Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Atlanta/Atlanta---June-2023/i-kQ4GDVJ/0/7889d12a/L/20230527_131607-L.jpg)
A virtual walk along the Atlanta BeltLine, one of the largest, most wide-ranging urban redevelopment projects in the country. A 22-mile corridor connecting neighborhoods in Atlanta's urban core, the BeltLine is the most comprehensive revitalization effort ever undertaken in the City of Atlanta.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/the-atlanta-beltline-where-atlanta-comes-together/
Was just there last weekend. I've only been in recent years when it's been super crowded (weekends). The pictures look like middle of the weekday level of crowds. I'm always just blown away by Atlanta's progress as of late...if we could just get 1% of what they get. I try to get up there every few months and I stay with friends in Midtown, Cabbagetown (Fulton Cotton Mill lofts...VERY cool adaptive reuse, probably one of the best in the country), etc
Jamestown (my old company) has another cool project underway in Raleigh called the Raleigh Ironworks. Office-dominant project, but a cool one that would fit right in on the Beltline or in Charlotte's South End.
https://raleighironworks.com/
It's so puzzling why these projects are so in demand and happening right and left in other Sunbelt/Southern cities, and yet in Jax there are a few of us trying to desperately just to get *something* *anything* off the ground. We have really just a smattering of small creative office projects here and there and they always have trouble leasing them, even just a small bit of square footage. Our Emerald Trail/Groundworks just won $5M for another study ($5 MILLION) on a portion that already has overpasses and all sorts of things already rendered and engineered (why do we need another study...just friggin build it).
I think we just have something in our water.
The other thing I really like about all of these cities is the mix of modern and historical in all of their neighborhoods. Atlanta is really good at this. It just looks good, everywhere. Tons of history, but tons of new investment as well mixed in. And also mixture of densities...lots of little infill apartments/condos/lofts mixed into the single family neighborhoods.
I've always said this and one day I will form a group to oppose our preservation organizations, but the way we run historical preservation in our actual neighborhoods holds the whole place back, impedes investment/development, and keeps the neighborhoods looking like crap in a lot of cases. I know RAP has done a huge PR job for decades now and so nobody in this town can envision a Riverside-Avondale without them, however, they'd be a much better organization if they kept to event programming and neighborhood building missions, and we rolled back some of the preservation restrictions and intense Commie-board JHPC regulations on homeowners and small businesses.
I laugh at the RAP's annual preservation awards and just how ridiculous the whole organization is. And other neighborhoods have bought the Koolaid that it actually enhances the "value", so you have battles in San Marco and elsewhere to try to get the same level of intense regulation.
I know too many people that would love a historic home (to improve) with charm but avoid Riverside and Avondale because they don't want to deal with the BS. I know of too many awesome deals that didn't happen in Riverside's commercial corridors because RAP/overlay/JHPC ran investors out of town. These are all out of town investors used to building cool urban infill projects in other much more historic cities and they can't do it here in Jax because we cray cray.
It's going to be an uphill battle but the mentality of this place is "we like it the way it is"...
^^
Charleston has extremely strict historic guidelines as well as deep pocketed private organizations to provide external pressure, yet they have plenty of new development in those same areas. I just don't think these 'awesome deals' you speak of are actually out there. If they are too timid to even go public and make an attempt at approval, they are in the wrong business.
QuoteI've always said this and one day I will form a group to oppose our preservation organizations, but the way we run historical preservation in our actual neighborhoods holds the whole place back, impedes investment/development, and keeps the neighborhoods looking like crap in a lot of cases. I know RAP has done a huge PR job for decades now and so nobody in this town can envision a Riverside-Avondale without them, however, they'd be a much better organization if they kept to event programming and neighborhood building missions, and we rolled back some of the preservation restrictions and intense Commie-board JHPC regulations on homeowners and small businesses.
I laugh at the RAP's annual preservation awards and just how ridiculous the whole organization is. And other neighborhoods have bought the Koolaid that it actually enhances the "value", so you have battles in San Marco and elsewhere to try to get the same level of intense regulation.
