Homeless Center In the Old Armory Building...Brilliant!

[Debbie Thompson]

Pinky, Springfield still has 4 alco houses and 4 sober houses.  Four are within a block of our house.  All well run and no issue for the community, but really, until you have 8 active social services facilities within a few blocks of your house, you have no right to call someone else a NIMBY.  Springfield is the most supportive, diverse, welcoming, and generous neighborhood in which I have lived in Jacksonville.  We just don't think we should be expected to shoulder more than our share of the social services of the city.

If I Loved You, apparently you don't want to cause an issue with one company, Sally Industries, but causing an issue for thousands of residents of a still-struggling historic neighborhood is OK with you.

[If_I_Loved_you]

^I agree.  It basically opens up to what Salvation Army already has in place.

The old Lee & Cates glass warehouse isn't a good idea at all! It's to close to the "Sally Corporation" we don't need to tick these people off and have them move from the area. 

Doesn't sound like your familiar with what already takes place behind that old building.

I could say I do but I don't, but if you open up the Homeless Center there it will only get worst.

[CityLife]

Agreed Debbie. Some of these posters are "trolls" though. Basically people who intentionally try to stir the pot and agitate people, with no care about what they are even talking about. There are quite a few on MJ. I don't think I've ever seen If I Loved You make a valid point in any thread ever.

[If_I_Loved_you]

Thanks for linking that Roadking. I've always thought we should consolidate our services in one central location, either in an area like the Dennis Street District that Lake has mentioned, or on a rural piece of land away from residential districts, but importantly with a bus line and free bus passes.

The homeless put a huge, huge burden on the city and its residents. I once sat through a presentation by the head of the Jail, who listed the top 10 or so most active recidivist criminals (who were all homeless/vagrants DT). They were each arrested an appalling amount of times per year. Something like 15-25 times each. This was a few years ago, but if I remember correctly, the cost of just those 10 or so to the city was something like $1 million a year in wasted JSO time, prosecution, jail bookings, jail stays, etc.

Then look at the cost to our local hospitals. Shands gets absolutely crushed by having to provide hospital services to the homeless, and I believe St. Vincents, and the Southbank hospitals get hit hard too.

Then there is the issue of downtown revitalization. Look you can spin it all you want and mock people for being afraid to live, work, and play downtown because of the homeless (I'm not)...but you cannot deny that they do hinder DT in numerous ways. And like that former homeless person said, DT isn't exactly a great atmosphere for the homeless.

So consolidate all services somewhere where ALL parties can benefit. Get Shands, St. Vincents, Baptist, etc to open a great clinic there and limit their losses. Open a mental health clinic there, a pharmacy, a VA branch. Give them everything they need from a mental health and health perspective. Then use the land to teach them sustainable agriculture practices, teach them how to manufacture things, get them GED's, and vocational training. Make sure that they have bus access to the rest of the city for job opportunities.

I could go on and on, but to keep it short, consolidating services will not just benefit downtown and Jacksonville residents, but also the cities budget, and the quality of life of its residents. Additionally, the homeless could be much better served through targeted efforts and not a scattering of services.

Hopefully the day center will just be a temporary band aid, until we can get some leadership that are willing to think big picture.

(Dennis Street District) Not going to happen citylife!

[If_I_Loved_you]

Pinky, Springfield still has 4 alco houses and 4 sober houses.  Four are within a block of our house.  All well run and no issue for the community, but really, until you have 8 active social services facilities within a few blocks of your house, you have no right to call someone else a NIMBY.  Springfield is the most supportive, diverse, welcoming, and generous neighborhood in which I have lived in Jacksonville.  We just don't think we should be expected to shoulder more than our share of the social services of the city.

If I Loved You, apparently you don't want to cause an issue with one company, Sally Industries, but causing an issue for thousands of residents of a still-struggling historic neighborhood is OK with you.

Ha! You act as if the Old Armory Building is right in the middle of Springfield??? Well it isn't and we are talking about a day center D.T. 9am - 5pm 02roadking is right on the money when he said NIMBY = "not in my back yard." And I have a Major Problem with a homeless center going into the Dennis street area  or any warehouse area of Jacksonville!

[thelakelander]

And I have a Major Problem with a homeless center going into the Dennis street area  or any warehouse area of Jacksonville!

Is that why you don't like the Salvation Army site on West Forsyth?  Because it's in what's left of the LaVilla Warehouse District.  Should Salvation Army relocate too?

[If_I_Loved_you]

And I have a Major Problem with a homeless center going into the Dennis street area  or any warehouse area of Jacksonville!

Is that why you don't like the Salvation Army site on West Forsyth?  Because it's in what's left of the LaVilla Warehouse District.  Should Salvation Army relocate too?

