Florida's Major Downtowns: How Does Jax Compare?

[thelakelander]

Is what Jacksonville considers to be downtown too spread-out for its own good? Ever wonder how downtown compares in scale and size to other central business districts in Florida? Does pedestrian scale density really matter when it comes to downtown redevelopment and vibrancy? Take a look the maps and information below and let us know your opinion!

Full article: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/floridas-major-downtowns-how-does-jax-compare/

[Pastor Eric Wester]

Thanks for your steady, informative, nuanced and cogent research, writing and commentary, Lake. I have been "lurking" on this site (and it's predecessor) for a few years, mostly out of wanting to observe, read and learn.  My wife and I purchased our desired condo in The Plaza in July. We have just begun shifting our belongings with our permanent relocation slated for a February permanent move. You'll have new neighbors. We are moving from Arlington,VA, by choice. Cost is a significant factor. Climate makes a difference, too. Living here eight years gives us experience and perspective on the pedestrian, bike and transit-oriented locale. Two notable features here is lots of access and high expectations of local, elected officials.

We have hope for Jacksonville's urban development and see real potential by maximizing the river as the definitive asset it is for the downtown. Regarding the JaxMag photos and overlays, the distance/area in downtown JAX is a challenge. Thanks for spotlighting the population and square mileage factors, which (in basic math) calculate for density.  I was in town last week and pleased with signs of development. Progress requires multi-faceted efforts, and the "storefront by storefront" headway really matters. The big projects catapult the progress, so it takes both. There's much that's possible, and when we arrive we hope to inch up the population density by adding two to the numerator.

Thanks for allowing me to be part of the public conversation here. Soon to arrive...and hopeful.

[Tacachale]

Thanks for your steady, informative, nuanced and cogent research, writing and commentary, Lake. I have been "lurking" on this site (and it's predecessor) for a few years, mostly out of wanting to observe, read and learn.  My wife and I purchased our desired condo in The Plaza in July. We have just begun shifting our belongings with our permanent relocation slated for a February permanent move. You'll have new neighbors. We are moving from Arlington,VA, by choice. Cost is a significant factor. Climate makes a difference, too. Living here eight years gives us experience and perspective on the pedestrian, bike and transit-oriented locale. Two notable features here is lots of access and high expectations of local, elected officials.

We have hope for Jacksonville's urban development and see real potential by maximizing the river as the definitive asset it is for the downtown. Regarding the JaxMag photos and overlays, the distance/area in downtown JAX is a challenge. Thanks for spotlighting the population and square mileage factors, which (in basic math) calculate for density.  I was in town last week and pleased with signs of development. Progress requires multi-faceted efforts, and the "storefront by storefront" headway really matters. The big projects catapult the progress, so it takes both. There's much that's possible, and when we arrive we hope to inch up the population density by adding two to the numerator.

Thanks for allowing me to be part of the public conversation here. Soon to arrive...and hopeful.

Welcome to Jax, Pastor!

[thelakelander]

Ditto! Welcome to Jax!

[Kerry]

Pretty nice analysis and I agree that downtown Jax, just like the rest of the City, is simply too spread out.  Earlier this year my son and I decided to walk from 220 to the Ballpark to catch a baseball game.  It took almost 45 minutes.  Even our urbanism is sprawled out.  It is impossible to have walkable urbanism if the sheer distance doesn't make walking possible.

[Adam White]

I disagree (sort of). I don't think it's an issue that the area is large - I think it's an issue of density. No one complains that Manhattan is too large, for example. Density, combined with effective mass-transit systems, makes all the difference.

No one really cares too much about walking long(er) distances if there is a lot of stuff to see and do between point A and point B.

[thelakelander]

The problem Jax faces with an area so large is that it can't quickly build density with current resources because the land area is too large....resulting in our limited resources being spread too thin. The other cities appear to have had faster turnarounds because all of their downtown redevelopment resources have been funneled into significantly smaller areas of land.  In terms of changing the image and stimulating around the clock activity, it's better to get 5 continuous blocks right as opposed to having 20 blocks is sparsely spread out activity.

