay Commission Chairman through to the County Planner: was Lake Asbury Sector Plan (#1) in fact Authorized by DCA?
Chalk it all up to "Regional Approach".It's all related in an internecine manner.
The fact that little,if any of the Clay proceedings were 'covered' by News & Information sources will eventually become a story in itself.
Ditto St Johns/Nocatee, another chapter.
As if a Carl Hiaasen novel.
:o ;)
Nocatee- Bold New Edge City
Nobody here at MJ should harbor illusions of somehow controlling surrounding growth in favor of "Jacksonville"- key proceedings occurred years ago.
I see the local TV weather sections notes Nocatee on the regional map images. Prominently lodged between Jax and St Augustine.
Filled a Gap. We can't stand Gaps.
Growing up in a Chicago suburb, I find it odd that the choices in the South seem to be/perceived to be:
Urban - high rises, traffic, terrible schools, cultural institutions, a la carte amenities
Suburban - single family homes, sprawl, sameness, good schools, HOA-based amenities, car is a necessity
The "suburban" SFH I grew up in was walking to a unique, medium-density, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly, fixed-rail transit based, small-business centric downtown with a movie theater that still had an organ, fantastic schools, a community band and several community performing arts centers (not even mentioning the multitude of county institutions). No HOA fees, possible to get around without a car if you had to and so on.
I'll admit that pretty much all of St. John's County horrifies me as a bland wasteland of McMansions. However, I found living in Riverside to be more suburban than urban in my spectrum of experiences. That the Sunbelt is full of awful suburbs is because people accept awful suburbs.
Another topic for another day, but I'm sick and tired of the '[insert word for bad] schools' argument. And not that you're using it at all jf, but the general sentiment that many people express as you pointed out.
Our kids get the education from school that we, as parents, allow them to get.
Quote from: JFman00 on June 15, 2015, 03:35:54 PM
Growing up in a Chicago suburb, I find it odd that the choices in the South seem to be/perceived to be:
Urban - high rises, traffic, terrible schools, cultural institutions, a la carte amenities
Suburban - single family homes, sprawl, sameness, good schools, HOA-based amenities, car is a necessity
The "suburban" SFH I grew up in was walking to a unique, medium-density, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly, fixed-rail transit based, small-business centric downtown with a movie theater that still had an organ, fantastic schools, a community band and several community performing arts centers (not even mentioning the multitude of county institutions). No HOA fees, possible to get around without a car if you had to and so on.
I'll admit that pretty much all of St. John's County horrifies me as a bland wasteland of McMansions. However, I found living in Riverside to be more suburban than urban in my spectrum of experiences. That the Sunbelt is full of awful suburbs is because people accept awful suburbs.
Good post. A lot of stereotyping takes place in these types of discussions. In reality, both can offer similar sustainable amenties and environments if designed properly.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
Quote from: Know Growth on June 12, 2015, 11:08:23 PM
Quote from: simms3 on June 10, 2015, 12:30:07 AM
Know Growth, were you loaded when you wrote those two last posts?
So glad to see anxiety
I've read his posts on a variety of topics, and I feel like he has an informed opinion and years of experience in the topics that he/she discusses.
But the delivery is so poor and disconnected that the messages get quickly overlooked and often ignored. It really can't even be considered "trolling" because most of the posts are jumbled and unorganized.
Know Growth, we all would value your opinion if we could understand you better.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
I'd be interested to hear your opinion why you believe the SJCPS to be superior to the DCPS.
What are these 'different problems'?
This is coming from the parent of a child who was accepted into Stanton (and declined), has scored 4s and 5s on all of his standardized tests and has been a student in Duval County since 1st grade: Upson ES (1-5) Ribauult MS (6-8) and now Lee HS (9 & 10)
Edit:
I've been a step-parent to 2 children in private school (elementary) for the past 3 years and don't see any difference in education. The differences I see are the extracurricular that the kids are exposed to on a daily basis and I would be lying to you if I told you I though that the private school education is actually better overall. I'd describe their schooling considerably more homogeneous.
I went to a private school myself from 4-12 and didn't learn anything about 'diversity' until my freshman year at college.
Second Edit:
Mods, this may warrant being moved to an entirely different thread altogether. Totally off topic from Nocatee.
"If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it."
THIS is why we can't have nice things. Doubling down by isolation is what has made matters worse.
Areas with a high degree of cultural and ethnic homogeniety tend to be less tolerant, in my limited experience. Recently had to move to an overwhelmingly white area in order to afford to buy a flat. Shortly thereafter, we had a national election and the racists came in second in my constituency.
Everyone out here is nice and polite - it's really a lovely area. But it seems the ones who fear 'the other' the most are the ones with the least exposure.
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 02:59:49 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/20/dylann-roof-manifesto-charleston-shooting_n_7627788.html
QuoteNow White parents are forced to move to the suburbs to send their children to "good schools". But what constitutes a "good school"? The fact is that how good a school is considered directly corresponds to how White it is. I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared, and brainwashed to fight. Why should we have to flee the cities we created for the security of the suburbs? Why are the suburbs secure in the first place? Because they are White. The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood
Lemme clarify my statement a bit.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 15, 2015, 04:56:50 PM
Our kids get the education from school that we, as parents, allow them to get.
Keep moving them around to 'protect' them, and they'll learn that
racism classism segregation is the way to handle life.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
You're conflating two things: being "a white, successful, friendly, and strong family", and living a suburban lifestyle. Neither of those things is dependent on the other. No one considers it negative to be white or successful or to have the impulse to have a strong, safe family environment.
There are plenty of people who consider the suburban lifestyle (or parts of it) to be negative. But not all the criticisms are the same. To me, and a number of others on this forum, the issue isn't the suburbs or even White Flight, per say. I don't care where other people live. If you want to live in the suburbs, have at it. My problem is when our communities and governments focus on developing those great suburbs while neglecting or even disadvantaging other parts of town and the health of the overall metropolis.
For instance, in another thread you were advocating the First Coast Expressway. This is a project that may make it a bit easier for suburbanites to get around, and will open up new land for suburban development. We always seem to have hundreds of millions of dollars for projects like that, but we can't scrape two nickels together to fix our urban infrastructure and keep chunks of Downtown from falling into the river. In other words, our state and local governments continue to subsidize suburban development but struggle even with simple upkeep of our urban areas.
^Well said.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 21, 2015, 03:55:17 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
You're conflating two things: being "a white, successful, friendly, and strong family", and living a suburban lifestyle. Neither of those things is dependent on the other. No one considers it negative to be white or successful or to have the impulse to have a strong, safe family environment.
There are plenty of people who consider the suburban lifestyle (or parts of it) to be negative. But not all the criticisms are the same. To me, and a number of others on this forum, the issue isn't the suburbs or even White Flight, per say. I don't care where other people live. If you want to live in the suburbs, have at it. My problem is when our communities and governments focus on developing those great suburbs while neglecting or even disadvantaging other parts of town and the health of the overall metropolis.
