What Would Jax's Population NOW Be Without Consolidation?

[vicupstate]

I agree with stjr - think of it this way:

If I'm the city (not the consolidated city), and a company comes to me and says they are interested in relocating here, then I'm sure not taking them to Gate Parkway - I'm showing them downtown (or one of the surrounding areas).  I also think that if we were not consolidated, we would actually be able to pronounce the word "infill", since I have no vacant land to burn.

However, there are a lot of benefits to consolidation, however they don't tremendously help the urban core.

Industrial/business prospects focus on selecting a metro area first.  Because of consolidation, Jax is an exception because so much of the metro is in the city proper, and Clay and St. Johns Counties have been content to stay on the sidelines. That is not the norm though.

Most metro areas market themselves as just that, and let the prospects requirements drive an exact site within that metro area.

Those other cities I listed also prove that DT can be, and in fact is, at the center of those city's recruitment and improvement efforts, even though the city is vast in land and population.   I've  seen it too many times to believe it can't be done, or that it isn't done by default due to physical size.  I would submit that DT WAS the primary focus of the Godbold (billion dollar decade), Austin (River City Renaissance) and the Delaney (BJP projects excluding roads were substantial focused on Dt)  adminstrations.                 

[thelakelander]

The last significant annexation in Jacksonville prior to the consolidation happened in 1932.  Here is a graphic story we did on the growth of Jacksonville throughout the years.  The boundary information came from the Jacksonville Historic Commission.

The Plight of the Urban Core
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/914/115/

Also, this link will take you to charts showing the 100 largest US cities from 1790 to 1990.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/twps0027.html

The 1940, 1950 and 1960 census statistics list Jacksonville as being 30.2 square miles.  So for whatever reason, no annexation occurred during a +30 year period.

[stjr]

Macroeconomic trends nationwide more than overwhelmed ANY city's attempt to counter what was going on in their Downtowns in the '60's and '70's.  Specifically I am referring to the 'Malling of America', increased crime in cities, white flight, women joining the workforce, etc.  

Jax spent tons on money DT during the '60's and '70s and '80's [new city hall, new courthouse, Hemming plaza, fostering the construction of the building the skyline, etc.].  But it was wrongheaded.  The DESIRE was there, the good decisions weren't.   That said, Jax wasn't doing any better or worse than any other city in that regard.

The turnaround of Downtowns did not begin in ernest until well into the 1980's, and really the 1990's.  Many cities have been quite successful at it, although Jax has not been yet.  But if you look at the history of those other cities, the turnaround came only after decades of decline in their respective downtowns.  Some cities escaped some of the really bad 'urban renewal - tear everything down' mistakes, which turned out to be beneficial later (a remaining urban fabric to simply renew, rather than re-create).  But such cities are the exception.  

You would be hard pressed to name a city that had a improving and thriving downtown during the period of the 1960's through the mid '80's.  The turnarounds all came after that.

Yes, there were macroeconomic trends but each city responded in its own way.  Many cities began their renaissances in the mid to late 60's starting with steps such as historic preservation.  During the 70's and 80's many started rebuilding residential options and improving their amenities and street scapes.  The main upward trend may have kicked in for many areas in the 90's with the overall growth of the economy, but much of the groundwork was done in the years before.   Jax has, heretofore, failed to lay such groundwork and often worked counter to it, such as destroying historic buildings in droves for no particular reason.

I lived in Philly (a city that has not had notable metro area population growth) in the 70's and areas like Rittenhouse Square, the Parkway, Society Hill, etc. were already rehabbed and very desirable residential addresses.  Likewise, areas such as Georgetown in D.C. or the Village in New York.  Atlanta got a boost beginning with Underground Atlanta, etc.  In the 90's, these "seeds" of improvements began to spread more completely throughout the inner cores.

Jax has paid homage to downtown as you point out.  But it was mostly government facilities and a smattering of office buildings replacing older buildings already occupied by the same tenants (banks, lawyers, accountants, insurance, utilities).  Missing was any real attempt to attract new retail, residential, or entertainment to create a complete, self-sustaining community.  Yes, it was wrongheaded (i.e poor leadership?).  We agree. My continuing point is this occurred due to a lack of understanding, failing to maintain a single-minded focus, and inadequate support for going beyond the "easy" things - all possibly traceable to having a consolidated city.

How easy is it for a consolidated city mayor or city council person to say to constituents they can't have a boat ramp, park, traffic light, street lights, adequate roads, etc. in the suburbs while rebuilding downtown which, at the start, is devoid of residents and accompanying activity?  And, even with champions of downtown, what areas do the majority of votes on the City Council represent - the suburbs.  So, when resources are limited, how much will be allocated to the underrepresented core city?