I know too many people that would love a historic home (to improve) with charm but avoid Riverside and Avondale because they don't want to deal with the BS. I know of too many awesome deals that didn't happen in Riverside's commercial corridors because RAP/overlay/JHPC ran investors out of town. These are all out of town investors used to building cool urban infill projects in other much more historic cities and they can't do it here in Jax because we cray cray.
It's going to be an uphill battle but the mentality of this place is "we like it the way it is"...
LOL. No city has done less to protect its historic buildings than "tear them down Jax." I would suggest just the opposite of your position is what is needed more. This city has squandered more character than many cities will ever have to begin with.
The problem isn't historic preservation, it is lousy leadership that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Over the decades, our community has not elected visionary, creative and community oriented officials, but rather "good ol' boys" who only care to get projects done that line their pockets with the most amount of money at the taxpayer's expense. Developers have owned this city forever and it has resulted in development here being lightly regulated compared to many other progressive communities. This hasn't paid off well when you look at how we compare to those with more disciplined planning and standards.
If people despise rules and regulations, why do so many chose to live in condos, gated communities or other developments with HOA's ready to bring down the hammer if one blade of grass turns brown? They do it to create a sustainable minimum standard of "quality" that all residents can count on to match the expectations they had when they purchased their home there.
Those buying in historic neighborhoods have the same expectations and accept that they will be subjected to rules that sustain them. Don't like it? There are more than enough options in this city to choose from. As they say, something for everyone.
They are not in the wrong business my friend. If you've paid enough attention to local real estate politics, then you've seen even individual restaurant deals get chased away in the heart of Riverside. You've seen large dramas unfold many times, and many proposals just fall by the wayside. There are also deals that did get done that involved retrofitting VERY average unhistorical buildings that really should have been teardowns to allow for increased density/higher and better mixed use, but you just can't do that around here.
Not to mention to compare Riverside and Avondale to Charleston or Savannah (which is what a lot of people attempt to do for whatever silly reason) is simply exactly where we're off! We should not have the level of historic BS regulation that requires approvals for windows and roofs and doors. Riverside and Avondale are truly "dime a dozen" streetcar neighborhoods around the country. Yes, they have charm and walkability and historic homes, etc, but they aren't the historic colonial/antebellum core of Charleston (or the Back Bay of Boston). We can preserve character and welcome new investment at the same time without being too crazy. I was just in Savannah - despite their historic guidelines they also get more infill and even have a high-rise student housing building under construction right now that's probably their new tallest building. That is literal evidence that they are just handling things better.
If you want to leave it at "if you're house is PREWAR you cannot tear it down", then that's one thing. But a lot of the "contributing structures" are way post-war, and workforce housing when they were built. It literally makes no sense. Not to mention stupid regulations like requiring a certain kind of driveway (such as pavers) that just dings middle class homeowners. Sometimes a plain cement driveway looks actually better for the house, but it's not even allowed. My God it's just insane...believe me when I tell you, A LOT of smart money that doesn't want the hassle goes to other neighborhoods where they can still buy a historic home and make it nice without ninny nannies (mostly all transplants too by the way) giving them the yay or nay for minor cosmetic repairs or enhancements.
I hear of this/learn of this ALL the time. Not to mention my own mother was a Realtor with Berkshire Hathaway Avondale for 30+ years and had a career pretty much only selling nice homes, so there's a lot of anecdotal stuff I have just from that. That's on the residential, but the same thing applies to the commercial as well. Now that I am a 30-something homeowner and that's my social group as well, I personally know tons of people that stay clear of the RAP district. They have cute tasteful brick and otherwise homes they've fixed up real nice elsewhere, that could have been right here in Avondale, but they simply don't want to deal with this stuff on principle, and I get it.
The fight against the RiverVue apartments was also pretty epic. So glad that the traffic worries have been disproven and I hope all developers took good factual notes. It's not the highest quality development by any means (and I would have loved to see the original proposal get built), but to support walkability and more retail and restaurants and amenities, we need higher density. Try putting up a new 8-unit rental building in the middle of Avondale/Riverside. Nobody's really done it...it's too much hassle and you'll get unbelievable pushback. The rents may not be there to justify a truly glamorous building, but I would still welcome even average on some of these vacant lots or overgrown double lots. It would certainly be better than what exists now in nearly all cases.