For instance, in another thread you were advocating the First Coast Expressway. This is a project that may make it a bit easier for suburbanites to get around, and will open up new land for suburban development. We always seem to have hundreds of millions of dollars for projects like that, but we can't scrape two nickels together to fix our urban infrastructure and keep chunks of Downtown from falling into the river. In other words, our state and local governments continue to subsidize suburban development but struggle even with simple upkeep of our urban areas.
I'm only conflating the two topics because I believe that there might a strong correlation between the two in the case of why White people might be moving to St. Johns County. Why do White people believe life is better in suburbia in NE Florida?
Regarding funding:
As MANY tend to do, you're confusing different levels of government and different pots of money. The State of Florida (FDOT, in this case) and the City of Jacksonville. Different entities, different leadership, different revenue sources. If urban infrastructure needs more funding (which I agree certainly does), then that's on COJ, not necessarily the state. I do want to point out that FDOT IS funding urban infrastructure within the urban area: Overland Bridge Project, and I-10/I-95 Operational Improvements Project. Both projects are increasing capacity through the urban/downtown area.
Can the state help out COJ with funding? Absolutely, in the form of grants and other types of beneficial monies. Why isn't that happening? What about a growth management plan and supporting land development policies that ACTUALLY encourage urban growth? Or, a Public Works Department and JTA that are well-funded, and can maintain urban infrastructure? What about functional local government led by a mayor that can actually govern, raise taxes, set budgets, etc. ?
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 21, 2015, 01:31:10 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
I'd be interested to hear your opinion why you believe the SJCPS to be superior to the DCPS.
What are these 'different problems'?
This is coming from the parent of a child who was accepted into Stanton (and declined), has scored 4s and 5s on all of his standardized tests and has been a student in Duval County since 1st grade: Upson ES (1-5) Ribauult MS (6-8) and now Lee HS (9 & 10)
Edit:
I've been a step-parent to 2 children in private school (elementary) for the past 3 years and don't see any difference in education. The differences I see are the extracurricular that the kids are exposed to on a daily basis and I would be lying to you if I told you I though that the private school education is actually better overall. I'd describe their schooling considerably more homogeneous.
I went to a private school myself from 4-12 and didn't learn anything about 'diversity' until my freshman year at college.
Second Edit:
Mods, this may warrant being moved to an entirely different thread altogether. Totally off topic from Nocatee.
First and foremost, it's the students and supportive families. Any and all other reasons about why SJCSD (needed to correct myself) continually outperforms DCPS are tied to this. A typical problem is unsupportive families, malnutrition, single-parent families, etc. I don't pretend to know all, because I don't. But I do have SOME insight to why the DCPS school system is not succeeding. I agree, a but off topic from Nocatee.
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 01:41:50 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
mostly because you are willing to tax the shit out of the rest of us in order to do it i suppose.
Please explain. I hear this argument all too much, and have a hard time understanding. Thanks.
Quote from: ben america on June 21, 2015, 02:38:58 PM
"If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it."
THIS is why we can't have nice things. Doubling down by isolation is what has made matters worse.
Really. So the "White Flight" is what's making matters worse. You can't be serious, right? What a joke.
We can't have nice things because White people are moving for greener pastures?
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 02:59:49 PM
ibecause racial segregation, rather than investment, is whats required for any of that, right?
can't imagine where Ive heard that over the past couple of days.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/20/dylann-roof-manifesto-charleston-shooting_n_7627788.html
QuoteNow White parents are forced to move to the suburbs to send their children to "good schools". But what constitutes a "good school"? The fact is that how good a school is considered directly corresponds to how White it is. I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared, and brainwashed to fight. Why should we have to flee the cities we created for the security of the suburbs? Why are the suburbs secure in the first place? Because they are White. The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood
Ridiculous to even bring that into the conversation. No one is advocating those actions, not even close. Come on.
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 05:31:59 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 05:29:14 PM
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 02:59:49 PM
ibecause racial segregation, rather than investment, is whats required for any of that, right?
can't imagine where Ive heard that over the past couple of days.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/20/dylann-roof-manifesto-charleston-shooting_n_7627788.html
QuoteNow White parents are forced to move to the suburbs to send their children to "good schools". But what constitutes a "good school"? The fact is that how good a school is considered directly corresponds to how White it is. I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared, and brainwashed to fight. Why should we have to flee the cities we created for the security of the suburbs? Why are the suburbs secure in the first place? Because they are White. The pathetic part is that these White people dont even admit to themselves why they are moving. They tell themselves it is for better schools or simply to live in a nicer neighborhood
Ridiculous to even bring that into the conversation. No one is advocating those actions, not even close. Come on.
It is ridiculous that you brought race into the conversation. I agree. Its uncomfortable to hear the same words repeated in their logical context though..Really? Segregation? So be it?
The choice to "flee" isn't based on race, it's based on crime and education. Those items are higher on my priority list than what the racial makeup is of the neighborhood. My point is that if Nocatee has lower crime, better schools, and less diversity, than I'm OK with that. I was merely adding on to the post that I originally quoted when I joined the conversation.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 06:05:25 PM
The choice to "flee" isn't based on race, it's based on crime and education. Those items are higher on my priority list than what the racial makeup is of the neighborhood.
This isn't directed at any you in particular, just my perception of why I believe things are the way they are.
You're fleeing because it's easier to run away from a problem than it is to stand up an be an active member of the community.
Ask your wife how many of her 'good' students have left over the years. Now consider that a portion of those families left for the same reason you are considering. Imagine how strong the school would be if those families not only stayed, but pulled their peer group kids into school as well. And I know that sounds all Pollyanna and Rainbows and Unicorns, but it's also true. And it also follows the same theme that's ongoing regarding sprawl. You wouldn't consider the move if you didn't have all these nice, empty highways to make your commute to and from BFE easy. That is until the next wave pushes out another 10 miles and you're left with the same decision regarding your younger kids.
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 06:25:01 PM
ah. I don't think anyone was confused by what you wrote. Just curious though, what part of your recent quote wasn't about race?
The objections to suburban mostly have to do with tax policy and maintaining the already developed areas before taking on new expenses for the taxpayers. You seemed to think it was about white people
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
The direction of the thread turned racial. I continued WarDamJagFan's post because it never really got responded to. It's a perspective that seemed to lack a voice here. Sorry for sharing my opinion. Feel free to call me "racist" now.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 21, 2015, 06:35:13 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 06:05:25 PM
The choice to "flee" isn't based on race, it's based on crime and education. Those items are higher on my priority list than what the racial makeup is of the neighborhood.
This isn't directed at any you in particular, just my perception of why I believe things are the way they are.
You're fleeing because it's easier to run away from a problem than it is to stand up an be an active member of the community.
Ask your wife how many of her 'good' students have left over the years. Now consider that a portion of those families left for the same reason you are considering. Imagine how strong the school would be if those families not only stayed, but pulled their peer group kids into school as well. And I know that sounds all Pollyanna and Rainbows and Unicorns, but it's also true. And it also follows the same theme that's ongoing regarding sprawl. You wouldn't consider the move if you didn't have all these nice, empty highways to make your commute to and from BFE easy. That is until the next wave pushes out another 10 miles and you're left with the same decision regarding your younger kids.
