Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Prudential-Drive-Self-Storage/i-9b6rLL4/0/f14a1f18/X2/20230209__DDRB%20AGENDA%20PACKET_Page_100-X2.jpg)
A self-storage fight in the Southbank could come to a head this week.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/self-storage-fight-could-come-to-a-head-this-week/
This is when everyone needs to be contacting their council members....
Quote from: acme54321 on June 26, 2023, 08:02:29 AM
This is when everyone needs to be contacting their council members....
a reminder, with the vote tonight (June 26) it is the "old" council members, not the newly elected and installed - they don't take office until July 1, Saturday.
Watched the entire public hearing from 6/6/23.
- Every council-member has more than 180 emails in opposition
- Not a single council-member declared ex-parte with any emails/letter in favor of the project
- The DIA recommended denial in their report
- The developer group met with almost every council-member on LUZ
- The developer group paid to have 3 experts give their opinion of the project
- There were more than 20 speakers in opposition
- There were negotiations with the developer group to explore alternative uses or uses that incorporate "less" storage with a residential component. All of those other uses were shot down with the exception of a rooftop bar that the developer group proposed.
- A speaker made a great point, stating that Soba & The Station are actually in much worse locations (next to freeways) than this storage unit, and if passed this storage unit would house the boxes in a more prime location than some of those actually using it (LOL)
All that said, they passed LUZ 6-2. This thing is happening, sadly.
Lol that speaker was right. This will be where those residents store their extra junk. If approved, that fake stucco facade is going to age and deteriorate quickly.
Sorry 5-2* lol
Really unfortunate circumstances but maybe some heavy hitters that actually can sway some of these council members will show up but I wouldn't bet on it. Carlucci & Cumber really made a mockery of the whole thing with the "experts." I have also been physically present and have heard multiple times from other council-members "I'm not going to go against the wishes of the area's council-member" yet today both members who reside over it, in heavy opposition, were disregarded. Funny how that works!
The fact that they're spending the effort and money to make this storage unit look like an apartment kind of screams that maybe that's what should actually be done with this site.
Would be the gold standard of storage facilities in Northeast Florida. They've made an effort on the design and activation.
That said, don't like the precedent of blowing up the (recently updated) Downtown zoning overlay for something as soul sucking as a storage facility.
Quote from: fsu813 on June 26, 2023, 02:39:38 PM
Would be the gold standard of storage facilities in Northeast Florida. They've made an effort on the design and activation.
That said, don't like the precedent of blowing up the (recently updated) Downtown zoning overlay for something as soul sucking as a storage facility.
What "activation"? The rooftop bar? Why not some ground-floor activation?
Lol more than half the discourse from the LUZ was about the 16k of ground-floor retail hahahaha. It's almost like this is a retail project to the developer.
Also they touted this 80/20 ratio.. 16,042 sf of retail / 165,075 of total space = 9.72%
HMMMMMMMMM.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 26, 2023, 03:53:41 PM
Lol more than half the discourse from the LUZ was about the 16k of ground-floor retail hahahaha. It's almost like this is a retail project to the developer.
Also they touted this 80/20 ratio.. 16,042 sf of retail / 165,075 of total space = 9.72%
HMMMMMMMMM.
They've had funny math all through this project. They only count the square footage of actual storage units toward that category, not the aisle between the units, elevator lobby, etc. However everything that is not storage gets counted toward the "20%". The design changes are back of napkin drawings with no real detail that the developer can be held to. It's a last ditch effort to get votes, but it's too little too late.
I love it lol just go back & forth from total to rentable when it's convenient. I'm really interested to see what the final vote is.
LUZ is stacked with good ol' boy developer friends. It's about as bad as ever, and that is saying a lot, as that is the history of this committee over the decades. It is exhibit A for how developers and their attorneys own the City Council.
What is the Planning Department's position on this project? They are also usually rubber stamps for developers and I hope Deegan makes some serious changes in how that department is managed. However, if they ever recommend denial of a project, you know it must really be awful ;D.
