Metro Jacksonville Rail Plan Already Spurring Development?

[tufsu1]

Agreed...Glenwood Park may be the best urban version of "new urbanism" I have seen yet...I drove through there last year....architectural styles fit in and the street grid has even been connected to the surrounding neighborhood...unfortunately, it is quite expensive!

I have not seen this area yet. How close is the Inman Park/Reynoldstown Station to this location? (if you know) seems to me the one in Jax would be better than this, They will have a Skyway Station right at the front/back doors right?

pretty much just across I-20 from the Inman Park area...so probably about 1 mile

[tufsu1]

Can I just quickly insert a brief reality check on Jackson Sq vs. the lovely places you guys are showing/talking about in ATL and Orlando:

This development will mainly be 900 APARTMENTS.  Not lovely townhouses/condos like the Atlanta. In the PUD as it exists today, they're asking for a 90/10 split -- 90% apartments, 10% retail.   With that math -- this will ALL be about the apartments.

And they'll be $700/month apartments at that. And, they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

All of the project depictions make it quite clear these will not be low-rent apts....the only way to fit 900 on the site is to provide structured parking....that inflates the cost of the units alone!

Plus...what are you so scared of...as I pointed out a few posts back, everyone of us has probably lived in an apt. at some point in time.

[Joe]

^ I think it's really damn obvious what they are actually scared of. I just don't want to open that can of worms by saying it.

[cline]

Can I just quickly insert a brief reality check on Jackson Sq vs. the lovely places you guys are showing/talking about in ATL and Orlando:

This development will mainly be 900 APARTMENTS.  Not lovely townhouses/condos like the Atlanta. In the PUD as it exists today, they're asking for a 90/10 split -- 90% apartments, 10% retail.   With that math -- this will ALL be about the apartments.

And they'll be $700/month apartments at that. And, they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

It is refreshing to see a project like this that will be affordable to the average person.  Many of the projects mentioned previously, while very good, are not reasonably affordable for the average person.  Just because the project consists of apartments rather than "lovely townhomes" isn't a bad thing.  Are you insinuating that the Philips HIghway area is not able to be revitalized?

[thelakelander]

^ I think it's really damn obvious what they are actually scared of. I just don't want to open that can of worms by saying it.

Everything is bound to come out sooner or later.  I believe the first public hearing on the rezoning is coming up soon.  We're also going to feature this subject as tomorrow's front page article.

[southerngirl]

Since the PUD was so "thin" and lacking in details, nobody really knows what this thing will become, which rightfully explains why the surrounding neighborhoods are worried and want answers. We've all driven by the monstrosity that was crammed into the University/Atlantic area and, in protecting our home values (which are hurting enough already, thanks), are wary of the same thing happening here.

The neighbors just want the impact, which will be felt all over these small, single-family, bungalow homes, to be considered.  We have been here, establishing and supporting the "urban core" for years and just wish that there was some respect for that vs. what we're hearing from the developers and many of you here: "This is good for Jacksonville and will fix Philips Hwy, so just deal with it."  That's not "community."

Show me the Transit piece installed and working, show me the clean up of the rest of Philips Hwy between 95 and Emerson, and then maybe I'll believe that we're not about to have to live in the shadow of 900 un-rented apartments and buses and more rail traffic from commuter rail making dangerous crossings and streets like River Oaks even more dangerous.

Why does our little neighborhood have to be the incubator without our being asked/included/considered?

That's all I'm saying, guys.

[Coolyfett]

Can I just quickly insert a brief reality check on Jackson Sq vs. the lovely places you guys are showing/talking about in ATL and Orlando:

This development will mainly be 900 APARTMENTS.  Not lovely townhouses/condos like the Atlanta. In the PUD as it exists today, they're asking for a 90/10 split -- 90% apartments, 10% retail.   With that math -- this will ALL be about the apartments.

And they'll be $700/month apartments at that. And, they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

700$ is low rent!?!?!? I better move then! Anywho if the Skyway goes there as intended the price may go up a couple hundred.

