As I have pointed out many times here, Jax adopts land use rules and restrictions and then consistently waives or ignores them resulting in little to no real standards for development.
The City Council's LUZ committee approval by a 6 to 1 vote to approve a request allowing self storage buildings in the core of Downtown over opposition by an unusual combination of bedfellows is just another example of the lack of backbone resulting in scattershot development that ends up collapsing upon itself with the lack of compatible structures, uses and architecture thrown together in some random way.
Add this to diluting architectural standards, the twisted interpretation of height restrictions in San Marco, allowing exceptions to the setback heights along the riverfront, selling off chunks of park lands and timidly protecting historic buildings from demolitions. Death by a thousand knife cuts.
QuoteCompany that builds self-storage units wants Jacksonville to lift ban in much of downtown
After shutting the door on new self-storage buildings in most of downtown three years ago, the city of Jacksonville is on the verge of unlocking that ban at the behest of a company that wants to construct a storage building on the downtown Southbank a few blocks from San Marco.
The proposed change in the document known as the downtown overlay has drawn opposition from City Council member LeAnna Cumber along with nearby residents and business owners.
"My constituents don't want it," Cumber said. "The businesses don't want it and if we really want to grow downtown, putting storage units throughout downtown is insane. There is zero cities in this country that has grown by putting storage units throughout downtown."
Despite opposition by Cumber, who represents the Southbank, the legislation (2021-821) has momentum for passage as it heads to a vote by the full City Council on Tuesday. The Land Use and Zoning Committee voted 6-1 last week in favor of the change....
....The proposed change to the overlay won backing of the Land Use and Zoning Committee even though the Downtown Investment Authority and the Downtown Development Review Board say the overlay should remain as it is.
The committee also heard public comments in opposition from a resident of the Peninsula residential tower, the owner of bb's restaurant and bar and the San Marco Preservation Society.
Opponents said other property just a few minutes outside downtown is already zoned to allow construction of self-storage units that can serve residential growth.
The DIA board told City Council that if council does decide to expand the portions of downtown where self-storage buildings can go, it should limit those to within a 500-foot strip in an outer ring of the overlay's boundaries.
Much of the discussion at last week's Land Use Committee meeting revolved around how to measure the restriction.
Boyer said the DIA's position is that the 500-foot strip would be a "permissive zone" and a new storage building would have to be entirely within the zone
Steve Diebenow, an attorney representing the Simpson Group, which has self-storage facilities across the Southeast, said the 500-foot distance should be from the outer boundary of downtown to the portion of a storage building closest to the downtown border....
.... The upshot of measuring in that manner is a new self-storage building would be allowed even if the building is not entirely within the zone. Instead, the building could be built so long as a portion of it is inside the zone.
Cumber said Diebenow doesn't want to use the DIA's interpretation of the 500-foot zone because his client's property is located on a lot that's too far away for a building to go entirely inside the zone.....
..... Scenic Jacksonville added its voice to the opposition Monday when it emailed council members urging them to reject the legislation, saying a change in the overlay would hurt the "positive momentum of our downtown revitalization."
Scenic Jacksonville Executive Director Nancy Powell said storage buildings take up space that more vibrant, people-oriented uses would otherwise add to downtown.
"The edges of downtown in some cities become some of the most innovative, interesting and affordable places to live and play, so allowing self-storage facilities in the perimeter does not support revitalization or affordability," she wrote.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2022/06/13/jacksonville-could-lift-ban-new-self-storage-buildings-downtown/7605106001/
The LUZ vote was 6-1 but is still very much a split issue at the time, and public input will matter. A group I'm associated with has been in contact with Cumber and Council urging support for DIA's position and adherence to their recently adopted overlay.
Are they willing to ensure that self storage buildings in downtown are designed to be mixed-use (i.e. actual retail at street level)? Or are we only looking at the issue of allowing big windowless boxes that create dead space at ground level?
I have said since about 2005 that the problem with Jacksonville is the LEADESHIP, or more exact, the LACK of LEADERSHIP that is here. This is certainly an example of that. But by all means keep using the thoroughly illogical crutch of 'consolidation' to explain it.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 14, 2022, 01:01:08 PM
Are they willing to ensure that self storage buildings in downtown are designed to be mixed-use (i.e. actual retail at street level)? Or are we only looking at the issue of allowing big windowless boxes that create dead space at ground level?
LOL. C'mon man, you know the answer to this already.
IMO, keep self storage companies OUT of the Urban Core, Downtown Jacksonville, etc. Put them on the outskirts and/or surrounding neighborhoods to downtown (Riverside, Springfield, etc.). There are many people moving to downtown; so, we can deduce that these type businesses will in fact be needed, and will be needed close by not too far from the urban core/downtown. We've got vacant lots still that need to be "infilled" with businesses, offices, residences, etc. downtown; so keep self storage businesses close by the urban core/downtown but not in it.
After a lengthy discussion, it was referred back to LUZ to reexamine.
