Council and developers want to change the mobility plan again?

Started by thelakelander, January 22, 2014, 04:07:17 PM

What to do with the Mobility Plan & Fee?

Leave it alone and let's see how it works as originally approved and envisioned.
41 (97.6%)
Modify it. The development community and council knows what's best.
0 (0%)
Kill it altogether. Jacksonville is fine just the way it is.
1 (2.4%)

Total Members Voted: 42

Voting closed: January 29, 2014, 04:07:17 PM

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 ... 8
User actions

thelakelander

January 22, 2014, 04:07:17 PM Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 08:34:01 PM by thelakelander
As many of our long time readers know, I had the opportunity to work as a part of the team that created the award winning 2030 Mobility Plan and Mobility Fee. 

(For more background information: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-sep-2030-mobility-plan-the-cutting-edge-of-planning)

Since it's original approval, instead of allowing it a chance to do what it was supposed to do, every year, council and the development community have tried to alter its original purpose.

Unfortunately, out of that team that worked to put the details of the plan together, just about everyone has moved on to other communities across the country, so critical background knowledge and understanding has been lost.

Today, I received an email stating there's a new bill under consideration that allows developers to not have to give money towards a project identified in the mobility plan but let's them propose something else, which can then be approved by council.  Bill Bishop is the sponsor.

I'm still processing information but as of right now, but I'm somewhat skeptical of allowing developers to propose their own projects and getting the green light if approved by council. Here are my initial feelings and concerns about the latest attempt to alter the plan that everyone agreed on in 2011:


To be honest, I'm skeptical. One of my fears is that this will really hurt the mode our city's leaders ignore the most......transit. If this happens, the Northside and Urban Core will be negatively impacted the most because this is the only real funding source that can have a significant impact on improving multimodal connectivity and redevelopment opportunities in this continuously overlooked and underfunded areas.

Being involved with the creation of the plan, a major benefit of the priority project list is that money would be funneled into funding "legacy" projects (ex. streetcar, commuter rail, context sensitive streets, multiuse paths that actually connect people to where they want to go, etc.). Things, we've always claim that we can't afford to do. Need an example? Just look to FDOT's push back and promotion of a misinterpreted and unapplicable law as reasoning of why they can spend $136 million widening the Fuller Warren and not including a barrier separated multiuse path connecting Brooklyn/Five Points and the Southbank/San Marco.

Furthermore, the Mobility Plan's selected transportation investments were also tied with supportive land use policies that when combined, ultimately would transform Jacksonville's sprawling sparsely population landscape into a more environmental, economic and financially sustainable form.

Another important part of the priority project list was that mobility money intended for the urban core would not be spent on additional widening of roadways in the urban core.  There, the focus would be placed on bike, ped and transit. 

Probably, the most important aspect of the mobility plan and fee as originally intended was the removal of local politics from actual long range mobility needs and implementation of community-based mobility and land use visioning efforts.

There was a rational nexus behind the whole plan and projects selected.  My concern right now is that this bill basically takes that rational nexus away. Also, with that rational nexus gone, we never generate the funds to construct intended community enhancing legacy projects because funding is now nickeled and dimed to who knows what by every guy who comes up with his own self serving idea.

However, maybe my thoughts are off-base and perhaps this bill is an improvement? Whatever the case, this thing is moving fast. There will be a public hearing at next council meeting on the Tuesday, January 28, 2014.

My question for everyone is do you believe (or not) that this bill as written, creates a loophole that lets Jax politics back in the game?












"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali

Charles Hunter

#1
January 22, 2014, 05:22:14 PM
Voted "No" only because there isn't a "Hell No" option.
"Professionally accepted standards and criteria"?  There are a range of answers you can get using "professionally accepted standards and criteria".  And Lake is right, won't ever get a streetcar or other transit, or pedestrian, or bicycle options.

JeffreyS

#2
January 22, 2014, 05:29:27 PM
Just some good ol boys
wouldn't change if they could
kickin the ass of their constituents
and stealin more than we even thought they would.