On a side note there is a lot at Ortega Blvd and Venetia on the canal (asking way too much for that location) that should be a three-story 6-unit condo, in my opinion. Neighbors would never allow that, no matter how nice. Venetia doesn't even have a historic designation or the same regulations but those residents (a few anyway, and I know who...he doesn't even live there anymore) chased away the Edley's BBQ proposal on the old Shell Gas Station site, so now we have another permanent vacant lot that nobody will touch. It's not just RAP, it's a general mentality in this city. It's so backwards. But RAP and the enforcement board are just the worst.
There are still grass lots in prime commercial strips. There have been proposals. I have a client that looked at something near 5 Points. Backed away. They do infill stuff all over the place and it looks good. You may or just may not be aware of what comes and goes through Jax, and their comments comparing dealings here to elsewhere (not to mention I have my own experience to look upon).
I work in commercial brokerage and I used to work for truly fabulous developers, so I've been around the block and I still get around the block and I think what we have with our activist neighborhood preservation groups (and general backwards mentality pretty much everywhere...look at the craziness at the beaches) absolutely holds the neighborhoods back from blossoming and developing appropriately.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on June 21, 2023, 10:14:36 PMLOL. No city has done less to protect its historic buildings than "tear them down Jax." I would suggest just the opposite of your position is what is needed more. This city has squandered more character than many cities will ever have to begin with.
The problem isn't historic preservation, it is lousy leadership that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Over the decades, our community has not elected visionary, creative and community oriented officials, but rather "good ol' boys" who only care to get projects done that line their pockets with the most amount of money at the taxpayer's expense. Developers have owned this city forever and it has resulted in development here being lightly regulated compared to many other progressive communities. This hasn't paid off well when you look at how we compare to those with more disciplined planning and standards.
If people despise rules and regulations, why do so many chose to live in condos, gated communities or other developments with HOA's ready to bring down the hammer if one blade of grass turns brown? They do it to create a sustainable minimum standard of "quality" that all residents can count on to match the expectations they had when they purchased their home there.
Those buying in historic neighborhoods have the same expectations and accept that they will be subjected to rules that sustain them. Don't like it? There are more than enough options in this city to choose from. As they say, something for everyone.
I'll address each briefly.
1. Two things can be true at the same time. Downtown has been decimated and needs RAP level oversight now, we have like 5 historic buildings left and I saw the wreckage of the Ford Plant from a distance today. Broke my heart. I went to the Ed Ball building to protest its demolition, and I am HUGE historic preservation advocate.
But what we have in Riverside-Avondale is beyond the pale. For one, you're comparing every day residential homeowners who aren't made of money and just want to have their driveway repaved or their windows fixed to commercial investors who come in and just wreck any old building downtown. That is not a good comparison.
I would strongly argue that we need to loosen things up drastically in RAP's boundaries/overlays, and tighten things up drastically in downtown's overlays.
2. Yes we have lousy leadership. I would argue at City Hall and I would argue that RAP is blinded to itself and does not realize where it might get in the way of things, and so I think we have neglectful leadership on one end that has resulted in a neglected downtown, and we have too much control on the other, and that has a different but also negative effect.
3. The types of people that want to live in Avondale are NOT the type of people who want to live in an HOA subdivision community. This is precisely the damn point!
I would go one step further - there are many multi-generational people living in Avondale who never wanted the level of historic preservation controls that were put in place. My great grandparents lived in a grand old dame on St. Johns Ave in Prohibition and had a whiskey distillery in their attic. I have family throughout the neighborhood...there is a reason I am here as well. Yes you get your disclosure when you buy a house, but you'll never fully know what that means until you want to spend money on your own home to improve it.