Favorite line was by Al Ferraro, when discussing zoning overlays, something to the affect of: "Different communities want different things. In Springfield they like craft beer, that wouldn't work in my community"
He remembers!
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2016/09/21/planned-springfield-brewery-met-with-public.html
And San Marco residents like to put things in boxes when they drink their craft beer. ;)
Usually don't agree with Cumber, but she is on point!
The more people that write to the council on issues like this the better.
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Murray-Hill-Self-Storage/i-TnWDQf4/0/b9620db6/L/image%20(4)-L.jpg)
If this is the type of mixed-use self storage development being discussed, then I do believe there are some spots within the downtown area where such a use would be appropriate. These types of self storage mixed-use projects are present in urban core areas like Downtown Miami and Orlando. They aren't in the heart of those CBDs but they are in fringe areas. However, we need to get way more specific, in terms of location, than randomly drawing a 500' radius around edge of downtown's borders. Corridors like State and Union, property fronting I-95 and various parcels within the Sports and Entertainment District in the vicinity of Talleyrand Avenue could make sense. Then again, these projects are also suitable for various older industrial districts just outside of downtown like the Rail Yard District and Jessie Street, between MLK Parkway and Talleyrand.
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
Quote from: thelakelander on June 15, 2022, 11:45:33 AM
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
It's the current Basil Thai restaurant parcel at Hendricks and Prudential. One of the most prominent pieces of property in that area and across the street from a vibrant restaurant. The Industry West and Reddi Arts renovations will also bring more life to that area. This is not the place for self storage.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 15, 2022, 12:24:41 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 15, 2022, 11:45:33 AM
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
It's the current Basil Thai restaurant parcel at Hendricks and Prudential. One of the most prominent pieces of property in that area and across the street from a vibrant restaurant. The Industry West and Reddi Arts renovations will also bring more life to that area. This is not the place for self-storage.
Agreed - that would be an awful location.
QuoteIf this is the type of mixed-use self storage development being discussed, then I do believe there are some spots within the downtown area where such a use would be appropriate. These types of self storage mixed-use projects are present in urban core areas like Downtown Miami and Orlando. They aren't in the heart of those CBDs but they are in fringe areas. However, we need to get way more specific, in terms of location, than randomly drawing a 500' radius around edge of downtown's borders. Corridors like State and Union, property fronting I-95 and various parcels within the Sports and Entertainment District in the vicinity of Talleyrand Avenue could make sense. Then again, these projects are also suitable for various older industrial districts just outside of downtown like the Rail Yard District and Jessie Street, between MLK Parkway and Talleyrand.
THIS. I can think of a number of locations that I'd be okay with 5 floors of Self-Storage over Ground Floor Retail covering 75% of the site. Now, something like Main and Adams isn't one of them (total example, first surface parking lot in the core I thought of).
This goes back to the hotel at Park and Rosselle about to break ground. The flaw in the zoning overlay for that project was that Park, Roselle, and Chelsea Streets were all treated the same when - to the developer's credit - the Park and Rosselle frontages were fine (especially for that location). This is similar. We need to designate our streets by their use. Things like parking garage accesses, loading docks, etc. do have to go somewhere, and we need to designate streets where we can relax the ideals for practicality. Streets like Chelsea, Oak, even Church may fit that bill. Streets like Park, Adams, Laura, etc. would NOT.
Agree on all accounts. It's a bad use for Basil Thai parcel. It's also very similar outcome to a planning problem that presented itself with the Park Street hotel project. We really do need to designate various streets and corridors for certain types of uses and environments to cohesively development over time. If not, we're going to spend billions and end up with a hodge podge of things that don't go together. 20 years from now, we'll still be talking about the need to revitalize DT.
I guess the Store Space Self Storage at 1820 Kings Ave must have filled up really fast. Agree this is a poor location for that use, and a terrible idea to amend the entire overlay for one specific company.
Why not use part of the enormous surface lot at the (huge development) corner of Philips and Emerson. There's acres of pavement there that does not get too much use. Build it there.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/public-outcry-against-storage-units-in-downtown-jacksonville-forces-delay-in-vote/ar-AAYvDxL?li=BBnbfcL
Quote from: thelakelander on June 15, 2022, 11:45:33 AM
(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Murray-Hill-Self-Storage/i-TnWDQf4/0/b9620db6/L/image%20(4)-L.jpg)
If this is the type of mixed-use self storage development being discussed, then I do believe there are some spots within the downtown area where such a use would be appropriate. These types of self storage mixed-use projects are present in urban core areas like Downtown Miami and Orlando. They aren't in the heart of those CBDs but they are in fringe areas. However, we need to get way more specific, in terms of location, than randomly drawing a 500' radius around edge of downtown's borders. Corridors like State and Union, property fronting I-95 and various parcels within the Sports and Entertainment District in the vicinity of Talleyrand Avenue could make sense. Then again, these projects are also suitable for various older industrial districts just outside of downtown like the Rail Yard District and Jessie Street, between MLK Parkway and Talleyrand.