[Coolyfett]

^ I think it's really damn obvious what they are actually scared of. I just don't want to open that can of worms by saying it.

Yea I hear ya, They are going through the same thing in Atlanta. Maybe thats why republicans hate trains so much lol.

[JeffreyS]

Can I just quickly insert a brief reality check on Jackson Sq vs. the lovely places you guys are showing/talking about in ATL and Orlando:

This development will mainly be 900 APARTMENTS.  Not lovely townhouses/condos like the Atlanta. In the PUD as it exists today, they're asking for a 90/10 split -- 90% apartments, 10% retail.   With that math -- this will ALL be about the apartments.

And they'll be $700/month apartments at that. And, they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

I think these are very reasonable concerns.  I love the proposal that has been talked about here but with the current hosing market residents need to be concerned with what developers are doing. 

Clearly Southerngirl has made up her mind in advance that this will be a negative impact development. I understand that change scares people all the time. That does not mean anyone should decide in advance that this project will be all that we hope.   

they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

Yes look out for the worst case scenario but if you choose to live in a core neighborhood of a growing city you should probably consider there will be infill.

[thelakelander]

Great points, Southerngirl.  With the public hearings coming up, this will be the opportunity to iron out these issues to ensure the the development has a positive impact with the surrounding community.  

The site is currently zoned CCG-2.  Here's a list of what can go up on this site right now, regardless of what currently surrounds it.

V.   Commercial Community/General-2 (CCG-2) District.    
(a)   Permitted uses and structures.    
(1)   Commercial Retail Sales and Service Establishments
(2)   Retail sales of new or used automobiles, trucks and tractors, mobile homes, boats, pawnshops subject to Part 4, automotive vehicle parts (but not automobile wrecking yards, junkyards or scrap processing yards), heavy machinery and equipment, dairy supplies, feed, fertilizer, plant nurseries, lumber and building supplies and similar products.
(3)   Service stations, truck stops, car wash, major automotive repair, car or truck rental, restaurants, laundromat or dry cleaners, veterinarians, animal boarding kennels meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4, pest control, carpenter or cabinet shops, home equipment rentals, job printing or newspapers, radio or television offices and studios, blood donor stations and similar uses.
(4)   Commercial, recreational and entertainment facilities such as carnivals or circuses, theaters (including open-air theaters), skating rinks, athletic complexes, arenas, auditoriums, convention centers, go-cart tracks, driving ranges, indoor and outdoor facilities operated by a licensed pari-mutuel permitholder, and similar uses.
(5)   Fruit, vegetable, poultry or fish markets.
(6)   All types of professional and business offices.
(7)   All establishment or facility which includes the retail sale and service of all alcoholic beverages including liquor, beer or wine for off-premises consumption and on-premises consumption in conjunction with the service of food which is ordered from a menu and prepared or served for pay for consumption on premises.
(8 )   Small scale operations including wholesaling, warehousing, storage, distributorship business where the total operation does not require more than 10,000 square feet of floor space, no vehicle is used in excess of one and one-half ton capacity, all merchandise is stored within an enclosed building and no heavy machinery or manufacturing is located on the premises.
(9)   Hotels and motels.
(10)   Day care centers and care centers meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4.
(11)   Hospital, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, group care homes, housing for the elderly or orphans and similar uses.
(12)   Boatyards.
(13)   Racetracks for animals or vehicles.
(14)   Adult entertainment.
(15)   Light manufacturing, processing (including food processing but not slaughterhouse), packaging or fabricating.
(16)   Off-street commercial parking lots meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4.
(17)   Retail outlets for sale of used wearing apparel, toys, books, luggage, jewelry, cameras, sporting goods, home furnishing and appliances, furniture and similar uses.
(18)   Recycling collection points meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4.
(19)   Essential services, including water, sewer, gas, telephone, radio, television and electric, meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4.
(20)   Private clubs.
(21)   Churches, including a rectory or similar use.
(22)   Personal property storage establishments meeting the performance standards and development criteria set forth in Part 4.
(23)   Vocational, trade and business schools.
(24)   Banks, including drive-thru tellers.
(25)   Dancing entertainment establishments not serving alcohol. This provision shall not supersede any other approvals or requirements for such use found elsewhere in this Chapter or elsewhere in the Ordinance Code.

http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp?pid=12174&sid=9

Nearby residents should view this as a process to create a compatible development.  Unfortunately, some sound like they want to kill it instead attempting to make sure its fully integrated.  As long as both sides are willing to work together, this is the opportunity to improve the entire area.  

