The Downtown Investment Authority's Future

[marcuscnelson]

^ A number of states & provinces as of late have chosen to strip municipalities of their zoning privileges. The restrictions levied by cities in a lot of cases have been cited as the principal reason for the current housing supply crisis, and most cities have shown little interest in addressing the problem, to the point that it becomes harmful to the state's overall economy. Hence these laws.

There are legitimate possibilities for very tall and dense multi-family projects to be built next door to single-family homes. I'm not talking four-story buildings. I'm talking mid to high rise buildings.

-Municipalities have to approve a multi-family or mixed-use development if at least 40% of the units are affordable in ANY area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed-use development.

-If a project qualifies for the above provision, it is eligible for the highest allowable density in ANY zoning district in the city. This means a developer could get Downtown level density in the suburbs or historic districts. However, maximum height typically limits the maximum possible density.

-Speaking of which, the Act says that a municipality may not restrict the height of a qualifying project to anything less than the highest allowable height within a commercial or residential development that is within a mile of the project. In Jax, I imagine that anything within a mile of Mayo, Baptist South, Shands, and suburban office parks could automatically get a fair amount of height. Then you can also likely do the same anywhere within a mile of the outer edges of downtown, plus other urban areas where some height is allowed like Five Points and San Marco.

-If a development qualifies and meets all of the land development regulations, it must be approved administratively. This means no public hearing process. Simply a staff level review and signoff.

So objectively, what is the problem here?

The 14k under construction is actually more like 8-9k.

Nonetheless, number three on the list of most apartment deliveries is the westside. To me, that's pretty damning on the lack of ability to turnaround DT as a desirable market, even after all the $$ has been poured into it. Apartment economics are viable in every direction, especially with the influx the Northside will receive in 2024.

Funniest part is that we are in probably the second fastest growing city in the country for jobs & population (per capita) and we're still unable to capitalize on that growth DT.

The thing that I've noted recently is how the city continues to encourage this kind of spreading in where it authorizes public funds for housing. So many projects being authorized and funded hugging the beltway and far from frequent transit (for people who are less likely to deal with the cost of car ownership). So if the city is encouraging that kind of disparate investment, why wouldn't the market follow?

[Tacachale]

2. It sounds like the new mayoral administration is frustrated with the lack of progress/slow pace with public works projects and is committed to getting the parks built and operating on a faster timeline than Curry and Co. They've got committees in place to understand what went wrong with sites like Friendship Fountain and make sure the same mistakes aren't repeated. I dig it.

I can verify this is the case. I can also attest that many of the delays in these projects haven't been on DIA's end -- DIA doesn't execute projects, city departments do. In past years, procedural roadblocks and lack of prioritization have delayed things considerably, and these are things the administration is working to fix at all levels. And I can certainly verify there's frustration about lack of progress -- I mean, y'all all know how I feel. What I hope we'll see moving forward is more incremental improvements and less flashy renderings that end up never getting built.

[Tacachale]

^ A number of states & provinces as of late have chosen to strip municipalities of their zoning privileges. The restrictions levied by cities in a lot of cases have been cited as the principal reason for the current housing supply crisis, and most cities have shown little interest in addressing the problem, to the point that it becomes harmful to the state's overall economy. Hence these laws.

There are legitimate possibilities for very tall and dense multi-family projects to be built next door to single-family homes. I'm not talking four-story buildings. I'm talking mid to high rise buildings.

-Municipalities have to approve a multi-family or mixed-use development if at least 40% of the units are affordable in ANY area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed-use development.

-If a project qualifies for the above provision, it is eligible for the highest allowable density in ANY zoning district in the city. This means a developer could get Downtown level density in the suburbs or historic districts. However, maximum height typically limits the maximum possible density.

-Speaking of which, the Act says that a municipality may not restrict the height of a qualifying project to anything less than the highest allowable height within a commercial or residential development that is within a mile of the project. In Jax, I imagine that anything within a mile of Mayo, Baptist South, Shands, and suburban office parks could automatically get a fair amount of height. Then you can also likely do the same anywhere within a mile of the outer edges of downtown, plus other urban areas where some height is allowed like Five Points and San Marco.

-If a development qualifies and meets all of the land development regulations, it must be approved administratively. This means no public hearing process. Simply a staff level review and signoff.

So objectively, what is the problem here?

In some ways, it's good. There's definitely a housing crisis, and local ordinances are the main culprit of that, particularly in places where NIMBY neighbors have a lot of power like California. At the same time, there's always a risk having the state take away home rule. In this case, the state might not actually do things better than the local government that's closest to the issue.

For example, the bigger issue than lack of new development is the zoning that requires acre after acre of single-family homes with suburban density. However, when Gainesville tried to remove single-family-only zoning, this same state government stepped in and stripped their ability to govern themselves. Jacksonville's ADU bill could be targeted on the same grounds. It's a definite double edged sword -- the state isn't necessarily acting in ways that will resolve the crisis.

What I'd say is that I don't I trust the state enough to actually tackle the housing crisis that stripping local communities of home rule is warranted.

[Jax_Developer]

The 14k under construction is actually more like 8-9k.

