RAP-->Costs? Benefits?

[Timkin]

hu·bris/ˈ(h)yo͞obris/
Noun:   
Excessive pride or self-confidence.
(in Greek tragedy) Excessive pride toward or defiance of the gods, leading to nemesis.

   

[wowowow]

Your wonderful work documenting the architectural history of the city and the great fire and so many other things has been trailblazing and inspirational to so many in this town and simply cannot be appreciated enough!

However, I have also found with dismay over the past couple of years that several of your printed assumptions regarding the history of development and decline in this city have been taken as gospel rather than opinion, and have led to serious misconceptions regarding the same.

I am sorry if my reliance on the hard researched facts rather than your opinion disappoints you, but I am afraid that you should get used to it.  And I say that with affection.

Riverside Avondale was a streetcar suburb, as documented here in another thread at great length.  It was neither designed for nor developed by cars, and in fact Avondale was developed by Telfair Stockton, the owner of the streetcar company that served the area.

I am not sure how you missed these obvious facts when researching your book, but in all fairness your research took place at a time before the internet really opened up and indexed previously hard to coordinate facts.

Stephen Dare

Thank you for your affection.

But oh my goodness! You are berating me for my research because it was done before the Internet existed. So the Internet is your source for facts? There is a lot of great info on the Internet (as well as a lot of errors!), and it is handy for people who do quick "research" without studying numerous primary sources in depth. Please don't refer to this as your "hard researched facts." I have visited MetroJAX several times today, trying to discover the depth of your research methods and to find any sources for your facts.

You have referenced your post, "Telfair Stockton, Street Car Magnate and Developer of Streetcar Suburbs," as the only proof that Avondale was a "streetcar suburb."  Your only source for this statement is a 1925 article by Charles Donald Fox that you found on the Internet. Sorry, but your skimming this Internet source failed to grasp the truth.

You quoted his 1925 article correctly:  ". . . to Telfair Stockton must go the credit for having been Florida's first successful sub-division operator. Making a beginning in what then was a remote section outside the city limits of Jacksonville, this organization brought success to a project which had previously failed. To-day that section is a part of Jacksonville and is served by first-class street car service. Thus through the efforts of this master realty expert success was made of failure and Jacksonville has a thriving community section."

You interpreted this to mean "both Telfair Stockton himself and the author seem to be saying that streetcars had made Avondale succeed after years of failure." (your words.) This is not correct.

As Lakelander notes above, the "failure" that the 1925 author was referring to was "Edgewood," a subdivision started in the 1880s by James Randall Challen, that never took off. Telfair Stockton purchased the old failed subdivision of Edgewood and it became part of the new subdivision of Avondale. Avondale was immediately successful. 402 of the 750 lots were sold in the first two years. It was never a failure.

Telfair Stockton was not "Street Car Magnate and Developer of Streetcar Suburbs,"  and he was not "the owner of" the local Avondale streetcar company. His brother J.N.C. Stockton built the street car that ran through Avondale a decade before Avondale was built, in order to get people to his (J.N.C. Stockton's) new suburb of Ortega. I think you are confused about the names of the Stockton brothers.

Avondale was not a so-called "streetcar suburb" just because it had a streecar. It was designed to attract the new upper class who owned  automobiles. Of course the streetcars were a significant but secondary mode of transportation, as was pedestrian traffic. On the other hand, much of Riverside was could be called a "streetcar suburb" because it truly was developed around the streetcar line  (but Telfair Stockton had nothing to do with the development of Riverside.)

This is similar to another of your Internet-researched posts in MetroJacksonville: "Thomas Telfair Stockton, Founder of the Times Union."
Thomas Telfair Stockton was not the founder of the Times Union.  He was also not the founder of Avondale. That was his brother, Telfair Stockton.

J.J. Daniels  and John N.C. Stockton were the principal owners of the Florida Publishing Company, which purchased the Times-Union from Charles H. Jones, who founded the Times-Union in 1883. Three of the Stockton brothers were major sharehoders of the Florida Publishing Company, which purchased the Times-Union in 1888:  Telfair,  T.T. (Thomas Telfair), and John N.C. Stockton. Two of the brothers worked at the newspaper:  John N.C. Stockton was the publisher and  and T.T. (Thomas Telfair) was the newspaper's business manager.