[JeffreyS]

^ I think it's really damn obvious what they are actually scared of. I just don't want to open that can of worms by saying it.

Yea I hear ya, They are going through the same thing in Atlanta. Maybe thats why republicans hate trains so much lol.

Yes and they tried to restrict MARTA to the poorest neighborhoods only to miss out on the increased property values MARTA brought with it.

[tufsu1]

southerngirl....you ask that the transit be installed and working and that all of Phillips Hwy. be revitalized before you agree to allow this development....how would that be posible...you have to start somewhere....this type of project is designed to support/encourage transit and could become a catalyst for other redevelopment.

The PUD is somewhat thin, but it does include a site plan which clearly shows what the project is envisioned to be...any significant deviation from that later would require a resubmittal.

the fact is, assuming this development is done right, home values in the area will likely increase (case studies all over prove that)....using your logic, I suppose that any increases in home values that can be attributed to Jackson Square should be turned over to the developer!

[thelakelander]

they're ON PHILIPS HWY.  Not in "San Marco."  They will be Philips Highway low-rent apartments.

This should be seen as a great thing.  San Marco does not need any help in becoming a vibrant community.  It already is.  Its now time to focus on spreading that vibrancy.  Philips needs a catalyst and this development may be what's needed.  The focus needs to be on working to properly integrate and fill in what's missing (in response to the PUD application).  If this is done, the development will be a 100% asset to the River Oaks community.

[southerngirl]

I sincerely hope all of you who believe this will be done right are right.

As far as the neighborhood having made up its mind -- while there does seem to be a pretty unified voice about traffic impact (on River Oaks, Lorimier, Dunsford), there's certainly not a clear majority that San Marco is completely against the development going in there. But just like if they were putting the BIGGEST DEVELOPMENT IN JAX in your neighborhood, you'd want to have some input and be heard.  That's what the River Oaks/San Marco "community" is doing.  Asking to be heard.

Again, if the developer and his legal representation had listened more to the individual neighbors and been honest about traffic impact (with a serious face, they told the neighborhood that their traffic studies indicated there would only be an additional 50 cars/day on River Oaks Road -- 900 apartments +  retail/commercial and only 50 cars a day, right), this would probably not be as snarly as it is.

Instead of catching more flies with honey, their approach appears to have been to swat them away again and again. There's still time for them to do the right thing -- and the neighborhood is hopeful they will.

[thelakelander]

I sincerely hope all of you who believe this will be done right are right.

Imo, it can only be done right, if the developer, city and residents are willing to sit down together and work to create a viable plan that alleviates everyone's concerns.

Again, if the developer and his legal representation had listened more to the individual neighbors and been honest about traffic impact (with a serious face, they told the neighborhood that their traffic studies indicated there would only be an additional 50 cars/day on River Oaks Road -- 900 apartments +  retail/commercial and only 50 cars a day, right), this would probably not be as snarly as it is.

What is the traffic impact?  I wasn't aware that one had been done.  What would be the result if the connection between the development and River Oaks Road was shifted to St. Augustine Road instead?

Instead of catching more flies with honey, their approach appears to have been to swat them away again and again. There's still time for them to do the right thing -- and the neighborhood is hopeful they will.

Speaking from experience in the development field, its pretty easy to catch flies with honey.  Many times neighbors just want to be heard and a part of the planning process.  When this is done, these projects normally turn out better and are easily approved because they have gained the community's support.  I hope that happens here.  Philips Highway could really benefit from a positive shot in the arm.