A Tour of Bartram Park

[thelakelander]

Philips and Emerson was once known as Miracle Mile, 30 years ago.  Normandy was once as vibrant as Argyle is today.  What happens to this area in 30 years?  Can it stand the test of time?  Riverside, San Marco, San Jose, etc. have held up well, but they had enough character to maintain a sense of place.

[zoo]

Except for a grocery store and a smidge of retail, this community is my version of hell on earth.

[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...)

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

Fair question, dear sir!  The answer to it is, I was not yet living in town when a lot of the 'communities' opening up or nearing completion were first planned/proposed.  However, you can be sure that this serves as the catalyst for me to get on the ball and attempt to be more outspoken for community affairs such as this.  It's definitely stirring me into action.

[cstanbe]

really jacksonville??
let's try to be more backwards in our thinking and development. we have a core. let's exploit it.

[Clem1029]

Alright, I'm going to be honest here...this thread is really infuriating me. The sheer elitism and attitude of "why the hell would anyone want to live in this craptastic setup?" demonstrates not only why folks around here (in general, not absolute) can't get any of their goals accomplished in this town, but why the positions advocated here are actively ignored. When your attitude exudes "we know better than any of these dolts" you're guaranteed to be ignored.

Listen up folks...believe it or not, Bartram Park actually APPEALS to people. I know that might be shocking in this sometimes echo chamber, but it's true. Let's establish my demographic...I'm a young professional (28), engaged to be married next year, and currently in the market for a home once we get married. And I look at the various developments and locations that are advertised around here...and between any of the new lofts downtown, Jackson Square, or just about anything in Arlington, Springfield, etc, etc, Bartram Park is wildly superior in just about every aspect.

I'm in the demographic that the aforementioned alternatives should appeal to, and yet I want nothing to do with them. They're in area of town I want nothing to do with (let alone children down the line), reputations of being unsafe, and significantly longer commutes than the alternative.

I look at Bartram Park, and I see new construction (because you need a strong financial backing and handy thumb to want a significantly older home), with enough amenities in the area, in an area that has a reputation for being relatively safe, with good schools, within a 5 mile drive to my office (7 miles for my fiancee). What wouldn't appeal to me? What does the core have to offer that Bartram Park doesn't? Simply put: nothing.

More importantly, I don't understand why it's a Bartram Park (et al.) vs. the core anyway. I'm not a Jax native, and I've lived most of my life in a city and county where the city isn't the county, and regionalism means cooperation, not domination. Suburban areas should be able to compete with the core, not be dependent on them, or be a "funding alternative" for them. I'm a firm believer in competition, and if you let suburbs actually compete with the urban areas, you get better development in both. Right now, what incentive does the city have to compete against areas like Bartram Park? None whatsoever - the residents are still on the tax rolls, the majority of their jobs are still at various points of the county, and they can still claim new construction success.

Also, another fact to consider is other reasons why normal people want nothing to do with Bartram Park. I've investigated the area, and I'm avoiding purchasing there for a simple reason - I don't want to own a condo/townhouse (note that every photo provided is of some sort of that kind of setup). Myself, like a good number of potential homeowners, want to own a HOME, not a glorified apartment. So people like me (and there's far more of us than you might think) avoid Bartram Park (and in turn, Jackson Square, downtown lofts, and other multi-unit housing) for a completely different reason than the complaints here.

In addition, while I'm completely on-board with the advocated transit positions in this area, there's an honest question that needs to be asked - if the commuter rail plan goes into practice, how does that discourage stuff like Bartram Park? I mean, put a station right over 95 at Phillips there, and for those that don't work on the Southside have an easy shot downtown. I understand the TOD concepts...but slightly removed developments (like Bartram Park) would be encouraged even further, wouldn't they?

At the end of the day, advocates around here need to mention a basic consideration - if someone in my demographic wants to avoid Bartram Park for those reasons, why would I even want to CONSIDER something in the core? What does the core have to offer that various suburban locations don't? I've seen a lot of "promote Jacksonville's culture" posts around here, but there's not much of it actually happening. I mean, in the 3 years I've lived in this town, I can count on two hands (that's being generous...it might really be one, but I'm allowing for something I forgot) why I've been drawn downtown (or to other various "core" points) for just about anything.

Slag Bartram Park (and the like) all you want. But until an actual, comparable, viable alternative in the core is a reality (and not just a glorified pipe dream), then folks like me are going to ignore the core and want considerations like Bartram Park.

[ProjectMaximus]

Clem, I accept your viewpoint and to be clear, I have no planning expertise. So there shouldn't be any perception of pretension from my side. Likewise, I'm probably not qualified to respond the way I am about to, but I'll take a stab anyway.

I think you're missing the point, perhaps just as a few others before you did as well. This obviously isn't a "suburbs vs. the core" argument because the location is invariable. In your frustration, you keep asking what more the core has to offer, but the real question is what more could Bartram Park offer with certain revisions to the master plan? What I believe the article was intending to demonstrate were these possible improvements that could be (or could have been) made to a suburban development. As you say, these are mostly townhouses, so considering that, couldn't some of them have been mixed-use with retail or office space? Could the buildings have been set closer to the street? Could those streets have been gridded, bringing everything into closer proximity?