The bottom line is it's 2008 and Jacksonville's downtown has made relatively little progress compared to many other comparable cities regardless of the timeline you chose.  The question we are trying to answer is why?  Could consolidation have held us back?  I suggest "yes."

[vicupstate]

I don't think an apples to oranges comparison can be made between NYC, DC, Philly toJax.   Those cities are in a whole different league.

Underground Atlanta wasn't rebuilt until the late '80's and prior to that no sane person would walk those streets alone.


Duval County population exclusive of Jax proper was 99,512 in 1950. It grew to 327,00 in 1965.  The city population fell in that time form 204,517 to 198,000.   It's pretty obvious what was happpening. 

The last SIGNIFICANT annexation was 1932 when 3.25 sq. miles was added.  Between 1932 and 1937, there were two annexations that totaled about 300 acres.  There were no annexations after that.  Source: "A Quiet Revolution" by Richard Martin.       

[tufsu1]

the revitalization of Society Hill in Philly occurred because the Old City Development Corporation (now the Center City District) offered homes for $1 in the 1960s....and all people had to do was agree to rehab within 5 years and keep the front of the units historically correct.

[stjr]

the revitalization of Society Hill in Philly occurred because the Old City Development Corporation (now the Center City District) offered homes for $1 in the 1960s....and all people had to do was agree to rehab within 5 years and keep the front of the units historically correct.

And....it worked splendidly!  What did Jax do?  Nothing. Exactly my point.

[vicupstate]

the revitalization of Society Hill in Philly occurred because the Old City Development Corporation (now the Center City District) offered homes for $1 in the 1960s....and all people had to do was agree to rehab within 5 years and keep the front of the units historically correct.

And....it worked splendidly!  What did Jax do?  Nothing. Exactly my point.

The city didn't do 'nothing' . It spent hundreds of millions of dollars tearing down such places. 

It didn't ignore downtown, it used a flawed strategy, just as many other cities did in that time period .     

[heights unknown]

Great info Lake...thanks.  From assessing the info that you provided, Jax basically built out and annexed out as much as it could and then there was no more to do until about the 1970's, in which consolidation happened in 1968. Of particular note, Jax annexed it's ass off much earlier than the other major Florida cities because Jax was much older and around for a much longer period for the exception of Tampa (which probably did it's annexing earlier in it's history as well).  Without consolidation, Jax would be a shadow and shell of her former self and at the time it only made sense to consoidate, however, I agree with stjr; along with the consolidation it appears that we have taken the focus out of the old census tract city (old city boundaries) and the urban core, and when we try to lure businesses here, it appears that our business leaders and government leaders do not entice them to come downtown, but anywhere within the consolidated boundaries, which basically are within the Duval County boundaries (Jax City limit).

I think consoldiation is fine; and I still feel that 40 years later it is still a work in progress.  I also feel that our City and Business leader should make it a priority to pitch the urban core and downtown when business or other entities are considering moving to Jacksonville...that should be the primary point of focus.

Heights Unknown

[heights unknown]

I don't think an apples to oranges comparison can be made between NYC, DC, Philly toJax.   Those cities are in a whole different league.

Underground Atlanta wasn't rebuilt until the late '80's and prior to that no sane person would walk those streets alone.


Duval County population exclusive of Jax proper was 99,512 in 1950. It grew to 327,00 in 1965.  The city population fell in that time form 204,517 to 198,000.   It's pretty obvious what was happpening. 

The last SIGNIFICANT annexation was 1932 when 3.25 sq. miles was added.  Between 1932 and 1937, there were two annexations that totaled about 300 acres.  There were no annexations after that.  Source: "A Quiet Revolution" by Richard Martin.      

Again, I feel the reason why there were no more annexations after 1937 is because there wasn't much more out there, that is, outside of the City limits to annex; Jax had basically built out and what was outside of the City limits was much less than what was in the core (population).

At the time (1968) Consolidation, in my opinion did make sense, though the City leaders at the time tried to make it look like government waste, abuse, crime, etc. was the reason; I don't think so.  Lost prestige, white flight, inner city decay and crime I feel were the main reasons; had consolidation not happened, Jax would certainly be a third or fourth tier City in America with little or no significance at all.

Lastly, all three major Florida Cities circa 1960, 1950, 1940 and 1930 were about the same size (30 or more square miles in size); and just as stjr said, it's obvious what happened in Jax; while the other Florida cities were racing ahead in population, Jax was stumbling and falling not only in population, but in pride, prestige, etc.  The only option for Jax was to pull out the consolidation card.

Heights Unknown