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
Agreed that there are some spots where requiring ground floor commercial would be appropriate downtown. Architects can also design them so that the ground floor ceiling heights and orientation allows them to be converted to commercial space in the future (if/when the market warrants). I had to do that once on a self-storage that was adjacent to a potential future transit station. The market wasn't there for the commercial space at the time of construction, but the municipality and developer wanted to have the potential to convert it to commercial in the future IF a transit stop was ever built. We even parked it at the commercial rate, just to keep that door open.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 15, 2022, 12:24:41 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 15, 2022, 11:45:33 AM
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
It's the current Basil Thai restaurant parcel at Hendricks and Prudential. One of the most prominent pieces of property in that area and across the street from a vibrant restaurant. The Industry West and Reddi Arts renovations will also bring more life to that area. This is not the place for self storage.
Holy shit. For some reason I thought this was the vacant parcel on Home Street that was used by the Wine Cellar for parking. I can't believe this is even being entertained...
Nate Monroe puts a pessimistic bow on what ails Downtown as he sings my tune (and that of others on the Jaxson). A "cluster" of a disaster with no end in sight. One bad turn after another. No leadership. Inconsistent and bad decision making. Lack of vision. Caving to developers with no coordinated plan. Adding up to a long term downward spiral.
QuoteNate Monroe: Jacksonville's bicentennial flop lays bare a city in deep malaise
COMMENTARY | Ben Becker, a reporter with Action News Jax, has an aggressive style that rubs some folks in City Hall and beyond the wrong way. So does Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry.
"You're a sad human being," Curry told Becker as he climbed into the passenger seat of an SUV.
Aren't we all?
It was as fitting a moment as any to be the most remembered about the city's bicentennial celebration this past weekend, a festival that, rather than unifying, turned out to be divisive and kind of strange. And despite indicating that all of Jacksonville's living mayors would attend the festivities, none actually did. Becker wanted to know why Curry skipped out. There may in fact be a good reason, though it's beyond this columnist to care one way or another; one does not need a compelling excuse to avoid milling around the shade-less patch of waterfront grass we are told will one day resemble something like an actual park.
But the malaise of it all — the bicentennial flop — feels like an outgrowth of something less trivial:
The sheriff fled town, unapologetically vacating his job nearly a year before his tenure was set to end, and leaving a pitiful legacy in his wake.
VyStar — plagued by a stunning, widespread and long-lasting failure of its online banking system — is Jacksonville's latest Prometheus, punished by the unforgiving gods for trying to save our cursed downtown. There can be no heroes, apparently.
The damn Confederate statue in Springfield Park remains, as much a monument to treasonous slugs as it is to contemporary political cowardice.
"Downtown once bustled with actual crowds," a local headline deadpanned, a fitting indictment of the status quo — a landscape of sun-blasted lots and hollowed-out buildings.
The City Council's response to this desolation is to consider reversing a previous ban on the construction of new self-storage unit buildings in downtown. That'll fix it!
Does it feel like anyone is in charge?
Downtown itself has been balkanized — divided up among various developers who are drawing up piecemeal plans with no connection to a larger, unified vision. The Downtown Investment Authority, theoretically the agency in charge of creating and stewarding this vision, moves with the urgency of a yellow-bellied slider.
But in any case there is no actual vision to steward, just a smattering of "trust-us" plans with no real funding attached, all subject to change at any moment if someone with enough influence comes along and decides the latest planned park would actually make for a better multi-family low-rise. It'll be anyone's guess if that mediocre low-rise ever materializes, but in the intervening years the city will have a perfectly functionless patch of grass to fawn over.
The vision-setting has been entirely outsourced to private special interests — the Jaguars, for example, who may or may not one day succeed in building a Four Seasons across the street from the stadium (fittingly, the project timeline is being pushed back even before a shovel touches the ground).
And then what?
Downtown will still be the same crummy old downtown — only this time with a Four Seasons attached to its outskirts. Downtown still won't have two-way streets, an idea promised for years and for years never acted on. It will still have little density and not nearly enough residential housing — short by many thousands of units — because instead of spending millions encouraging many developers to build housing in the downtown core it spent millions encouraging one developer to build a Four Seasons on the fringe. Downtown will still have a "homeless problem" because there is no sustained, holistic plan to care for people who don't have homes, and it will still have a "crime problem" because for some suburbanites no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever rectify this perception.
And ultimately Jacksonville will still have a downtown problem because city officials don't often like to speak to their constituents honestly, and honesty would require a plain acknowledgment things just aren't going well — and not just because of some vague, cosmic injustice but because of conscious decisions made by city officials for years and years: What to invest in; who to invest in; where to invest. These are all decisions with consequences.
A problem can't be fixed if it's never acknowledged.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2022/06/14/jacksonvilles-bicentennial-flop-reveals-city-despair-monroe/7620230001/
Quote from: acme54321 on June 15, 2022, 08:30:18 PM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 15, 2022, 12:24:41 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 15, 2022, 11:45:33 AM
Also, what is the specific site in the Southbank/San Marco, that led to this entire issue bubbling up?