Until we do the same, don't expect DT Jax to become vibrant at the pedestrian scale level for the foreseeable future. Instead, we'll continue to be what we've been the 1980s. A fairly quiet core with a few isolated nodes of inconsistent activity. Now there's nothing wrong with this if it what the community wants. It's just tiresome to see civic leaders and local media continue attempting to sell every gimmick as the "game changer", 10k residents as some magic number or demolition of vacant buildings as economic development.

[Adam White]

The problem Jax faces with an area so large is that it can't quickly build density with current resources because the land area is too large....resulting in our limited resources being spread too thin. The other cities appear to have had faster turnarounds because all of their downtown redevelopment resources have been funneled into significantly smaller areas of land.  In terms of changing the image and stimulating around the clock activity, it's better to get 5 continuous blocks right as opposed to having 20 blocks is sparsely spread out activity.

Until we do the same, don't expect DT Jax to become vibrant at the pedestrian scale level for the foreseeable future. Instead, we'll continue to be what we've been the 1980s. A fairly quiet core with a few isolated nodes of inconsistent activity. Now there's nothing wrong with this if it what the community wants. It's just tiresome to see civic leaders and local media continue attempting to sell every gimmick as the "game changer", 10k residents as some magic number or demolition of vacant buildings as economic development.

Totally get it. I think my point was more that with density, we wouldn't be questioning whether or not the DT was too big. But given how empty it is now (and all the literal empty parking lot space), it is likely more challenging. It would seem that the best approach would be to concentrate on one or two areas (like the elbow or whatever it is) and see what happens. Eventually, it may spread?

[thelakelander]

Yes. Also in a weird way, one can argue that the neighborhoods "annexed" into downtown would have been more dense and better off if left alone. For example, if Springfield were "annexed" into downtown the same way Brooklyn, LaVilla or East Jacksonville was, would it be as intact as it is today?

[jaxnyc79]

The problem Jax faces with an area so large is that it can't quickly build density with current resources because the land area is too large....resulting in our limited resources being spread too thin. The other cities appear to have had faster turnarounds because all of their downtown redevelopment resources have been funneled into significantly smaller areas of land.  In terms of changing the image and stimulating around the clock activity, it's better to get 5 continuous blocks right as opposed to having 20 blocks is sparsely spread out activity.

Until we do the same, don't expect DT Jax to become vibrant at the pedestrian scale level for the foreseeable future. Instead, we'll continue to be what we've been the 1980s. A fairly quiet core with a few isolated nodes of inconsistent activity. Now there's nothing wrong with this if it what the community wants. It's just tiresome to see civic leaders and local media continue attempting to sell every gimmick as the "game changer", 10k residents as some magic number or demolition of vacant buildings as economic development.

I've got mixed feelings on this.  I believe the vastness of Jax's downtown could be an opportunity in the long-run.  Downtown's size is likely a symptom of Jax being the old guy in the room versus other Florida cities, and that should be an opportunity to be seized.  At some point in the future, Jax could potentially have a mega-historic CBD, along with a mega-zone for walkability, active streetscapes, and clustered mixed-use living, versus peer cities in the Sunshine State.

Having said that, it's much harder to create and manage a perception of vibrancy when so much of the area defined as downtown sits idle and forlorn.  Downtown's vastness presents some major "branding" challenges.

I also worry that the city tries to commit resources to "revitalization projects" in too many different places, and as a result, loses focus and fails to create the sustained "spark" of bustle in any single area.

[thelakelander]

The problem Jax faces with an area so large is that it can't quickly build density with current resources because the land area is too large....resulting in our limited resources being spread too thin. The other cities appear to have had faster turnarounds because all of their downtown redevelopment resources have been funneled into significantly smaller areas of land.  In terms of changing the image and stimulating around the clock activity, it's better to get 5 continuous blocks right as opposed to having 20 blocks is sparsely spread out activity.

Until we do the same, don't expect DT Jax to become vibrant at the pedestrian scale level for the foreseeable future. Instead, we'll continue to be what we've been the 1980s. A fairly quiet core with a few isolated nodes of inconsistent activity. Now there's nothing wrong with this if it what the community wants. It's just tiresome to see civic leaders and local media continue attempting to sell every gimmick as the "game changer", 10k residents as some magic number or demolition of vacant buildings as economic development.