My question is, what started the "flight", (regardless of ethnicity, please, for stephendare's sake). Why did "good" students begin leaving? Well, better options of course. Newer options, safer options, better educational options.
I'm active in my community when I'm not working 50+ hours a week. And of course, I do vote. And sure, you can call it fleeing, "scared" if you must, but in reality, it's all about choices. I'm pretty sure I'm not turning Jacksonville around myself, or else I'd run for mayor.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 07:02:39 PM
My question is, what started the "flight", (regardless of ethnicity, please, for stephendare's sake). Why did "good" students begin leaving? Well, better options of course. Newer options, safer options, better educational options.
I'm active in my community when I'm not working 50+ hours a week. And of course, I do vote. And sure, you can call it fleeing, "scared" if you must, but in reality, it's all about choices. I'm pretty sure I'm not turning Jacksonville around myself, or else I'd run for mayor.
I don't think you can point to any singular cause. There are a myriad of reasons, some of which you've stated yourself, that people left and continue to leave: Race, financial ability, accessibility, perception of safety. Those are just a few, but are what I would consider the most important. And you're correct that it is a choice, but I won't make that particular choice because it goes against my what I believe regarding how to make this a better place for my kids. I want them to experience things. I want them to have to learn how to make choices for themselves. I want them to learn from my example. I'm trying to be a role model, and IMO running to greener pastures is not the first option that I want to come to mind.
And yeah, it's tough to have 2 career-oriented parents and still do 'stuff', but I'm also of the opinion that's more of a cause to the problem at hand than a solution for it. (yes. I keep my rose-colored glasses right next to my tin-foil hat if you're wondering)
Quote from: stephendare on June 21, 2015, 07:06:29 PM
because, subsidized by the taxpayers.developers and communities started building new on the outskirts and selling cheap. The middle class got financing and followed the tax dollars. Its pretty simple. The process got underway in the fifties, but really picked up steam in the 1980s.
Agreed, it is a pretty simple formula if you think about it. Overcrowding in cities that weren't being maintained well lead to higher crime and declining school districts. Meanwhile developers starting building shiny new neighborhoods where taxes were less, you could get a bigger house, and live in a better school district. It's hard to convince someone that has kids and wants the best for their kids to stay in an area that is declining and might not offer their kids the best opportunities. In America there is always something newer and better around the corner and like birds, people flock to those areas in swarms once a few others do. What seems to be happening now in many cities is that the metropolitan areas have become so huge and so sprawled out that people, including many with kids, have had enough and they are moving back to the cities, at least some. Sprawl continues in places like Nocatee and SJC but I don't think it is going to mean the death of Jacksonville. I think there will be a reverse trend in Jacksonville down the road and just like everything else it will be about 20 years after every other major city sees that trend, which is happening right now.
I love the irony that posts since my last one have continued to make a binary distinction between city and suburb as if each has mutually exclusive characteristics. I'd like to re-emphasize that that distinction is an artificial one that seems to predominate Sunbelt cities and is hardly an ironclad law of urban studies. The ideas that cities are by definition racially diverse or that suburbanites are tied to long, car-based commutes may be accurate descriptions of overall trends, but they neglect the sizable minority of examples that show that it need not be all of column A or all of column B. Why further the unproductive "us vs. them" narrative?
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 05:03:04 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 21, 2015, 03:55:17 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 01:11:28 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 10, 2015, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: finehoe on June 10, 2015, 01:28:55 PM
I'm struck by how many people above think it is somehow "better" for children to be raised in an environment where they are isolated from people who different from themselves, have to be driven everywhere they might want to go and have little access to anything other than electronic-based entertainment. To each his/her own, I suppose.
Close access to the beach, youth sports leagues, a big yard to play in, etc. is a bit more than electronic-based entertainment. And again, it's all about space. If you have 2, 3 kids, in my mind it makes no sense to live (if you have the choice) in an area in which you basically have no yard and your living space is crammed, vs an area which provides more square footage and more green space. Suburbs tend to offer the latter, and city core living does not.
And if suburbs are more homogeneous in demographics in certain areas, then so what? Will a kid who grows up in a mostly white neighborhood and is taught right vs wrong, the importance of hard work, excels in school, and then moves on into the work force be less ready for the real world than a kid who grew up in a neighborhood and school that's 30% white, 30% hispanic, 20 % black, 20% Asian and taught all the same things? Absolutely not.
This post seemed to get lost among all the negative posts. I just wanted to see it reposted again.
And to add my two cents:
I'm white, married, with one kid, and more coming. We both work, shes a teacher, and I'm an engineer. I live in a newer neighborhood in Southside, and we're going to be making the move to SJC in the near future. So, we're part of this "White Flight" that this board seems to denounce. And that's OK with us. If a little racial segregation is required for better schools and low crime, so be it. Longer commute? I'll take it, and in fact, I'll just avoid rush hours for my Jax commute.
We'll trade DCPS for SJCPS as soon as possible. Are St. Johns schools perfect? No, obviously; their problems are just different. As another poster mentioned, it's about being in a school system where parents are involved. As a teacher in DCPS, the stories are tragic, and these families are our neighbors!
Most of the people involved with this "White Flight" are law abiding, tax paying, families looking to keep their families strong. Why does this concept get hated on here? Is it possible that there might be some truth to the reasoning behind this?
It's as if being a white, successful, friendly, and strong family here is viewed as negative.
You're conflating two things: being "a white, successful, friendly, and strong family", and living a suburban lifestyle. Neither of those things is dependent on the other. No one considers it negative to be white or successful or to have the impulse to have a strong, safe family environment.
There are plenty of people who consider the suburban lifestyle (or parts of it) to be negative. But not all the criticisms are the same. To me, and a number of others on this forum, the issue isn't the suburbs or even White Flight, per say. I don't care where other people live. If you want to live in the suburbs, have at it. My problem is when our communities and governments focus on developing those great suburbs while neglecting or even disadvantaging other parts of town and the health of the overall metropolis.
For instance, in another thread you were advocating the First Coast Expressway. This is a project that may make it a bit easier for suburbanites to get around, and will open up new land for suburban development. We always seem to have hundreds of millions of dollars for projects like that, but we can't scrape two nickels together to fix our urban infrastructure and keep chunks of Downtown from falling into the river. In other words, our state and local governments continue to subsidize suburban development but struggle even with simple upkeep of our urban areas.
I'm only conflating the two topics because I believe that there might a strong correlation between the two in the case of why White people might be moving to St. Johns County. Why do White people believe life is better in suburbia in NE Florida?
Regarding funding:
As MANY tend to do, you're confusing different levels of government and different pots of money. The State of Florida (FDOT, in this case) and the City of Jacksonville. Different entities, different leadership, different revenue sources. If urban infrastructure needs more funding (which I agree certainly does), then that's on COJ, not necessarily the state. I do want to point out that FDOT IS funding urban infrastructure within the urban area: Overland Bridge Project, and I-10/I-95 Operational Improvements Project. Both projects are increasing capacity through the urban/downtown area.
