Should We Pay Professionals To Live Downtown?

[Overstreet]

I seemed to read that the companies were paying incentives.

What advantage would a downtown company have with people living closer?  Most folks fund their own comuting cost. They show up for work in most all kinds of weather. Our last snow day was in 1989. Most companies can close a day or two anyhow.

Why would a company pay more to get something they already get?

Granted certain professions have recall requirements. For example transplant teams on stand by often have 30 minute recall distance requirements.  Which could be still in the burbs since we are talking off hours not normal duty hours.

[thelakelander]

The program isn't limited to their downtown. Midtown and New Center (the other hoods along the proposed streetcar line) are also included. Locally, it would be like including the Eastside, Springfield, Sugar Hill, Durkeeville, etc.

[thelakelander]

Overstreet, I guess civic pride and the need to compete globally for high skilled workers. A few of the companies recently relocated from the burbs to DT Detroit.

[urbanlibertarian]

Another advantage for DT companies to have employees living close by is less demand for employee parking options.  Parking seems to be a consistent obstacle to locating corporate offices DT.

[urbaknight]

living DT and close to work eliminates the need to drive and pay to park. That alone would be all the incentive one would need. Not to disagree with the points made in this article, I think they're great, just thought I'd add to it.

[Kiva]

Downtown is slowly attracting more small business, restaurants, bars etc. Once the downtown area is busy in the evenings people are going to want to live there. You don't need to pay them.

[thelakelander]

^Downtown Detroit was slowly attracting more small business, restaurants, bars, etc. as well (probably a little faster than us).  Instead of taking 10 to 20 years to slowly fill in (our current pace and their former), they want more immediate results in years 0-5. Thus, the incentive program, streetcar, and bike projects they are investing in.

When it's all said and done, time becomes the primary reason for aggressive incentive programs. In 2000, Philly did something similar and attracted 25,000 people to Center City within a 5 year period.  In Charlotte, they gave enough money away to a college to get them to close locations in other states and move to Uptown Charlotte in the early 2000s.  All of this boils down to time.  Do little and revitalize slowly over decades, like Jax, or get aggressive and rapidly speed the process up.

[jaxlore]

^^DT is already busy at night. I have to circle the block a few times to find parking near bay street, whereas a few years ago, i would pull right up. (Core trolly service anyone?) I am with Lake stop giving incentives to companies that open up in the suburbs. If they want to open up out there they can use there own cash. Jax needs to get agressive and the current city council is not suited for that.

[DDC]

I agree with Jaxlore. In the evenings especially from mid to end of the week, Parking can get scarce from Bay to Adams and all the surrounding cross streets. I like the idea of incentives to come downtown instead of the 'burbs. When I go out, I rarely venture out much farther than Riverside. I like the Downtown and Springfield area to much.

[Tacachale]

Lake, I highly doubt this one project led to all that progress in Detroit. There are other things we need to get to first-notably, increasing our residential options.

[thelakelander]

You're right.  This one project didn't lead to all the progress.  The worker incentive policy is being implemented to push everything over the top. 

Over the last decade or so, major investment has been put into their urban core parks and efforts have been made to successfully convince companies to move thousands of workers from the burbs back to downtown.  On CEO alone is responsible for moving 7,000 workers back since 2010.  In addition, the city is aggressively adding an urban core bike facility network.  Their "civic council" has also pooled $100 million in private funds for a 4 mile modern streetcar line that will break ground this year.

Nevertheless, keep in mind, that things are being implemented simultaneously.  The goal appears to create a vibrant urban center by 2015 instead of 2025 or 2030.

[simms3]

I would hate to stoop so low that Jacksonville has to be compared to Detroit.

Jacksonville: has a *much* better climate, low tax environment, business friendly environment, on the coast, diverse economy, growing state and growing city, etc etc etc

Look, if Charlotte and Nashville and Raleigh and Salt Lake City and Orlando and Oklahoma City can get residents downtown without the kind of coaxing that this article presents, then so can Jacksonville.  One thing common to a few of these cities (Austin, Charlotte, Nashville in particular) is a plethora of hometown hero real estate developers.  One thing common to all of these cities is a major hometown based private partner(s).

Jacksonville should be able to rely on its hometown private leaders, but it needs its top public leaders, such as the Mayor, to really call on these guys and nudge these guys to do something.  For instance, as discussed on another thread, if the mayor were to leverage his relationships and call on the top private leaders in Jacksonville who are invested in downtown, real estate, or attracting educated young professionals, then it shouldn't be too hard to get the deepest pockets in the city to start opening up to the idea of fixing parks and public spaces and beefing up museums/institutions, etc.

It is true that Philly fell pretty far, but it isn't true that they were ever on Detroit's level or to a level where tumbleweeds were blowing down sidewalks.  The south side of Center City around Rittenhouse Park has always been an expensive, prestigious area to live in and Walnut Street shopping is not a new phenomenon (this area is 2 blocks south of Market St right in the heart of downtown).  In fact, Philly is still really rough around the edges, and will likely always be.  Sure there is a lot of money in the city (an ungodly amount compared to anywhere in the South) and major institutions such as Penn, the Ben Franklin Institute, etc, and an ungodly amount of tourist traffic relative to the South, but it is and will always be a blue collar NE city.