Wayne Wood

[thelakelander]

Wayne, if you don't mind, I'd like to provide a different perspective on a couple of comments.

First, Riverside and Avondale were originally built as residential neighborhoods. The three commercial corridors (5 Points, Park and King, and Avondale Shopping Center) were built well after the residential portions of the neighborhood were developed. They were commercial intrusion from the outset.

Sanborn maps and city directories indicate these areas were sparsely populated for years prior to the installation of streetcar lines and the influx in population growth after the Great Fire.  I'd argue that in some cases, they were not commercial intrusion but a natural part of the organic growth of a community that rapidly increased in population and density in a relatively short time period.  Without these neighborhood commercial districts rising at the same time as the majority of the residences in the district were being constructed, the district we know and love today would not exist or be as vibrant.  With that in mind, the preservation and restoration of the area's commerical zones are just as important to its character as the preservation of its residential architectural structures.

The Avondale Shopping Center came in the decade after Avondale was developed and on land that was not part of the original Avondale subdivision. Notice the sharp demarcation between residential and commercial at Talbot Street.

From what I can tell (via Sanborns, City Directories, and files in the library's Special Collections department), some of the retail along St. Johns Avenue was initially developed during the same time period as Telfair Stockton's initial Avondale development between Talbot and Seminole.  For example, the Emly Benham building Mellow Mushroom wants to buy was constructed in 1922.

Nevertheless, the sharp demarcation between residential and commercial between these two areas can also be contributed to the initial Avondale development (beween Talbot and Seminole) having deed restrictions to keep out apartments, offices, commercial, etc.  This would be no different today than our land use regulations allowing a Publix anchored shopping center on one block and single family homes immediately adjacent to it on another block.

Thus, naturally, the commercial to support the residential needs would then rise on the peripheral.  Similar to this, Polk County doesn't allow strip clubs.  Thus the need/desire/market for such activity still exists so several strip clubs have opened up on the opposite side of the county line.  Same concept but different uses in a different community.

Like the Shops of Avondale, there's another sharp demarcation between residential and commercial at Edgewood and Plymouth, the northern border of the original Avondale development.  We tend to overlook it because of the railroad tracks, the widening of Demere Street into Roosevelt Boulevard and that part of the old Edgewood development now known as Murray Hill.

Second, Avondale was built for cars, not based on trolleys. The subdivision was marketed to upper income families who had automobiles. Virtually every house had a driveway and a garage.

It was certainly built to accommodate cars just like it accommodated bicycles, and pedestrians.  However, there's no doubt that it was built around streetcar lines already in place.  In essence, that makes it a TOD (Transit Oriented Development).  Based on the era of time and the transportation technology of that time period, it's probably most accurate to claim it was a multimodal development where residents had a variety of mobility options for short and long trips.  In the long run, I believe that's the direction we must return to from a transportation planning standpoint.  Not only for Riverside/Avondale, but the majority of pre-consolidated Jacksonville in general.

The trolley line which served Ortega was three blocks distant from the Avondale Shopping Center. Angled parking for cars was built into the shopping center, with apparently just the right amount of parking spaces to support the commercial district without having cars spill over into the residential area.

No denying this.  However, the period of time was a different one.  The boutiques of the shops today were not there initially.  Instead there were grocery stores, cleaners, drug stores, meat markets, etc. to support the every day needs of nearby residences.  It would not be surprising if most of the mobility trips made to the shops during the neighborhood's early years were on foot instead of car or trolleys.  Documents in the special collections department also refer to an express bus line being implemented in Murray Hill and Avondale in 1933.  Unfortunately, I have not been able to dig up the exact route of this system at this point.