It's the current Basil Thai restaurant parcel at Hendricks and Prudential. One of the most prominent pieces of property in that area and across the street from a vibrant restaurant. The Industry West and Reddi Arts renovations will also bring more life to that area. This is not the place for self storage.
Holy shit. For some reason I thought this was the vacant parcel on Home Street that was used by the Wine Cellar for parking. I can't believe this is even being entertained...
Yeah, we tend to seriously entertain some foolish projects. My guess is its only gotten this far because of the Steve Diebenow is representing the project.
As usual, Nate hits it out of the park. Do any of the mayoral candidates give an inkling of having a vision (not having visions) for downtown and the city? Anyone? Bueller?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 15, 2022, 10:28:46 PM
As usual, Nate hits it out of the park. Do any of the mayoral candidates give an inkling of having a vision (not having visions) for downtown and the city? Anyone? Bueller?
I've had the chance to meet and speak with Leanne Cumber and I would say she seems to be a bit more aware of the problems than anyone else currently running. It's pretty sad to say (when looking back at previous candidates over the years) but probably her best qualification is simply the fact that she hasn't lived and worked in Jacksonville her entire life like a Donna Deegan or Daniel Davis. Most people here (the Jaxson) seemed to agree with her staunch disapproval of this self-storage insanity and logic behind her disapproval. I know politics has become more tribal than college football in the South, but I think she has opinions about DT and what needs to change that many here wouldn't necessarily disagree with. At this point, we don't need a candidate who we agree with on 100% of the issues. Just give us someone who's not an entrenched slug. Think of it like the Jags... "We just want to be competitive at least!"
^ FYI, I have heard Deegan speak about Downtown and she appears to me to get it. Much of her comments aligned with those on the Jaxson. I also have heard from others that she has done a lot of "homework" canvassing a range of interested parties about various approaches.
I have supported other candidates in the past after hearing them/speaking with them and find many don't come close to acting as promised once elected. No guarantees, of course, but Deegan seems more sincere than most. I am not convinced, as much, that this is true of the other "leading" candidates given they have already changed their tunes over time to pander for votes.
As a longtimer :) I also have seen "newcomers" sometimes less vested in the City than not, so, while I appreciate they can bring fresh perspectives and less "baggage," it is not a given that works out. In the end, I judge by the individual's character, experiences and demonstrated positions. Unfortunately, in today's world, I often find myself not liking any of the choices and just voting for the lesser of evils. Our current vicious environment has done a good job of running off many of the best possibilities.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 16, 2022, 05:28:22 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 15, 2022, 10:28:46 PM
As usual, Nate hits it out of the park. Do any of the mayoral candidates give an inkling of having a vision (not having visions) for downtown and the city? Anyone? Bueller?
I've had the chance to meet and speak with Leanne Cumber and I would say she seems to be a bit more aware of the problems than anyone else currently running. It's pretty sad to say (when looking back at previous candidates over the years) but probably her best qualification is simply the fact that she hasn't lived and worked in Jacksonville her entire life like a Donna Deegan or Daniel Davis. Most people here (the Jaxson) seemed to agree with her staunch disapproval of this self-storage insanity and logic behind her disapproval. I know politics has become more tribal than college football in the South, but I think she has opinions about DT and what needs to change that many here wouldn't necessarily disagree with. At this point, we don't need a candidate who we agree with on 100% of the issues. Just give us someone who's not an entrenched slug. Think of it like the Jags... "We just want to be competitive at least!"
Cumber understands some of the problems we have with Downtown. The problem with her is she's willing to oppose and even fight against the solutions for political expediency. She talks about infrastructure investment but opposed the gas tax and putting the school board tax on the ballot. She talks about not wasting money but she voted to spend $233 million on Lot J. She's right about some things, like this storage fiasco, but very often she's indistinguishable from the current status quo.
People who are new here don't necessarily have any better insight than the old timers. Brian Hughes and Aaron Zahn are also Jax newbies.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 16, 2022, 01:40:29 PM
^ FYI, I have heard Deegan speak about Downtown and she appears to me to get it. Much of her comments aligned with those on the Jaxson. I also have heard from others that she has done a lot of "homework" canvassing a range of interested parties about various approaches.
I have supported other candidates in the past after hearing them/speaking with them and find many don't come close to acting as promised once elected. No guarantees, of course, but Deegan seems more sincere than most. I am not convinced, as much, that this is true of the other "leading" candidates given they have already changed their tunes over time to pander for votes.
As a longtimer :) I also have seen "newcomers" sometimes less vested in the City than not, so, while I appreciate they can bring fresh perspectives and less "baggage," it is not a given that works out. In the end, I judge by the individual's character, experiences and demonstrated positions. Unfortunately, in today's world, I often find myself not liking any of the choices and just voting for the lesser of evils. Our current vicious environment has done a good job of running off many of the best possibilities.
