This is horrible: Sizing up Downtown

[thelakelander]

This nation just went through one of the largest urban redevelopment booms in recent times but DT Jax went backward. 

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/sizing-up-downtown

If anything, this shows maintaining status quo while your peers continue to move forward only results in you losing ground.  Wake up Jax before the gulf is too large to overcome.

[Joe]

I don't think you're going to get any disagreement from me or anyone else that downtown has really stagnated during the "Peyton years."

However, I don't think it's fair to say that Jax went backwards or lost any ground. The TU's graphics (and accompanying article) definitely had an overly negative slant. A lot of that slant is well deserved, although they clearly overemphasized the negative and de-emphasized the positive. Crime is the same or down, homeless population is the same, residential population is way up, tax base is way up, restaurant and bars are the same.

It's certainly fair to say that things have moved too slowly, or like you said, maintained the status quo. Especially given the significant booms in so many other cities, it's really sad to see Jax treading water. But decline? Heck no. Lack of progress, yes.

[JeffreyS]

The residential population doubled in four years. I think if the bar restaurant section had included 09 it would have looked better.  Over all just stagnate.

[thelakelander]

I don't think you're going to get any disagreement from me or anyone else that downtown has really stagnated during the "Peyton years."

However, I don't think it's fair to say that Jax went backwards or lost any ground. The TU's graphics (and accompanying article) definitely had an overly negative slant. A lot of that slant is well deserved, although they clearly overemphasized the negative and de-emphasized the positive. Crime is the same or down, homeless population is the same, residential population is way up, tax base is way up, restaurant and bars are the same.

It's certainly fair to say that things have moved too slowly, or like you said, maintained the status quo. Especially given the significant booms in so many other cities, it's really sad to see Jax treading water. But decline? Heck no. Lack of progress, yes.

Significantly less events, a decline in office employment and stagnant in retail over the last decade.  Residential growth has doubled (although too spread out to make a significant impact), but what major city DT population did not significantly grow during the previous boom (okay, maybe Buffalo or Rochester)? When compared to typical peer city (ex. Charlotte, Oklahoma City, Norfolk, Louisville, Indianapolis, Raleigh, Hartford, etc.) trends over the same time period, status quo or stagnant equates to losing ground.  We have a lot of work to do.

[sheclown]

Tourism is way down and that strange thing called "mental health" crimes has very dramatically changed.

[Joe]

I agree that there's a lot of work to do. But Jax's downtown was also way worse off than almost all of our peer cities in the late 90s, (when there were only 800 residents, almost exclusively low-income. Find a peer city that compares to that one).

I think Jax would have seen significant improvement if Carlucci or Weinstein had won the mayor's race instead of Peyton - no doubt about it. But it's not the complete doom-and-gloom that the TU is painting either.

I think the most relevant points highlighted in the TU are as follows:
- Declining office occupancy
- Need for much more residential
- Too much land owned by the city
- Lack of a DDA and the subsequent mismanagement of the TIFs.
- In addition, I think the TU comments section clearly illustrates that vagrants and parking are HUGE problems for the suburbanite's image of downtown.

I'm not sure that anything can be done about the first two problems in light of macroeconomic conditions. But I am optimistic that the next mayor will basically have to be better for downtown than Peyton.

[tufsu1]

Significantly less events

note that this stat only applies to the Prime Osborn facility.

[vicupstate]

The office employment is quite high, though declining.  I wonder if that number includes Springfield, including Shands and Swisher, etc. and maybe San Marco too.  Charlotte has about the same level of employment (55K) but has a ton of high rises by comparison (and low vacancy).

Does anyone know the physical boundaries of the numbers in the TU article? 

[vicupstate]

However, I don't think it's fair to say that Jax went backwards or lost any ground. The TU's graphics (and accompanying article) definitely had an overly negative slant. A lot of that slant is well deserved, although they clearly overemphasized the negative and de-emphasized the positive. Crime is the same or down, homeless population is the same, residential population is way up, tax base is way up, restaurant and bars are the same.

