New Convenience Store

[Johnny]

Examples of CCG2 zoned property uses - outside storage or trucks, heavy equipment, warehouse, distributors, etc...

All of this is irrelevent because its not a CCG-2 zoning and it won't be rezoned to CCG-2.  The zoning would stay CCG-S.  An exception for a car wash under the CCG-S zoning would only allow for a car wash to open under that exception.

Thank you, I wasn't aware of that.

[thelakelander]

Here is a list of things he could open up with and without the exception, under the CCG-S zoning.

The property is zoned for this carwash and the lessee is seeking an exception to add a convenience store to the car wash.

Its actually the other way around.  He needs an exception for a carwash.  If he wanted to, he could open a convenience store up and no one could do anything about it.  Here is what is allowed on this site:

IV.   Commercial Community/General-Springfield (CCG-S) District.
   
(a)   Permitted uses and structures.   

(1)   Retail outlets for sale of food and drugs, wearing apparel, toys, sundries and notions, books and stationery, leather goods and luggage, jewelry (including watch repair) art, cameras or photographic supplies (including camera repair), sporting goods, hobby shops and pet shops (but not animal boarding kennels), musical instruments, florist or shops, delicatessens, bakeries (but not wholesale bakeries), home furnishings and appliances (including repair incidental to sales), office equipment or furniture, antiques, hardware, new automobile parts (including rebuilt parts not installation, repair or rebuilding of parts) and accessories and similar uses.

(2)   Service establishments such as barber or beauty shops, shoe repair shops, restaurants, interior decorators, reducing salons or gymnasiums, self-service laundries or dry cleaners, tailors or dressmakers, laundries or dry cleaning pickup stations, dry cleaning and laundry package plants in completely enclosed buildings using nonflammable liquids such as perchloroethylene and with no odor, fumes or steam detectable to normal senses from off the premises, radio and television broadcasting offices and studios, communication antennas, funeral homes, marinas, blueprinting, job printing (but not newspaper), radio and television repair shops, travel agencies, employment offices, (but not day labor pools), home equipment rental and similar uses.

(3)   Banks (including drive-thru tellers), loan companies, mortgage brokers, stockbrokers and similar financial institutions.

(4)   All types of professional and business offices, newspaper offices (but not printing), employment offices, union halls, buildings trades contractors (not requiring outside storage or the use of a vehicle in excess of one-ton capacity or equipment, machinery, ditching machines, tractors, bulldozers or other heavy construction equipment) and similar uses.

(5)   Original use single-family dwellings.
(6)   Original use two-family dwellings.
(7)   Original use multiple-family dwellings.

(   Commercial indoor recreational or entertainment facilities such as bowling alleys, swimming pools, indoor skating rinks, theaters (including motion picture theaters but not open-air theaters), and similar uses (but not dance halls).

(9)   Art galleries, museums, community centers, music, photography, gymnastics, karate and martial arts studios, theaters for stage performances (but not motion picture theaters) dance, art, vocational, trade or business schools and similar uses.

(10)   Homes for aged and orphans.

(11)   Nursing homes.

(12)   Day care centers or care centers meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(13)   Off-street commercial parking lots meeting the performance standards and criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code and the Springfield performance standards and development criteria set forth in Section 656.369.

(14)   Hospitals, sanitariums and similar uses.

(15)   An establishment or facility which includes the retail sale and service of beer or wine for off-premises consumption or for on-premises conjunction with the service of food which is ordered from a menu and prepared or served for pay for consumption on-premises.

(16)   Retail plant nurseries (including outside display but not landscape contractors requiring heavy equipment or vehicles in excess of one-ton capacity).

(17)   Veterinarians meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(18)   Retail outlets for the sale of used wearing apparel, toys, books, luggage, jewelry, cameras, sporting goods, home furnishings and appliances, furniture and similar uses.

(19)   Essential services, including water, sewer, gas, telephone, radio, television and electric, meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(20)   Churches, including a rectory or similar use.

(21)   Schools meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

Uses allowed by exception

(c)   Permissible uses by exception.   

(1)   An establishment or facility which includes the retail sale and service of all alcoholic beverages including liquor, beer or wine for on-premises consumption or off-premises consumption or both, including permanent or restricted outside sale and service, meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(2)   New multiple-family structures.

(3)   Live-work lofts meeting the criteria set forth in Section 656.369.

(4)   Crematories.

(5)   Service stations, service garages for minor repairs and car washer.

(6)   Recycling collection points meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(7)   Essential services, including water, sewer, gas, telephone, radio, television and electric, meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(   Private clubs.

(9)   Restaurants with the outside sale and service of food meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4 of the Zoning Code.