I was helping Matt Carlucci when he was in the mayor's race (and am continuing to do so in his council race). He was the candidate whose ideas on Downtown were the most similar to mine. It's a real blow for him to be out of the race.
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place. I think especially for her, it's going to be a matter of building the right staff to make it happen (and to show voters she can make it happen). Re Davis, he's going to be generally supportive of Downtown development, at least in the ways the establishment gets behind. I don't think we have to worry about him cutting funding for historic renovations, for instance. Unfortunately with him, there's going to continue to be hooey like the claim that getting 10k residents Downtown to fix everything, as well as deals like Lot J and the JEA sale fiasco. We haven't heard to much from Audrey Gibson yet, so it'll be interesting to see which way she goes.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 15, 2022, 10:08:16 PM
Quote
it will still have a "crime problem" because for some suburbanites no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever rectify this perception.
Nate Monroe is good at uncovering the backroom dealings of the current administration, but at the same time I don't feel like he is helping Jacksonville or downtown progress. In the above quote he recognizes that crime is more of a perception issue than an actual problem, but in the remainder of the article I feel like he is spreading a lot of negative perception that is overblown. In the Tucker Carlson era, being a loud voice criticizing others gets more views/clicks than offering up solutions and I think Monroe is taking a page out of that playbook.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 02:50:29 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 16, 2022, 05:28:22 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 15, 2022, 10:28:46 PM
As usual, Nate hits it out of the park. Do any of the mayoral candidates give an inkling of having a vision (not having visions) for downtown and the city? Anyone? Bueller?
I've had the chance to meet and speak with Leanne Cumber and I would say she seems to be a bit more aware of the problems than anyone else currently running. It's pretty sad to say (when looking back at previous candidates over the years) but probably her best qualification is simply the fact that she hasn't lived and worked in Jacksonville her entire life like a Donna Deegan or Daniel Davis. Most people here (the Jaxson) seemed to agree with her staunch disapproval of this self-storage insanity and logic behind her disapproval. I know politics has become more tribal than college football in the South, but I think she has opinions about DT and what needs to change that many here wouldn't necessarily disagree with. At this point, we don't need a candidate who we agree with on 100% of the issues. Just give us someone who's not an entrenched slug. Think of it like the Jags... "We just want to be competitive at least!"
Cumber understands some of the problems we have with Downtown. The problem with her is she's willing to oppose and even fight against the solutions for political expediency. She talks about infrastructure investment but opposed the gas tax and putting the school board tax on the ballot. She talks about not wasting money but she voted to spend $233 million on Lot J. She's right about some things, like this storage fiasco, but very often she's indistinguishable from the current status quo.
People who are new here don't necessarily have any better insight than the old timers. Brian Hughes and Aaron Zahn are also Jax newbies.
I did want to ask her about Lot J but time didn't allow it. I agree with you in that I certainly have questions behind the vote once more of that garbage can of a "deal" came to light. There was a lot of discussion around the Laura Street Trio and why that is being held up in addition to other related projects from Steve Atkins that required far too much give from the city in her opinion. The last bit of time we had was around Tampa. I forget how there's a connection but I remember her discussing having a strong relationship with the former Mayor of Tampa, Buckhorn. Tampa has certainly turned its game around and she talked about some of the shakeups to City Hall which allowed Tampa to flourish and, naturally, how she would want to do the same here.
While some of the above may seem somewhat vague as I don't remember too many specific details, I do remember liking most of what I heard. Time will tell once campaigns get into the full swing. All I know is that I have extreme voters remorse over Curry. With our first kid finally on the way, there's more of a motivation to be involved in this community. I have conservative leanings but I'm sick of the R vs D war. If it comes down to Deegan vs Davis and Deegan's plan for the city is more rooted in true structural changes that would allow this place to flourish then sure, I'd vote for her.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 03:13:09 PM
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place.
in almost 30 years as a professional adult in Jax, what has Donna Deegan done for Downtown?
Quote from: fieldafm on June 16, 2022, 08:53:18 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 03:13:09 PM
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place.
in almost 30 years as a professional adult in Jax, what has Donna Deegan done for Downtown?
Out of curiosity, who do you think has done something good for Downtown besides developers and since, maybe, Jake Godbold? What did Curry, Austin, Peyton, Brown, Delaney do before they were elected? - or once they got in office?
Quote from: fieldafm on June 16, 2022, 08:53:18 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 03:13:09 PM
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place.
in almost 30 years as a professional adult in Jax, what has Donna Deegan done for Downtown?
She sure hasn't moved it backwards the way most of her competition has done in the last few years alone. Having met with her, she's a lot more knowledgeable about City Hall and the political levers from her years as a newscaster than some give her credit for.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 16, 2022, 09:18:51 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on June 16, 2022, 08:53:18 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 03:13:09 PM
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place.
in almost 30 years as a professional adult in Jax, what has Donna Deegan done for Downtown?
Out of curiosity, who do you think has done something good for Downtown besides developers and since, maybe, Jake Godbold? What did Curry, Austin, Peyton, Brown, Delaney do before they were elected? - or once they got in office?