Knowing a good amount of board members myself and those on various committees, basically all transplants. From my perspective, they are the same as the transplant from New York who came down in 2019 and then complained to OSHA about our Jax Beach volunteer lifeguard program and created that whole fiasco. I feel like these people come in and take over, and they think they are God's gift, but from my vantage point, especially with all the money in Jax now, there's a lot that doesn't come in because they have the same mentality as me but don't have as many reasons to keep them here and so they go to other neighborhoods.
It's a nanny state mentality, and not all of us have that or appreciate that.
Great shots. I've always thought how cool it would be if they could replicate something like Atlanta's Krog St. tunnel with the Myrtle Ave. underpass. It's unfortunate that part of downtown Jax doesn't have the density and connectivity surrounding the tunnel but it would still be a very interesting and ambitious art project I'm sure local artists would love to be a part of.
It's good to have 16 Fortune 500 corporations headquartered in your city.
Hopefully the Emerald Trail will let us see some version of this success. Especially if we make sure people can find places to live and ways to get around.
It is absolute nonsense to say that Riverside-Avondale does not have architecture worth preserving. The existence of Prairie style architecture alone makes it unique compared to other cities. History didn't stop at the Civil War or WW2. What is contemporary today will one day be historic.
I don't know the details on your complaints about 'pavers' and 'driveways' and such and concede there could be overreach or excess in regards to such things. But don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
As far as the commercial projects that have gotten push back, 85% of the time on 85% of the projects it has mostly been objections on parking or the lack thereof, not the use or architecture.
Quote from: vicupstate on June 22, 2023, 05:43:04 PM
It is absolute nonsense to say that Riverside-Avondale does not have architecture worth preserving. The existence of Prairie style architecture alone makes it unique compared to other cities. History didn't stop at the Civil War or WW2. What is contemporary today will one day be historic.
I don't know the details on your complaints about 'pavers' and 'driveways' and such and concede there could be overreach or excess in regards to such things. But don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
As far as the commercial projects that have gotten push back, 85% of the time on 85% of the projects it has mostly been objections on parking or the lack thereof, not the use or architecture.
Avondale/Riverside has beautiful homes worthy of saving for generations. Avondale/Riverside also has an extremely toxic culture of DIY and the sheer number of homes (typically north of park st) that have 0 permits is astonishing. There are dozens of homes in RAP right now that should be bulldozed due to extremely poor workmanship/dodgy mechanicals.. and this is from personal experience. Full additions without permits, hidden cloth wiring, rotted out beams being caulked with wood puddy... the list goes on.
For those later homes the Association works against the people. Those homes are never flagged, halted, or anything because they "know" how to get away with it. People that actually want to do it right get miffed because RAP/COJ is on them like a dog.. Creates a very unfriendly business environment.
Can't say that I have seen this type of behavior in any other historic district in town, given that the attitudes of people living there seem to be different. In Springfield for example, people know some homes are just unfeasible to save.. and the one's not needing to be saved get knocked down for new homes which match the style that once existed. (News flash that's most of urban western Europe.)
I think people need to not be so blanketed when it comes to these districts.. I do think we need them to preserve the character & meaningful homes from the time but nobody needs to be arguing for a 800 sf bungalow that has had 3 additions put onto it over time to be preserved for future generations. Because of the obstacles to ever get that done in RAP are impossible, this DIY trend will continue to hamper resales in certain parts of the RAP district.
Quote from: vicupstate on June 22, 2023, 05:43:04 PM
It is absolute nonsense to say that Riverside-Avondale does not have architecture worth preserving.
But who exactly is saying that? This is what I don't understand about people's comprehension.
So it must be RAP level discourse and regulatory action or you think that all history should be demolished? I think RAP is an organization that gaslights all people into thinking that Riverside and Avondale would literally be a ghetto without the historic district status and oversight. I contend that what we would be would actually be something better and further along than the neighborhood is now without all of the BS oversight.
It's the same argument with rent control. Some people truly believe that rent control helps keep rents down for every day Americans. Having lived in a rent control city myself, I could see all the negative effects it had. It quite literally chases away and disincentivizes new investment. Ultimately you have a ton of people living in squalor conditions because they can't afford to move and landlords have no financial means for keeping up their buildings. And the same types of activists pushing rent control also fight new projects that come in, so you have less of those as well. And lo and behold the politics of the people running RAP are also the same type of rent control proponent types in other cities. It's all the same people.