It's certainly fair to say that things have moved too slowly, or like you said, maintained the status quo. Especially given the significant booms in so many other cities, it's really sad to see Jax treading water. But decline? Heck no. Lack of progress, yes.

If your peers are advancing and you are standing still, then you ARE declining. Not to mention that in several areas there IS a numerical decline.

[heights unknown]

I don't think Jax went backwards, it progressed in some ways, but remained stagnant and sedentary more than anything else.  There's pockets of progress and leaping forward and there's pockets of emptiness with no growth or progression, which in my mind is not moving forward at all (when a lot is empty or nothing changes, that doesn't mean it's moving backward, it means it didn't move forward or didn't move at all).

"HU"

[thelakelander]

Vic, DT's boundaries are I-95 (west), State/Arlington Expressway (north), river (east) and I-95 (south).  The Northbank, Southbank and Brooklyn are the neighborhoods included.  

[Ocklawaha]

You people need some philosophy from the old hippie here:

SECOND PLACE = "THE FIRST LOSER!"

Think about this when you try and rationalize the Peyton Years with the usual Jacksonville drivel of "almost, could have, should have, would have, didn't have, and RIGHT BEHIND TAMPA... and Orlando... and St. Petersburg... and West Palm... and Fort Lauderdale... and Miami... and ? PALATKA ANYONE?

Being a second place city is just unacceptable to me, what about you?

OCKLAWAHA

[thelakelander]

I agree that there's a lot of work to do. But Jax's downtown was also way worse off than almost all of our peer cities in the late 90s, (when there were only 800 residents, almost exclusively low-income. Find a peer city that compares to that one).

Tampa, Norfolk and Raleigh would be three.

[AaroniusLives]

You people need some philosophy from the old hippie here:

SECOND PLACE = "THE FIRST LOSER!"

Think about this when you try and rationalize the Peyton Years with the usual Jacksonville drivel of "almost, could have, should have, would have, didn't have, and RIGHT BEHIND TAMPA... and Orlando... and St. Petersburg... and West Palm... and Fort Lauderdale... and Miami... and ? PALATKA ANYONE?

Being a second place city is just unacceptable to me, what about you?

Ocklawaha, I heart you. You always stir the pot!

"The only city that lost buildings and ground during the great High!"

That line, while delivered as a joke, is actually pretty telling. I think that's what most interesting about Jacksonville's development over the last decade is that the city/county/region resisted the urban infill trend most of the country embraced.

Tourism is way down and that strange thing called "mental health" crimes has very dramatically changed.

Tourism, and the relentless need to attract it, is part of the problem, specifically in Jacksonville and broadly in Florida. Orlando is the great big hole of tourism in the state. That's where the tourist go most, and first. The rest of the state needs to work on creating diversified economies in metros where people want to live, work and play...and then the tourists will come. Moreover, from a branding perspective, to be non-touristy is to separate yourself somewhat from the rest of the state, and thus, give yourself a selling point. The best thing South Florida ever did for itself was to diversify their economy after Disney opened. Tourism is a part of the mix, but not the whole deal.

This nation just went through one of the largest urban redevelopment booms in recent times but DT Jax went backward.

Moreover, this redevelopment boom was markedly different from the previous 1980s moment (which Jacksonville mos def experienced.) For most of the cities that went through this period, they created a new foundation of sustainable development. Unlike the "festival marketplaces," office skyscrapers and stadiums from the 1980s, the downtowns laid down new cloth to stitch future development along. That's probably the largest tragedy of Jacksonville sitting out the 2000s.

[Dog Walker]

Toronto has to have one of the most livable downtowns of any city in North America?  Why?

For the last couple of decades it has been a requirement that any new non-public, office building going up has to have a percentage of the square footage devoted to RESIDENCES and to RETAIL.  All in the same building or directly adjacent to it.  There are grocery stores on the street front of huge financial office towers because there are people LIVING in those buildings.  There are also trams and buses running frequently at all hours.

Of course, they did have the advantage of having Jane Jacobs living there, keeping an eye on their planning.