Roost Cafe and Coffee shop trying to open on Oak St?

[Sentient]

Perhaps you need to read it again if you did not comprehend the developers point of view in the article.  It may be too much to ask that you raise your level of discourse.

Residents push back against planned restaurant in Riverside

Some Riverside residents are pushing back against a requested change in zoning that would allow a restaurant to open in a vacant building on Oak Street.

The pushback comes after two local developers, JC Demetree and Ted Stein, put forward the possibility of opening a 150-seat restaurant called Roost in the former Deluxe Laundry and Dry Cleaners at 2216 Oak Street. The developers are looking to change the zoning for that building, as well as half of the adjacent De Luxe Launderette building, from a commercial residential and office space to a planned unit development.

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/11/18/residents-push-back-against-planned-restaurant-in.html

Holy smokes....   this reporter is an absolute idiot letting Kevin write an anti development article for her and seeking NO other sources for comment...  like not one direct sourced comment from the developer.

and this Pettway sounds like a complete tool.  such arrogance...  should be allowed just for this alone.

"Kevin Pettway, who lives across the street from the property, said he's concerned about the proximity of the in-the-works restaurant to homes. The restaurant would have 32 outdoor seats in addition to the interior space.

"The primary concern of the community is the fact that the Oak Street corridor between King Street and Margaret Street is vulnerable to commercial encroachment," Pettway said. "Our best use for that property is residences. We actually would love to see something put in there and see that property develop, but we would like to see it develop intelligently."

""It would be fine in a different place," Pettway said. "Many of our neighbors have expressed that if this were a few blocks away, they'd be happy to go there.""

really...  he speaks for the whole community it appears... and will be the arbiter of what constitutes "intelligent" development...  But all is not lost, he would deign to allow it in someone else's backyard...


Hey Kevin... if you are so intelligent why not buy the place and do something with it yourself?

Oh but if I would hit the Mega Millions.  I'd raze that place and put up a 10 story HUD project for you to look at... LOL  Or a methadone clinic, in keeping with the historic "character" of the area...

show me the direct quote from any developer.  can you?

[mtraininjax]

While 150 may be too much, I don't think 80-100 is bad.

Its too much for many to comprehend here, so the short, short version. 60 was the original number of seats, then ROOSTer came back and the chicken wanted 150 instead of 60. So 60 was a done deal, then the owners lied and really wanted a larger number for the same small space.

No one is against development. But a lot of honesty will go a long way.

[jaxjags]

We recently purchased a house in Avondale, and the immediate development around the homes we looked at played a huge factor in our ultimate decision.  If having commercial property across the street is an issue with a renter or buyer, look somewhere else (which is exactly what we did).  People move to riverside for the reason of having establishments such as Roost within walking or biking distance.

Exactly - How do we expect for real connected and walkable neighborhoods to develop like other cities of Washington DC, SF, Phiily,etc.

[jaxjags]

Worse case scenario - they open, the product doesn't fit the 'character' of the neighborhood and they're forced to change the business model or close the doors.  Now the neighborhood has a newly renovated, empty storefront that might open the door for another brave soul to open something that fits the neighborhood a bit better.

Get out of the way and let the market decide if it's a viable business or not.  I think that's the point that some other posters on this site have stated a helluva lot more eloquently than I.

Once the business is in, no entity can "make them change it". The issue is that the business might be perfectly viable, but be awful for the residents on either side of it. Remember, this is a residential character area, not a commercial character area (like Biscotti's or Mellow).

Under your example of free market, I could open a paper mill on the river in Avondale that is financially viable. Don't think anyone would want to live next to that.

BTW, for the record I don't have my mind made up on this one - I want to understand it more. The building is a commercial structure in nature (this would be completely different if someone wanted to turn a house into this restaurant), but it isn't really zoned for this. It's zoned CRO (which an example of a CRO business would be the dry cleaner that used to be in it, or a psychologist's office - I don't remember every use the overlay mentions off the top of my head)

Steve, I work in the pulp and paper industry and the chance of getting the proper environmental permits for a new paper mill ANYWHERE IN THE US is slim to none. So not a very good comparison. LOL

[thelakelander]

Exactly - How do we expect for real connected and walkable neighborhoods to develop like other cities of Washington DC, SF, Phiily,etc.