Can the state help out COJ with funding? Absolutely, in the form of grants and other types of beneficial monies. Why isn't that happening? What about a growth management plan and supporting land development policies that ACTUALLY encourage urban growth? Or, a Public Works Department and JTA that are well-funded, and can maintain urban infrastructure? What about functional local government led by a mayor that can actually govern, raise taxes, set budgets, etc. ?
I mentioned the FDOT and First Coast Expressway as something that touches on St. Johns (obviously, COJ and JTA don't control what happens in other counties). As far as FDOT goes, it certainly focuses much more on the outer city than the inner (connecting the state is their mission). The First Coast Expressway is just one recent example among many, but the same tendency is clear even in their urban core projects, where the needs of commuters and travelers often trump what the actual neighborhoods want. Looking at I-95 specifically, the interchange plan involved even further encroachment on Riverside and Brooklyn to serve drivers. FDOT was
very resistant to the less invasive design and the bike/pedestrian element desired by the neighborhoods. If I recall correctly, you argued for the flyovers as something the community "needs" despite the invasiveness, and thought the bike/ped element was a frivolous expense. This is one example of the ways government investments can stack the deck in certain ways: here, FDOT's goal was to make it easier for drivers to get through the area as fast as possible, the needs of the area itself was an afterthought.
You're spot on about the issues with COJ and FDOT.
As to your point about people moving to St. Johns, for one thing, it's not as though all white people in the metro are moving to St. Johns County (or want to). For those that do, you're right, many of them do it because that's the lifestyle they want. You're probably right about a lot of the driving factors: they what St. Johns has to offer (or what they perceive it to offer) and don't mind the long commutes, racial segregation, isolation, etc. For others, though, it's a lack of options. Proportionately, there are a lot more suburban areas than in-town neighborhoods, especially those that offer comparable amenities and benefits. When communities subsidize suburban development and neglect urban neighborhoods, the results aren't surprising.
For still others, it's a lack of
knowledge of what options there are. Professional families new to Jax often end up in St. Johns because they don't know the metro and St. Johns has a strong brand. They know it has A-rated schools and is full of their peers, so even folks that might prefer Avondale or San Marco head for the county line. Plus, it's all so many of us know. When generations of Americans grew up in subdivisions and are told their whole life that living the dream involves a big new house with a garage and a yard with a white picket fence, it has an effect. It's harder to put the upsides of living in a downtown environment or streetcar suburb on a billboard ad. In our situation, we lose many people interested in that lifestyle to cities that do it better.
Quote from: JFman00 on June 21, 2015, 11:05:01 PM
I love the irony that posts since my last one have continued to make a binary distinction between city and suburb as if each has mutually exclusive characteristics. I'd like to re-emphasize that that distinction is an artificial one that seems to predominate Sunbelt cities and is hardly an ironclad law of urban studies. The ideas that cities are by definition racially diverse or that suburbanites are tied to long, car-based commutes may be accurate descriptions of overall trends, but they neglect the sizable minority of examples that show that it need not be all of column A or all of column B. Why further the unproductive "us vs. them" narrative?
That's not what "irony" means, but, you're quite right about the binary. I think part of the thing is there's a lack of consistent terminology for what everyone's talking about. "Urban" and "suburban" mean different things to different people. Some people use "urban" only for the highest density core areas of a city, and everything else is "suburban" or rural. Others, like Metro Jacksonville, include the pre-World War II suburbs as urban, and suburban mainly means the autocentric post-war bedroom communities. Then, of course, not all suburbs are the same, some have better or worse planning, and some are/were towns unto themselves. Sometimes, "urban" and "suburban" refers to whether something's inside or outside the city limits, regardless of how it's designed.
As for the unproductive binary, I think it's really less urban-vs.-suburban than it is urban
ism-vs.-the status quo, which seems to lean in favor of sprawl. It's still possibly unproductive, but it's probably natural. Folks who prefer (or are heavily invested in) the status quo want to believe things are like this because it's what people truly want. They downplay the influence of development policy, investment/disinvestment, government subsidies, mass marketing, etc. Folks who prefer a change want to believe that things are only like this due to concerted effort, that more people would choose different lifestyles if that effort were reduced or eliminated. This is where I think thelakelander's stance that suburbs are great as long as they're financially sustainable for the community makes a ton of sense. It shifts the conversation away from personal preferences into economics.
Best conclusion post so far.
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren. So this type investment for RAM and the other powers that be isn't worth it, IMHO. So, when the so-called Urbanites condemn suburbia, it would be nice to hear one admit that's in THEIR best interest. That type of understanding is sorely missed here, and that I doubt we'll see Urbanites admit.
^I'll never use the Mayport Ferry but I totally understand the need for it. I won't really use the freeway upgrades to US 19 in Pinellas County, but I have no problem with the state investing in it. On the other hand, there are both several urban and suburban projects (both transit and roadway) that I feel aren't the best use of public money. So I guess I don't fit the limited definition of an urbanite or suburbanite?
Yeah, I'm not sure I follow that one. I think the bike/ped bridge is a worthwhile investment as it was strongly desired by the communities, economical (especially once savings were found in the project itself), and provided something that couldn't have been done otherwise. I don't imagine there's be much objection from urbanites against a comparable project in the suburbs. In fact, isn't that new University Boulevard bridge with bike/ped paths an FDOT project? I think that's great.
If we only supported or funded things we personally benefitted from, nothing would ever get done.
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
Quote from: Adam White on June 22, 2015, 05:02:22 PM
If we only supported or funded things we personally benefitted from, nothing would ever get done.
Disagree. We probably disagree fundamentally on politics, too. But that's fine for other thread.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2015, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2015, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
My thoughts as well. You don't have to use the infrastructure to understand that a lot of other people do, and in our case, enough of them die or get injured that our reputation has become quite notorious. Surely transportation planning can have some effect on changing that for the better.
Discussions like these show why it's so important that the people affected by these transit projects have a say in how they're implemented. I think one of FDOT's biggest problems is that at least locally, they impose suburban-minded plans on urban areas, regardless of what the affected neighborhoods need or want. In the case of the I-95 expansion, it was nice that they were finally made to listen.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 02:04:16 PM
Best conclusion post so far.
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren.
really?
what if it is an amazing regional attraction, which is entirely possible? For example, I don't live on the westside but I've rode the Baldwin trail.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely.
you mean, like the one that will be built on the Fuller Warren Bridge?
