Ron Littlepage: Looking for ways to reinvigorate downtown Jacksonville

[BridgeTroll]

I'm with ya JJ... but...

DVI could also press landlords of vacant properties to fix up their buildings and offer lower rents to small business and non-profits who are spunky people willing to be in an urban space. Sure they don't pay big bucks, but something is better than vacant.

We always assume something is better than vacant... but is it?  Given the history of the area one must come to the conclusion that the landlords DO NOT feel that way.  My question is why?  Why do the landlords of downtown and for that matter Springfield seem to prefer no rent instead of some rent?

[thelakelander]

Could insurance and liability be an issue?

[Jumpinjack]

I have some tenants and you always pay insurance and liability whether the building is vacant or fully rented. We chose to lower the rents to keep the tenants.
I think Bridge is right to some degree ... It's a darn habit. Some landlords are letting a property agency handle the property. They may live somewhere else and don't get it about downtown vacancy rates. Asking is the first thing and DVI should do that asap.

[Jumpinjack]

doing nothing is always easier than dealing with negotiations.

[BridgeTroll]

That certainly would be horrible.  Rents spiral lower until businesses and apartment renters find downtown a desirable place to live and do business...  And worse yet...  Soon enough they would be able to actually raise rents as businesses and renters compete for desirable space downtown...  Good god... eventually we might have to enact rent control... thehorrorthehorror

Sorry... I couldn't help it...

[Ocklawaha]

Hey Ron, nice that SOMEONE cares enough to get this in front of the TU's readers. Give me a call, I'd like to show you a plan that could electrify your column AND downtown's redevelopment.

[BridgeTroll]

knowing many of them, I can tell you that the majority of them are afraid that if they accept less rent, it will start a wave of rent wars.

Could these people actually be colluding to to keep rents high??  If so to what end?

[Jumpinjack]

That certainly would be horrible.  Rents spiral lower until businesses and apartment renters find downtown a desirable place to live and do business...  And worse yet...  Soon enough they would be able to actually raise rents as businesses and renters compete for desirable space downtown...  Good god... eventually we might have to enact rent control... thehorrorthehorror

Sorry... I couldn't help it...

Good one.

[Captain Zissou]

Downtown accounted for 13.5 percent of the city’s property tax base 20 years ago. Today, it’s at 3.2 percent.

This is going to cause a big problem for justifying spending on the core, IMO.  We do need more businesses downtown, but more parks and cleaner sidewalks aren't going to fix that.  We need it to be profitable for business owners to locate downtown.  Until then, we're wasting our time.  Once people have a chance to make a buck downtown, people will move in.  When people move in, tax revenue goes up.  When tax revenue goes up, then we can work on the big money capital projects.  When we start funding some big projects, we're headed straight to the moon and there's no looking back.

[BridgeTroll]

So if one landlord could be convinced to reduce rates large enough to induce renters... the others might follow suit?

[Captain Zissou]

Garden Guy, Littlepage lives in Avondale, on the eastern side.  He has a lovely historic brick home in a great neighborhood.  I'm guessing that's closer to downtown than you live.  

[spuwho]

Lots of ideas, suggestions and plans.

Little political will or desire.

Apathy on behalf of the taxpayer, who only see downtown when the Jags play or when showing up for jury duty.

If the taxpayer has "no need" for downtown, why would they care?

Flip the coin a little and think perhaps the downtown model is dead?

I know its desirable here in this forum, but maybe taxpayers are not pro-urban?

Perhaps Jacksonville should be thinking with a "post-urban" model where a central part of the city serves a purpose outside the housing of jobs, sidewalk cafes and cement and steel towers.

Perhaps re invigoration starts when we stop thinking Jax should be like other urban centers.

[dougskiles]

Perhaps re invigoration starts when we stop thinking Jax should be like other urban centers.

I'm sure there are many who share this opinion, however, it seems to me that this is exactly how we have been operating for many years.  If this model worked, then there would be no need for re-invigoration.  And our city finances wouldn't be so stretched out due to the high cost of running a sprawled-out city.

[spuwho]

  And our city finances wouldn't be so stretched out due to the high cost of running a sprawled-out city.

As compared to what? Our finances wouldn't be stretched if we were 100 percent urban? were a non-consolidated city?

Actually, in this case, I think consolidation has been an asset. A tax base outside of its traditional city boundaries that can be tapped when the urban core is weak.

[dougskiles]

I don't believe the taxes drawn from the outer parts of the city are enough to cover the costs of providing services.  But, I admit I don't have any data to back that up.  It has just been a perception that I need to research.  I just did a quick internet search but didn't find anything.  I keep hearing it over and over again from various members on the forum and perhaps they can provide the backup.

The basic question is "Do surburban neighborhoods pay enough taxes to cover the costs of basic services?"

If anyone has an answer, I would be interested in seeing the data.

As far as consolidation goes, it has been a benefit in that it has reduced the duplication of services.  But to the question above, I don't know if it has resulted in an increase of funds available for the urban core.

Going back to the original concept of fixing downtown, I don't know that it is a matter of more money.  We've already thrown lots of money at it.  I believe that more than anything, we need to get out of our own way.