Jackson Square Controversy Brewing

[hound dog]

P.S.  As I understand it, Jackson Square is privately backed, and is receiving no federal dollars for construction.  They hope to convert from apartments to condos several years down the line.  I'm rooting for that scenario, but that's leaving a lot to chance.  And it doesn't preclude HUD conversion 8 years after it's been built.  Just because the feds aren't on board now doesn't mean they won't be later.

[thelakelander]

P.S.  As I understand it, Jackson Square is privately backed, and is receiving no federal dollars for construction.  They hope to convert from apartments to condos several years down the line.  I'm rooting for that scenario, but that's leaving a lot to chance.  And it doesn't preclude HUD conversion 8 years after it's been built.  Just because the feds aren't on board now doesn't mean they won't be later.

What type of HUD housing comes with multiple private swimming pools, multiple parking garages and 350,000 square feet of office/retail space?  The investment it would take to get something like this off the ground eliminates the possibility of it converting to HUD housing.  The land would sit vacant before that happens.

[thelakelander]

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?

Good point.  The commuter rail study does not recommend a station being added at Jackson Square.  However, the station locations identified so far are only being done so to generate ridership numbers.  There's nothing stopping a potential system from having a station at Emerson AND Jackson Square (assuming its built).  Nevertheless, there should be some commitment from JTA regarding mass transit coming into the area.  I assume the commitment right now is BRT, not commuter rail.

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.

They have 17.31 acres.  That's a lot of land for a vertical project.  The site is ideal for a project of this magnitude.

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.

Retail generates more traffic then residential.  Going 50/50 would increase the proposed amount of traffic.  There are other ways to meet the middle ground, then reducing components that may end up in the development becoming unfeasible.

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.

I'm torn on this one.  On one end, I see how closing the crossing can be a negative for automobile traffic movement.  However, closing it benefits the effort to bring commuter rail to this corridor.  As for River Oaks residents walking to this development (someone mentioned this in an earlier post), that brings just as much liability to FEC as the existing crossing does (unless a pedestrian overpass is constructed).

[thelakelander]

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.

Assuming the crossing is closed, does having a restriction in off-street parking even matter?  Its well known that our current zoning laws require more parking than actually needed.  This defeats the purposes of having a TOD. Besides, most vibrant urban areas take advantage of on-street parking.  A closed River Oaks (east of the tracks) offers the opportunity for existing public infrastructure to be used for excess parking.

[midnightblackrx]

Civil - Interesting article and interesting point.  It is a valid question and I would not be satisfied if I lived in the area and it were not addressed. 

I have seen areas though, such the Gateway Project in Columbus, OH that have transformed crack-ridden areas into attractive residential and commercial destinations.

[aceman]

First of all I didn't say it was federally funded. I just asked the question. Also, if you read the post traffic is not my only concern. As I live within 1/4 mile of this proposed project, crime is also a concern. Next, I do understand the lack of a grocery store. I really could care less about having other retail as Lakewood and Riverside are within a 5 minute drive. Now lets get to the real point of your comment. Do you truely believe that tgis will be upscale. Allow me to take you for a walk down Philips. Immediately south on the left is federally subsidized housing. I guess the government will evict all tenant's in lieu of this project. Then we stroll alittle further to the road that leads to Douglas Anderson. This is a very low income neighborhood. I guess they will be asked to relocate. Then further down on the right, we have the juvenile detention facility, encased in barbed wire. I guess the city will jump on relocating this also. Then, of course on the left, we have the adult only motel. I am sure that, when family members come in town for holidays to catch up with other family members living in this upscale development, they will have a close place to stay. Go a little further down and on thright we have another transient motel, albeit newly painted. The we have Emerson, gotta love Sable Palms subsidized housing to the right and to the left you have Wakko's. I heard they have a great lunch special. I can keep going on and on but if you think that people will do a drive by and pay top dollar for an upscale in this neighborhood, when maybe 10 years down the road it may be cleaned up a little, your crazy. They know this.  Plus If someone was going to pay top dollar, why wouldn't they buy into one af the several units available on the river? The reason they stopped construction on the East San Marco development is because of the glut in high end condos and apartments, so your saying that someone is going against the grain and is smarter than Regency and St. Joe. OK. Besides, just out of curiousity, I am a developer. I have lived in this neighborhood and seen its growth. What is your experience?

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?

[hound dog]

Lakelander, good points.  Thanks for the constructive dialog!

[cline]

I can keep going on and on but if you think that people will do a drive by and pay top dollar for an upscale in this neighborhood, when maybe 10 years down the road it may be cleaned up a little, your crazy. They know this.  Plus If someone was going to pay top dollar, why wouldn't they buy into one af the several units available on the river? The reason they stopped construction on the East San Marco development is because of the glut in high end condos and apartments, so your saying that someone is going against the grain and is smarter than Regency and St. Joe. OK.

As was mentioned by a previous poster, revitalization has to start somewhere.  You mention that in 10 years the  road might be cleaned up a little.  How can this happen if new projects can never get off the ground?  Should the land just remain an abandoned lot?  That's not going to start any revitalization.

Perhaps the developer should just scrap this project and build another strip joint or seedy motel.  That way it would fit in with the current fabric of Philips Highway.  Why even try to make a change for the better, right?