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
I pretty much guarantee that...and many more
Heck, the Main Street and Acosta bridges get several hundred each day now....and with a wider path and parking on at least one end, this may be a more attractive facility for recreation.
and then there's this new trail/bridge over Tampa Bay
http://tbo.com/pinellas-county/final-phase-of-courtney-campbell-trail-opens-today-20150622/?utm_content=buffer48bf7&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=buffer
^Yeah, I see more than that on the Acosta Bridge, when I cross in the morning now. It's not unrealistic to expect that the FWB path will see much higher usage, given the design and access to Baptist Medical, Nemours, RAM, San Marco and Riverside.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2015, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
But you'll never get those numbers without the investment. So it's a chicken and egg thing. But it's a worthwhile goal to pursue, for everyone. More people cycling can lead to less traffic congestion. It also can lead to less heart congestion.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 22, 2015, 09:50:24 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 02:04:16 PM
Best conclusion post so far.
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren.
really?
what if it is an amazing regional attraction, which is entirely possible? For example, I don't live on the westside but I've rode the Baldwin trail.
I don't live on the Westside either, and I too have enjoyed the Baldwin Trail. I'm all about the Rails to Trails, and riding bikes through the natural areas. So, for the Baldwin Trail, it is personal, and not necessarily geographical. The Fuller Warren Bike/Ped Bridge Widening isn't for me. If it could be shown that the money spent would provide a new transportation mode that resulted in an improved economy/revunue stream/funding/etc. that benefited the area/City/region, than YES, I'm all about it. I just don't see it happening!
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 22, 2015, 09:51:44 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely.
you mean, like the one that will be built on the Fuller Warren Bridge?
No, I meant more like the Baldwin Trail.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 22, 2015, 09:53:54 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
I pretty much guarantee that...and many more
Heck, the Main Street and Acosta bridges get several hundred each day now....and with a wider path and parking on at least one end, this may be a more attractive facility for recreation.
and then there's this new trail/bridge over Tampa Bay
http://tbo.com/pinellas-county/final-phase-of-courtney-campbell-trail-opens-today-20150622/?utm_content=buffer48bf7&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=buffer
I'm curious...was there a recent bike/ped study done on the Main Street and Acosta Bridges?
Let me check some math...
Say that the typical hours for bikes/ped is 10 hours per day (8 AM - 6 PM). And we'll use 200 bike/peds per day... Thats 20 bikes/ped per hour, and 1 every 3 minutes. Say that it takes about 20 minutes to cross the St. Johns River...then we really should see about 6 bikes/ped on the bridge at any given moment.
You're telling me that's happening today? I honestly don't know, and that's why I'm asking.
Quote from: Adam White on June 23, 2015, 01:24:25 AM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2015, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
But you'll never get those numbers without the investment. So it's a chicken and egg thing. But it's a worthwhile goal to pursue, for everyone. More people cycling can lead to less traffic congestion. It also can lead to less heart congestion.
Sure, I get that. I'm all about smart infrastructure spending when the purpose and need can be shown to benefit as many citizens as possible. FCX included.
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
► Vehicle travel and obesity show high correlation (R2=98.44%) in the United States.
► This correlation reflects their nationwide evolution in recent decades.
►
Policies to reduce vehicle travel may have the added benefit of obesity reduction.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X11000515
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:42:22 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 22, 2015, 09:50:24 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 02:04:16 PM
Best conclusion post so far.
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren.
really?
what if it is an amazing regional attraction, which is entirely possible? For example, I don't live on the westside but I've rode the Baldwin trail.
I don't live on the Westside either, and I too have enjoyed the Baldwin Trail. I'm all about the Rails to Trails, and riding bikes through the natural areas. So, for the Baldwin Trail, it is personal, and not necessarily geographical. The Fuller Warren Bike/Ped Bridge Widening isn't for me. If it could be shown that the money spent would provide a new transportation mode that resulted in an improved economy/revunue stream/funding/etc. that benefited the area/City/region, than YES, I'm all about it. I just don't see it happening!
Well evidence is merely anecdotal, but no offense, if all Jax can offer is a typical suburban environment surrounded by "family friendly" exurbs, then it has no chance of growing a strong economy or competing in an ever changing landscape with ever changing demographics and preferences.
While to your professional eyes it may seem like a ped/bike path across a bridge in Jax, such as the Fuller Warren (which already seems to have the space, it probably just needs markers and dividers...a minimal "investment"/cost), may seem a waste of money, it's those little pieces that count just as much as those bigger pieces out in the burbs that add up together to make Jacksonville a more attractive place for more types of people who have different preferences for lifestyle, different preferences for living options, and different preferences for getting around/amenities.
Companies tend to go to cities that can accommodate a wide range of people. A city that has a fairly homogeneous (politically, racially, and in age/household size) population, or one that is fairly divided to no benefit (aka wealthy white republicans in the burbs and a large poor area, perhaps predominantly minority, in the inner city) is not one that is attractive at all to most people or most companies.
While cities like DC, Boston, NYC, San Francisco, and Austin TX may not float your boat, they are doing something right. Despite their high taxes and high costs of living, they are cities that don't need to offer incentives to companies to get them to relocate, expand, or stay in their bounds. Some companies end up leaving, especially as cities/states such as FL and TX get on their knees and indicate willingness to service the nether regions of companies indicating they are "fed" up with the high costs of these other coastal markets, but most companies set up shop in these high cost cities because they know that the best and brightest and most creative minds and most diverse demographics wish to be in these cities, not Jacksonville.
So the more of these little projects in the urban core the City of Jax can do to make Jax a more broadly appealing place, the better it will be for all. And yes, it will be impossible to measure a return on investment for this teeny tiny project, just like believe it or not, it truly is impossible to measure all costs (foreseen/budgeted for and unforeseen/not budgeted for) and the almighty "return on cost"/"return on investment" with the larger infrastructure projects out in the suburbs.
So don't be so narrow minded. Don't be so idiotic. And don't even make your demands, because you sound silly when you do. Don't try to "sound reasonable" with your platitudes that you bike the Baldwin Trail or that you're "all for it if...". Just understand the reality, or put up and shut up and enjoy what technically is the most subsidized lifestyle (by MY generation if you will) in the history of humanity. And be grateful that you enjoy YOUR situation, and hope that others can do the same, whatever their desired situation may be.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on June 23, 2015, 01:24:25 AM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2015, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
We're not talking about transit or widening a roadway for extra auto capacity. I don't ride bikes on a daily basis either but given our pedestrian and cycling death rates, I can at least see the need to invest in a dedicated pedestrian and bicycle network throughout town. Anyway, what type of ridership numbers do you believe are needed to justify providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the middle of a city Jacksonville's size?
Solid question. I don't know? 50-100 bikes/peds per day? What would be tragic is if it were 5 peds/bikes per day.
But you'll never get those numbers without the investment. So it's a chicken and egg thing. But it's a worthwhile goal to pursue, for everyone. More people cycling can lead to less traffic congestion. It also can lead to less heart congestion.
Sure, I get that. I'm all about smart infrastructure spending when the purpose and need can be shown to benefit as many citizens as possible. FCX included.
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
Spare me your platitudes.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
You're right - people aren't obese because there aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. But maybe a city with more cycling (or pedestrian) infrastructure would encourage more people to cycle, run or walk. And that might help combat obesity.
Quote from: finehoe on June 23, 2015, 01:24:15 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
► Vehicle travel and obesity show high correlation (R2=98.44%) in the United States.
