Jackson Square Controversy Brewing

[southerngirl]

I can't really see why residents on River Oaks would want the access to be blocked across the rail lines???

Suppose this project does lift off the ground and there are retail stores popping up along Philips, do they really want to drive North to Atlantic cross over and get to Philips?  They may be regretting that in the future if they do succeed in shutting down access.

I hope this project does go through...as long as the area doesn't clean up to the point where it's no longer entertaining to drive along Philips Hwy afterwork.

We would do what you people want us to -- WE WOULD WALK!!!

[aceman]

Being a San Marco resident of 35 years, I am trying to understand the benefit. For one thing: Is the ferderally subsidized housing?, Since there will be 950 units, that means, at least over 1,900 temporary residents, which means probably over 1,000 vehicles. That is a huge impact on that small corridor., Does everybody realize that the Skyway is not city funded but federally funded since it's inception?, If the feds have not extended so far, what makes you think they will now? They havent even extended it to the stadium. And for the retail, which is my business, until it's built, anything can change even after initial planning approval. They show an electronics store. You think Best Buy. It will probably be a Save-a-Lot. You see an office supply and think Ofice Depot. It will probably be some sort of mega pawn shop. Thank God the FDOT has access approval. I'm not trying to stereo-type, I'm just saying that this project has the potential to do more harm than good. And I'm sure that they will be asking for some sort of city assistance, being loans, real estate tax deferment, etc. The city and taxpayers got burned with the shipyards, do you think that the city and tax payers can't get burned again.

[BridgeTroll]

What do the residents of San Marco want there?  All would agree that what is/was there was very rundown.  I am sure we do not need another strip mall complete with Taco Bell and McDonalds...

[hound dog]

Yup, River Oaks Road clearly doesn't have the capacity to handle any more traffic.  This traffic would come from a chunk of the 900+ residents using it as a short cut to Hendricks (especially those with kids at Hendricks elementary), and retail-generated traffic from San Marco.  It's already everybody's favorite short-cut, and the main arteries can handle the diversion of its closure. Is anyone proposing that a residential street take pressure off of 4-lane roads like Atlantic?

Residents would be more likely favor the development if:

-direct access to River Oaks Road via Summerall were eliminated.  This would take some short-cut pressure off the street.

-sufficient on-site parking were required. The PUD application for Jackson Square calls for only half the parking capacity required by zoning laws.  This creates an incentive for people to park on side streets, especially River Oaks Road.

-JTA makes contracts and commitments for a light rail/BRT station at Jackson Square.  Current JTA studies recommend Emerson Street over Jackson Square for a station because it has everything River Oaks doesn't: a multi-lane east/west corridor, existing commuter parking, & an improved rail crossing.  If Jackson Square gets passed over for a transit station, you can bet there'll be a lot more cars going down River Oaks Road.

-residential units were reduced by half or two-thirds the current number.  Any way you slice it, more residents=more traffic. 900 units=a lot of traffic.

See, River Oaks Road is already pedestrian friendly.  It's a 10-minute walk to San Marco Square.  It's already transit friendly; you can hop on the bus at Hendricks or Phillips.  It's not like it's a swanky neighborhood; it's solid working/middle class.  I can understand why residents wouldn't want their quality of life to go south in the name of what they already have.

I'm all in favor of infill/transit-oriented/pedestrian-friendly development, as long as it's proportional, sensitive to its surroundings, and safe from a traffic angle.  TOD's are meant to reduce traffic, not increase it.

Thanks for readin'.

[BridgeTroll]

What do the residents of San Marco want there?  All would agree that what is/was there was very rundown.  I am sure we do not need another strip mall complete with Taco Bell and McDonalds...

My apologies... I meant the side facing Phillips... NOT the surrounding homeowners...

[Coolyfett]

That's the negative in closing the crossing.  Grids typically work better than Cul-de-sacs.  River Oaks residents will most likely end up driving to the retail shops (one site plan shows a pharmacy like a Walgreens/CVS) and restaurants that this center will offer.  This means they'll most likely use the residential streets just to the south that connect San Jose Blvd. with St. Augustine Road.  So the negative impact of going to an arterial based suburban road layout is you end up increasing traffic on a few similar streets, to reduce traffic on one.  By keeping all streets open, you spread out traffic on several streets because drivers (River Oaks drivers included) have multiple access points to reach various destinations.

Lake is on point with this. Perfect example is College, Post, Forbes, Park, Riverside Ave during rush hour. When they were redoing Park Street, Post & College got packed more then they normally did. I don't think closing that rail crossing is a good idea.

[tufsu1]

pictures included here...

First is River Oaks looking WEST (toward traffic light @ Hendricks)

Second pic is River Oaks looking EAST (towards RR tracks)

omg...there is ONE car moving down the road...the others appear to be parked!

[tufsu1]

I can't really see why residents on River Oaks would want the access to be blocked across the rail lines???

Suppose this project does lift off the ground and there are retail stores popping up along Philips, do they really want to drive North to Atlantic cross over and get to Philips?  They may be regretting that in the future if they do succeed in shutting down access.

I hope this project does go through...as long as the area doesn't clean up to the point where it's no longer entertaining to drive along Philips Hwy afterwork.

from what I hear, some neighbors also want a massive wall where River Oaks would get closed off...if that gets built, how would you walk to Jackson Square?


We would do what you people want us to -- WE WOULD WALK!!!