(10)   Billiard parlors.

http://library8.municode.com/default-now/home.htm?infobase=12174&doc_action=whatsnew

[thelakelander]

Under the original CCG-S zoning, both my loft project on 6th Street and 3rd & Main would not be allowed without an exception or PUD.  Both of these projects had to go through what Mr. Jones is going through now.  Actually, because the overlay is poorly written in several areas, most future infill projects (including restaurants with outdoor serving/seating areas) would have to go PUD or seek an exception to become reality.

[sheclown]

Let me preface this by saying I am speaking only my opinion and not that of any organization. There is a reason certain uses were disallowed by zoning. The carwash is just one example of the commercial intrusion that led to the decline of the neighborhood. This fact has been well documented. When I moved here I did so with the understanding that the zoning overlay would protect us from further undesirable uses. When looking at any use I ask myself if I would want to live next door to it. There is an illegal use that has opened on Main St. since the zoning overlay was put in place and Mr. Jones is already using this as an example of why his business should be allowed. It is a very slippery slope. The carwash is not allowed under the zoning laws hence the need for an exception. Who will be next in line with an outlawed use and how many examples will they have to base their exception on?

Springfield declined as all inner city neighborhoods declined.

There wasn't this beautiful neighborhood and then all of a sudden car lots opened and it went to hell.  Violent social upheavals ran residents out, not car lots.

Main Street needs revitalization now.  It needs life.  It needs businesses.  The new businesses which want to risk opening in this economy need to be encouraged by the neighborhood or we will continue to be a ghost town down Main.

[thelakelander]

I believe if he closes and someone else wants to open a car wash, they'll have to apply for another exception.  There is an expiration date associated with the exception when the excepted use is not being used.  From reading the application, since 1992, an exception has been given and expired (because he did not open within a year of being granted the exception), which is why Mr. Jones is trying to get another one.

[sheclown]

So, is it true that it wasn't that the exception was denied two years ago, it was that it had expired?

[Dan B]

So, is it true that it wasn't that the exception was denied two years ago, it was that it had expired?

That, according to Silas. I have not called the zoning dept to confirm.

[Dan B]

As I said earlier in this thread, If he can make his layout interact better with Main St, its a win/win. He says he has permission to use the old car lot (also owned by Hionides). If her can use that entrance/exit, it helps him increase possibility for drive up traffic, and it makes the area less dead. It also removes the undesirable increase in traffic from 4th St.

[sheclown]

That's encouraging.

[fsu813]

Lake,

I said i could see it both ways, and you asked for the opposition point of view:

You can't realistically assume the best case scenario. The carwash won't be on Main, but on 4th right next to residential. I can understand how that makes them feel. If a carshwash opened next door to me, I wouldn't be happy. He says the lot on Main may be used, but who knows. He says that beer, cigs, etc won't be sold, but who knows. If he's a 4th Street carwash isn't doing so well, I can certainly see him turning towards a more proven/profitable model in these parts. Who can say about noise and traffic? Those are wait & see type of things, agian, on 4th, not Main. Something is not always better than nothing, that's for sure.

So that would be an opposition view.

but again, i can see the otherside too. i'd probably favor it in the end.

[thelakelander]

Then neighbors should have opposed 3rd & Main, which is a more intensive use of commercial property that abuts RMD-S zoning.  This thing has ill-informed knee jerk reaction syndrome written all over it.  Take Mr. Jones out of the equation and replace him with Whole Foods, Red Robin, Panera or some other popular nationwide establishment, all of which would generate tons of more traffic, noise and need direct access from 4th and the neighborhood would be doing everything in their power to get them there.  Toss 40-50 units of multifamily residential on top and the use would be a lot more intense.  However, this is the type of development people would like to see along the commercial corridor.  So complaining about cars being washed during daylight hours on a commercial site has little validity to me, when all things are considered.

I look at it this way.  Its one thing if the guy just purchased a residential property and wanted it rezoned to construct a new car wash facility.  However, this is not the case.  The site has been a car wash and commercially zoned since at least 1955.  Unless the next door neighbor has been living next door for 54 years, they purchased their home next to a commercial site on Main (everything east of the alley is commercial).  To me, this is identical to moving next to an airport or railroad, then complaining about noise or moving next to Blanding and crying about traffic congestion.

You also have to use a bit of common sense.  If the guy has already invested in $500k worth of automatic car was equipment, running the convenience store that you describe would never get him close to recouping the loss.  In addition, the convenience store issue is really irrelevant because the property is already zoned for it.  If he wanted to, he could give the community and the next door neighbors the finger, forget about the car wash exception and start selling singles tomorrow.  Btw, the same could go for Uptown Market.  If things don't work out, what stops them from changing their commercial model to something that's already allowed by the zoning, that will lead to more profitability?  Why wasn't the same concern addressed with them?

