State Rd 9B

[Mattius92]

Lake is right on some points, we DO need high density development, and I support it all they way. However downtown Jacksonville is going to have to be more poeple-friendly downtown. I would actually like to see an high-rise tower on the Riverside, because that place is pretty poeple friendly, possibly one of the best in the city in terms of walkibility and amenities.

[thelakelander]

Going vertical is something Jacksonville hasnt really ever had. We did get the 37-story Peninsula Residential Tower in 2008, and a few more in the general time frame. Then the good ol' housing bubble popped and then the economy took a wonderful plunge. Now several big high density projects have been either canceled or delayed. So are we going to wait for high-density to come, or are we going to build 9B which will promote growth, but not in a very vertical way.

Who said anything about going verticle and building 37 story towers DT?  Density is much more diverse and complex than directly relating it to a downtown oriented development pattern.  Single story structures can be constructed to still provide connectivity and support multimodal transportation options?  In turn, better utilizing our land helps cut down the amount of infrustructure the public must invest in to support new growth.

[cline]

Yes, you don't see people begging to pay more taxes.  In short, take a look at your city's land use regulations.  That drives the pattern of development.

My point was that there are thousands of people that choose to live in these low density areas-whether that is good or bad or right or wrong-that's how it is.  If you were to ask these people who already live there if they are in favor of 9B, I would venture to guess that the answer would be in the affirmative.  Commissioner Stevenson (SJC) is all about this project.  The reason being-her constituents want it.    

[thelakelander]

My point is, moreso than something picking to choose to live, this city through regulation drives certain development patterns, not end user choice.  

For example, there's nothing wrong with purchasing a place near SJTC.  However, there is something wrong with local requirements that don't properly connect individual developments, limit access, don't require sidewalks on both sides of the street, prohibit a mix of uses and forcing large building setbacks.  Our regulations drive auto oriented land development patterns.  This is the unsustainable stuff that breeds congestion and leads to stretching the city's financial resources too thin.  I could care less whether a person chooses to live in DT, Riverside, Englewood or Bartram Park.  Imo, through better land regulations, sustainable development can sprout up in all of these places.

[Mattius92]

You see that article on Mobile, maybe our politicians should take a tour of that city. I am guessing that is what Lake is talking about smart growth. And I do really like it.

[CS Foltz]

I concur lake! If the people who live in the Flagler Center area wish the 9B extension and off ramp for access, then let them form a special taxing district to pay for it! It does nothing for my world yet my tax money will be busy funding it! Fortress wishes to pay for it.........great! Taxpayer money, then the taxpayers should have some input! Put it on the ballot and let the voters say yea or nay! But to use taxmoney, as in stimulus, does the local taxpayer no good or benefit! Still no option for a rail connection..........just more concrete!

[cline]

However, there is something wrong with local requirements that don't properly connect individual developments, limiting access, not requiring sidewalks on both sides of the street, prohibiting a mix of uses and forcing large building setbacks.

I can agree with these specifics.  

The major problem is that those who have the ability to do this (COJ planners as we as others) have to answer to the politicians who are ultimately their boss.  We have seen that the politicians in this region are highly resistant to change.  Therefore, we don't get any.  Its a monumentle task just to get little things done. As for the task of completely re-writing the current land use regulations- I doubt I'll se that before I'm six feet under.  I guess I can hope though.

[cline]

I concur lake! If the people who live in the Flagler Center area wish the 9B extension and off ramp for access, then let them form a special taxing district to pay for it!

Using your logic, the next time Baymeadows Road (which does nothing for my world but does for you) needs to be resurfaced, I would expect you and your neighbors to get out your checkbooks and pay for it.  You can start by reimbursing the City for the Baymeadows traffic study that was recently completely (which cost around 1mil).

[thelakelander]

Here is a visual comparison of where I'm going.  The first image is Gateway Mall in Jacksonville.  The strip mall is separated from Norwood Avenue by acres of surface parking.  In the hot Florida sun, walkability easily becomes a no go.



This second image is a new strip mall in suburban Charlotte.  It has parking too, but the parking is located behind the buildings.  

Front


Back


You're providing the same services and needs, but one style of development is more visually pleasing for the surrounding community, embraces walkability and supports multimodal transportation options.  The other is dominated by an auto oriented focus.  Over time, one styles becomes a community while the other breeds congestion and eventually requires a larger public investment to maintain.

By changing or land use and development patterns, we will find that we can accommodate additional growth without the need of additional overly expensive superhighways like 9B and the Outer Beltway.

[Mattius92]

Isn't Duval taxpayers paying for the first phase, but isn't phase two and three in SJC. Or is both Duval and St. Johns paying for all the phases in the 9B project. I want to know how exactly is this project getting its funding.

And I can see that Charlotte has it down, no wonder they are beating us in population growth and just about everything.

[thelakelander]

However, there is something wrong with local requirements that don't properly connect individual developments, limiting access, not requiring sidewalks on both sides of the street, prohibiting a mix of uses and forcing large building setbacks.

I can agree with these specifics.  

The major problem is that those who have the ability to do this (COJ planners as we as others) have to answer to the politicians who are ultimately their boss.  We have seen that the politicians in this region are highly resistant to change.  Therefore, we don't get any.  Its a monumentle task just to get little things done. As for the task of completely re-writing the current land use regulations- I doubt I'll se that before I'm six feet under.  I guess I can hope though.

This is where the problem exists (not where people want to live) and where change needs to occur.  Until that happens, we'll always be planning in a reactionary role to a problem that can't be solved by continuing to make the same mistakes.

[CS Foltz]

cline........I can understand your fustration and I do agree. Maybe Amendment 4 will do something about making those changes? At this point, consultants are driven by the people they answer to, not the taxpayer, and just maybe 4 will control some of this sprawl! Yes lake I did participate in that Bay Meadows town hall meeting. Something that may come out of it is the ability to make my world a "Special Taxing District" in order to pay for the improvements in the Bay Meadows Circle West upgrade. I have no problem with paying for something like that which directly effects me! Golf Course would come back to life and a whole host of improvements to this general region! I can't do something about the interchange @ 95 & Bay Meadows since that is the Federal end............no stimulus money for that!! Interchange was not built with an eye towards possible future upgrades........silly FDOT!

[tufsu1]

Isn't Duval taxpayers paying for the first phase, but isn't phase two and three in SJC. Or is both Duval and St. Johns paying for all the phases in the 9B project. I want to know how exactly is this project getting its funding.

yes and no....9B (from I-95 to 9A) will be funded using State and Federal money...which means, in theory, that taxpayers in Alaska (I can see 9B from my front porch  ) could be funding it.

later extensions, beyond I-95 and into St. Johns County, may be funded through local taxes or developer contributions...but my guess is that state funds get used for it too.

[Mattius92]

I wanted to get that clear, because I wanted to know who and what would be taxed for this project.

Smart development is needed, simple as that. The question is, when will we get it?

[CS Foltz]

At the local level.........sometime after 2011 I would guess! Or atleast have a better option!