Jacksonville has the ability to follow in the footsteps of Nashville, Charlotte, Greenville, Indianapolis, Oklahoma City, and Salt Lake City.  A constant flow of new money, the right environment to naturally attract business and people, a perfect climate, a coastal location, and a decent amount of influential private leaders should be enough to light the fuse for change in the city.  Philly is not a good comparison (6 million person established city where a decline means "only" 50,000 residents and 300,000 workers downtown).  Detroit is not a good comparison because it probably is literally a dead city (hate to say it, but everyone is thinking it).

[Noone]

This was introduced at city council on Tues. 1/22/13 2013-55 Ordinance waiving Sec 116.910 (Residence Within the City;Exception) Ord. Code, to allow Rehire of 45 JSO officers; Provide for Sunset Provisions. Forget Downtown don't even live in Jacksonville.

[thelakelander]

I would hate to stoop so low that Jacksonville has to be compared to Detroit.

Jacksonville: has a *much* better climate, low tax environment, business friendly environment, on the coast, diverse economy, growing state and growing city, etc etc etc

Our urban core has an eerily similar population decline.  We've also seen less urban redevelopment in the last decade than they have.  We aren't as far apart as most tend to believe.

Look, if Charlotte and Nashville and Raleigh and Salt Lake City and Orlando and Oklahoma City can get residents downtown without the kind of coaxing that this article presents, then so can Jacksonville.  One thing common to a few of these cities (Austin, Charlotte, Nashville in particular) is a plethora of hometown hero real estate developers.  One thing common to all of these cities is a major hometown based private partner(s).

Nashville and Austin have major universities  near their downtowns.  However, Charlotte and Oklahoma City are two places that have put their money where their mouth is.  They've tossed around more cash to stimulate downtown redevelopment than Jacksonville and Detroit combined.  For example, if we were Charlotte, there's no way Florida Coastal School of Law would have ended up in Baymeadows.  By the same token, if we were as serious about downtown as Oklahoma City, we would have put up the cash to restore Hogans Creek two decades ago.  We may have a similar metro/urban area population of some of these places but we definitely aren't investing in our core at the same rate.

Jacksonville should be able to rely on its hometown private leaders, but it needs its top public leaders, such as the Mayor, to really call on these guys and nudge these guys to do something.  For instance, as discussed on another thread, if the mayor were to leverage his relationships and call on the top private leaders in Jacksonville who are invested in downtown, real estate, or attracting educated young professionals, then it shouldn't be too hard to get the deepest pockets in the city to start opening up to the idea of fixing parks and public spaces and beefing up museums/institutions, etc.

These other places are doing this and more.  That's my basic point.  If you want a quick turnaround, you get aggressive with policies that encourage it.  Detroit's policy towards getting professionals to flock there is only one form on an aggressive policy.  Miami's decision to completely revamp their entire zoning code to Form-based is an example of another. If you want your revitalization process to take 20-30 years, continue to do what we're doing.

It is true that Philly fell pretty far, but it isn't true that they were ever on Detroit's level or to a level where tumbleweeds were blowing down sidewalks.  The south side of Center City around Rittenhouse Park has always been an expensive, prestigious area to live in and Walnut Street shopping is not a new phenomenon (this area is 2 blocks south of Market St right in the heart of downtown).  In fact, Philly is still really rough around the edges, and will likely always be.  Sure there is a lot of money in the city (an ungodly amount compared to anywhere in the South) and major institutions such as Penn, the Ben Franklin Institute, etc, and an ungodly amount of tourist traffic relative to the South, but it is and will always be a blue collar NE city.

I'd argue we've reached the point where tumbleweeds are blowing down the sidewalks in significant areas and that it will take decades of infill growth to fill them back up.

Jacksonville has the ability to follow in the footsteps of Nashville, Charlotte, Greenville, Indianapolis, Oklahoma City, and Salt Lake City.  A constant flow of new money, the right environment to naturally attract business and people, a perfect climate, a coastal location, and a decent amount of influential private leaders should be enough to light the fuse for change in the city.  Philly is not a good comparison (6 million person established city where a decline means "only" 50,000 residents and 300,000 workers downtown).  Detroit is not a good comparison because it probably is literally a dead city (hate to say it, but everyone is thinking it).

All of these places are great comparisons, IMO.  Those that are doing best have invested a lot more money in themselves than we have.  In addition, they've aggressively modified public policy and land use regulations to support the environment they desire.  We haven't done that.  Thus the revitalization gulf.  Whether we want to invest in mass transit, parks, pay people to relocate, raise sales tax, pay Everbanks and 220 Riversides to come, etc., all of the moves are the same in that they are being done to level the playing field for feasible development to breathe life back into certain areas of town.  Thus,  good and bad examples across the entire country are fair game for evaluation.

[thelakelander]

With all of this said, here's why I don't immediately brush off this concept as many have done.  The Live Downtown program they've implemented is peanuts compared to the amount of public subsidies we come up with for projects around town.  Right off the top of my head, +$300 million for the first short leg of the Outer Beltway to drive growth right out of Jacksonville's Westside into Clay County.  Nearly $200 million more for a SR 9B to drive growth out of the Southside into St. Johns County.  Another +$137 million over the last decade to expand and extend Collins Road as a reliever to Argyle Forest, Blanding, and a feeder to the Outer Beltway.  $80 million for two overpasses affiliated with Kernan Boulevard.  +$100 million for every major expressway overpass/interchange that needs to be rebuilt. A whopping $350 million on a courthouse that kills blocks of the Northbank at the pedestrian scale level.  Incentives to nearly ever project of decent size over the last decade in downtown. We've already stooped well below a level of a $2 million/year Live Downtown program, which helps quickly create market rate urban core redevelopment opportunities.