Forget about it. What we call dense in Jax would be considered a suburb in the cities you just mentioned. Unless Jax builds a neighborhood of such density completely from scratch in a burned out area like LaVilla or Sugar Hill (where no one lives), it won't be happening.

[Adam White]

really...  he speaks for the whole community it appears... and will be the arbiter of what constitutes "intelligent" development...  But all is not lost, he would deign to allow it in someone else's backyard...

Erm... he said, ""Many of our neighbors have expressed that if this were a few blocks away, they'd be happy to go there."

Many - not all. I don't think he is saying everyone is opposed. I find it interesting how you so stridently take offence at his apparent attempts to speak for "the whole community" yet haven't bothered to call out those posters in this thread who have said things like, "People move to riverside for the reason of having establishments such as Roost within walking or biking distance."

[Sentient]

really...  he speaks for the whole community it appears... and will be the arbiter of what constitutes "intelligent" development...  But all is not lost, he would deign to allow it in someone else's backyard...

Erm... he said, ""Many of our neighbors have expressed that if this were a few blocks away, they'd be happy to go there."

Many - not all. I don't think he is saying everyone is opposed. I find it interesting how you so stridently take offence at his apparent attempts to speak for "the whole community" yet haven't bothered to call out those posters in this thread who have said things like, "People move to riverside for the reason of having establishments such as Roost within walking or biking distance."

Try reading the actual quote, in context next time Adam - to wit

""The primary concern of the community is the fact that the Oak Street corridor between King Street and Margaret Street is vulnerable to commercial encroachment," Pettway said. "Our best use for that property is residences. We actually would love to see something put in there and see that property develop, but we would like to see it develop intelligently.""

Still have smart mouth comment?

[CCMjax]

Exactly - How do we expect for real connected and walkable neighborhoods to develop like other cities of Washington DC, SF, Phiily,etc.

Forget about it. What we call dense in Jax would be considered a suburb in the cities you just mentioned. Unless Jax builds a neighborhood of such density completely from scratch in a burned out area like LaVilla or Sugar Hill (where no one lives), it won't be happening.

There are some nice older suburbs of Chicago that are pretty walkable.  Oak Park, Evanston, Wilmette, etc.  They are very pleasant and more like Riverside or Springfield with more main street activity (Jacksonville's densest neighborhoods).  I think Jacksonville's core neighborhoods should forget about trying to be like inner city DC and Chicago like Lake said and focus more on building upon what they are now, more like the walkable older suburbs of those cities.

[Steve]

Worse case scenario - they open, the product doesn't fit the 'character' of the neighborhood and they're forced to change the business model or close the doors.  Now the neighborhood has a newly renovated, empty storefront that might open the door for another brave soul to open something that fits the neighborhood a bit better.

Get out of the way and let the market decide if it's a viable business or not.  I think that's the point that some other posters on this site have stated a helluva lot more eloquently than I.

Once the business is in, no entity can "make them change it". The issue is that the business might be perfectly viable, but be awful for the residents on either side of it. Remember, this is a residential character area, not a commercial character area (like Biscotti's or Mellow).

Under your example of free market, I could open a paper mill on the river in Avondale that is financially viable. Don't think anyone would want to live next to that.

BTW, for the record I don't have my mind made up on this one - I want to understand it more. The building is a commercial structure in nature (this would be completely different if someone wanted to turn a house into this restaurant), but it isn't really zoned for this. It's zoned CRO (which an example of a CRO business would be the dry cleaner that used to be in it, or a psychologist's office - I don't remember every use the overlay mentions off the top of my head)

Steve, I work in the pulp and paper industry and the chance of getting the proper environmental permits for a new paper mill ANYWHERE IN THE US is slim to none. So not a very good comparison. LOL

The point was something that isn't great to live next to you. I could have used Paper Mill, Steel Factory, Wal-Mart SuperCenter, or a variety of different things. The point is just because a business is viable doesn't make it suited for next to single family homes.

[Adam White]

really...  he speaks for the whole community it appears... and will be the arbiter of what constitutes "intelligent" development...  But all is not lost, he would deign to allow it in someone else's backyard...

Erm... he said, ""Many of our neighbors have expressed that if this were a few blocks away, they'd be happy to go there."