Nonetheless, number three on the list of most apartment deliveries is the westside. To me, that's pretty damning on the lack of ability to turnaround DT as a desirable market, even after all the $$ has been poured into it. Apartment economics are viable in every direction, especially with the influx the Northside will receive in 2024.

Funniest part is that we are in probably the second fastest growing city in the country for jobs & population (per capita) and we're still unable to capitalize on that growth DT.

The thing that I've noted recently is how the city continues to encourage this kind of spreading in where it authorizes public funds for housing. So many projects being authorized and funded hugging the beltway and far from frequent transit (for people who are less likely to deal with the cost of car ownership). So if the city is encouraging that kind of disparate investment, why wouldn't the market follow?

Right I agree.. Very much a situation where the attitude has demonstrated a "let's just build here next" attitude. The reality of our local apartment market is that 3/4-story garden is basically our only form of viable apartment housing outside of premium locations/sites or incentives. The goal for downtown is largely stuck in a crux of:

- We want to build uses & intensities that "make sense" for an urban downtown
- In order to do these intense uses, the apartment market needs to demonstrate high rents/sf
- To get high rents/sf, you need a "luxury" or "higher end" environment
- To create that environment, there needs to be amentities/factors that make it "better"
- To do so, there needs to be a substantial tax or business base to support the excess tax revenue to fund such "things"
- Without these nice "things" the ability to create a "better" environment becomes challenging
- We're unable to build "what we think DT deserves" because of the lack of "life" & predictability to support the intensity of such development

Gets me back to the Ford on Bay, American Lions, and (omg) any attempt at development on riverfront. Could have used the entire debt market from 2018-2022 to fund a reasonable, 6-10 story project, like the Doro or Vista, on the Northbank. Yes tax incentive heavy, but it's not unrealistic. Could have actually established a rent base for the Northbank, to possible justify future projects. Instead, we give massive incentives to projects we know are economically unviable. Seems like DT is consistently trying to hit home runs when we need a few singles to get going. Land values would skyrocket if the DT market became a viable economic market to build in.

Gets me back to Jacksonville's bread & butter. Why take any risk DT, when you can go build 3/4 story garden all over town.. near the beaches, near town center, near San Marco, Saint Johns... I mean sites where retail is really killing it. Much more predictable and the banks like that as much as the city does.

[marcuscnelson]

Lori Boyer now calling for 15,000 residents (up from 10,000) for downtown vibrancy.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/nov/10/growth-of-downtown-residential-population-remains-a-priority-for-dia/

[iMarvin]

I've heard that 10,000 number now for at least 5 years, if not longer... The fact that we still haven't been able to reach that number despite the recent building boom all over the city and state should say enough.

I also doubt 15,000 residents will really change anything in regards to how vibrant downtown is.

[thelakelander]

10k, 15k, etc. don't matter. It's best to not use random numbers like this as benchmarks to something that is determined by several other factors and conditions. If we don't address the other issues, we'll hit 10k, 15k, etc. and move the goal posts again to 20k or 25k.

[heights unknown]

Lori Boyer now calling for 15,000 residents (up from 10,000) for downtown vibrancy.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/nov/10/growth-of-downtown-residential-population-remains-a-priority-for-dia/

I don't know as much as you guys know about a lot of this stuff, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out or ask the question: "How can you be calling for 15k residents downtown when you fail, time after time, to bring new residential developments in or see proposed or planned residential developments through to completion? We don't need NO EXCUSES now Lori. I got blown away yesterday reading articles about what's going on in Tampa. Jacksonville, supposedly Florida's largest City, is behind ALL of the top 5 including midsized and some smaller Florida cities. (sigh)

[tufsu1]

^ there are plenty of new residential buildings in the DIA service area, with several more currently under construction. I'm not saying DT Jax is doing great, but there has been significant movement over the past few years in the residential market.

[Ken_FSU]

Curious, our loose definitions aside, what do grocers look for in terms of population base/density/proximity when deciding whether to set up shop? Word on the street seems to be that the Pearl Street group is targeting Publix. Would that be a tough sell? An easy sell? Does the presence of a Whole Foods & Fresh Market in Brooklyn hurt? Help?

[thelakelander]

We already have two grocers downtown. Back in the day, you needed around 20,000 for a store. Regarding the Pearl Street area, I'm aware of another chain. However, a site with frontage to State and Union is more regional. So anything there doesn't have to rely on  downtown's population base.

[Skybox111]

Gateway project receives 100 million and construction on seven story building will start on oct 2024  and 22 story dec 2024  and parking garage feb 2025  and seven story april 2025.

[heights unknown]

^ there are plenty of new residential buildings in the DIA service area, with several more currently under construction. I'm not saying DT Jax is doing great, but there has been significant movement over the past few years in the residential market.

IMO (which doesn't count for anything) not enough to justify where she's trying to go; she'd better get busy I think.

[heights unknown]

Gateway project receives 100 million and construction on seven story building will start on oct 2024  and 22 story dec 2024  and parking garage feb 2025  and seven story april 2025.

That's going to be a small downtown within downtown in that area. Hope we make it to see that project to fruition/completion.

[Skybox111]

I know   They said a while back that one of the buildings was going to start in middle of next year but now near end of next year.