In Avondale, you have a group that gaslights people into thinking that people will only move in and invest money into restoration IF they are allowed to have their oversight into your activities. This couldn't be further from the truth and there is tons of evidence in other neighborhoods in town (Ortega, San Marco, Miramar, the list goes on).
RAP came about because of a plan to extend a major highway thru the middle of it. There are thousands of examples of where just such highways had major negative impact, including in Jacksonville.
Riverside use to have 30 or more major mansions that if still in existence would probably be Jacksonville's version of the NOLA Garden District. Only two survived.
I don't remember this level of dissension over RAP in the 2000's, and they were still protected then too. Maybe some excesses have arisen but I repeat, don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.
FYI, here is an overview of Federal historic preservation approaches. Seems much of what Simms is complaining about can be required in historic districts. It comes down to what standard is to be applied.
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historic-properties.htm#:~:text=It%20is%20always%20recommended%20that,consulted%20early%20in%20any%20project.&text=The%20Standards%20for%20the%20Treatment,rehabilitation%2C%20restoration%2C%20and%20reconstruction.
Quote from: simms3 on June 23, 2023, 11:05:15 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on June 22, 2023, 05:43:04 PM
It is absolute nonsense to say that Riverside-Avondale does not have architecture worth preserving.
But who exactly is saying that? This is what I don't understand about people's comprehension.
So it must be RAP level discourse and regulatory action or you think that all history should be demolished? I think RAP is an organization that gaslights all people into thinking that Riverside and Avondale would literally be a ghetto without the historic district status and oversight. I contend that what we would be would actually be something better and further along than the neighborhood is now without all of the BS oversight.
It remains to be seen at this time if in fact Riverside and Avondale are to become a " Ghetto".
Riverside likely a bit ahead.
Ortega further behind.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 23, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.
Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have? Nobody's going to wholesale bulldoze an entire intact single family neighborhood filled with sidewalks and historic homes just to build whole-block Group 4 Design apartment buildings. And I can predict one response to that - Brooklyn was largely black and Riverside/Avondale largely white. Yes, this is true. Riverside/Avondale are actually pretty diverse now, but it's also more of a socioeconomic thing - Riverside/Avondale have way more general affluence and the residents and their existing home values would make it pretty hard to see the same thing happen. Brooklyn was also largely already demolished by the time new investment decided to come in and the blank slate was part of the appeal for getting those larger developments off the ground.
I'm also willing to give Brooklyn a chance as it continues to develop into something better each year. It's not even close to finished being built out. What I will say as well is that in literally ANY major city, areas that are filled with predominantly new residential towers mixed in with office buildings are often soulless. The "neighborhoods" are always where it's at in terms of life and charm. Areas with smaller lot sizes are always more charming and walkable than areas with very large lot sizes.
Saying that what is going into Brooklyn would certainly happen wholesale to Riverside/Avondale if historic district regulation weren't in place is a form of the kind of gas lighting that I feel like happens in this city! I think enough of us are at a certain intellectual level to know that it wouldn't! I wish people *would* know that people still desire to come in and fix up an old home even without a historic district status attached to it (look at plenty of other neighborhoods just in Jax).
What I would welcome is small versions of the investment Brooklyn is getting on currently vacant or clearly teardown lots. And if the designs of such infill weren't the apparently mandatory "new-old" bungalow look, I also wouldn't shed a tear.
On this very forum we have people salivating for real public transit and walkability (and cool things like we see in Atlanta), but many of the same people seem to be advocates for an organization and level of historic preservation oversight that kills infill investment and opportunity for increased density in the urban core in these areas.
The same crowd that wants more bars and this type of restaurant and that type of restaurant in Murray Hill also does not want any more apartments coming to the area. It's sad to say, but it's the same type of mentality as the people in Baker County, who want more commercial and more restaurants but no more rooftops.
