2030 Mobility Plan: The Cutting Edge of Planning

[thelakelander]

He has to vote to approve it.  We'll have a detailed front page story on this in the morning.

[Dashing Dan]

I am stunned.

I thought that the base of support was too broad for this to happen.

[dougskiles]

Let's face it, with very few exceptions, we have a group of very easily influenced leaders in our city right now.  They all want to be the hero and "save" the economy.  Never mind the 99.9% of citizens who will continue to pay the hefty price tag of sprawl, gotta have those hammers swinging at all cost!

[JeffreyS]

No doubt a developer has been making promises he will never deliver on. 

[John P]

Love, lumb, gaffney, anderson etc. All represent areas that support mobility plan 2030. I have to think they all wont let it die or will have a modification bc they know most of their active constituentcy support it. They are not dumb. There are other ways to key pieces. Parallel tracks.

[thelakelander]

I am stunned.

I thought that the base of support was too broad for this to happen.

The support for the mobility plan and fee over the old traffic concurrency system is strong.  However, the impact of mobility choices on quality of life and economic development is still something that needs to be seriously discussed in Jacksonville.  Right now, we're still focused on stimulating a growth based economy.  It's time we admit that dead horse as sailed.

[Jumpinjack]

John, I hope you are right. Those people are smart councilmen and I am shocked by their support of a moratorium. I do believe there is another story behind the scenes and I bet it's a stinky one.

[thelakelander]

Love, lumb, gaffney, anderson etc. All represent areas that support mobility plan 2030. I have to think they all wont let it die or will have a modification bc they know most of their active constituentcy support it. They are not dumb. There are other ways to key pieces. Parallel tracks.

It appears its going to be suspended for at least a year.  At the very least I hope the City keeps track on the number of permits made before & after and the amount of mobility money lost.  It will be pretty interesting to see what type of small scale projects could have been funded with the money given to private development.  For example, I think Dollar General had to pay a $60,000 mobility fee for one of their recent projects.  How far could you stretch $60,000 to paint bike lanes on an existing street with enough pavement width to accommodate them or fill in a small gap in the sidewalk network?

[Dashing Dan]

Lakelander: Is this what you're saying?

When the mobility fee option was being put together, the development industry saw it as better than concurrency.  But now that concurrency is optional, the development industry doesn't see any further need for the mobility fee.

[thelakelander]

Something similar to that.  The development community would prefer not paying anything, considering that would improve their bottom line (most are in the business to make money, so that's understandable to a degree).  The mobility fee is viewed by all as a better option than the old fair share system.  However, the change of events politically and the economy gave them the opportunity to convince council pass their impact cost to John Q. Taxpayer for at least a year (in the name of job creation of course).  My guess is that we'll see a rush of permits pulled when the moratorium gets close to expiring or a push to get the sunset deferred for another year.  The key for Jacksonville residents will be to make sure this deferment stuff doesn't happen. 

[Dashing Dan]

Given that governments don't have any money of their own to spend, they may be shooting themselves in the foot.

[thelakelander]

^I believe they're pumping their toes full of slugs.

[sheclown]

Look who sponsored it. Seems like a done deal

[Tacachale]

What a remarkable lack of foresight. If only the mayor were in a strong enough position to fight this.

[pwhitford]

from:    pwhitford
Sent at:  11:05 AM (GMT-04:00). Current time there: 12:20 PM. ✆
to:   mayorbrown@coj.net,
Clay@coj.net,
WBishop@coj.net,
RClark@coj.net,
Redman@coj.net,
LBoyer@coj.net,
MattS@coj.net,
Gaffney@coj.net,
EDLee@coj.net,
WAJones@coj.net,
RBrown@coj.net,
Holt@coj.net,
doylec@coj.net,
Gulliford@coj.net,
JimLove@coj.net,
KimDaniels@coj.net,
JRC@coj.net,
Joost@coj.net,
GAnderson@coj.net,
RLumb@coj.net

date:    Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:05 AM
subject:   Ordinance 2011-617

Dear Mayor Brown and Council Members:

Please do not put a moratorium on the Mobility Fee.  Vote against Ordinance 2011-617.  Jacksonville taxpayers subsidizing 100% of private development's negative impacts on public infrastructure is not acceptable or productive. The Mobility Fee helps Jacksonville’s citizens maximize the benefits of needed development.  A moratorium will not encourage development in a community where over 50% of residential properties are currently underwater and office vacancy rates are over 20%.  To date, there is little to no evidence to support the proposition that such a moratorium significantly stimulates any private sector development and hence no evidence of the measure’s actual benefit to anyone other than a few developers. That is a non-argument.  Please do not support the moratorium. 

Thank you,


Now let's see what happens...