So, I can see it from both ways as well.  However, when you apply economic, financial and zoning realities to the situation, strictly opposing it out right is a knee jerk position not built on or supported by facts so far.  I say this because every "negative" that has been bought up in this thread has immediately been hit harder out of the park than a Barry Bonds flyball.

[Karl_Pilkington]

The site has been a car wash and commercially zoned since at least 1955.  Unless the next door neighbor has been living next door for 54 years, they purchased their home next to a commercial site on Main (everything east of the alley is commercial).  To me, this is identical to moving next to an airport or railroad, then complaining about noise or moving next to Blanding and crying about traffic congestion.

couldn't agree more.  I purchased a home across from a commercial enterprise which has lots of ingress/egress and foot traffic, it has never been a problem.  In fact, I see it as a plus because there are always people around which I think helps for security reasons.  Its when its very quiet and empty that I get the problems.  When the business is open and people are around I've never had one problem.

[Dan B]

In all of this, i think its important to look at what other businesses are doing. Jack Meeks, for instance, is in the process of turning a residential property into a meeting/storage facility that sits next to his office, plus he had to apply for an exception when he built his office, I believe it had reverted back to residential when he bought it. At the time, the folks against it (some that are pulling FOR the car wash now) had a similar smear campaign going, saying he was going to be running a temp employment agency, and the traffic would be a nuisance. It seems to have worked out ok so far, and the people who raised the concerns did so for not.

Have ANY of the people opposed gone over and talked to Silas?

[strider]

A couple of quick things.

I believe if you research it you will find that once an exception is granted, it becomes like being grandfathered.  If the business remains open, it can be sold and resold and remain a car wash.  If it is closed for one year and a day then purchased, the new owner would have to apply for a  new exception.

Also, because the exception had expired due to the time that had passed, Silas did have to go get an new exception two years ago and that was denied.

There is a reason certain uses were disallowed by zoning. The carwash is just one example of the commercial intrusion that led to the decline of the neighborhood. This fact has been well documented. When I moved here I did so with the understanding that the zoning overlay would protect us from further undesirable uses.

Yes, this is true, however, this use is not “disallowed” by zoning, but is an allowed use by “exception“.  This only means that the zoning laws recognize that the use may be harmful, but also that it may be a net positive to the community and so requires that each case be looked at for it’s own merits. 

Someone mentioned Meeks place…yes, the PUD (which made the changes perminate) allowed for them to basically open a labor pool if they so chose so that was the complaint.  As it should, the system weighed the communities input and decided that it would be a net positive for the community and so it was approved.

This car wash sure seems like it would be a net positive so I hope it does get approved

[Springfield Girl]

I copied this straight from COJ.net -

The development of Springfield was barely completed when it began to decline in the last 1920's. The Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance passed by the city in 1925 classified the entire Springfield section as "Business A," resulting in the depreciation of residential property values. City Planning Engineer George W. Simons described Springfield's problems in May 1931.

Many former residents, during the past four or five years, have left Springfield to live in other areas where property is restricted. Tenement dwellers have entered Springfield and the property, generally speaking, is depreciating and when this state starts its rate of progress is rapid. Poorly placed business has sprung up at scattered points and with each new business the sphere of effective depreciation widens. There are still in this area many beautiful homes of old families and working people--homes representing a life time of labor and saving, which are constantly faced with the thoughts of adjacent filling stations or stores. Why shouldn't these people be protected? Why shouldn't the beauty and distinctiveness of Hubbard Street, Silver Street, Boulevard, and Perry Street, as well as that of several cross streets, be preserved?
A half century later, these same ills still plague Springfield, having been accentuated by the changing demographics and general urban decay that since the 1950's has caused our nation's inner-city neighborhoods to decline. A local preservation organization, Springfield Preservation and Restoration(SPAR), was founded in 1975 to counteract this trend. In 1979, SPAR successfully led a campaign to down-zone Springfield, which became the first neighborhood in Jacksonville to change most its commercial zoning back to residential. Other organizations, such as the Greater Springfield Business Association and Springfield Neighborhood Housing Services, have greatly contributed to efforts to restore this once proud neighborhood. In 1987, Springfield was listed in the National Register of Historic Places as Jacksonville's second Historic District. With thousands of vintage houses, proximity to Downtown, and recent escalation of property values, Springfield is destined to re-emerge as one of Jacksonville's successful residential neighborhoods.

Springfield declined as all inner city neighborhoods declined.

There wasn't this beautiful neighborhood and then all of a sudden car lots opened and it went to hell.  Violent social upheavals ran residents out, not car lots.

Main Street needs revitalization now.  It needs life.  It needs businesses.  The new businesses which want to risk opening in this economy need to be encouraged by the neighborhood or we will continue to be a ghost town down Main.