Historically, having worked in City Hall before becoming mayor has served mayors well. And conversely, not having that experience can set them back to one extent or another.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 16, 2022, 09:18:51 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on June 16, 2022, 08:53:18 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 03:13:09 PM
I've met with Donna and talked quite a bit about Downtown, and we're in agreement on a lot of our problems and solutions and she seems all in. Her head's definitely in the right place.
in almost 30 years as a professional adult in Jax, what has Donna Deegan done for Downtown?
Out of curiosity, who do you think has done something good for Downtown besides developers and since, maybe, Jake Godbold? What did Curry, Austin, Peyton, Brown, Delaney do before they were elected? - or once they got in office?
Um, ok.
Doesn't Deegan live out at the beach?
Since there is a consensus of what should NOT go there, what do you folks think should go there? Obviously residential is maxed out in that location, so please share your ideas. The parcels were not "For Sale" as it was. A developer came in and cobbled together several parcels and made offers to the (multiple) owners that were accepted, on the condition the storage unit building could be built.
I would be fine with a storage unit with retail at ground level. Seem them in other cities, but not here.
Quote from: MusicMan on June 18, 2022, 04:48:09 PM
Since there is a consensus of what should NOT go there, what do you folks think should go there? Obviously residential is maxed out in that location, so please share your ideas. The parcels were not "For Sale" as it was. A developer came in and cobbled together several parcels and made offers to the (multiple) owners that were accepted, on the condition the storage unit building could be built.
Residential with ground floor retail if that would fit. Otherwise, adaptive reuse for the existing retail building, or new retail with more density.
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 16, 2022, 06:10:01 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on June 16, 2022, 02:50:29 PM
Quote from: WarDamJagFan on June 16, 2022, 05:28:22 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 15, 2022, 10:28:46 PM
As usual, Nate hits it out of the park. Do any of the mayoral candidates give an inkling of having a vision (not having visions) for downtown and the city? Anyone? Bueller?
I've had the chance to meet and speak with Leanne Cumber and I would say she seems to be a bit more aware of the problems than anyone else currently running. It's pretty sad to say (when looking back at previous candidates over the years) but probably her best qualification is simply the fact that she hasn't lived and worked in Jacksonville her entire life like a Donna Deegan or Daniel Davis. Most people here (the Jaxson) seemed to agree with her staunch disapproval of this self-storage insanity and logic behind her disapproval. I know politics has become more tribal than college football in the South, but I think she has opinions about DT and what needs to change that many here wouldn't necessarily disagree with. At this point, we don't need a candidate who we agree with on 100% of the issues. Just give us someone who's not an entrenched slug. Think of it like the Jags... "We just want to be competitive at least!"
Cumber understands some of the problems we have with Downtown. The problem with her is she's willing to oppose and even fight against the solutions for political expediency. She talks about infrastructure investment but opposed the gas tax and putting the school board tax on the ballot. She talks about not wasting money but she voted to spend $233 million on Lot J. She's right about some things, like this storage fiasco, but very often she's indistinguishable from the current status quo.
People who are new here don't necessarily have any better insight than the old timers. Brian Hughes and Aaron Zahn are also Jax newbies.
I did want to ask her about Lot J but time didn't allow it. I agree with you in that I certainly have questions behind the vote once more of that garbage can of a "deal" came to light. There was a lot of discussion around the Laura Street Trio and why that is being held up in addition to other related projects from Steve Atkins that required far too much give from the city in her opinion. The last bit of time we had was around Tampa. I forget how there's a connection but I remember her discussing having a strong relationship with the former Mayor of Tampa, Buckhorn. Tampa has certainly turned its game around and she talked about some of the shakeups to City Hall which allowed Tampa to flourish and, naturally, how she would want to do the same here.
While some of the above may seem somewhat vague as I don't remember too many specific details, I do remember liking most of what I heard. Time will tell once campaigns get into the full swing. All I know is that I have extreme voters remorse over Curry. With our first kid finally on the way, there's more of a motivation to be involved in this community. I have conservative leanings but I'm sick of the R vs D war. If it comes down to Deegan vs Davis and Deegan's plan for the city is more rooted in true structural changes that would allow this place to flourish then sure, I'd vote for her.
Totally reasonable. For me, one of my biggest pet peeves is politicians who make a big show of saving small amounts of money (such as by opposing modest tax increases), and then turn around and blow far more money on wasteful things. Cumber likes to be seen as a "fiscal conservative" when it comes to opposing minor tax increases, even when it's for important things like infrastructure. But then she has supported things like Lot J that would have given $230 million a single block of stadium parking. That's just not fiscal responsibility.
That said, Cumber's hardly the only current council member who does that kind of thing, and in instances like the self storage thing, she's 100% right on. I hope she takes more stances like this in the future. She's definitely smart and capable enough to do the job and make the tougher calls.