You recently seem bent on trying to prove that intensive commercial development, e.g., Kickbacks and the Mellow Mushroom along with their inherent increase in traffic and parking problems, are not only good for the residential neighborhood but have a manifest birthright to be there. Stop. Riverside and Avondale were originally designed and built as residential neighborhoods. Commercial intrusion has been damaging the the quality of living in these communities for many years, especially in the last five decades, which has resulted in several hundreds homes being demolished.

I'd argue that the redevelopment of the area's commercial strips are positives instead of negatives.  We just need to find the correct balance that doesn't allow either use (residential or commerical) to intrude on the other.  This is where we need to be seeking, planning, and implementing multimodal transportation solutions, just like the area's original developers did 100 years ago.  If we can do that, the area will be even better than it is today and those on both sides of the table will prosper.

[grimss]

Lake, Stephen, I respect your diligence and research as I have, in far smaller measure, been engaged intermittently in my own historical enthusiasms. It is tremendously gratifying to believe you've discovered something others have not. However, what my own efforts have taught me is to never disregard how much harder--and more intense and authentic--the process of research was in the pre-Internet era, and certainly NEVER to believe that what I've found on the Internet is actually"new" information.

To your credit, Lake, I know you've assiduously hunted down primary source documents, and I assume Stephen has done the same. However, I must note that in Wayne's world, such primary research is not even a question; he's hunted it ALL down, collating and making sense of everything that was available--and probably helping put it in the form that you're now accessing (despite not having the Internet to "index previously hard to coordinate facts.") To assume your "modern" assessment is more accurate than Wayne's "historical" assessment is dangerous. As Wayne noted, there's lots of room for misinterpretation and error when you're piecing together disparate bits of information.

As an aside, I'd like to share one of my most treasured research sessions with Wayne. I've developed a passion for learning more about "Rochester House" (now known as "River House") on River Blvd. in the St. Johns Quarter of Riverside.  Once Wayne realized my interest was sincere, he took me out to an anonymous office strip mall off JTB to view and interpret for myself what are the only property records to survive the Great Fire of 1901. (These are the bound records that two brave souls stored in a boat and rowed across the St. Johns to escape the flames.) He introduced me to one of the caretakers of the records (who let me explore to my heart's content) and never once tried to prejudice my opinion (as sometimes happens here).

My point is that Wayne is CONSTANTLY enriching his own knowledge of our neighborhood and our city; he's not wedded to any theories he developed 40 years ago; to accuse him of such is a tremendous insult that speaks more to your own hubris than his.

[grimss]

I'd argue that the redevelopment of the area's commercial strips are positives instead of negatives.  We just need to find the correct balance that doesn't allow either use (residential or commerical) to intrude on the other.  This is where we need to be seeking, planning, and implementing multimodal transportation solutions, just like the area's original developers did 100 years ago.  If we can do that, the area will be even better than it is today and those on both sides of the table will prosper.

Lake, I certainly agree with you here. Our vibrant commercial strips play a key role in attracting new people to our neighborhood. However, I don't believe the commercial districts are the only--or even the primary--determinent in anyone's decision to buy here. That also means the needs of the commercials districts shouldn't automatically trump the rights of the residents.

[thelakelander]

Lake, Stephen, I respect your diligence and research as I have, in far smaller measure, been engaged intermittently in my own historical enthusiasms. It is tremendously gratifying to believe you've discovered something others have not. However, what my own efforts have taught me is to never disregard how much harder--and more intense and authentic--the process of research was in the pre-Internet era, and certainly NEVER to believe that what I've found on the Internet is actually"new" information.

Grimms, let me separate myself from this particular quote and response.  You won't find one instance on this forum or in person where I have ever disregarded anyone's process of research whether it was internet or pre-internet era.  I incorporate all methods of research into shaping my opinion on all issues and regularly fact check various sources against once another.  With that being said, we all have our various perspectives and opinions on the facts.  I don't think I've disrespected anyone here in my presentation and understanding of the documentation and material I've researched that has led me to my point of view.  If so, it certainly isn't intended.  I'm only providing a view of the situation and material from my understanding of my studies.