[tufsu1]

Being a San Marco resident of 35 years, I am trying to understand the benefit. For one thing: Is the ferderally subsidized housing?, Since there will be 950 units, that means, at least over 1,900 temporary residents, which means probably over 1,000 vehicles. That is a huge impact on that small corridor., Does everybody realize that the Skyway is not city funded but federally funded since it's inception?, If the feds have not extended so far, what makes you think they will now? They havent even extended it to the stadium. And for the retail, which is my business, until it's built, anything can change even after initial planning approval. They show an electronics store. You think Best Buy. It will probably be a Save-a-Lot. You see an office supply and think Ofice Depot. It will probably be some sort of mega pawn shop. Thank God the FDOT has access approval. I'm not trying to stereo-type, I'm just saying that this project has the potential to do more harm than good. And I'm sure that they will be asking for some sort of city assistance, being loans, real estate tax deferment, etc. The city and taxpayers got burned with the shipyards, do you think that the city and tax payers can't get burned again.

I strongly disagree...first off, there is nothing that implies this project is federally subsidized housing...it will likely be fairly upscale, taking advantage of the proximity to Downtown, Southbank, San Marco, and Riverside....if traffic was your only real concern, you would not have even mentioned the potential of "lower class" people living there.

Since you are a resident of San Marco you should clearly understand the lack of basic retail in the area...I mean the closest grocery stores are Publix at University/St. Augustine and Winn Dixie at University/Hendricks...so what makes you think that things like a grocery store, Best Buy, and Office Depot can't happen?

[tufsu1]

THIS JUST IN...

City Council just heard public comment on this project....but they have agreed to re-open the comment period at the 9/9 meeting ( 2 weeks)

The project approval timeline will also have a 4 week extension in order to allow more coordinatoion between the developer, the neighborhood, and City staff.

[southerngirl]

pictures included here...

First is River Oaks looking WEST (toward traffic light @ Hendricks)

Second pic is River Oaks looking EAST (towards RR tracks)

omg...there is ONE car moving down the road...the others appear to be parked!

EXACTLY!  When there are cars parked on both sides of River Oaks -- the street CANNOT handle two lanes of traffic.   The cars in these shots on the sides of the road ARE PARKED!  And only one car can get down it. 

NOW, imagine that same street, PLUS Jackson Sq. traffic, PLUS the speed bumps some people think will solve the problem. Oh yeah -- a train  -- or MANY MORE TRAINS -- are coming.  What do you do???

[tufsu1]

pictures included here...

First is River Oaks looking WEST (toward traffic light @ Hendricks)

Second pic is River Oaks looking EAST (towards RR tracks)

omg...there is ONE car moving down the road...the others appear to be parked!

EXACTLY!  When there are cars parked on both sides of River Oaks -- the street CANNOT handle two lanes of traffic.   The cars in these shots on the sides of the road ARE PARKED!  And only one car can get down it. 

NOW, imagine that same street, PLUS Jackson Sq. traffic, PLUS the speed bumps some people think will solve the problem. Oh yeah -- a train  -- or MANY MORE TRAINS -- are coming.  What do you do???

simple...the same thing done in most places....either yield (which you all probably do now)...or if its really an issue, restrict on-street parking to one side of the road.

[civil42806]

I'm sorry but whenever you see this type of plan its always important to ask if the housing would be available for section 8 subsides.   The atlantic ran a great story on memphis and the effects of section 8 dispersal

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

Having lived in a development that was destroyed by section 8 housing, its a question that has to be asked.

[avonjax]

I think the real issue here is everyone says they encourage and want to see projects like these, but not in their neighborhoods....
That section of San Marco on Philips has been a slum for years and unless something like this kind of developement happens it will be a slum for the next 50 years.
Even the location leads me to think it will be a pretty decent project.
And as for all the cars parked on River Oaks, how can moderate size houses have so many cars anyway?
I live on a similar street in Avondale and there are 3 or 4 cars per house which means 2 of them have to be parked on the street. And most of the houses on my street are between 1000 to maybe 1400 sq ft with 2 to 3 bedrooms....
It's a giant pain to back out of your driveway and sometimes  cars gets backed into or sideswiped. BUT on the plus side most people avoid my street because you HAVE to drive slowly to navigate....
So River Oaks could be bumper cars or not nearly as bad as you might think. At least you can be sure people probably won't be able to speed through.....

[hound dog]

First: If River Oaks is like my street, it gets a lot of residential services: delivery trucks, yard services, cable trucks, the works.  That's where on-street parking cannot be fixed by residents just parking in their driveways.

Second: Who wouldn't love, LOVE to have a transit oriented development in their neighborhood.  Hop a train downtown, or to St. Augustine.  But, will JTA build light rail?  And will they build a station at Jackson Square?  Will there be transit?

Third: Quality retail would be TERRIFIC.  I hear they need a grocery store.

BUT...

900 apartments? on 17 acres? 50+ units per acre? 900+ cars and only half the parking? 90 foot towers?

That's just too BIG.  And it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to fit that on the space. What nobody here gets is that Jackson Square has applied for waivers on ALL RESTRICTIONS so they can build whatever they want if their pie in the sky doesn't bake.  Their zoning application bears NO RESEMBLANCE to the lovely renderings you see above.

So scale back the residential portion.  Get a 50/50 residential/retail ratio. Provide sufficient parking ON SITE.  Limit height to 3 or 4 stories.  Get a contract with JTA and guarantee the transit.  It can't be all or nothing, folks; we've got to find a middle ground.  Middle ground makes for livable neighborhoods.

If River Oaks wants to close their crossing and miss out on a good thing, let 'em.  But they'd better get behind speed bumps on their parallel streets.  They'd owe it to their neighbors.