I've got mixed feelings on this.  I believe the vastness of Jax's downtown could be an opportunity in the long-run.  Downtown's size is likely a symptom of Jax being the old guy in the room versus other Florida cities, and that should be an opportunity to be seized.  At some point in the future, Jax could potentially have a mega-historic CBD, along with a mega-zone for walkability, active streetscapes, and clustered mixed-use living, versus peer cities in the Sunshine State.

The "downtown border" is a fake one. Urbanism and walkability in these other communities doesn't abruptly end at what their city describes as their official downtown or puts under the authority of a "DIA or "DDA". Tampa's Ybor, Miami's Wynwood, etc. all fall outside of their "DDA" controlled central business districts, yet they're still walkable (moreso than anything in DT Jax) and have a high amount of infill taking place. In Jax, Springfield, Riverside/Avondale, San Marco, Murray Hill, etc. are local examples of this. The only difference we have that these places don't is that our "DIA" has control over 3.9 square miles of the urban core and their's does not. That simply means, their downtown authorities make their investments in more concentrated areas, leading to those concentrated areas becoming significantly denser and walkable. So potential totally depends on if one believes revitalization is better with COJ's hands deeper into the cookie jar or not. Or in other words, would Five Points or 8th & Main be better today if they were under DIA (or the old DDA) control? Part of me feels like if these places were considered a part of downtown, half the buildings would have been demolished during their down years.

Having said that, it's much harder to create and manage a perception of vibrancy when so much of the area defined as downtown sits idle and forlorn.  Downtown's vastness presents some major "branding" challenges.

Yes, this is where having a smaller area to focus on, leads to more compact development that creates pedestrian scale synergy at a similar pace. This doesn't mean that good infill development can't still take place outside of "fake urbanism border". However, it does mean that the extra focus of a "downtown development authority" on a compact area changes that limited land mass literally overnight in comparison to what Jax has experienced.

I also worry that the city tries to commit resources to "revitalization projects" in too many different places, and as a result, loses focus and fails to create the sustained "spark" of bustle in any single area.

We're 60 years in the downtown revitalization game at this point. Unfortunately, this is exactly what has happened and continues to take place today.

[Tacachale]

The size of the official downtown isn't the issue. The issue is a failure to cluster within that area. There would be no issue if we'd stuck to plans to develop in clusters as we do in the successful urban core neighborhoods. Development in the Stadium District and Brooklyn is a good thing especially when they're done to enhance those areas specifically and better connect them to adjacent districts. But it wouldn't have the same impact on the Downtown Core that developments within the core would have, and shouldn't be treated as if it would. That's been our bigger issue.

[thelakelander]

Size is an issue if DIA funds are being spread too thin, due to the large area it is responsible for. Development will happen in adjacent urban districts (like it does in other cities), without additional public fingers in the cookie jar if the market and local public policies support it.

[jaxnyc79]

Size is an issue if DIA funds are being spread too thin, due to the large area it is responsible for. Development will happen in adjacent urban districts (like it does in other cities), without additional public fingers in the cookie jar if the market and local public policies support it.

Honestly, I think all I really care about is dense, mixed-use, walkable living with local flavors and proprietorships all attempting to make their appeal with the depths of their distinction/uniqueness.  I don't care if that happens at the beach, in Mandarin, or in Downtown.  So remind me, why are we saving Downtown again?  Is it that we want a vibrant, 24-hour CBD?  Or the city's walkable "activity" zone needs to exist amidst our tallest towers?  What is it that we're saving here and why should it exist in a smaller zone than what is on a map today?  What if Five Points or Brooklyn wind up as the 24-hour, walkable activity-zone, and the Central Business District just turns into a really nice, differentiated office park with some tall residential towers for baby boomers seeking low-maintenance living.  Is this a problem?

[Kerry]

You start with downtown because it has the largest concentration of employees.  All you have to do is give them another option to driving an hour home every night - something Jax has failed miserably at doing.  I've spent the last 2 weeks near Naperville, IL. and what downtown Naperville has accomplished should make Jax City officials ashamed of themselves.

https://downtownnaperville.com/