YeeHaw
Lenny Smash

JeffreyS

#3
January 22, 2014, 05:32:54 PM
I guess the council would hate to make good rules and follow them because where is the corruption in that.
Lenny Smash

strider

#5
January 22, 2014, 06:30:28 PM
Let's face it, the money people do not worry about changing anything unless they can change it to benefit themselves. And we know that the money people hate the fees, mobility or otherwise.  Then, of course, who does Council listen to, us taxpayers or the few money people?

What's sort of funny - sad is that yesterday while I was downtown pulling a permit, a guy at the zoning desk was commenting on how much work they are doing in St John's county.  A comment was made about how little their fees seems to hurt them and yet Jacksonville bows down to the developers and gives away money.  Frankly, things are doing just fine as they are, changing anything will do nothing but put more money in someone else's pocket and take it out of ours - again.

But everyone remember what happened last time they attacked the mobility fee.  Is anyone strong enough to fight this change? Will ANY of the council members listen to us this time?
"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

spuwho

#6
January 22, 2014, 06:31:44 PM
The issue here is that the proposed change isn't weighed against the merits of the overall plan. This is proposed as a wholesale change that only favors those who are doing the building, not those who can benefit from the fee.

Instead of a great citywide plan which implements fairness in funding, it demoted the funding to a purpose that serves only whom the developer serves.

Poor civic leadership going on here. A prime example of why nothing can get done beyond the vision of the next year or the next election. 

Should be voted down. This offers no benefits to its citizens.

would we let a developer determine how a school should be built? Of course not. The money goes to DCPS and they decide best practice.

strider

#7
January 22, 2014, 06:34:52 PM
If anyone does want to fight this, the first thing is to put in a public records request now in the name of MetroJacksonville ( as Press) for any and all e-mails and other correspondence about this change to and from all council members and the mayors office.  If nothing else, it says we are watching and about to start talking.
"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

L.P. Hovercraft

#8
January 22, 2014, 06:48:20 PM
These crooked f*ckers won't stop this sh*t until the mobility plan is dead, buried, and forgotten, or at least crippled and defanged until it's nothing but a paper tiger and powerless to effect any positive change--like actually getting a working 21st century transit system in Jacksonville.  I swear, they're like zombies or Frankenstein's monster or some other undead creature of the night--they really need to be run out of town with torches and pitchforks!

Letting developers (like king-of-the-strip-mall Sleiman) propose their OWN projects just sounds WAY too much like letting the fox guard the hen house for my liking.  Where's the accountability to the PUBLIC good? 
A: There won't be any accountability, and these developer-proposed "projects" (rubber-stamped by our own enabling city council members looking for donations from these guys for their next election) will just be used as a public teat for further private enrichment...and around and around we go.

It's beyond despicable really, it's sickening.
"Let us not be blind to our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and the means by which those differences can be resolved.  And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity."
--John F. Kennedy, 6/10/1963

jcjohnpaint

#9
January 22, 2014, 07:27:47 PM
The developers and the politicians they own don't want this plan to go.  People might actually like it!  This is why I love Democracy.  I get to vote against these spineless worms :P

JeffreyS

#10
January 22, 2014, 07:47:13 PM
Councilman Bishop, I demand you explain yourself immediately on MetroJacksonville.com. 
Lenny Smash

Bridges

#11
January 22, 2014, 07:59:39 PM
No time to waste.  Have to email council as fast as possible.  They fed the developers once, then fed them again, now they're back for more.

We were told that this was it the last time.  We must see "OBVIOUS" improvement.  Absolute horseshit.  I'd say I was shocked, but you could see this train "sprawled automobile development" coming from a thousand miles away. 

So I said to him: Arthur, Artie come on, why does the salesman have to die? Change the title; The life of a salesman. That's what people want to see.

vicupstate

#14
January 22, 2014, 08:51:57 PM
Sounds like a streetcar project can be substituted with a highway 'flyover' project.... or am I missing something?   

"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 ... 8
User actions