^ My main concern when declared candidates take "popular" stances leading up to an election is how much is sincere and how much is "click bait" to grab favorable headlines. And, then, if elected, they resort to a prior tact.
I look for consistency of efforts in the best interests of the community over a longer period of time. Once a candidate declares, I discount there "Johnny-come-lately" positions. Where did they stand on issues before that time?
Quote from: MusicMan on June 18, 2022, 04:48:09 PM
Since there is a consensus of what should NOT go there, what do you folks think should go there? Obviously residential is maxed out in that location, so please share your ideas. The parcels were not "For Sale" as it was. A developer came in and cobbled together several parcels and made offers to the (multiple) owners that were accepted, on the condition the storage unit building could be built.
In what world is 'residential maxed out' here?
Vestcor had this same assemblage under a contingent contract for a Lofts residential building, IMMEDIATELY preceding the self storage developer. Just because commercial real estate isn't on Loopnet, doesn't mean that its not for sale- or the owners aren't open to offers.
^Yeah, mixed use residential would be a great use at that spot.
The Vestcorp deal? Why didn't they close the deal?
I have a pretty good relationship with one of the principals at Catalyst Development Partners as well as one of their cash investors, who happens to own one of those Home Street parcels currently under contract. If they had seen the opportunity to make more $$ at an adjacent site to SoBa they would have jumped on it years ago. They would have put that deal together and built it right after they finished SoBa, don't you think?
(Being 100% honest they did try, contingent on approval, but could not get one of the key owners to Sell).
And yes, there is a lot of residential within a half mile radius of that site, with hundreds more units already having broken ground.
The Peninsula, The Strand, SoBa, Broadstone River House, Southerly at South Bank, (1300 units or so...) plus the proposed residential at the Baptist Health site (Montana Ave...340 units, 1230 Hendricks....340 units, the almost 1000 new units along Philips and Atlantic, 2 developers (yes over 1000 yard radius) and then the massive development that cannot seem to ever get finished/started, The District (unknown number of additional residential units). So almost 3000 residential units right there not counting all the single family residential and small multi-family that falls within that radius. There's a lot of residential in there, so 'maxed out' is a reasonable assessment.
We have suburban densities in the Southbank, San Marco and generally all of DT still. We need a lot more than 3,000 units to max out from a residential perspective.
How many units currently in the CBD, NOT counting Brooklyn? Not counting proposed projects, but occupied units?
The 3000 I mentioned are from a pretty small area of South Bank/San Marco.
Nothing would make me happier than an additional 3000 market rate units within a half mile/mile of Symphony Hall. By 2025.
That's some slam dunk analysis. I don't know what two apartment buildings almost a mile and a half away from this site, and that are located next to an interstate highway ramp and a six-lane highway that soon becomes a limited-access expressway, has anything to do with the residential density of the Southbank.
There are 185 units at the Southerly, 147 units at SoBa, 243 units at Broadstone, 13 units in the Home Street Lofts (really 12 as someone owns 2 units that just haven't been joined together), 141 units in San Marco Place, 236 units at Peninusla, and 295 units in The Strand (in practice, 291 as four units are furnished daily rentals). There is a little more than 80 acres of undeveloped land on the Southbank. Street traffic counts are less than 50% of actual roadway capacity throughout the Southbank. There is less than 20,000 square feet of retail space in the Southbank, and none of that is clustered together. The proposed self-storage unit would actually remove existing retail space. By any stretch of the imagination, there is very little density for what is supposed to be an urban environment. Being a former Southbank resident, and whose mother-in-law presently lives in the Southbank, at no point did I ever turn to my wife and openly complain: 'when is all this growth going to stop... its just too intense here and there's just too many people walking and driving around, and I have too many dining options to choose from'.
I don't know why Vestcorp didn't build anything, but Vestcor didn't build a Lofts at Southbank project, as they didn't get LIHTC financing approved at that site. I actually answered that in another thread you started.
Here's some facts: in an area in desperate need of residential infill with street level retail, a developer of storage facilities actually has a contract in place.
Please explain that.
In this ultra premium location, where are all the residential developers? Corner Lot? JWB? The local guys? The big money from Atlanta and Miami? I assume they are waiting for the storage guys to get turned down, then they will step in with plans?
You are the expert. Were they turned down? Could they not make it work financially? Everyone blogging on this site says that's the perfect fit for this area, so why isn't it happening? I'm asking so please answer.
My guess was there is enough residential in place and under construction to satisfy the current need. Obviously I am wrong. So you enlighten us.
Who gives a shit? It's not permitted by the overlay for a reason. Do you really think a storage unit at one of the most prominent corners on the Southbank is a good idea?
Quote from: MusicMan on June 27, 2022, 09:54:53 PM
Here's some facts: in an area in desperate need of residential infill with street level retail, a developer of storage facilities actually has a contract in place.
Please explain that.
In this ultra premium location, where are all the residential developers? Corner Lot? JWB? The local guys? The big money from Atlanta and Miami? I assume they are waiting for the storage guys to get turned down, then they will step in with plans?