[thelakelander]

I'd argue that the redevelopment of the area's commercial strips are positives instead of negatives.  We just need to find the correct balance that doesn't allow either use (residential or commerical) to intrude on the other.  This is where we need to be seeking, planning, and implementing multimodal transportation solutions, just like the area's original developers did 100 years ago.  If we can do that, the area will be even better than it is today and those on both sides of the table will prosper.

Lake, I certainly agree with you here. Our vibrant commercial strips play a key role in attracting new people to our neighborhood. However, I don't believe the commercial districts are the only--or even the primary--determinent in anyone's decision to buy here. That also means the needs of the commercials districts shouldn't automatically trump the rights of the residents.

If there is one thing I'd like to drive home in this conversation is that this should not be a debate over commercial districts automatically trumping the rights of residents or vise versa.  Both of these uses are a part of several things that combine the make the neighborhood the special place it is today.  The key to the area's success should focus on providing the correct balance that provides fair opportunity to all. 

We should never start off looking at a place like Kickbacks or Mellow Mushroom as a bad thing.  Your final product is what you make it.  View these proposals and others like them as opportunities to enhance the neighborhood and then work with building owners for solutions that actually do just this.  The same goes for the residential side of things.

With that said, in any urban area, there is not one particular thing that makes or breaks it.  A community's sense of place and the mixture of its uses combine to create the atmosphere that attracts people of all ages, races, cultural and economic backgrounds.

[grimss]

Lake, Stephen, I respect your diligence and research as I have, in far smaller measure, been engaged intermittently in my own historical enthusiasms. It is tremendously gratifying to believe you've discovered something others have not. However, what my own efforts have taught me is to never disregard how much harder--and more intense and authentic--the process of research was in the pre-Internet era, and certainly NEVER to believe that what I've found on the Internet is actually"new" information. Grimms, let me separate myself from this particular quote and response.  You won't find one instance on this forum or in person where I have ever disregarded anyone's process of research whether it was internet or pre-internet era.  I incorporate all methods of research into shaping my opinion on all issues and regularly fact check various sources against once another.  With that being said, we all have our various perspectives and opinions on the facts.  I don't think I've disrespected anyone here in my presentation and understanding of the documentation and material I've researched that has led me to my point of view.  If so, it certainly isn't intended.  I'm only providing a view of the situation and material from my understanding of my studies.

Lake, I have nothing but respect for the diligence you've shown in researching historical facts and creating compelling narratives from said facts. Indeed that, and other wonderful qualities you exhibit, is why I unhesitatingly recommended you for service on the board of the Jacksonville Historical Society. (It goes without saying that I am thrilled you accepted such service.) I am merely cautioning that we all have a tendency to assume the information we've unearthed is better than what someone else has found, and in the case of Dr. Wood's efforts, we should all have the respect to tread lightly.

[thelakelander]

I am merely cautioning that we all have a tendency to assume the information we've unearthed is better than what someone else has found, and in the case of Dr. Wood's efforts, we should all have the respect to tread lightly.

^However, I must point out I have not even done this.  My response to Wayne's comments is to provide a different perspective based on the same stack of facts.  I love Wayne, and respect his work.  I have stacks and stacks of Wayne's work right on my desk and use them as resources regularly.  I also have no ill will for RAP and believe that the community would not be what it is today without the hard work of the organization and the neighborhood's residents.  Nevertheless, this doesn't mean all of our opinions on the same stack of facts or topics will come out to be the same.  Independence is what makes life worth living and places like Riverside/Avondale special.

[Bella]

I just want to say that developing urban areas with businesses that are within walking distance is actually just what we need from a practical point of view. 

I lived in Europe for five years and there is a reason that developing neighborhoods with local businesses are so successful there...It is functional and convenient. 

I recently moved back to Jacksonville after living abroad for 20 years.  I was pleasantly surprised by the maturity in the Jacksonville urban areas compared to other less matured cities.  I believe that mimicking the "village" style neighborhoods in Europe can be beneficial for all urban areas. 