Bottom line, I'll go back to my original point - I wish we could give our neighborhoods the "Atlanta makeover", which would require loosening the thumb of RAP and existing historic district preservation guidelines, a makeover of our collective mentality towards growth and infill, and the welcoming of a wider variety of designs and densities into our urban core.
Quote from: simms3 on June 27, 2023, 08:26:57 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 23, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.
Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?
It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 27, 2023, 08:56:28 PM
Quote from: simms3 on June 27, 2023, 08:26:57 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 23, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.
Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?
It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.
Yea, but in the very modern era did it? I remember Brooklyn pre-Riverside Ave widening, and I even remember the old Acosta vaguely. I just stayed at a buddy's in Cabbagetown as well. I feel like at least in my lifetime, Brooklyn and LaVilla were pretty much already hollowed out. I remember one fairly significant brick building on Riverside that was demolished to make way for the widening. Obviously we all remember the firehouse that was demolished to make way for FIS (didn't the city provide opportunity for the private sector to come in, move it somewhere else and do something with it?) I love brick, and certainly in my fantasies Jacksonville never demolished all of the downtown-surrounding areas, but the fact of the matter is that by the time new investment came to Brooklyn, it was long hollowed out (probably even well before RAP was formed).
I am focused on the here and now. I do not think that Riverside and Avondale risk being demolished wholesale for cookie cutter crap and Group 4 Design/Vestcor disgusting apartments. We do at least have the rents in those neighborhoods and the home values to fuel much better on a smaller infill scale. So one has to ask oneself, why is it that there is never really any infill built in Riverside and Avondale? Literally nothing ever gets built...there are empty lots and buildings in disrepair literally everywhere. There's a lot "for sale" right freaking near the Shoppes of Avondale less than a block away on St. Johns that should be a no brainer. There are people with brains and money. So why doesn't even the low hanging fruit ever get eaten? We have to ask ourselves this question and acknowledge that there may be an issue with over-regulation and activist level histrionics.
In fact, I'd like to add a garage apartment to my backyard over a garage (a minor form of infill is it not?), but I can't legally do so because I can't go above my current one-story roofline (nevermind the fact that there is a super cute 1934 one story on my own block with a matching two story garage and apartment in the back). I'm not sure yet if this is a city zoning issue or a RAP overlay issue, but it is an example of just how far-reaching and ridiculous the regulations are on homeowners and why it's so damn hard to do anything cool, creative or "infill".
The regulations surrounding ADUs and the fight over even just slightly loosening them recently is just another example in this city of how crazy it is, how NIMBY it is, how over zealous everyone is for their "idea" of preservation and character maintenance. In the views of the preservation activists, it is better for my one neighbor to keep his house looking like a crack house (and it is beyond repair and nobody will ever buy it because it's not worth saving) than it is for me to put in modern windows and a garage + upstairs apartment in the back of my 1952 cinder block home.
Isn't that scenario by definition discouraging investment on a small, homeowner scale? So too is this type of stuff discouraging investment on a larger scale in our commercial areas. Atlanta does not seem to have this issue in its urban core areas.
Quote from: simms3 on June 27, 2023, 10:06:38 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 27, 2023, 08:56:28 PM
Quote from: simms3 on June 27, 2023, 08:26:57 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 23, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.
Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?
It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.
Yea, but in the very modern era did it? I remember Brooklyn pre-Riverside Ave widening, and I even remember the old Acosta vaguely. I just stayed at a buddy's in Cabbagetown as well. I feel like at least in my lifetime, Brooklyn and LaVilla were pretty much already hollowed out. I remember one fairly significant brick building on Riverside that was demolished to make way for the widening. Obviously we all remember the firehouse that was demolished to make way for FIS (didn't the city provide opportunity for the private sector to come in, move it somewhere else and do something with it?) I love brick, and certainly in my fantasies Jacksonville never demolished all of the downtown-surrounding areas, but the fact of the matter is that by the time new investment came to Brooklyn, it was long hollowed out (probably even well before RAP was formed).
I'd consider the 1980s and 1990s to modern times. In 2000, Brooklyn was still pretty much in tact. Even after Riverside Avenue was widened, much of the neighborhood was still in tact. Much of the demolition has taken place since 2005 or 2006.
