Solving State & Union; The key to a healthy and vibrant urban core

[Mathew1056]

Recently, The problems that State and Union Street face have been brought in to the spotlight with the city expressing interest in turning the Old Armory, located on State, into a day center for the homeless. The Springfield community came out in force to stop the plan that they felt would threaten the vitality of the historic neighborhood. Currently, other locations are being evaluated. Springfielders are sensitive to issues relating to State and Union. A high concentration of missions are located within a few blocks and the main bus transfer station is located between the two roads. Vagrancy traffic is common. To most of Jacksonville the roads serve only to move vehicle traffic from Arlington and the beaches to the Westside. Most drivers do not divert to stop in at a local boutique or take a side trip to the beautiful Confederate Park. My point in all of this is that State and Union are well recognized as places that people do not want to be. So I pose the question to the thoughtful minds at MetroJacksonville, What will it take to make those streets a place people want to go?

As I see it, the keystone in this debate is the traffic that pours off 95 and the Arlington Expressway. This traffic creates a ridged border between the population center of Springfield and the economic potential of downtown. The movement between these historically connected communities should be more fluid. Bike lanes should be painted denoting safe routes for travelers. Park systems should extend into both districts encouraging more pedestrian movement. The most difficult task lies in how to deal with thousands of vehicles speeding down what equates to a street level expressway. Until traffic is diverted I'm convinced that all of the economic, social, environmental, and safety problems confronting this area will persist. It will continue not just in the immediate State and Union area, but also the entirety of the communities that make up the urban core.

With this logic in mind I propose that the best solution is another bridge. It sounds crazy, but this may be one of those instances that more expressway may lead to a more walkable city. Thousands of vehicles should not be allowed to flow through downtown unless the intention is to actually contributing to its economy. Let's make a place worth caring about, not one that we pass through.

[thelakelander]

I'd simply change the land use policies and market them as commercial corridors for infill mixed-use development.  They'll still be busy streets but it will be much easier and desirable to cross them if there is something there worth walking to.  Another option to reduce traffic is to encourage more traffic to use the MLK Parkway.

[Mathew1056]

@thelakelander

I believe that is the way things are headed. McDonald's and Family Dollar are moving in right across the street from the Old Armory. My concern with that type of development is that it is still largely autocentric. It is hard to find community in a McDonald's off the side of a freeway. What the urban core has that the rest of suburban Jacksonville doesn't is scale. It's streets were build to handle a scale of movement that we do not enjoy today. One-way streets with timed stop lights were an after thought. It's really about feeling accommodated. I walk to State and Union and I feel like a pedestrian on the side of a freeway. When I walk down Laura Street I feel the elements in place are for the safety and enjoyment of me, the pedestrian. I guess the question is what kind of growth do we want?

[thelakelander]

You can change scale, character, and the environment of that corridor without constructing a $800M to $1B bridge. There needs to be a change in land use policy to encourage pedestrian scale infill and redevelopment. Do that and it will resemble walkable arterials found in vibrant cities across the country.

[Mathew1056]

My concern with just changing policy and forging ahead with pedestrian guidelines is the disfranchisement of those who live in Arlington and the beaches. In this instance it would be a zero-sum game when it comes to favoring cars or people. All that would entail an effective pedestrian strategy, i.e. traffic calming, two-way streets, slower speeds, less lanes, and unsynchronized lights, would in turn reduce the connectivity Arlington shares with the Western side of the river. The core is far more important, but is connecting one community at the expense of another really making progress? I do not doubt that a bridge project of such a scale would cost quite a bit. I guess when i look at how the dynamics of the city would change by the addition of such a bridge I see a better connected city for everyone, and a downtown with a better potential for infill development based on need instead of passing traffic.

[dougskiles]

If DT is the priority, our transportation systems should lead to DT as the destination.

I don't understand what economic benefit would result from a faster trip between Arlington and the westside.  Many forward thinking cities (like the recently featured Oklahoma City article) are taking their elevated freeways down because they know business happens at street level.  The property devaluation that occurs along the elevated freeway is a neighborhood killer.  Just look at all the shuttered restaurants along the BJP overpasses.