► This correlation reflects their nationwide evolution in recent decades.
► Policies to reduce vehicle travel may have the added benefit of obesity reduction.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X11000515
Haha. Strong correlation, right. I respect a nice strech of statistics, when comes to obesity, Americans have too many excuse on why we're fat.
Quote from: simms3 on June 23, 2015, 02:14:11 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:42:22 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 22, 2015, 09:50:24 PM
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 02:04:16 PM
Best conclusion post so far.
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren.
really?
what if it is an amazing regional attraction, which is entirely possible? For example, I don't live on the westside but I've rode the Baldwin trail.
I don't live on the Westside either, and I too have enjoyed the Baldwin Trail. I'm all about the Rails to Trails, and riding bikes through the natural areas. So, for the Baldwin Trail, it is personal, and not necessarily geographical. The Fuller Warren Bike/Ped Bridge Widening isn't for me. If it could be shown that the money spent would provide a new transportation mode that resulted in an improved economy/revunue stream/funding/etc. that benefited the area/City/region, than YES, I'm all about it. I just don't see it happening!
Well evidence is merely anecdotal, but no offense, if all Jax can offer is a typical suburban environment surrounded by "family friendly" exurbs, then it has no chance of growing a strong economy or competing in an ever changing landscape with ever changing demographics and preferences.
While to your professional eyes it may seem like a ped/bike path across a bridge in Jax, such as the Fuller Warren (which already seems to have the space, it probably just needs markers and dividers...a minimal "investment"/cost), may seem a waste of money, it's those little pieces that count just as much as those bigger pieces out in the burbs that add up together to make Jacksonville a more attractive place for more types of people who have different preferences for lifestyle, different preferences for living options, and different preferences for getting around/amenities.
Companies tend to go to cities that can accommodate a wide range of people. A city that has a fairly homogeneous (politically, racially, and in age/household size) population, or one that is fairly divided to no benefit (aka wealthy white republicans in the burbs and a large poor area, perhaps predominantly minority, in the inner city) is not one that is attractive at all to most people or most companies.
While cities like DC, Boston, NYC, San Francisco, and Austin TX may not float your boat, they are doing something right. Despite their high taxes and high costs of living, they are cities that don't need to offer incentives to companies to get them to relocate, expand, or stay in their bounds. Some companies end up leaving, especially as cities/states such as FL and TX get on their knees and indicate willingness to service the nether regions of companies indicating they are "fed" up with the high costs of these other coastal markets, but most companies set up shop in these high cost cities because they know that the best and brightest and most creative minds and most diverse demographics wish to be in these cities, not Jacksonville.
So the more of these little projects in the urban core the City of Jax can do to make Jax a more broadly appealing place, the better it will be for all. And yes, it will be impossible to measure a return on investment for this teeny tiny project, just like believe it or not, it truly is impossible to measure all costs (foreseen/budgeted for and unforeseen/not budgeted for) and the almighty "return on cost"/"return on investment" with the larger infrastructure projects out in the suburbs.
So don't be so narrow minded. Don't be so idiotic. And don't even make your demands, because you sound silly when you do. Don't try to "sound reasonable" with your platitudes that you bike the Baldwin Trail or that you're "all for it if...". Just understand the reality, or put up and shut up and enjoy what technically is the most subsidized lifestyle (by MY generation if you will) in the history of humanity. And be grateful that you enjoy YOUR situation, and hope that others can do the same, whatever their desired situation may be.
It's like you got more angrier as you wrote your post. Relax, I'm disagreeing with the investment, that's all. I'm not all up in arms about it, and I've seen bigger wasteful spending, that's for sure.
What demands have I made again? I'm merely adding my opinion, and no one seems like it since I'm idiotic, narrow minded, and silly.
It's like a bunch of you all sit around your keyboards and high five each other for having the same opinions. I can't believe I'm engaging some of you, because you can't seem to respect an opposing opinion because I'm too ignorant of this "truth".
One thing I really do like about Nocatee is that it has been planned from the start to be multimodal friendly. The streets have sidewalks and a pretty decent network of bike facilities and shared use paths. As the development grows, these will become built in amenities that will help it age with time.
Let me just provide a snippet of your posts.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 21, 2015, 07:02:39 PM
I'm active in my community when I'm not working 50+ hours a week. And of course, I do vote. And sure, you can call it fleeing, "scared" if you must, but in reality, it's all about choices. I'm pretty sure I'm not turning Jacksonville around myself, or else I'd run for mayor.
Several things going on here:
1) Your first post is basically saying you're not really all that active in your community because you work 50 hours a week. It's like saying, "I LOVE to sail, I just never have time." You make time if it's what you love to do. I want to work out, but I just don't have the time. Yea, that excuse never flies, and it's the same, conceptually, as yours. You have time to post on this website!
2) "I can't be mayor, so my efforts to change this city don't matter." That's a pretty bad attitude. Even a Facebook post every now and then, sharing an important news article or opinion on something can start a dialogue and pull people in. Posting on this website can do the same, as you have done. Every little effort collectively makes way more of a difference than any single one person can make, including the mayor. But you knew that...
3) 50 hours is nothing. I'm not sure if I've had a workload that light since I've been out of college and I'm getting up there, not too far from 30 years old. My boss, a VP around 50 years old with 4 kids, probably averages 60-70. Count that particular blessing, it's why you live in Jax, not the NE or the W Coast. You should have *Plenty* of time to do other things you feel a duty to do, or things you like to do.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 02:04:16 PM
One point I'd like to make is regarding the bike/ped component. Politics is always personal (or at least it typically should be). I'll never ride my bike over the Full Warren. So this type investment for RAM and the other powers that be isn't worth it, IMHO. So, when the so-called Urbanites condemn suburbia, it would be nice to hear one admit that's in THEIR best interest. That type of understanding is sorely missed here, and that I doubt we'll see Urbanites admit.
1) That's a fairly conservative/Republican mentality. Sure, republicans give more to charity than Democrats. Charities of their choosing, of course, ranging from the Red Cross to non-profits that try to block gay marriage and give shock treatment to gay teens. Full array, good and bad. But Democrats, in general, are far more altruistic with politics, and see the big picture that Republicans can't seem to see.
So, I disagree that politics is personal. It bugs me here in San Francisco when some very far left groups get "personal" with their motives, and end results include atrociously expensive housing (they technically work against their own interests). Politics should not be personal. People need to be informed and attempt to see a bigger picture. We are all part of humanity. Jacksonvillians should remind themselves that an appropriate mixture of healthy suburbs AND a healthy downtown/urban core is in EVERYONE's best interest, if they wish to see their region prosper, and perhaps their home values appreciate accordingly. Only attracting solid middle class republicans who oppose quality of life expenditures and any sort of tax increases are really only serving themselves, and they are making a city inhospitable for their children and they are making the city so unattractive to outside investment that they'll never see an appropriate return on what could be an investment in their home.