No see I don't have a problem with this you do? But hiding the Homeless like it's going to help people that need help to me is just plain stupid. 

[Ralph W]

Here's another location many won't like...
Shortly, the VA will be moving its clinic from 1833 Boulevard to new facilities, practically across the street. This will free up a substantial portion, if not all, of the building that has served our veterans for many years. If this location is/was good enough for our veterans it's good enough for the homeless. In addition, it is across the street from Shands Hospital where many of the indigent or homeless go for treatment. The property is owned by Shands Jacksonville Affiliates, Inc., has a market value at around $4 million and, because it is a medical facility, generates ZERO property taxes.

Perhaps in exchange for the City paying for maintenance and management, a cost that will occur where ever the center is located, and remaining on the non-taxable list, Shands Jacksonville Affiliates, Inc will consider remodeling the property to accommodate the homeless.

The location is served by JTA as well, and to sweeten the pot, JTA could agree to provide free bus service to and from the shelters and other services our City provides for free to the homeless.

Let's hear from the NIMBY's.

[CityLife]

Ralph, that is probably a more suitable location than the Armory...but lets get real here. Not wanting a homeless center near a major park, a national historic neighborhood, and a redeveloping area, does not make anyone a NIMBY in the pejorative sense. Not even close. In fact quite a few people who don't live in Springfield are as up in arms as Springfield residents.

I'll give you $100 bucks if you find me another residential neighborhood that is fine with a homeless center being located there.

[thelakelander]

Why not just make Hemming the day center? Doesn't the same logic apply? Anyway, the Salvation Army site sounds good. As for the old VA Clinic, how about a hotel or apartment conversion with street level retail?

[Debbie Thompson]

The old VA clinic would make that 5 social services within a block of our house.  So, while we already have 4 social services providers almost lterally in our back yard, I guess I'd still be a NIMBY if I wasn't thrilled about a 5th?

[thelakelander]

The old VA clinic is pretty large. A day center doesn't need a quarter of that space.

[CityLife]

Ralph, that is probably a more suitable location than the Armory...but lets get real here. Not wanting a homeless center near a major park, a national historic neighborhood, and a redeveloping area, does not make anyone a NIMBY in the pejorative sense. Not even close. In fact quite a few people who don't live in Springfield are as up in arms as Springfield residents.

I'll give you $100 bucks if you find me another residential neighborhood that is fine with a homeless center being located there.

Not taking sides here, but City Life that is the literal definition of NIMBY.

I said not NIMBY's in the pejorative sense...meaning said with negative connotation.

This isn't a bunch of people up in arms over a Mellow Mushroom. It's people upset over homeless services...which would be pretty high on the list of undesired uses adjacent to residential anywhere and everywhere. If virtually everyone, everywhere would oppose homeless services adjacent to their residential neighborhood, you can't pejoratively call those who feel the same way NIMBY's. More like NIABY (Not In Anyone's BackYard).

[CityLife]

like I said, Im not taking sides.  Im just pointing out that a bunch of residents not wanting something in their neighborhood as in:

I'll give you $100 bucks if you find me another residential neighborhood that is fine with (insert here) being located there.

is pretty much the textbook definition of "NIMBY"

Stephen, don't think you are quite getting the original assertion. Of course not wanting something in your back yard fits the literal definition of a NIMBY, however I specifically said in the "pejorative sense" exactly for that reason. You can't negatively call someone a NIMBY, if it is something you yourself, or virtually anyone would oppose in their neighborhood. 

Would you call someone a NIMBY that doesn't want a nuclear reactor in their neighborhood too?

[Miss Fixit]

like I said, Im not taking sides.  Im just pointing out that a bunch of residents not wanting something in their neighborhood as in:

I'll give you $100 bucks if you find me another residential neighborhood that is fine with (insert here) being located there.

is pretty much the textbook definition of "NIMBY"

Stephen, don't think you are quite getting the original assertion. Of course not wanting something in your back yard fits the literal definition of a NIMBY, however I specifically said in the "pejorative sense" exactly for that reason. You can't negatively call someone a NIMBY, if it is something you yourself, or virtually anyone would oppose in their neighborhood. 

Would you call someone a NIMBY that doesn't want a nuclear reactor in their neighborhood too?

Interestingly, the nuclear reactor industry is the origin of the word NIMBY passing into popular usage.

Funny, Steven - although the most important reasons for locating the day center somewhere other than the Armory are not NIMBY reasons, I will be honest and admit that I personally am guilty of NIMBY feelings in this case and I described my reaction about the proposal to someone as feeling like a nuclear missile had been dropped on my house! 

And I agree with City Life - it's not unreasonable for anyone to prefer that neither a nuclear reactor nor a homeless day center be located two blocks from their home, or across the street from their children's playground.