The two-waying of both streets, with street parking and signals that slow traffic will result in far more economic development.  The signals could be timed for safe pedestrian crossing and we would regain the pedestrian connection between Springfield and DT.

[Mathew1056]

If you were to pull up a map of Oklahoma City and look at the freeway you are describing you would find that the project is not as worth while as it initially sounds. Rather than removing one of the states busiest routes, the highway  is  being rerouted to a larger more modern freeway only a few blocks south. It is hardly the accomplishment it is being touted as.

A better connection between Arlington and westside really equates to a better connection between two large halves of the city. a faster connection between the two section results in economic benefits on many levels. Anne just got a job in Jacksonville and is looking for a place to move that is affordable and conveniently located. Based on where her job may be it may be a large contributing factor into weather she buys into a certain neighborhood. Property becomes more desirable when it is better connected to its surroundings. It works the same way when a business is setting up shop. Easy access results in businesses relocating. If Tallyrand is easier to get in and out of it may attract new clients and save money for those that already call it home. Better connectivity changes the everyday decision making of each and every person who lives in the affected area.

Think of it this way. In 1998 a 56k internet connection changed the way people interacted with the internet. Fast forward to today where a DSL connection seems to be the norm and you get a much more vibrant internet with more economic potential than ever. The increase in speed changed the dynamics the web and created the internet we use today. Regardless of the medium, both connection devices, whether a bridge or a fiber-optic cable, are connecting people and ideas with other people and ideas. Making these connections faster or more convenient plays into the emergent nature of human society. All this is still just a fridge benefit of the overall good a faster link would do for the State and Union area.   

[thelakelander]

^Cities are now resolving this with fixed transit connectivity instead of highways, which have been historically proven to be major negatives for urban neighborhoods.  Nevertheless, I still fail to see how a new bridge changes State and Union.  What type of environment do you envision State and Union transforming into by a new bridge being built along the St. Nicholas riverfront?

[Mathew1056]

I'm willing to bet that even the best world class cities are not the void of a freeway or two. Unfortunately it is the world we live in and it's a world the Republicans are not going to give up anytime soon. What i envision is not any substantial lengthening of the system. It would simply add a connection that did not exist before. The resulting change in traffic patterns would possible negate the need for the Mathews expressway and a more cohesively connected urban core which can better infill and attract worthwhile businesses that people desire to go to and stay. I'm in no way shape or form in support of the Outer Beltway project, or similar ventures. Humans have lived in civil societies for thousands of years, suburbia is not civil society. If the city's nucleus is healthy it is in a better place to extend that health further out. I see health as effective public transportation. 

[Debbie Thompson]

Ideally, make them two way.  That would cut down on the speeding through there mentality.  They really are virtual expressways.  Everytime I slow down to turn right on Main, I'm afraid I'll get rear ended by someone barreling along who hasn't noticed I'd like to turn before we get all the way to I-95. :-)  If they were regular downtown feeder streets, traffic could still use them to navigate between the Matthews Bridge and I-95, just not at the speed of light.

[thelakelander]

I'm willing to bet that even the best world class cities are not the void of a freeway or two. Unfortunately it is the world we live in and it's a world the Republicans are not going to give up anytime soon. What i envision is not any substantial lengthening of the system. It would simply add a connection that did not exist before. The resulting change in traffic patterns would possible negate the need for the Mathews expressway and a more cohesively connected urban core which can better infill and attract worthwhile businesses that people desire to go to and stay. I'm in no way shape or form in support of the Outer Beltway project, or similar ventures. Humans have lived in civil societies for thousands of years, suburbia is not civil society. If the city's nucleus is healthy it is in a better place to extend that health further out. I see health as effective public transportation. 

Between this and replacing the Matthews Bridge, we'd be looking at spending over $2 billion dollars on capital costs alone.  If we could muster up that kind of cash, we could literally rebuild the entire urban core into whatever we wanted.  $2 billion could literally fund a comprehensive county wide mass transit system.