Many - not all. I don't think he is saying everyone is opposed. I find it interesting how you so stridently take offence at his apparent attempts to speak for "the whole community" yet haven't bothered to call out those posters in this thread who have said things like, "People move to riverside for the reason of having establishments such as Roost within walking or biking distance."

Try reading the actual quote, in context next time Adam - to wit

""The primary concern of the community is the fact that the Oak Street corridor between King Street and Margaret Street is vulnerable to commercial encroachment," Pettway said. "Our best use for that property is residences. We actually would love to see something put in there and see that property develop, but we would like to see it develop intelligently.""

Still have smart mouth comment?

Fair enough - I see your point. I took the comment about many neighbours to be qualification. It's clear that KPettway is acting as a spokesman (for exactly whom, I don't know). I have no issue with his points - I think they're fair and if I lived across the street from a proposed restaurant, I'd possibly oppose it or want changes. It's to be expected. I wouldn't be surprised if the strength of opposition to the proposal weakens the further you move away from the site.

All that said - he (KPettway) has been perfectly nice. There is no reason for you to be a [redacted]. He's not insulted you or anything. I don't see why you can't just accept that he has a different opinion without immediately feeling the need to make it personal. You should be able to disagree and remain civil while you do it.

Or maybe you're just angry at the world because mommy and daddy put you on restriction because you got too many Ds and Fs on your most recent report card. How's that for a smart mouth comment, [redacted]?

[mtraininjax]

Well done Stephen, well done. Its too close to Thanksgiving to allow so many turkeys to run loose in the yard.

[mtraininjax]

http://residentnews.net/2015/12/01/neighbors-rally-restaurant-planned-laundry-center/

New article on the Roost in the Resident today....

Neighbors rally against restaurant planned for old laundry center

Residents believe Roost is fox in henhouse
In what may be an ironic choice for a name, The Roost is being viewed by residents as the fox in the henhouse, believing that approval of the plan bodes ill for the neighborhood.

What was initially pitched as a small, 60-seat breakfast and lunch café expanded into a 150-seat late-night restaurant after the property owner, Anthony Saleeba, offered up two of his three buildings at the former Deluxe cleaner site on Oak Street to restaurant developers Ted Stein and J.C. Demetree.

Once word spread about The Roost, residents joined forces to oppose the plan. In a matter of just a few weeks, a group led by Kevin Pettway coalesced formally as P.R.O.U.D.: Positive Riverside Optimized Urban Development. Pettway, who lives near the proposed restaurant, created a website, proudofriverside.com, and initiated social media to find supporters against the plan.

"My wife and I were on a walk when I first heard about the proposed development from a neighbor who had discovered it from city government. We immediately began asking around to see what anyone else knew, and shortly afterwards, I happened to bump into Ted Stein himself," said Pettway. "He pitched me the initial, smaller-scale version of the restaurant. At first my attitude was to wait and see, but I quickly became alarmed and began meeting with other concerned neighbors to organize opposition to this proposal."

RoostSitePlanIn early November, Stein and Demetree circulated a petition among residents living on Riverside Avenue, Oak Street, and Herschel Street as well as the cross streets in between to solicit support to rezone the property at 2220 Oak St. They invited the community to hear about their proposed restaurant on Nov. 12 at the Riverside Avondale Preservation office.

The neighborhood is currently zoned CRO (Commercial Residential Office) in a Residential Historic Character Area. Due to the amount of deviations needed for the restaurant, Saleeba is applying for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to "facilitate the redevelopment of a commercial area and provide for a unified scheme of development."

Neighbors flatly oppose Roost

Pettway said he and a group of concerned citizens met with Riverside Avondale Preservation in late October and stated only one person at that meeting was in favor of the idea.

"Everyone else was clearly opposed," he said. "[At the Nov. 12 meeting] I saw a packed room of neighbors united in their objection to the plan. Even J.C. [Demetree] said, and I quote, 'I'm a little taken aback by this.' Clearly, the developers underestimated the strength of the opposition to this proposal."

RoostRenderings-1Among the concerned neighbors is Roxanne Henkle, who lives in a 100-year-old carriage house across the street from the old Deluxe cleaners. A resident since 1990, Henkle is opposed to The Roost for a variety of reasons.

"I am concerned that the proposed 150-seat restaurant would have an adversely intense impact upon our area. Currently, Snap Fitness has taken up much of the street parking. Parking requirements alone would displace many residential and tenant parking," Henkle said. "Add a 150-seat restaurant with alcohol and the street will suffer from constant strain of traffic, not to mention the effects of late night hours on the neighborhood that is mostly residential."

