TU kickbacks article

[riverside planner]

What aggravates the parking problem is that almost everything south of King St. was built before many people had cars and there was seldom any provision made for parking cars on the properties.  Makes it tight.

People who live in cities just have to get used to people that they don't know parking in front of their houses.  It literally comes with the territory.

True, but King Street was built as a NEIGHBORHOOD scale commercial district.  While it has become a destination in recent years, it was never designed to serve as such. 

[Dashing Dan]

So along with streetcars I guess we should be bringing back bordellos too?

[fieldafm]

At some point alternative modes of mobility will have to be seriously addressed, planned for, and advocated with the same passion or risk endangering the character of the area to create additional capacity for the automobile.

It's really amazing that the conversation is getting so blurred in this debate.  Literally almost every non-work-related conversation I have engage in has revolved around this issue for at least the past week, and everybody keeps going back to the same place. 

Which is not surprising... even at the forum-style meeting RAP held months ago, whenever someone brought up alternative forms of transportation, people just became more angry and kept getting back to yelling about people peeing in front yards.

The conversation about planning and ADVOCATING for different ways of moving people around the neighborhood is at a tipping point.  The proverbial can cannot be kicked down the road any longer.  More infill is happening, and before you know it(even sooner than that based on the interest I have been hearing about some empty sites) new construction is going to take hold... and by then, it will be too late.

[riverside planner]

What aggravates the parking problem is that almost everything south of King St. was built before many people had cars and there was seldom any provision made for parking cars on the properties.  Makes it tight.

People who live in cities just have to get used to people that they don't know parking in front of their houses.  It literally comes with the territory.

True, but King Street was built as a NEIGHBORHOOD scale commercial district.  While it has become a destination in recent years, it was never designed to serve as such.

Im sorry, Riverside Planner, but this is one of the most ridiculous assertions Ive heard.

King Street was built as a residential/commercial/industrial district during a time when Jacksonville was one of the largest tourist draws in the United States.

From its inception as a trolley based expansion of the city, the neighborhood aimed at providing prosperity, upper scale density and high volume shopping to the vacationing millions that visited the city, famous for its climate, incredibly developed entertainment options and bordellos.

Please, can we abandon this fantasy of Jacksonville as a pastoral, quiet little town with nothing more going on in it than the occasional church service followed by a mint julip mixer?

Believe me I harbor no delusions about Jacksonville as a "pastoral, quiet little town".  While I wholeheartedly agree that we need truly multimodal transportation, I was on the steering committee for the Riverside Avondale Zoning Overlay and bring that knowledge, as well as my experiences as a resident of the greater Park & King area to the table.  Parking was not an issue when this area developed, but it is now.  The Overlay is far from perfect, I recognize that, but it is also clear that new commercial construction triggers the need to address parking. 

[fieldafm]

but it is also clear that new commercial construction triggers the need to address parking.

The Park and King area can in fact support much more commercial density than it has now, while still being a great place to live if the proper parking management policies are put into place and viable alternative modes of transportation are offered.  Riverside/Avondale is not unique in this respect.  A trip to Williamsburg, Georgetown, Lakeview, etc etc etc shows that with proper policies... mixed use density can co-exist.  To continue to ignore this will hurt the neighborhood.  Alternatives to heavy auto-centric movement needs to have happened yesterday(not today or tomorrow).

If Kickbacks doesn't kickstart this conversation in earnest... we will all be very sorry a year down the road.  I sincerly hope that won't happen.

[BridgeTroll]

The neighborhood was never originally designed for cars, it was designed for street cars. 

While this is true and undeniable... it is also true and undeniable that there is not and there has not been streetcars for what... a hundred years?  Since the demise of the streetcars the 'hood has changed a bit.  To restore the original historic density without addressing the fact that the 'hood has changed is clearly causing issues that need to be addressed.  To simply say to the residents... "too bad" is short sighted, counter productive and will lead to stiffer more organized and vocal opposition to the goal we are all seeking... which is a dense, walkable, neighborhood destination.

[fieldafm]

To simply say to the residents... "too bad" is short sighted

That is not my personal goal one bit.  As a matter of fact, its the residents who benefit the most from more diverse transportation options. 

To restore the original historic density without addressing the fact that the 'hood has changed

It was this change that has in fact hurt the neighborhood and will be very detrimental if people's reality continues to be complete auto-centric mobility. 

Burying one's head in the sand on this issue is not a viable solution.

[urbanlibertarian]

Since streetcars are not coming anytime soon it would appear that shuttle buses would be needed to get folks from where we want them to park to the King St establishments they want to go to.  Where DO we want them to park?  Do we want JTA involved in this solution?

[cline]

Since streetcars are not coming anytime soon it would appear that shuttle buses would be needed to get folks from where we want them to park to the King St establishments they want to go to.  Where DO we want them to park?  Do we want JTA involved in this solution?