Also, there is no need for a Matthews Bridge Expressway.  It and the Hart Bridge Expressway should be removed and turned into grand boulevards when their life spans end.  Furthermore, siphoning off traffic is a sure fire way to hurt your chances at market rate commercial development.  Looking no further than Jacksonville's city limits, the construction of our original expressway system directly led to the decline of several historical commercial corridors (ex. Main, Davis, Edison, Florida, etc.) throughout the city.  The traffic counts on State and Union are actually assets that we aren't utilizing to our advantage. We can improve the area without spending significant capital costs and long term maintenance costs with a structure that will never pay for itself.  That's cash that could be used in improving our mass transit, cultural institutions, public schools, parks, police/fire, etc.

[Debbie Thompson]

Go, Lake!  You think big.  Knock those suckers down now, and build the grand boulevards. Encourage development all along that corridor that's currently in the shadow of the expressways.  Why wait 20 or 50 years more?  By the time their "life span" ends, we could have done it now and have a vibrant area where they currently sit.

I won't hold my breath.  But it sure is a good idea.

[strider]

Hmmm, from a everyday person's perspective, this new bridge seems to do nothing but destroy another older neighborhood (St. Nicolas?) but might redevelop Arlington? And I don't see any benefit to State and Union?   I suppose that after it was built, you could do what many are hoping for and turn State and Union into those grand boulevards, but then the commuter traffic would go the new way and state and union may no longer justify the commercial development then?

It seems to me that the entire issue with the roads Downtown is that they do nothing but attempt to move traffic right on through.  They make it hard to go anywhere in the urban core but easy to get out of it. That needs to change to make the urban core successful.  And if you can do that, make the urban core a place people want to see and be, then the commuters won't mind a bit longer commute, in fact, they will look forward to stopping off in the urban core to meet a friend or to pick up that special meal they can't get anywhere else. Another way out of the Urban Core is the last thing we seem to need.

At least, that is how this layman sees it.

[acme54321]

Yeah I live right at the western foot of the "eighth bridge" being discussed, not a fan of that idea.  We have plenty of bridges downtown.

I'm with the camp that that elevated hart bridge and the expressway section west of MLK expressway should be removed at the end of their useful lives.  Let MLK continue to connect to the bridges as an expesssway for those that are trying to get from I-95 to Arlington/Beaches.

[Ocklawaha]

This is the rendering of the 'Core to Shore' redevelopment of OKC, the east-west (left to right) jog of the new freeway and the future boulevard on the old freeway route is easy to spot. The change in the nature of the neighborhood is stunning.

That OKC freeway is actually far more incredible then you realize. The North Canadian River typically has a flood plain, along this flood plain and just above the levees was an old abandoned railroad yard and sundry pipe yards (acres of metal pipes and materials used in the oil fields - definitely not picturesque).

In the meanwhile, the old I-40 through downtown was exactly the type of freeway on a bridge that you describe. It did absolutely NOTHING for the vibrancy of downtown and even though it was entirely elevated, it might as well have been a 30 foot high wall. Everything south of the freeway rotted away in a no mans land of a clinking, clanking, clattering collection of caliginous junk.

Killing that freeway was the key to opening the former south side of that super slab to rehabilitation and that rehabilitation has come on fast and furious, even before the old route has been completely disassembled. Now there are plans for a grand Parisian style boulevard, a lineal park and fixed route mass transit to replace the route of those old bridges.

So OKC is not only relevant, it is an example of smashing success by doing the precise opposite of another elevated freeway. BTW, the new I-40 is largely at surface level. I was involved in the early stages of the planning in downtown OKC, as one who was there, the result of taking downtown pedestrian has changed the course of their history.

Simply changing the ramps to and from the Hart and Matthews Bridges to create a wide inviting link onto MLK, and taking down both the Commodore Point and Arlington Expressways west of those bridge ramps. replacing them with context sensitive tree lined, two way boulevards, would change the face of Jacksonville. Toss in an extended Skyway (Bay Street and Hogan) and Streetcar (Beaver and Duval) and the north and east side of downtown would flourish.

Jacksonville has much better fabric to work with, but Jurassic leadership driving the bus.