A Tour of Bartram Park

[copperfiend]

Where's the park?

[thelakelander]

Its not the buyers, its the policy makers and it has little to do with living in the urban core.  We're raping the natural beauty of our community and straining our infrastructure and resources in the process.  Even with bad architecture, we can create a better community by making sure our zoning and land use requirements demand better results.

I can agree with that to an extent.  Unfortunately, policy makers are often directed by elected officials who are influenced by citizens (consumers as well as developers).  If individuals are telling elected officials this is what they want then the policies will reflect that.

The individuals telling elected officials what they want in policies aren't the ones buying and living in these types of developments.  The general public, at least in most the community meetings I've sat in over the last few years, want the type of things that make the community more sustainable. 

Most may not know how to get there, but if asked, they can tell you what they want or wish.  However, I will admit that local politics play a huge role in the way or policies are enforced and carried out.  Unfortunately, that's going to have to change if we want a better community.

[EP]

I definitely blame the policy makers.  Suburban land development codes require this type of development.  Its amazing how neighborhoods like Riverside and Springfield were created before zoning.  I can't blame Jacksonville's planning department because the City Council rarely listens to their recommendations anyways.

[thelakelander]

I teach one day a week down at SJRCC, and I have to drive past this going to and coming home.  I want to vomit each time.  Seeing places like this makes me want to become a tax attorney or something other than an Architect in the state of Florida.  All of these developers should be burned at the stake for shoving this kind of crap down our throats.  It's sickening.

This isn't directed at you so please don't take offense,  but it is aimed at everyone who whines about projects like this after the fact. Unfortunately this is a typical emotional response! and it is an ineffective response.

I don't take this as an offense, but I'll try to respond to some of your points.

is the place nice? I don't think so, is this how I would develop the property, i don't think so. But my money wasn't involved so I  or any other "outsiders' don't have too much of a say in the style of the development. (before you say wrong read on)

Your money is indirectly involved.  When eventually built out over 10,000 residents will have no choice but to exit out at two major stop lights.  When congestion occurs on the nearby streets, it will be up to John Q. Taxpayer to ultimately pay for the expansion of adjacent roads.  So to a degree, we're all "insiders".

The developer feels that this type of development will provide the best return on his investment, in this country people are still allowed to maximize their profit potential, within the boundaries of the laws.

The developer's desire to provide the best return on his investment is fine and is one that we all should have.  However, the failure occurs with the way our law is written.  We start off on the wrong path, so its difficult to expect improvement.  There are things that we can change in the law that would provide a higher return for the developer and create a better community in the long run.  Unfortunately, for whatever reason, we haven't gotten there yet.

The proper way to attack projects like this is speak up and have input before they sprout up, people need to get involved with projects like this in the planning stages and from what little I know about how the game is played here in NE FLA I can see that there is little to no oversight or public participation during the planning stages of most projects.

Public participation doesn't mean squat if the zoning policy doesn't back you up.  

Doesn't Duval have a planning board, or some other development oversight board? if they do (and I am certain that there is some form of board) doesn't the board hold hearings regarding their planning/zoning and land use decisions? If they do hold hearings (and I am sure that they do) that is the time for "outsiders" ie: the public to have their say as to the location, design, impact, density and almost any other facet of any proposed development. Once the place is built any complaining is just a waste of energy.

The time for the public to have their say is in the community visioning processes.  If the policy can be improved early on, if will enhance nearly all future developments coming online.  Also, taking note of the negatives of a completed development isn't a waste of energy.  Its the best way to avoid making similar mistakes and coming up with better options in the future.

Are you tired of congestion, tired of more strip malls? tired of sprawl? learn how to take on the developers in their own venues and work for reasonable development or one day you'll wake up and find JAX looking like NJ

Well NJ does have rail......just kidding .  Seriously though, if you're tired of crap, demand better.  Its easier to change things at a public level when there is a public outcry.  Expect more of the same if everyone keeps their complaints to themselves.

[Matt]

yikes...does anyone else find these kinds of places creepy?

[copperfiend]

yikes...does anyone else find these kinds of places creepy?

How are they creepy?

[thelakelander]

I don't find it creepy, because these come a dime a dozen across the country, but it is a wasted opportunity.  Cheap architecture and construction aside, the community would have a completely different atmosphere if connecting interior streets, reduced building setbacks and better mixing in of the recreational and commercial components were incorporated into the plan.

These things sound like a lot, but really they don't cost the developer more than bad layouts do.  However, they make a world of difference in creating a community.

[reednavy]

The shocking part was I saw brick used on some of the buildings!

[Joe]

The developer's desire to provide the best return on his investment is fine and is one that we all should have.  However, the failure occurs with the way our law is written.  We start off on the wrong path, so its difficult to expect improvement.  There are things that we can change in the law that would provide a higher return for the developer and create a better community in the long run.  Unfortunately, for whatever reason, we haven't gotten there yet.

---

Public participation doesn't mean squat if the zoning policy doesn't back you up.  

Thank you for that breath of sanity Lakelander! I wish that our elected officials had the same grasp of the true issues that you do!

These kinds of land use failures are rarely the fault of the developer or consumer. Almost every example of poor land use planning in places like Bartram park can be directly attributed to stupid government regulations. Most developers would be happy to build urban projects at urban densities (they can make more money that way). However, our zoning code, amongst other regulations, explicitly prohibits both urban design and urban density.

Why are Bartram Park's streets so wide and houses so far apart? Our building code demands it - based on absurd and outdated fire safety regulations.

Why is Bartam Park so disconnected, with only a couple access points? DOT traffic engineers purposefully force developers to limit access points. Nonsense "wetlands" regulations often require seemingly arbitrary buffer zones and preservation zones, even at the expense of preserving true contiguous undeveloped land.

The list goes on, and on, and on, and on ...

[Doctor_K]

I don't find it creepy, because these come a dime a dozen across the country, but it is a wasted opportunity.

Not to mince words or disagree with you (because you're absolutely right), but I think it bears noting that developments such as some of these are not just a dime-a-dozen across the country, they're a dime-a-dozen right here in town.  Pulte's developments of Drayton Park on Touchton and one of the Ironwoods on Gate Pkwy West are EXACT replicas of some of the townhouse construction that you've pictured in the article - down to the design details and color palette.

If we're going to be stuck with duplicate construction, at least change the colors to make me believe I'm in a newer, different subdivision than the lackluster one I lived in previously.  Gag.

[thelakelander]

Where's the park?

The wetlands to the west of the development are labeled as public space on the master site plan.  Each apartment/condo/townhouse community also has their own individual amenity center with a clubhouse, pool and tot lot.  I don't know if there there will be any place available for a game of baseball or soccer. 

[Doctor_K]

Yeah!! Whatever happened to the ballfields??  *That's* what's missing from so many similarly 'master-planned' communities!  (y'know, along with all those other important things like gridded streets, setbacks, sense of community...)

[apvbguy]

Yeah!! Whatever happened to the ballfields??  *That's* what's missing from so many similarly 'master-planned' communities!  (y'know, along with all those other important things like gridded streets, setbacks, sense of community...)

where were you with these great questions when the project was in the planning stages?
it's too late to note any deficiencies now, the baby has been born!
next time, if projects like this bother you so much get involved in the planning stages and have your input heard.
The politicians who are on these boards will allow the developers to cut corners and get away with anything if nobody is watching

[cline]

I wish that our elected officials had the same grasp of the true issues that you do!

They are elected by the people.  Change starts at the ballot box.

[TD*]

looks like a decent starter neighborhood. No reason to fret.