Bartram Park: A suburban millennial paradise?

[Metro Jacksonville]

Bartram Park: A suburban millennial paradise?



Despite well publicized excitement about downtown revitalization, young adults are fueling rapid growth in suburban areas like Bartram Park across the country. Is it by choice, or necessity?

Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2017-aug-bartram-park-a-suburban-millennial-paradise

[jlmann]

The reasons: lack of inventory and high prices in revitalizing/revitalized neighborhoods.  and you don't have to spend 15/20k per year to send your children to "a good school" read: primarily white school

[remc86007]

^ This.  I don't think many people would look at that picture and think of it as "paradise." Haha

I wonder what the traffic will be like around there when the whole road is built out and the Gate project down the road is done? It looks to me like some of the town home developments on that road have more land behind them for an additional phase of development too...

There is almost no availability downtown. I really don't understand why more downtown residential tower projects have not materialized. I guess it is just a financing problem since there is little precedent for such development recently. Hopefully the projects on the south bank will go well and encourage some development on the north bank. I know several people, in addition to my wife and I, that were trying to find a first place after college now that we have better paying jobs, and there simply wasn't any viable availability below $2k per month that had more than one bedroom. Now we have the workforce housing being built, which is great to see, but I'm sure there are a lot of people that would like to be downtown if they could find a 2-3 bedroom place around $1,500 per month.

[thelakelander]

From my perspective, the urban core (downtown included), needs less towers, stick-built apartments, single-family homes, etc. and a lot more townhomes, rowhouses, duplexes, tri-plexes, quads, etc.  That missing segment of housing types will help create availability in price points that new construction single-family housing and residential towers will never be able to compete with effectively.

[remc86007]

^But isn't there not enough available land to build any meaningful number of townhomes? At least in that respect, towers are much more efficient and practical to build downtown.

[thelakelander]

There's tons of land in neighborhoods like the Eastside, LaVilla, Sugar Hill, etc. We have more than enough property to accommodate something for all segments of the population.

[MusicMan]

Spend a day down there and you can count the people using bicycles as their primary mode of transportation on one hand.

They drive everywhere. They don't walk at all.  Look at their waistlines, too. All the evidence you'll need.

Stick built homes with OSB siding. Wait til a hurricane comes and go take a look. New building codes help but still.......................

Ultimately, this type of development is designed to maximize the developers profits. They are cutting down piney woods and building cookie cutter homes.  Barf!

[Kiva]

I know several people, in addition to my wife and I, that were trying to find a first place after college now that we have better paying jobs, and there simply wasn't any viable availability below $2k per month that had more than one bedroom. Now we have the workforce housing being built, which is great to see, but I'm sure there are a lot of people that would like to be downtown if they could find a 2-3 bedroom place around $1,500 per month.

Downtown is more expensive, but there are still 3 bedroom homes in Springfield for under $1,500 a month. http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/410-E-3rd-St_Jacksonville_FL_32206_M62486-09778

[MusicMan]

Several choices in San Marco under $2000. However that is not Downtown Jacksonville.

But I did a quick MLS check and your basic premise is true. Renting downtown is expensive.

You would think more developers would have noticed that by now.

[thelakelander]

^It's simple. The numbers don't work. The amount of rent needed to cover the land acquisition and construction costs in downtown exceeds what the local market is willing to pay.  To fill the gap, public inventives need to be given or areas on the fringe need to be explored.

[remc86007]

^I'm not convinced that the numbers don't "work" in the sense that it would be unprofitable to do so, I think the anticipated margins are just higher in other areas (with cheaper and more abundant land) and therefore, given a finite number of investors, downtown has to either wait for the demand to increase further or incentives are needed as you suggest. I do think that developers and lenders are vastly underestimating the demand for high-rise living downtown. Just look at the response to 220 Riverside, people want to live in the urban core, and people like living in buildings that are taller than four floors. Admittedly, the Fresh Market likely greatly enhanced the demand for 220, but I still think if a developer built a 20 story residential tower downtown (maybe where the Greyhound station is now), it would be a huge success.

