Author Topic: Lessons from Gainesville  (Read 1946 times)

Zac T

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Lessons from Gainesville
« on: April 30, 2021, 11:53:30 AM »
I thought this was an interesting story out of Gainesville.

An out-of-town developer was proposing a low density development at a major intersection. It featured a drive-thru and 32k square feet of commercial space. Residents of the neighborhood opposed this plan because it would lead to more traffic on a busy street with a lot of pedestrian activity. They even had a petition with 800 signatures.

During the commission meeting, residents spoke in favor of a lower density development than what was proposed with no drive-thru to keep the feel of the neighborhood. To everyone's surprise, the commission essentially upzoned the entire parcel by approving a land use change that allowed a multistory, urban, mixed-use development with apartments and street level retail. This was an even greater intensity than the developers were asking for and now the neighborhood is confused.

I couldn't imagine anything like this happening in Jacksonville right now especially after the pushback towards the San Marco apartments. However, if our leaders were this friendly towards density, it could dramatically change and improve our urban neighborhoods and even aging, suburban ones like Arlington.

Quote
Residents of a large northwest Gainesville neighborhood thought Thursday they might be preparing to further battle a proposed drive-thru business near their homes.

Instead, they're scratching their heads and wondering what an Atlanta developer will do next, after city officials gave a green light to a much larger — and taller — development than had been proposed.

https://www.gainesville.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/29/gainesville-leaders-ok-bigger-development-than-requested-near-suburban-heights/7399281002/

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 807
Re: Lessons from Gainesville
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2021, 11:11:32 AM »

IMHO the pushback on the San Marco apartments thing was driven by ideology, not legal and practical fairness.   

I only mention this because I suspect a lot of missing middle foamers will applaud this sort of thing.    It has it's pluses.  The danger for a cause like the missing middle is that it leads to heavier entrenchment of R-1 stuff.

It's the old, be careful what you wish for.