2) I believe this site makes it pretty damn clear that it advocates for projects and budget items that are in the urban core's best interest. There is no lack of transparency there. The general attitude in town is pretty hypocritical. It's "natural" to spend money on suburban infrastructure, give incentives to companies that will locate way out in some greenfield (and require additional infrastructure using an inefficient means of sources, etc), and there's never any comment about it. But when money is spent downtown, there's usually a huge hoopla by people like you that almost want to be "thanked" for your payment of taxes, basically for maintaining what we already have.
It's quite worse than the pot calling the kettle black. And sadly, you can't even see that.
Who cares if "more people live in Durbin Crossing" than downtown Jax. Durbin Crossing will be a shithole generic community facing awful traffic in 10-20 years without a home price appreciation safety net built into better growth control management and a strong urban core that anchors the region. I guarantee it. People paying CFDs will be underwater from a tax basis perspective if they don't wake up and see the bigger picture. If this were a metro of 5-10 million people with a roaring economy and no more space to build, I'd say expand the highways out to burbs, build some rail lines out to burbs, and build build build wherever you can without killing the environment. This is Jacksonville, where Riverside is less dense than the wealthiest suburban communities in Silicon Valley. There is hardly yet a need to spend all this money to focus growth in some pine forests 20-30 miles away. And it's a shame.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 22, 2015, 06:34:43 PM
If the ridership numbers are there in 5 yeats, then great! I just don't see it happening, even with a bike share program. I just don't consider the bicycle to be a serious mode of transportation ever. It's too unsafe (sure call me scared), and I'd rather ride a bike along a dedicated path leisurely. The suburban way :)
Ok, your opinion. But your opinion times 70% of the voters is what is going to hold it back for that 30% that is just coming into being. This is the selfishness of generations older than Gen X. And sadly, even Millennials/Gen X'ers in Jax share a lot of commonalities with Baby Boomers (judging by the amount of married 25 year old republicans with kids in Jax, that I know of, personally, it's pretty unbelievably odd when you compare to other cities). Something is in the water.
How the heck do you honestly expect your children to pay for their own children and then pay for you in old age when your MEMEMEMEME "My Opinion My Vote" mentality is just killing their future? On a macro level, this happened with Fed policy, and there's a whole segment of young adults who exited college between 2008 and 2011 that will always have a grudge for what their parents' generation did, which has set them back an unprecedented amount compared to the 2-3 generations ahead of them.
A tighter, denser urban core that uses existing infrastructure is what more and more people want, and it will be far more cost effective and have so many benefits in the future. So YOU don't want it. But you're willing to let existing infrastructure rot and pay for additional infrastructure for inefficient land use patterns, because that is what YOU want. Can we find a balance? Can we attempt to do both?
You'll make the urban core SOOOO inhospitable that NOOOO company will ever think twice about moving downtown and at best you'll get a few back office operations on the SS after you suck corporate cock and shell out a fortune in incentives (because honestly, what company is dying to come to Jacksonville of their own volition?). You'll have hardly any creative class or young professionals (and therefore no cultural enrichment whatsoever...something almost already extinct in Jacksonville), and hardly any prospects, locally, for your children.
Rather dull way to think, in my opinion.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:42:22 PM
I don't live on the Westside either, and I too have enjoyed the Baldwin Trail. I'm all about the Rails to Trails, and riding bikes through the natural areas. So, for the Baldwin Trail, it is personal, and not necessarily geographical. The Fuller Warren Bike/Ped Bridge Widening isn't for me. If it could be shown that the money spent would provide a new transportation mode that resulted in an improved economy/revunue stream/funding/etc. that benefited the area/City/region, than YES, I'm all about it. I just don't see it happening!
One of your demands, laid out. Should we demand the same from every Woodpecker Trail Drive or Deer Trace Run that needs to get built, feeding into some brand new black top arterial in the middle of nowhere, with fire stations and police stations at minimum 2-3 miles from the nearest house by road, should we demand the economic impact of that, too? With a super in depth study, you might not like what you see. Also, common sense should preclude a study, in my opinion. Connecting two sides of the river, two of the densest neighborhoods in the city, hospitals, schools (
think how many kids in San Marco go to RPDS, and with a safe bike path could get daily exercise and bike to school![/i][/u]), etc is a way better economic benefit than the next Marshy Deer Frolick Meadows Trail Run Trace that gets built in a community named [Rodent] + [Verb] + [1-syllable uncommonly used word].
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
Sure, I get that. I'm all about smart infrastructure spending when the purpose and need can be shown to benefit as many citizens as possible. FCX included.
But spare me the heart congestion reason. People aren't obese because their aren't enough bridges with ped/bike paths. :)
That's right, there is never any one cause. But a suburban lifestyle promotes a sedentary lifestyle for many, if not most people who live in such areas. Enough studies out there show enough correlations whereby we know it's not a random musing. I'm curious to know what you look like. Please don't take offense, but I picture you as kind of overweight. I don't picture you hitting the gym in your busy 50 hour work weeks, and I do picture you driving, A LOT, and spending a lot of time around the house. Compared to the average Manhattanite or San Franciscan, you might feel uncomfortable about your looks if this is the case. So, about those studies...
What if you lived in a walk-up on the 4th or 5th floor (stairs multiple times a day...slow elevator for moving in or ADA), walked to work and the grocery? Even with no gym commitment, you are bound to be far healthier and in shape than someone who drives everywhere. And there's no jogging commitment or gym commitment involved. You could probably even smoke a few cigs and survive! Now what if you had this in a neighborhood with low crime and decent schools, and mixed-income housing so your children could settle down near you?
Can we strive for that?!? Other cities have paved the way...and not just old cities like Boston, but new cities like Seattle and Denver, and now a few Southern cities like Charlotte and Austin are doing a pretty good job - and they still have sprawlicious suburbs, but they also invest in a healthy core.
Quote from: southsider1015 on June 23, 2015, 06:28:16 PM
Haha. Strong correlation, right. I respect a nice strech of statistics, when comes to obesity, Americans have too many excuse on why we're fat.
Sure, pick and choose the studies and sources you wish to listen to based on whether or not the end results line up with your opinion.
No offense, but the common theme of your posts is MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME. PICKANDCHOOSEPICKANDCHOOSEPICKANDCHOOSE. TRYTOHAVEITBOTHWAYS.
A million of you [on one side] and 5,000 others (all posters on this website) [on the other side] is the ratio that is making Jacksonville suck more and more each year.
Let me ask you a question. If Jacksonville were in a state with a state income tax and a colder climate where it snowed each winter, where do you think Jax would be? Where it is now? Would it even exist? Minneapolis has been kicking ass, as has Boston. So it's possible to overcome such obstacles. So I ask again, what is the reason for Jax's being? In my opinion, it rests *entirely* on being in a no-state-income-tax state and with a warm weather climate on a beach.
And even then it's not growing like any of the 3 other metros, or SW FL! Keep Jax leadership and general mentality of the populace, and transport the place elsewhere, and see what it does.