[remc86007]

Downtown is more expensive, but there are still 3 bedroom homes in Springfield for under $1,500 a month. http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/410-E-3rd-St_Jacksonville_FL_32206_M62486-09778

Funny you should mention that, my wife and I are building a house with Terrawise very close to that house. (Actually, the proximity is kind of creepy haha)

[thelakelander]

^I'm not convinced that the numbers don't "work" in the sense that it would be unprofitable to do so, I think the anticipated margins are just higher in other areas (with cheaper and more abundant land) and therefore, given a finite number of investors, downtown has to either wait for the demand to increase further or incentives are needed as you suggest. I do think that developers and lenders are vastly underestimating the demand for high-rise living downtown. Just look at the response to 220 Riverside, people want to live in the urban core, and people like living in buildings that are taller than four floors. Admittedly, the Fresh Market likely greatly enhanced the demand for 220, but I still think if a developer built a 20 story residential tower downtown (maybe where the Greyhound station is now), it would be a huge success.

Unfortunately, it's not about convincing a few of us on the blogs that the numbers don't work enough for the private sector to be willing to invest their money in DT Jax as opposed to investing them elsewhere.  Developers aren't stupid. There's a reason they flock to suburbs and other downtowns all across the country.  There's also a reason most projects not asking for incentives are either in Brooklyn, the Southbank or Northern San Marco, as opposed to the historic Northbank. Downtown Jax isn't a hidden gem. The market dynamics simply aren't strong enough for most to risk their own money when more sound investment alternatives are still plentiful. With that said, things will slowly improve.....until the market crashes again.  Let's just hope we can get a few projects on the drawing board, underway before that happens.  However, I doubt we see many new construction high-rise/mid-rise projects (that aren't subsidized) offer units at rates as low as you mentioned in your earlier post.

[MusicMan]

If the numbers don't work is it the cost of the real estate or construction that are prohibitive?  I look at vacant parcels and my opinion is that most are way too expensive. And so they sit on the market for years................

PETRA has several large parcels for sale on Main Street in Springfield and are asking a million dollars (or more) for them. SERIOUSLY?

(1100 N Main asking $1,200,000     1400 N main asking $1,400,000    1148 N main 1 acre price not disclosed. SOURCE: LOOPNET)

There are NO COMPS to support those prices. I assume they think it's useful to decorate the vacant lot/building with a sign just so you know who owns it!?!

For comparison a one acre parcel on Ernest Street a block from Bold Bean just sold for low $300,000's.  In a red hot neighborhood.

I feel the same way about most of the parcels downtown.

Asking $1,500,000 for a 1 acre parking lot on Pearl and Ashley? (Colliers International).

The old Ambassador Hotel currently listed for $5,500,000 as a redevelopment opportunity?  Get real folks.

Lake, can you post the most recent vacant large parcel that sold Downtown? i can't find anything to support these numbers.

[thelakelander]

In general, budget busters would be cost of land and type of construction. If you can get away with a stick-built structure and surface parking (ex. Brooklyn Riverside), you'll be significantly better off than if you're dealing with the restoration of a long vacant structure, going vertical multiple floors or structured parking decks (ex. Berkman II or East San Marco). Those things drive your construction costs up.  If the market can support the higher costs, in terms of higher leasing or asking prices, then no problem.  If the market can't, then the project has a higher risk of success, which negatively impacts its chances of getting financing.  You're also okay if you can get incentives to eliminate the higher costs (ex. Laura Street Trio, Houston Street Manor).

So using the Pearl and Ashley example, you're already out of $1.5 million on land alone and for only one-acre? That literally forces you to do something vertical, to create enough density to get your money back and make a profit.  However, the vertical construction  pushes your investment costs higher, meaning you'll need to make your profit through higher rents, asking prices, etc.  Take a look at East San Marco, Bishopsgate and the high-rise project that ended up being townhomes at San Pablo and JTB. It's pretty obvious that type of market is limited in Jax at the moment.  If you're going for something like that, you're better off investing in Charlotte, Orlando, Miami, Atlanta, etc.