You are the expert. Were they turned down? Could they not make it work financially? Everyone blogging on this site says that's the perfect fit for this area, so why isn't it happening? I'm asking so please answer.
My guess was there is enough residential in place and under construction to satisfy the current need. Obviously I am wrong. So you enlighten us.
Doing whatever is viable at the moment isn't a good strategy. Good to have standards, of which zoning is a form of.
I do not. I asked what folks thought was a good fit. "Residential with retail at street level." So then I asked why that was not being pursued there.
There are better places for storage, I suggested using part of the massive parking lot it at Philips and Emerson, which I think is a good use for some of the asphalt there. I think it called San Marco East. Probably not allowed as it is already parking. But there is room on that parcel, so it seemed like a good place.
I also proposed that the reason no one is pursuing residential with retail at street level is because the developers (looking in that area) believe it's got enough right now between what is already there and what is proposed.
QuoteSo then I asked why that was not being pursued there.
It was mentioned on the other page that Vestcor had recently pursued this particular piece of property. Nevertheless, there doesn't appear to be a strong case to change the zoning overlay for this particular project. There are plenty of sites in and surrounding downtown where self storage can be built without changing the zoning code. Hopefully, this particular developer will pursue some of those opportunities.
Agree. Would the proposed storage building be about the same size as the garage recently constructed at Hendricks and I 95 for the project there? It pretty damn big.
A self-storage buyer could probably offer more money to the seller than a developer. I would assume the revenue per SF is significantly higher with self-storage. Thus the seller has an incentive to go that route and the self-storage buyer has good reason to offer more for the property. That doesn't make it a compatible use for the area, which is why that use is not permitted.
At LUZ yesterday evening, Gaffney said he will withdraw the bill.
This would have passed if not for the last minute overwhelming public input against it.
Looks like it's dead.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/council-committee-moves-to-pull-downtown-self-storage-bill
Definitely a good move. There was no logical reason to change the overlay for this project. There's opportunity for the developer to build this type of product in most CCG-1 and CCG-2 zoning districts adjacent to downtown already. They should redirect their site selection efforts to these locations.
Agree . Now it's free for all those "residential with street level retail" investors to make their move.
Not sure if there's enough room but 1853 Kings Ave, 1877 Kings Ave and the neighboring parcel (no address) look like a reasonable possibility. Correct Zoning as well (I think).
Quote from: MusicMan on July 20, 2022, 11:10:08 AM
Agree . Now it's free for all those "residential with street level retail" investors to make their move.
Not sure if there's enough room but 1853 Kings Ave, 1877 Kings Ave and the neighboring parcel (no address) look like a reasonable possibility. Correct Zoning as well (I think).
Someone was planning to build storage on those parcels like 5 years ago around the same time that the units on the other side of the road were built but it never happened.
It's kind of shocking how a relative few emails can make a difference. Hard to believe that 120 emails is all that it takes to make a difference in a city of a million. Really shows you how much people care, or rather don't.
Quote from: acme54321 on July 20, 2022, 10:21:23 PM
It's kind of shocking how a relative few emails can make a difference. Hard to believe that 120 emails is all that it takes to make a difference in a city of a million. Really shows you how much people care, or rather don't.
I have to give Councilwoman Cumber credit here. This rezoning application was thought to be dead many months ago. Pouncing on this opportunity that it was basically forgotten about, the attorney-in-fact got it moving again hoping to avoid public scrutiny.
Cumber made A LOT of calls and sent emails to a comprehensive gamut of people (including
many outside of Downtown and San Marco), trying to drum up awareness and public opposition to this horribly, short-sighted overlay change. It worked.
I have disagreed with Cumber, but she was 100% right here. Many thanks to her, Matt Carlucci and San Marco Preservation Society, as without them, this was on track to pass. It's unbelievable that such an obviously bad decision had so much support among council members. Or at least I wish it was unbelievable.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 21, 2022, 04:20:41 PM
I have disagreed with Cumber, but she was 100% right here. Many thanks to her, Matt Carlucci and San Marco Preservation Society, as without them, this was on track to pass. It's unbelievable that such an obviously bad decision had so much support among council members. Or at least I wish it was unbelievable.
Totally agree
FYI - As expected this is coming back as a PUD per the latest Resident. Put your gloves on for round 2.
Lol, the property owner must have been offered a pretty penny for the property.
Saw the site plans and renderings of this thing. Not as bad as I imagined, but still a storage building makes no sense on that corner.
I really don't understand how there can be this much insistence on this particular spot for this. This isn't exactly a small town!
There's enough money to be made for the property owner and seller to try and get it pushed through. This sort of thing happens everywhere. Some places just have the will power and ability to stick to their guns moreso than others.
Quote from: thelakelander on December 13, 2022, 05:41:19 PM
There's enough money to be made for the property owner and seller to try and get it pushed through. This sort of thing happens everywhere. Some places just have the will power and ability to stick to their guns more so than others.
LOL, thus the subject title of this thread.