QuoteI am focused on the here and now. I do not think that Riverside and Avondale risk being demolished wholesale for cookie cutter crap and Group 4 Design/Vestcor disgusting apartments. We do at least have the rents in those neighborhoods and the home values to fuel much better on a smaller infill scale. So one has to ask oneself, why is it that there is never really any infill built in Riverside and Avondale? Literally nothing ever gets built...there are empty lots and buildings in disrepair literally everywhere. There's a lot "for sale" right freaking near the Shoppes of Avondale less than a block away on St. Johns that should be a no brainer. There are people with brains and money. So why doesn't even the low hanging fruit ever get eaten? We have to ask ourselves this question and acknowledge that there may be an issue with over-regulation and activist level histrionics.
In fact, I'd like to add a garage apartment to my backyard over a garage (a minor form of infill is it not?), but I can't legally do so because I can't go above my current one-story roofline (nevermind the fact that there is a super cute 1934 one story on my own block with a matching two story garage and apartment in the back). I'm not sure yet if this is a city zoning issue or a RAP overlay issue, but it is an example of just how far-reaching and ridiculous the regulations are on homeowners and why it's so damn hard to do anything cool, creative or "infill".
The regulations surrounding ADUs and the fight over even just slightly loosening them recently is just another example in this city of how crazy it is, how NIMBY it is, how over zealous everyone is for their "idea" of preservation and character maintenance. In the views of the preservation activists, it is better for my one neighbor to keep his house looking like a crack house (and it is beyond repair and nobody will ever buy it because it's not worth saving) than it is for me to put in modern windows and a garage + upstairs apartment in the back of my 1952 cinder block home.
Isn't that scenario by definition discouraging investment on a small, homeowner scale? So too is this type of stuff discouraging investment on a larger scale in our commercial areas. Atlanta does not seem to have this issue in its urban core areas.
I'm focused on the here and now, primarily with neighborhoods like LaVilla and Eastside. Brooklyn is used as the example of what they don't want their areas to become. On the other hand, they also don't want to be as stringent on infill development as Springfield and Riverside. Every neighborhood has a different vision. I don't know Riverside's, but stay out of their business as well.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 27, 2023, 11:28:40 PM
I'd consider the 1980s and 1990s to modern times. In 2000, Brooklyn was still pretty much in tact. Even after Riverside Avenue was widened, much of the neighborhood was still in tact. Much of the demolition has taken place since 2005 or 2006.
I just looked at a satellite imagery from the 2004 basemap on Jax GIS and to me Brooklyn did not look very substantially intact at that point. Riverside Ave had been widened by then and the blocks from Riverside to Magnolia were swept clean. Most of the buildings lining Park are in fact still there at this point, and by 2004 the little residential areas were already mostly vacant lots and the houses that existed then are still mostly there today.
LaVilla was clearly long gone, super sadly. Cringy driving past Sandy Yawn's and Daily's vacant lots today.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 27, 2023, 11:28:40 PM
I'm focused on the here and now, primarily with neighborhoods like LaVilla and Eastside. Brooklyn is used as the example of what they don't want their areas to become. On the other hand, they also don't want to be as stringent on infill development as Springfield and Riverside. Every neighborhood has a different vision. I don't know Riverside's, but stay out of their business as well.
That's a fair point! See and look at LaVilla, starting to get some infill coming in. The Eastside is a future look, but I would consider the Union Terminal deal to be part of that neighborhood and that's a big investment. These are much riskier areas when it comes to fundamentals, compared to Riverside and Avondale, yet I would argue pound for pound they are receiving more investment into new projects. San Marco certainly is receiving a lot of new investment, and we can all see it.
I'm glad to hear that there are areas that want looser restrictions than are in place in Riverside/Avondale because things would grind to a halt all over the city if the whole urban core adopted RAP's control exertion.
I'm with a client today but will share photos of Brooklyn spaces that have been razed since we've had the forums, tomorrow.