In the short term I think that some sort of private shuttle service would be a solution.  There could potentially be some sort of Park-N-Ride in one of the surrounding parking lots (St. Vincents, for example) with a shuttle up through the strip.  I believe this idea is being kicked around already.

In the long term, I think that Streetcar is the way to go.  It is a shame that the mobility fee is pretty much dead in the water.  That could have allowed Streetcar to be built quicker than you might imagine.  There is still hope though. 

As for JTA, I don't think they should be involved in anything transit-related that we wanted to see become a success.

[BridgeTroll]

The neighborhood was never originally designed for cars, it was designed for street cars. 

While this is true and undeniable... it is also true and undeniable that there is not and there has not been streetcars for what... a hundred years?  Since the demise of the streetcars the 'hood has changed a bit.  To restore the original historic density without addressing the fact that the 'hood has changed is clearly causing issues that need to be addressed.  To simply say to the residents... "too bad" is short sighted, counter productive and will lead to stiffer more organized and vocal opposition to the goal we are all seeking... which is a dense, walkable, neighborhood destination.

this is dumb.  in reality, a group of residents simply changed the rules of engagement less than three years ago, and are now trying to enforce a pretty stretched definition of those changed rules on the commercial real estate.  Are you suggesting that we are to say to the commercial landowners 'too bad' instead?

Sounds nice and fair.

Just as dumb Stephen... since that is not what I said. 

An acknowledgement that the residents have legitimate concerns would be a good starting point.  One group should not have to lose to the other.  Parking issues amongst other are a legitimate concern for the folks who have lived in the area since there have not been streetcars and certainly needs to be addressed for the benefit of the businesses and the residents.

[riverside planner]

The neighborhood was never originally designed for cars, it was designed for street cars. 

While this is true and undeniable... it is also true and undeniable that there is not and there has not been streetcars for what... a hundred years?  Since the demise of the streetcars the 'hood has changed a bit.  To restore the original historic density without addressing the fact that the 'hood has changed is clearly causing issues that need to be addressed.  To simply say to the residents... "too bad" is short sighted, counter productive and will lead to stiffer more organized and vocal opposition to the goal we are all seeking... which is a dense, walkable, neighborhood destination.

this is dumb.  in reality, a group of residents simply changed the rules of engagement less than three years ago, and are now trying to enforce a pretty stretched definition of those changed rules on the commercial real estate.  Are you suggesting that we are to say to the commercial landowners 'too bad' instead?

Sounds nice and fair.

Just as FYI, there were commericial interests represented on the Overlay steering committee, including folks with interests on King Street. 

[thelakelander]

Since streetcars are not coming anytime soon it would appear that shuttle buses would be needed to get folks from where we want them to park to the King St establishments they want to go to.  Where DO we want them to park?  Do we want JTA involved in this solution?

Would five years be considered too long term to plan and advocate right now for something that won't cost an additional tax dollar out of your pocket?  Dealing with public agencies nearly any solution bought to the table will take at least a year or two to be implemented.  What are the implementation time lines associated with various solutions that have been mentioned (ex. parking decals, parking garages, neighborhood circulator, etc.)?

[BridgeTroll]

Since streetcars are not coming anytime soon it would appear that shuttle buses would be needed to get folks from where we want them to park to the King St establishments they want to go to.  Where DO we want them to park?  Do we want JTA involved in this solution?

Would five years be considered too long term to plan and advocate right now for something that won't cost an additional tax dollar out of your pocket?  Dealing with public agencies nearly any solution bought to the table will take at least a year or two to be implemented.  What are the implementation time lines associated with various solutions that have been mentioned (ex. parking decals, parking garages, neighborhood circulator, etc.)?

A concrete 4 or 5 year plan seems reasonable provided the current residential / business concerns can be alleviated during the interim.

[thelakelander]

In the long term, I think that Streetcar is the way to go.  It is a shame that the mobility fee is pretty much dead in the water.  That could have allowed Streetcar to be built quicker than you might imagine.  There is still hope though.

With vocal advocation, the moratorium could sunset this fall and money from new development would be following into that funding pot.  Not only for the streetcar but also for associated bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects within the district.  Combine these pots with other funding opportunities and these improvements could happen faster than raising the cash to pay and maintain a self funded rubber wheeled circulator.  Keep ignoring this stuff and the longer it will take to implement these options.

[thelakelander]

A concrete 4 or 5 year plan seems reasonable provided the current residential / business concerns can be alleviated during the interim.

Speaking of 4 or 5 years, how long has the talk about a Riverside parking and transportation plan been going on at this point?  It's been at least three years since I first heard.  Just pointing this out show whatever is proposed will take some time to implement.  It would be good to start defining various improvement options with time lines and funding strategies.