I left Europe and moved to Alaska, where they have a very strict zoning such as Mr. Wood appears to be suggesting.  I think his heart is in the right place and he articulates his opinion quite convincingly, but I believe people want to go back to the "tribe" feeling where we are all part of a whole.  People are very lonely and we need a way to connect close to home. 

Having dealt with this very type of segregation of some businesses when I lived in  Alaska, I am not impressed with the idea of removing resturants like "Mellow Mushroom" etc....  The outcome is inconvenient at best.  One can only drive to dinner, shopping and local conveniences that could be at your fingertips in your very neighborhood are far removed, take time away from your family to travel to and have not "close to home feel".  It is especially difficult for families who have to take the very inept transit system.  I can only give you the negatives that exist in the "reality" of living business being autonomous from neighborhoods. 

If we were to emulate a village setting, like they have in Europe, you would have a "central part of an urban area that has all the amenities of shopping, food and necessity right in one place.  Then you have the neighborhood circling the shops.  Some have the shops at the beginning of a small village, like that of Avondale, Riverside and San Marco.  These urban conveniences allowed families to take walks to eat, play, shop and find entertainment. 
Twenty one years ago, I actually chose to live in San Marco and at that time it was less developed than it is now.  I saved on gas, I was more healthy and it promoted an esoteric community of friends that always met at local restaurants and supported local businesses and also saved on gas and protected the environment with one action.  I only found this to be positive.

I hope more neighborhoods can get on board with this in Jacksonville.  I know that the more upscale neighborhoods like Ponte Vedra in Jacksonville, are already far ahead of this theme and it seems to be working quite splendidly for them.  When you have communities like the Country Clubs and amenities surrounding you, not only do you feel more of a sense of family, but you are enjoying the joys of life that existed and were in place for a very long time before we tried to "restructure and separate". 

I appreciate everyone's opinion on this thread, and hope that others will chime in as well with their experiences.
Sincerely, Bella

[wowowow]

Dear Dr. Wood.  Perhaps I share my confusion with the United States Supreme Court:

U.S. Supreme Court
ORTEGA CO. v. TRIAY, 260 U.S. 103 (1922)
260 U.S. 103

ORTEGA CO.
v.
TRIAY.
No. 75.

Argued Oct. 18, 19, 1922.
Decided Nov. 13, 1922.

Messrs. Herman Ulmer and W. T. Stockton, both of Jacksonville, Fla., for appellant. [260 U.S. 103, 104]   Messrs. Peter O. Knight, of Tampa, Fla., and J. L. Doggett, of Jacksonville, Fla., for appellee.

Mr. Justice McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.

It would be curious indeed for the Court to have made such a grave error in the case, especially since 1922 was the same time that William Telfair Stockton was also selling Avondale homes.

Shocking stuff indeed for them to have arbitrarily chosen the name of the wrong brother as part of their finding.

Perhaps a terse letter blasting this sloppiness to the Supreme Court is in order.

For your convenience, here is the mailing order.

Justice (or Chief Justice) (Justice's Full Name)
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543

[/quote]
The Supreme Court got it right.  A terse letter blasting their sloppiness is not in order.

W.T. Stockton was NOT Telfair Stockton. William T. Stockton was Telfair Stockton's nephew, the son of J.N.C. Stockton who was the founder of the Ortega Co.

William T. Stockton was an attorney admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme, and if you read your above citation carefully, you'll see that he was representing the appellant in this case, which was the Ortega Co.  His father J.N.C. Stockton passed away just 9 months before this case was argued. [citation Gold's History of Duval County, Florida, pp.665-675.]

I'm sorry this discussion has gotten rather tedious. If it results in nothing more than your starting to use simple footnotes for your historical assertions and encouraging your contributors to do the same, then MetroJacksonville's credibility would be greatly enhanced.

Wayne Wood

[Timkin]

Actually Dr Wood... The discussion is enlightening.   On a side note, I remember my Grandmother saying they purchased their Ortega home ( actually closer to Venetia) from the Stocktons.  I do not know if this is the same folks as you mention above , but given the time frame they purchased (1940)  , I would bet it had to be.

Thank you sir, for your contributions .