[JeffreyS]

The question of can this area be improved easily with development is a no brainer.  Lets see St. Nicholas, the south bank and FREAKIN San Marco are on it's borders.  I just do not understand the keep it pristine for the prostitutes plan of preserving quality of life and home values. So people who rent apartments are worse than hookers, drug dealers, abandoned properties and seedy motels.  At least the traffic argument makes sense and should be addressed but this fear that the developers will drag Phillips highway down is ridiculous.

[David]

This is only loosely related to the topic, but River Oaks road is the epitome of the "wrong side of the tracks" cliché. I use it on a daily basis to cut from Phillips to Hendricks, the very reason the nearby residents want it closed off.  The transition from down-trodden hooker infested slum to lovely historic tree lined neighborhood is instantaneous! I mean BAM as soon as you cross the tracks it's noticeable. You'd think they would have wanted  it already closed off in the past just to separate their neighborhood from the seedy Phillips corridor.

Also, didn't the residents of River Hills drive at Univ & Atlantic have a similar push years ago to block their street off for the same reason?



I'm not sure if they were successful with the push to close the road and if they were, i'm curious if the traffic calming benefits was really worth it.

[thelakelander]

Lakelander, good points.  Thanks for the constructive dialog!

No problem.  I believe everyone having constructive dialog is a sound way to come up and implement solutions that make all parties winners in the end.

[David]

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.
 

That's exactly what I think.

Ok, just from a layman's point of view- if they are successful in closing this road off, like you said that would push traffic south down to St Augustine road with various connections to Hendricks, (Lorimier, Dunsford, Kingswood etc) So what would stop the residents along these streets from pushing for a similar road closure? Seems like it would have a dominio effect and make traffic worse for the surrounding streets, but like I said, i'm not an transportation engineer. I'm just giving an example of the alternate routes i'd take as a motorist.

[thelakelander]

First of all I didn't say it was federally funded. I just asked the question. Also, if you read the post traffic is not my only concern. As I live within 1/4 mile of this proposed project, crime is also a concern. Next, I do understand the lack of a grocery store. I really could care less about having other retail as Lakewood and Riverside are within a 5 minute drive. Now lets get to the real point of your comment. Do you truely believe that tgis will be upscale. Allow me to take you for a walk down Philips. Immediately south on the left is federally subsidized housing. I guess the government will evict all tenant's in lieu of this project. Then we stroll alittle further to the road that leads to Douglas Anderson. This is a very low income neighborhood. I guess they will be asked to relocate.

Check out Channelside (Tampa), Columbia Heights (DC), the Saltillo District (Austin).  All of these are examples of shady areas of town, once in worse shape than Philips, that have turned around with the help of transit oriented developments.  There's too many successful examples out there to believe that this can't be done.......if carried out right.

Then further down on the right, we have the juvenile detention facility, encased in barbed wire. I guess the city will jump on relocating this also. Then, of course on the left, we have the adult only motel. I am sure that, when family members come in town for holidays to catch up with other family members living in this upscale development, they will have a close place to stay. Go a little further down and on thright we have another transient motel, albeit newly painted. The we have Emerson, gotta love Sable Palms subsidized housing to the right and to the left you have Wakko's. I heard they have a great lunch special. I can keep going on and on but if you think that people will do a drive by and pay top dollar for an upscale in this neighborhood, when maybe 10 years down the road it may be cleaned up a little, your crazy. They know this.

Typically, a development goes in that appeals to a market rate (not luxury) crowd.  That project exposes the area's potential and then slum lords sell their blighted properties to make a profit.  New projects take over those, while others are renovated and over time the entire district has changed.  In some areas, this process can happen fairly quickly (within 5 to 10 years).  Anyway, I don't think Philips will become Ponte Vedra anytime soon.  But it can become a sustainable urban working class neighborhood and commercial corridor for San Marco and the surrounding Inner Southside neighborhoods.  That would be a major plus for everyone.

Plus If someone was going to pay top dollar, why wouldn't they buy into one af the several units available on the river? The reason they stopped construction on the East San Marco development is because of the glut in high end condos and apartments, so your saying that someone is going against the grain and is smarter than Regency and St. Joe. OK.

East San Marco stopped because the condo market (not rental) went downhill.  However, I've heard from friends in the industry that it may be getting ready to get started again as apartments instead of condos.

Besides, just out of curiousity, I am a developer. I have lived in this neighborhood and seen its growth. What is your experience?

Development, Real Estate, Architecture and Land Planning.  My opinion has always been that Jacksonville is about ten years behind most of its peer cities in catching on and embracing the trends.  This style of development has been highly successful in similar sized communities for a long time now.  Once we catch on and accept them, they'll be highly successful here as well.  If anyone is smart and has a little extra cash to burn, now is a good time to invest in surrounding property along the Philips Highway corridor.

[southerngirl]

Anyone know why the developer is focused on a River Oaks entrance and stating in their PUD that there will be NO entrance to the development from the Perry/Mitchell side?  There are far fewer homes on that side of the development -- it borders the railroad and FirstStar has bought up many of the others.

Why don't they create their second entrance on THAT side -- which connects directly to Atlantic?

[thelakelander]

I noticed that on the plan.  I also wonder why these streets are not connected.  If community integration is a key, the development would be better integrated into the community if it were directly connected to streets surrounding it on all sides.

FDOT is also planning to rebuild the nearby I-95 interchange.  I wonder how that design will affect the small residential neighborhood to the north?