Quote from: fsu813 on June 22, 2023, 04:00:03 PM
It's good to have 16 Fortune 500 corporations headquartered in your city.
It's more important to have a vision and visionaries that will see a plan to fruition than Fortune 500 corporations. All the money in the world means nothing if you throw it into a dumpster fire. Atlanta (and other places large and small) make a plan, rally the community and stick it out with a common goal in mind.
Great point. Jax is a good example of a city that has thrown lots of money into a dumpster fire, having only vacant lots from demolitions to show for it. I'd argue that Lakeland is a good example of doing the opposite. Lakeland only has one Fortune 500 company. Yet, it was able to fund a $100 million park with private money. That only happens after a city has demonstrated its willingness to invest in itself in a right and efficient way.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 04, 2023, 11:56:02 AM
Great point. Jax is a good example of a city that has thrown lots of money into a dumpster fire, having only vacant lots from demolitions to show for it. I'd argue that Lakeland is a good example of doing the opposite. Lakeland only has one Fortune 500 company. Yet, it was able to fund a $100 million park with private money. That only happens after a city has demonstrated its willingness to invest in itself in a right and efficient way.
The first (and probably most important) step is getting the collective mindset heading in the same direction. I don't know much about J-ville but living in Atlanta and a being native Lakelander, I can attest that years of me being overly critical and frustrated about my hometown have paid off with some things they've gotten right.
Going back almost 2 decades when the city (Lakeland) made a push for downtown residential infill projects, I was EXTREMELY skeptical that they would get it right, let alone get anything off the ground. I'm sure you recall back in 2007 when acquisition of the area north of the police station was targeted for massive residential infill via eminent domain. It took years for the city to complete getting the land and even longer to find the right developer to kickstart that project but in the end, Lakeland got what it wanted in the Mirrorton project (https://mirrorton.com/). That's part of the first step. Since that time, several more infill projects have been proposed, U/C or completed as if the flood gates have opened up. The most recent being Lake Wire (https://www.lakewirefl.com/) on the former Florida Tile site. I love the project but if there's anything I could change, I would add a little more height even if the project had an extra phase or two as I feel the density aspect is a little underwhelming topping out at 4 stories.
I am more excited to see other projects that have been proposed, particularly infill on the Ledger property and the proposed 7-story residential mid-rise a block east of Florida Avenue and Lawton Chiles Middle. Below is a list of items pulled from Catalyst Lakeland (https://catalystlakeland.com/). The site is great in visualization but poor in execution:
VisionMassachusetts + Oak Phase 1: Mixed Use: 5 stories - 9,300 SF, 88 Units
Massachusetts + Oak Phase 2: Mixed Use: 5 stories - 9,300 SF, 88 Units
Police Station site: 350 residential Units
Catapult lot: 172 residential units - multifamily/Parking garage/retail
West DT: 240 Unit & 80 Unit
City Parking lot: 344 Residential Units
In DesignOak Street: Multifamily/Retail/Garage - 7 stories -201,600 SF - 200 Units
The Joinery expansion
The Ledger Redevelopment - 1500 Units
U/CLake Wire Multifamily - 630 Units
Indiana + Lime Apts - 48 Units
Orange Street Apts - 32 Units
Completed2016 NoBay: Multifamily/Retail - 60,000 SF - 54 Units
2019 Yard on Mass: 2,800 SF
2019 Heritage Plaza Garage (824): 40000 SF-Office-Retail
2019 632 Lake Mirror: Office-17,500 SF
2020 Mirrorton: 305 units
2020 Springhill Suites Hotel: 96,000 SF-126 room
2020 Catalyst: Office/Incubator: 40,000 SF
2020 The Joinery: 14,000 SF
2020 Rec Room:
2021 The Garden: Multifamily - 90 units
2021 Midtown Lofts: 80 units
2021 The Well: 4,700 SF
2022 Summit Consulting: 130,000 SF-Office/Parking Garage
Available Surface LotsWells Fargo
Terrace Hotel
Lake Mirror Center
Another big factor in alignment with some of the plans Lakeland has is the mayor on record and a driving force behind the push for 8,500 people living in DT Lakeland.