I think that's your proof in the pudding that YOUR way of thinking and those of your million republican suburban neighbors is not what is doing the city any favors, though it does provide some immediate short term gains for YOUR personal bank accounts (no state taxes, low property taxes). Is that selfish?
PS: Yes, you touched a nerve. And yes, I think you should re-evaluate your stances. Try not to think about things through the lens of WWJD ("What Would Jacksonville Do"), but rather what almost any other city do.
PPS: I wasn't trying to win your heart or any others with this reply. And I already know I'm a douche.
tl;dr
Quote from: simms3 on June 23, 2015, 11:22:18 PM
I'm getting up there, not too far from 30 years old. [Rodent] + [Verb] + [1-syllable uncommonly used word]. I'm a douche.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 23, 2015, 11:45:37 PM
tl;dr
Quote from: simms3 on June 23, 2015, 11:22:18 PM
I'm getting up there, not too far from 30 years old. [Rodent] + [Verb] + [1-syllable uncommonly used word]. I'm a douche.
Ha. Funny. You should have added into your summary the bit where's Simms calls the guy a lard ass. I got a belly laugh out of that particular paragraph.
tl; but I did read.
Feel better? You're all over the map, but again, great job for spending an hour typing that up.
I'll tell ya what...I'll reevaluate my stances just for you, since you seem to get the whole picture, and I'm just selfish.
But I'll enjoy riding my bike in Nocatee, and you can ride yours on the Fuller Warren. Enjoy :)
^Great. Judging from the surrounding environment, it creating direct connectivity with both riverwalks and several other projects across the country that connect two sides of cities separated by large bodies of water, the FWB path should be just fine...
(http://www.greenway.org/wp_ecg/wp-content/gallery/fall-2014-summit-charleston-sc/Ravenel-bridge-from-Summit-.jpg)
US 17/Cooper River Path - Charleston, SC (photo from Greenway.org)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2979680390_J76Vzcq-M.jpg)
I-95/I-495 Woodrow Wilson Bridge - Alexandria, VA (http://bubikes.bostonbiker.org/files/2009/06/bridgebikers.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2979680433_2PNKb8t-M.jpg)
I-676 Ben Franklin Bridge - Philadelphia, PA (http://wikimapia.org/56736/Ben-Franklin-Bridge)
If fact, I'd argue, it will be quite the attraction....especially when city does fireworks shows over the river. I anticipate FDOT getting a lot of good press when it opens!
Pieology, a build-your-own-pizza restaurant will open it's first North Florida location at the NTC.
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/11/12/build-your-own-pizza-restaurant-to-open-first.html
http://www.pieology.com/
I've heard reports that the Dunkin opened today and Pieology opens tonight. Nocatee also announced Starbucks and Tijuana Flats opening next year.
Unfortunately, they have a gigantic surface parking lot right in the middle of all that when they should have made that a public square like so many of the developments in the Carolinas and elsewhere are doing, with the parking behind the buildings. If you haven't been there, it feels like a giant strip center just like everywhere else, not the small town main street feel I think everyone originally thought they were going to do. Unless they make some major changes I don't think it is going to pan out as anything like what they have been trying to sell it as.
Giant Billboard ideas:
Nocatee!...Same Thing Only Different
Nocatee!....Way Better Than Jacksonville
Nocatee!.....We made sure to Jump Way Ahead On The Growth management Cycle! So Should You!
Nocatee!.....Better Than A Landfill$$$
Nocatee!....We know how to sell,you will love your cramped lot line
Nocatee! Ain't No jacksonville!! :) ;)
Quote from: Know Growth on April 18, 2016, 11:36:15 PM
Giant Billboard ideas:
Nocatee!...Same Thing Only Different
Nocatee!....Way Better Than Jacksonville
Nocatee!.....We made sure to Jump Way Ahead On The Growth management Cycle! So Should You!
Nocatee!.....Better Than A Landfill$$$
Nocatee!....We know how to sell,you will love your cramped lot line
Nocatee! Thank You Jacksonville :) ;)
We lived in Nocatee for over 9 years and loved it up to the last 3 years. Too many people for water park, fitness center and tennis courts. No ball fields so Davis park is now over run. The area outgrew itself quickly. The yards are so tiny and everyone has the same house. Too much drama and the area has gone down hill with all the low cost homes. That being said the area is still pretty and trails are cool, but the too fast golf carts really make it unsafe. Nocatee was a great concept in the beginning, but they cheaped out and it won't be anything more than julington creek. Moving into Nocatee 10 years ago was great but leaving to live at The beach is great :)
Quote from: Starfish18 on March 09, 2017, 10:13:58 PM
We lived in Nocatee for over 9 years and loved it up to the last 3 years. Too many people for water park, fitness center and tennis courts. No ball fields so Davis park is now over run. The area outgrew itself quickly. The yards are so tiny and everyone has the same house. Too much drama and the area has gone down hill with all the low cost homes. That being said the area is still pretty and trails are cool, but the too fast golf carts really make it unsafe. Nocatee was a great concept in the beginning, but they cheaped out and it won't be anything more than julington creek. Moving into Nocatee 10 years ago was great but leaving to live at The beach is great :)
Hi Starfish, and I know this is going to come off sounding completely douchebaggy, but what did you really expect? When you're the first one in a master development, it does feel like it's your own private island, but you didn't really expect people to not move there did you? And what is low cost? $200k? Considering that it's about a 10-40 minute drive in any direction to any decent job center, you can't exactly live out there AND be poor. What about the too fast semi-trucks that you have to deal with on US1 and I-95 since you live in the proverbial 'middle of nowhere'. Golf carts? Lol.
Enjoy the beaches I guess... a lot of people live there, too. And be careful of the golf-carts.
Non red necker - the PUD was much different when we bought in Nocatee. The crash made them build smaller cookie cutter homes on smaller lots for a lot less money. Not what we wanted and most of our friends that bought back then also eventually moved to beaches. Hindsight is wonderful thing- yes now I look back and say what did I think would happen. But like I said we had 5 years of fun living there before the amenities got too crowded. Now buyers have more to see for themselves, we just had a vision to go on, since Nocatee was dirt roads at the time, and they painted a believable one back then.
Not sure why your attacking my post. Just giving my opinion of having lived there so many years. You make fun of the golf cart issue, but young kids driving recklessly on paths is an issue there - many people almost hit by them- no fun. But fun to drive! Love my private island 8)
I really wasn't attacking, I just didn't know how to ask those questions is a nice way. As someone who has experience building those communities, I guess that I take for granted that I saw it being just another planned development from the eyes of someone who's used to seeing them go from what you see on a brochure to what you read about in the crime section in less than half a decade. I remember laughing out loud about all homes coming with a 'hurricane safe room', thinking unless it breaks away and floats, there's not really such a thing at that elevation.
You mentioned JC, and I think about the expansion down Argyle Forest into it's newest subdivision. You can physically see 30 years of sprawl as you turn off of Blanding Blvd and drive down to the soon to be Outer Beltway. Most of the materials on these builder-grade homes have a lifespan of 5-10 years and you can easily tell while driving by.
I'm glad you found a place you're happy.