Because it is downtown, the DIA & DDRB issued reports. (CPAC did also). DIA voted to deny. DDRB voted to approve with amendments. (The DDRB Chair & Vice-Chair both voted to deny.) CPAC voted to deny also.
That one DDRB report is the lifeline of the project right now. Several council-members sited that as justification for voting the way they did at the LUZ hearing.
I'd also like to add that every "aye" vote from the DDRB came from board members who directly work in development. (aka architects, civil engineers, and planners). The two "nay" votes were from the only two voting members not directly working in RE.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 26, 2023, 03:41:41 PM
Quote from: fsu813 on June 26, 2023, 02:39:38 PM
Would be the gold standard of storage facilities in Northeast Florida. They've made an effort on the design and activation.
That said, don't like the precedent of blowing up the (recently updated) Downtown zoning overlay for something as soul sucking as a storage facility.
What "activation"? The rooftop bar? Why not some ground-floor activation?
Ground floor retail space is part of the plan, no?
WOW! 9-9 - denied.
Wow!
If I remember city rules (law?) correctly because it was "denied" they cannot bring back this rezoning for a year.
Yes that's correct. Really hoping we can ultimately see a mixed-use residential product.
Well that's that. Great work to everyone who was part of this. Definitely hope we get some useful mixed use out of this site. The developer is welcome to pick any one of the many parcels just outside of downtown to build this in.
^That's not how the deal works! The developer is welcome but the property owner loses out on whatever cash they were in line to receive. I would not be surprised if they appeal, based off the comments at the end of the article.
QuoteSan Marco Preservation Society President Lauren Carlucci said June 20 the developer was not willing to meet the organization's compromise of 50% residential.
Council members received more than 400 emails in opposition to the project.
After the vote during public comment, Diebenow objected to the city attorney's opinion that the tie vote equaled a denial.
He said should Simpson appeal the decision, he wanted it on the record that he sees the ruling as against past Council practice and state statute.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/jun/27/in-a-tie-vote-city-council-denies-rezoning-for-southbank-self-storage-facility/
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2023, 08:44:33 AM
^That's not how the deal works! The developer is welcome but the property owner loses out on whatever cash they were in line to receive. I would not be surprised if they appeal, based off the comments at the end of the article.
QuoteSan Marco Preservation Society President Lauren Carlucci said June 20 the developer was not willing to meet the organization's compromise of 50% residential.
Council members received more than 400 emails in opposition to the project.
After the vote during public comment, Diebenow objected to the city attorney's opinion that the tie vote equaled a denial.
He said should Simpson appeal the decision, he wanted it on the record that he sees the ruling as against past Council practice and state statute.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/jun/27/in-a-tie-vote-city-council-denies-rezoning-for-southbank-self-storage-facility/
I've never heard of a LUZ ordinance being overturned due to the landowners not getting top dollar for the sale. Usually you pursue a PUD to 'increase' the value of the land.. so it should be somewhat obvious to lawmakers that the top dollar sale here is not apart of the conversation. There is some doubt of a backup offer, but regardless there is an end user here that will pay a lot for that land for an alternate use even in this economy... above $15k per residential door. (Yay, more incentives!)
These parcels never hit the open market. What occurred was OGC ruled the tie as an act of no motion and ultimately they were about to go back at the vote again. They took a recess, came back and OGC flipped their decision. I have to imagine that OGC saw something to make that change. The break was only supposed to be 5 or so mins but ended up being 20 mins. I respect the wishes for an appeal but I wonder if they will find any language that the OGC didn't. Frankly, everyone was shocked when it happened. We shall see!
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 28, 2023, 09:18:31 AM
I've never heard of a LUZ ordinance being overturned due to the landowners not getting top dollar for the sale.
Yeah, I wasn't implying this.
QuoteAfter the vote during public comment, Diebenow objected to the city attorney's opinion that the tie vote equaled a denial.
He said should Simpson appeal the decision, he wanted it on the record that he sees the ruling as against past Council practice and state statute.