Maybe you wouldn't like those changes, but more than likely you would. And in any case, these are steps that have proven to make communities more "sustainable." It is true that suburban sprawl has competed directly with urban centers over the last half-century, but the two can certainly coexist. If dense and well-planned suburban areas aren't your thing either, then maybe it is the gated country club you're looking for. And that's cool with me...I lived in one growing up, stay in one when I visit my parents, and perhaps will look to raise a family in one, oh say, at least 8 years from now. But I don't think anyone would take issue with your preferences, in this discussion we're simply trying to find ways to improve future developments that may or may not ultimately appeal to you, but ideally would benefit the quality of life throughout the city. Because these developments can affect everyone, not just those in living in them.

[ProjectMaximus]

Oh, and also about the possibility of commuter rail and how that factors into all of this...I think that if there were to be rail service to the Bartram area and a great demand for it between there and downtown, then that would give even greater importance to proper planning of the neighborhood. As you say, it would make the place more appealing to potential residents, but it would also make the deficiencies that much more glaring.

[thelakelander]

Good answer, ProjectMaximus.  Its definately not a suburb vs. urban core analysis.  The original article is simply a neighborhood photo tour, but most of the discussion following it has been about the desire to see even our suburban areas become more sustainable.

[copperfiend]

Except for a grocery store and a smidge of retail, this community is my version of hell on earth.

If you saw parts of India that I have seen, you would change your mind.

[cline]

Good answer, ProjectMaximus.  Its definately not a suburb vs. urban core analysis.  The original article is simply a neighborhood photo tour, but most of the discussion following it has been about the desire to see even our suburban areas become more sustainable.

If it is sustainability you are after there are other areas in Jacksonville that can be redeveloped (infill) with something like this rather than building on the suburban fringe of Jacksonville.  I hardly think building a large subdivision in the midst of forest and wetlands would ever be considered sustainable even with the addition of a gridded street network and different building setbacks.

[thelakelander]

Cline, when you know better, you strive to do better. 

Even in the burbs, better layouts, connecting streets, etc. will result in reducing the strain on infrastructure, which ultimately saves taxpayer money.

[lindab]

In 2000 when Bartram Park DRI went to the regional council for approval, the developer had worked a deal with the city to purchase the desirable Julington-Durbin wetlands, made up of 2000 acres of wetlands and 600 acres of uplands. The developer wanted this mitigation for wetland impacts to also stand as mitigation for the destruction of over 630 gopher tortoises, an upland tortoise which was found throughout the development. At that time the Fish and Wildlife Commission would give a permit for the entombment or crushing of the tortoises although they were opposing the granting of this permit. The large number of tortoises to be destroyed on this project would make it the largest gopher tortoise destruction in the state. Duval County led the state in numbers of tortoises destroyed.  The irony in the situation is that John Bartram, for whom the development was named, was the first naturalist to describe this animal over 200 years ago.

Over the next year, a lot of negotiations with the regional council, the FWCC, the water management district, Sierra Club, the Gopher Tortoise Council, and others led to an arrangement for the tortoises in the path of the bulldozers They would be moved to the preservation upland acres. This is a very labor intensive effort involving identifying holes where the animals live, setting up bucket traps to catch them when they emerge, checking them for injury and disease and moving them to a new tortoise home. The water management district agreed to burn the tract to make it more suitable habitat for the increased tortoise population. Volunteers as well as paid workers helped to mark the holes and move some of the tortoises.

I think my point is that Florida has been quick to benefit from the economics of construction. We haven't done so well about insisting on the other things. Sustainability should also include such things as energy efficiency, water conservation, and protection of native wildlife and habitat. It should not be cheaper to carve out a large development in our rural areas, forests, wetlands and salt marshes rather than redevelop crumbling suburbs and urban areas.

[ProjectMaximus]

Good background info!

It should not be cheaper to carve out a large development in our rural areas, forests, wetlands and salt marshes rather than redevelop crumbling suburbs and urban areas.

Man, that's so true. Very true.

[cline]

It should not be cheaper to carve out a large development in our rural areas, forests, wetlands and salt marshes rather than redevelop crumbling suburbs and urban areas.

Agreed.  But the sad reality is that it is true.  For example, I just noticed that they have begun clearing trees on the southeast corner of Baymeadows and Southside Blvd in order to put in retail (The Sembler Company).  Currently, there is a large shopping center on the northwest corner of the same intersection.  This center is fairly old and a little run down but would pose some very interesting opportunities for redevelopment in my opinion.  Instead, a bunch of trees are going to be bulldozed so that we can have another (new) shopping center.  We will now have a shopping center on each corner of this intersection.

[thelakelander]

Yeah, I noticed that too.  I always thought that land was pretty wet, but apparently its not wet enough to build on.