2030 Mobility Plan: A Driver for Better Development?
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/834308512_Xnm4L-M.jpg)
Metro Jacksonville takes a look at the proposed 2030 Mobility Plan's ability to make a positive change through encouraging multimodal friendly land use planning.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-apr-2030-mobility-plan-a-driver-for-better-development
Perhaps the waiting is almost over. We have a mobility plan now let's hope the city council makes it the law of the land quickly.
Has this been presented to the council yet?
This is one the MJ community needs to let the council know we want acted on quickly. Email, call or write your representative to encourage their support. Facebook this one out to your friends.
A committee has been fomed to figure out how best to implement the plan....best guess is final approval through Council won't occur until sometime next year.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 12, 2010, 08:42:57 AM
A committee has been fomed to figure out how best to implement the plan....best guess is final approval through Council won't occur until sometime next year.
They need to fast track this before amendmant 4.
It's the same old change thing... Our developers and money have been built on slap up - clap board and block, or downtown tilt ups. Until these boys see the profit in doing it right they will continue to destroy every plan that comes along. The solution? SHOW THEM THE MONEY, or as the new law does, SHOW THEM THE PENALTY FOR IGNORANCE.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: JeffreyS on April 12, 2010, 09:07:16 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 12, 2010, 08:42:57 AM
A committee has been fomed to figure out how best to implement the plan....best guess is final approval through Council won't occur until sometime next year.
They need to fast track this before amendmant 4.
that may be tough...but a poll a few weeks ago showed only 51% in favor of Amendment 4....it needs 60% to pass
I hate having to refer to Orlando for urban development guidelines. It would be great if Jacksonville would step up and be the leader for once. Hopefully this master plan isn't just a rainbow-colored bag of pixie dust hot air. I'd love to see something actually get done!
^The best thing the public can do is to lobby the council to get educated on the details of the plan and support it. That's going to be the most efficient way to move forward.
Does the Mobility Plan have safeguards against the City waiving the Mobility Fee for "favored" developments / developers? Like "incentives" to bring in "target employers"?
Mr Charles.............I would bet money there is a loop hole somewhere by the time the "Committee" gets completed! Mr Killingsworth has generated something that addresses alot of the issues we have to deal with and somehow since a "Committee" has been formed, that is probably number one on their hit parade! Lets get some more "Consultants" in on the party while we are committeeing so we can take a really good idea and see how much non-essential bull pucky can be added!
Would the plan totally change the existing zoning codes?
No. It just makes it possible to construct walkable development throughout the city with a financial incentive.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on April 12, 2010, 11:08:18 PM
Does the Mobility Plan have safeguards against the City waiving the Mobility Fee for "favored" developments / developers? Like "incentives" to bring in "target employers"?
Pretty much every community in FL allows this....the premise of concurrency is that impacts of development get mitigated....the "system" doesn't care who does it.
The problem is that communities often don't follow through and make the improvements when giving developers a pass....another problem that has occurred statewide is that many small developments don't have to make improvements, yet they still generate trips.
This does seem like a big step in the right direction. But this study is 225 pages long and contains so much information that relatively few will actually read it in it’s entirety. Lake is very right, in one way, we need to educate council members about this concept. However and perhaps most importantly, we need to educate the residents of areas that would most likely be effected. How do we take the suburban mentality and convince it that this is the way to go? How do we show that mixed use is right and that it won't drag down property values, endanger the children or bring in the wrong kind of people? These are the arguments we have seen against various higher intensive and much needed commercial developments recently. Many of us know these are false and incorrect arguments, but there are things in this plan that will promote these arguments against it. How do we educate people to prevent that?
I believe a picture or vision speaks a 1,000 words. We can educate by illustrating and showcasing real life examples. Locally, communities like Riverside and San Marco can be used as examples of places offering a quality of life that includes a mix of uses and higher density in a walkable manner. One issue that will continue to remain at the forefront of this process is SB 360. Jacksonville is going to have to do something to attempt to meet the bill's requirements regardless of the people's arguments. So for those who argue against multimodal transportation options and integrating land use with mobility, they are going to have to come up with a road based alternative that achieves the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, vehicle miles traveled and curbing sprawl. Good luck with that one.
Don't get me wrong, this is a great plan with tons more potential than anything else to come down the pike for some time. I think, Lake, that you are exactly right and we, as a city, need to do this. I have just been forced to become a realist in some things and there is wordage and ideas within this plan that will cause issues. While it is fine to say those who will make them an issue do not matter and their arguments does not have merit, you can never tell for sure who is listening to them and who is not. These concerns should be addressed early to avoid delaying plans like this if nothing else.
Having said all that, how far away is the next step? The committee, will it have public meetings, ETC.? How much input can the various communities and interested parties have in this?
The state legislature effectively gutted concurrency last year, by passing SB 360 (which basically eliminates concurrency requirements for anyplace with over 1000 people per square mile, which includes almost all of suburbia).
http://www.wikio.com/video/truth-florida-sb-1201843
http://www.fhba.com/docs/DOC172.PDF
So what's left to waive?
Not quite true...that was the Legislature's intent...but DCA's interpretation is that all that has been removed is the state mandate...local governments that implemented concurrency through ordinances would still need to repeal those ordinances...not surprisingly, very few have jumped up to do that.
Also keep in mind that SB 360 mandated that DULA communities institute plans to address mobility by 2012....that is what Jacksonville and other local governments are doing right now.
lake.........I agree with strider on this one! There should be local input (as in the various suburbs and neighborhoods) How will we be able to get input on this one? I don't trust the Council to do much except cover their own self interests and the mayor...........well won't go there, wasted effort!
I agree, please don't think I'm making an argument for there not being local input. This stuff was just not plucked out of thin air. Many of the transportation projects have had years of local input through the JTA BRT, commuter rail and streetcar studies, as well as the TPO's LRTP and the City's Visioning process. In addition, all council meetings are open to the public. If the public wants to be involved, the opportunity has and will continue for them to be.
Been to most of the mentioned agencies at one time or another just to get informed. Last TPO I attended was at Twin Lakes...........so that is why I asked if there will be other public meetings along those line?
FYI....public involvement often doesn't come cheap...for example, over $200,000 was spent trying to get participation in the LRTP.
Well tufsu............if they can scrounge up a dime or two for committee's and consultants, it would seem to me to be reasonable to inform the public in some manner! Sooner or later someone somewhere is going to asking the public for money to fund something that is supposed to benefit everyone! Don't you think it would be prudent to do something to address the issue with the taxpaying public as in townhall meeting or something similar? Last meeting I attended was outstanding not only from an information standpoint but the chance to discuss transportation issues with professionals was worth the personnel time!
Yes CS...I think its incredibly important....but when people constantly yap about lower taxes and cutting givernment expenses, it becomes difficult.