[wowowow]

I'd argue that the redevelopment of the area's commercial strips are positives instead of negatives.  We just need to find the correct balance that doesn't allow either use (residential or commerical) to intrude on the other.  This is where we need to be seeking, planning, and implementing multimodal transportation solutions, just like the area's original developers did 100 years ago.  If we can do that, the area will be even better than it is today and those on both sides of the table will prosper.

Lakelander --

Thanks for your thoughtful discourse. I especially appreciate you citing the reference you have used in forming your conclusions, which are among the same ones I rely on. I find nothing in your discussion to really disagree with, except that I would argue that IF there had been no streetcar line passing through the original Avondale subdivision, it would still have been built, exactly as it was. It was an amazing real estate deal, and Telfair Stockton was the quintessential promoter. The streetcars were an amenity, not Avondale's raison d'etre.

The small commercial shopping areas are the crown jewels of the Riverside Avondale Historic District. They give the neighborhood a human scale and contribute to its pedestrian/bicycling friendliness, which I extolled in the first book I ever wrote back in 1976. Finding the correct balance between commercial and residential is the key, as you have said. The R/A neighborhood is primarily and unequivocally a residential neighborhood. When commercial businesses intrude into the residential areas, the desirable residential qualities of the neighborhood go down quickly. At one point there was an effort to rezone much of the area between the Avondale Shopping Center and Boone Park, so the resulting extension of the commercial strip would have gobbled up many homes. RAP helped to defeat this. I'm glad, aren't you?

If a new business overburdens the parking capacity of any of these neighborhood commercial districts, it not only does it hurt the existing businesses but it causes adverse quality-of-life problems for the nearby residents. Balance is the key.

Wayne Wood

[wowowow]

Even so, It just doesn't explain away why Telfair Stockton is listed as the President of North Jacksonville Street Railway.

Let me list the citation again:

North Jacksonville Street Railway, Town & Improvement Co.

Plant and equipment - Miles of track (electric), 6.4; gauge 5 ft; 4 cars; power rented from city of Jacksonville.

Parks and Amusement Resorts - Roosevelt Park, at northern limits of city.

Officers - Pres. Telfair Stockton; Sec. Samuel P. Holmes; Treas. Ernest C. Budd; Gen. Man. L.A. Sohier; Supt. E.T. Smith.

Directors - Telfair Stockton, E.C. Budd, S.P. Holmes, H. Mason, F.C. Elwes.

General Office and Repair Shop at car barn, Roosevelt Park, Jacksonville, FL

Date of Information, March 1907.

Telfair Stockton WAS indeed the president of the North Jacksonville Street Railway, Town & Improvement Co..

That streetcar line went through Springfield!

He did not own the street car line that went through Avondale, which was one of the central points in your earlier post which argued that Telfair Stockton created Avondale to serve his streetcar business.

[thelakelander]

Lakelander --

Thanks for your thoughtful discourse. I especially appreciate you citing the reference you have used in forming your conclusions, which are among the same ones I rely on. I find nothing in your discussion to really disagree with, except that I would argue that IF there had been no streetcar line passing through the original Avondale subdivision, it would still have been built, exactly as it was. It was an amazing real estate deal, and Telfair Stockton was the quintessential promoter. The streetcars were an amenity, not Avondale's raison d'etre.

Thanks.  I don't disagree with this.  I believe the accessibility of the streetcar was an amenity just like the development's public parks and proximity to the river were.  These amenities (and others) combined with the real estate deal resulted in the crown jewel that remains today.

At one point there was an effort to rezone much of the area between the Avondale Shopping Center and Boone Park, so the resulting extension of the commercial strip would have gobbled up many homes. RAP helped to defeat this. I'm glad, aren't you?

Yes.  What year did this happen?

If a new business overburdens the parking capacity of any of these neighborhood commercial districts, it not only does it hurt the existing businesses but it causes adverse quality-of-life problems for the nearby residents. Balance is the key.

My key purpose for participating in these threads is to help promote potential solutions that define what that balance should be and concepts that gain better utilization of parking capacity and multimodal use.