Nancy Murrey-Settle and her sister Ruth Thompson grew up in the neighborhood and they were in attendance at the standing-room only meeting. "My grandparents bought two homes in 1922, and we have been stewards of the property and neighborhood since then," said Murrey-Settle. "We definitely have deep roots and a stake in all of this."

Murrey-Settle said there is much to lose if the PUD is allowed against the zoning currently in place. "If we allow too many exemptions, variances and, in this case, a complete PUD, that will change the fabric of our residential areas in Riverside. We can say goodbye to many of the homeowners who have invested their time and money to make Riverside the 'hot' area it is," she said. "What attracts the developers to our area is exactly what they will destroy by their presence."

Not right fit, says RAP

The PUD notes there will be 41 parking spots onsite, but according to the Municipal Code, 54 off-street parking spaces are required. The PUD indicates 13 spaces on the street will pick up the difference, however those spaces are shared with Snap Fitness, a gym located next door.

RoostRenderings-3Parking issues as well as increased noise and traffic are not the only concerns. At the Nov. 12 meeting, several people raised the issue of the PUD itself, which is filed under the property owner.

"Their Planned Urban Development (PUD) re-zoning request will stay with the property forever, making it easy for another bar to use it, without public input, should this development fail," said Pettway. "Unfortunately, such failure is statistically likely. It's a slippery slope, and we don't want to go there."

Run-off is another concern. Riverside Avenue residents living along the back side of the Oak Street property are currently dealing with water intrusion. One homeowner said she has 1,300 square feet of mold in her house from run-off behind Snap Fitness. She, along with others, is concerned that a paved parking lot will increase run-off, which causes flooding behind the property.

In response, Steve Diebenow, attorney for the developers, stated development of the property is not allowed to cause runoff that will hurt neighboring properties.

"If the lot is paved, we might as well send our neighbors little boats to use for the summer in their back yards," said Henkle, in an email to city officials.

At stake, too, is the precedent that will be set if this PUD is approved by Land Use and Zoning, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Although Diebenow claimed an approval will not set a precedent because all applications are judged on their own merits, Carmen Godwin, RAP executive director, disagrees.

"This absolutely does set a precedent. It's important what happens in this case," she said. "It's just not the right fit for this location. There is not one other property zoned CRO with a restaurant in our district."

Godwin stated RAP had offered to help Stein and Demetree find another, more suitable location for their restaurant, but they said they knew what they were getting into.

"They are asking for so much more than what's allowed. If they are not willing to negotiate, what role can RAP play?" she asked. "It's tough for us to be a mediator."

Murrey-Settle said if it were not for RAP, Riverside would not be the hot neighborhood it is. "When we did the remodel at our house we respected the codes and restrictions that come with living in a neighborhood that has a historical designation," she said. "I expect big moneyed developers to do the same."

RoostRenderings-2During the Nov. 12 meeting at RAP's office, residents asked for changes to the PUD, which Diebenow and the developers indicated they would take into consideration. Although a revised document was not available at press time, Stein and Demetree issued a statement:

"We listened attentively to all of the concerns shared by the neighbors, staying after to answer every question. We were encouraged by the number of supporters in attendance after sharing our vision for The Roost during the course of the evening.  As Jacksonville natives, we want The Roost to blend into the artistic fabric of Riverside.

"After listening to the concerns of the neighbors we decided to make changes to the initial concept to ensure that we re-develop these two vacant, dilapidated, historic buildings into something that makes Riverside proud. Our vision for The Roost can only succeed, and be made better, through a constructive and positive dialogue with all interested parties."

[BoldCityRealist]

For or against this development?

Come air your thoughts on the proposal at City Hall tomorrow, 5:30PM 4th floor, conference room A.

[BoldCityRealist]

Initial renderings here. Super excited and hope this happens! I need a diner in the 'hood!

https://www.facebook.com/TheRoostRiverside

[Kay]

The Facebook page gives the impression it is a day time operation--however, the concept is to be open till at least midnight with outside sales and service.  The location sits across from and in front of single-family homes.  Not the right location for a late night large restaurant.  Now if they actually wanted to be a small diner open for breakfast and lunch, that might be OK.