This is what I was looking at. OGC may have an opinion. However, like with the council redistricting issue, opinions are always up for debate.
I am not a lawyer or a zoning expert, but my guess is an appeal could be based on whether a tie vote "denies" a rezoning, or merely "does not approve" the request. In other words, is "failure to approve" by majority "yes" vote the same as "denial" from a majority "no" vote?
Drink every time Rory Diamond misses a Council meeting.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 28, 2023, 09:45:50 AM
I am not a lawyer or a zoning expert, but my guess is an appeal could be based on whether a tie vote "denies" a rezoning, or merely "does not approve" the request. In other words, is "failure to approve" by majority "yes" vote the same as "denial" from a majority "no" vote?
Bingo. It depends on if they are willing to spend more of their money to chase approval or not. That likely depends on the percentage of getting it overturned and the financial viability of the project (is it worth them taking the risk and spending the extra money necessary).
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2023, 09:37:34 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 28, 2023, 09:18:31 AM
I've never heard of a LUZ ordinance being overturned due to the landowners not getting top dollar for the sale.
Yeah, I wasn't implying this.
QuoteAfter the vote during public comment, Diebenow objected to the city attorney's opinion that the tie vote equaled a denial.
He said should Simpson appeal the decision, he wanted it on the record that he sees the ruling as against past Council practice and state statute.
This is what I was looking at. OGC may have an opinion. However, like with the council redistricting issue, opinions are always up for debate.
Ah gotcha. Yeah on that second point it was interesting is what I am saying. OGC originally "agreed" that the 9-9 vote did not deny the legislation, but ultimately changed their opinion on that. Diebenow will more than likely be pursuing the appeal on the same state statue that OGC ultimately reversed their decision on.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on June 28, 2023, 09:56:19 AM
Drink every time Rory Diamond misses a Council meeting.
Yea, so this one is interesting and I watched someone get roaster on Twitter for raising the issue. He's in the Reserves and is serving a commitment with them.
TO BE CLEAR HERE: I AM IN NO WAY QUESTIONING RORY DIAMOND'S PATRIOTISM AND I THINK IT'S WONDERFUL THAT HE HAS CHOSEN TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY. HE SHOULD BE APPLAUDED FOR THAT.
Now....in the private sector the law says that you can't lose your job because are serving. They don't have to pay you, but they have to give you your job (or an equivalent job with same responsibilities and same pay) back once you return. Additionally, the employer is free to move the work to another person or put a person in that role while you're gone as the work can't just pile up.
There really isn't an equivalent way to substitute his role as an elected official when he's away and I think that creates an interesting question. What would be the SOP if he was a member of the House or Senate in Washington?
Not to get off topic here but it's relevant given the vote was 9-9 and he was not in attendance.
What is most telling about the vote is who voted for and against. DeFoor and Cumber will be coming off and they were both no votes.
Meanwhile, Bowman, Carrico, Newby, Howland, Freeman, White and Gaffney are a reliable pro-developer voting block, the public input be damned. Only one I am a little surprised about is Pittman. Diamond would have been part of the pro-developer block had he been there and this would have passed.
So frustrating, that about half or so of the council just votes knee-jerk for developers a la Justice Thomas voting to the extreme far right no matter the issue before the Supreme Court. As a quasi-judicial process, people in these positions are supposed to be "open minded" and once-in-awhile vote the "other way" when there is appropriate support for so doing.
(https://media.yourobserver.com/img/photos/2023/06/27/Southbank_Self_Storge_PUD_-_Final_Vote__t850.png?94beabde1e982a4eee8f83697e93b1d92468de7c)
Quote from: Steve on June 28, 2023, 10:50:24 AM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on June 28, 2023, 09:56:19 AM
Drink every time Rory Diamond misses a Council meeting.
There really isn't an equivalent way to substitute his role as an elected official when he's away and I think that creates an interesting question. What would be the SOP if he was a member of the House or Senate in Washington?
Not to get off topic here but it's relevant given the vote was 9-9 and he was not in attendance.
Heavily agree. It was odd to witness really.