Metro Jacksonville

QuoteRon Littlepage's Blog

Not long ago, on one of those bitterly cold mornings when the wind blew directly and uninterrupted from the North Pole, I took a walking tour of downtown. I was joined by Terry Lorince, executive director of Downtown Vision Inc., the public/private partnership assigned the task of building and maintaining “a healthy and vibrant downtown community” and promoting “downtown as an exciting place to live, work, play and visit.” Lorince, shivering as much as I was, didn’t have to point out the obvious: The traditional downtown core isn’t exactly full of life.

The cold could explain the empty streets on that day, but the same lack of activity is too often the case.
These are some of the sad facts presented by Downtown Vision: Employment in downtown is dropping, and the core has one of the highest central business district office vacancy rates in the country at 23.5 percent. More than 50 percent of the core downtown is either parking lots, garages, vacant buildings or buildings less than 25 percent occupied.

Downtown accounted for 13.5 percent of the city’s property tax base 20 years ago. Today, it’s at 3.2 percent.
The last major office tower built in the downtown core was in 1990, the longest period without a major commercial construction project since the end of World War II.

Reversing these trends is critical because a successful downtown is key to a city’s success. But what to do?
Lorince and Downtown Vision believe that to move downtown forward, the focus has to be on the core.
In the last 10 years, more than $1.1 billion of development has taken place in downtown, but the bulk of it has been in the far-flung outer edges.

The theory is that by bringing the core back to life, success can begin spreading to other parts of downtown.
Ways to do that include making the core pedestrian friendly; cleaning it up; enforcing city codes; improving landscaping; providing adequate greenways; and ensuring public safety by increasing the police presence, not only during the work day but also at nights and on weekends, which means more than just parking police cruisers on the sidewalks around Hemming Plaza. It also would help if some of the business leaders who promote the importance of downtown would move their offices to the core. There is space available. Another key is to program more activities in the core.

The First Wednesday Art Walk and the Off the Grid Galleries have shown people will come downtown. The city needs to create more activities like these. Look at what the Riverside Arts Market has brought to the area under the Fuller Warren Bridge. The Northbank Riverwalk is one of downtown’s greatest assets. Create something that would have a similar impact on the riverwalk in the downtown core.

There are those who disagree with Downtown Vision’s approach to revitalizing downtown. It’s important to have the discussion now as mayoral and City Council candidates campaign on what their visions for Jacksonville are.
One question will be whether to build a new convention center and, if so, where â€" in the downtown core or on the outer edge?

With a developing entertainment district along Bay Street, I think an argument can be made that if we are going to put more big money into a capital project, the downtown core is the best site.
Even on a cold day, with more people on the streets and in the buildings, downtown would have a warmer feel.

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2011-01-29/looking-ways-reinvigorate-downtown-jacksonville

QuoteThe theory is that by bringing the core back to life, success can begin spreading to other parts of downtown.

Ways to do that include making the core pedestrian friendly; cleaning it up; enforcing city codes; improving landscaping; providing adequate greenways; and ensuring public safety by increasing the police presence, not only during the work day but also at nights and on weekends, which means more than just parking police cruisers on the sidewalks around Hemming Plaza. It also would help if some of the business leaders who promote the importance of downtown would move their offices to the core. There is space available. Another key is to program more activities in the core.

QuoteThere are those who disagree with Downtown Vision’s approach to revitalizing downtown. It’s important to have the discussion now as mayoral and City Council candidates campaign on what their visions for Jacksonville are. One question will be whether to build a new convention center and, if so, where â€" in the downtown core or on the outer edge?

I guess, I'm one who agrees with focusing on the core but disagrees with many of the ideas suggested here.  Pedestrian scale connectivity at street level is a vital component to any successful downtown.  The easiest thing we can do to start facilitating that connectivity is to modify policy and "strongly" encourage or property owners and existing businesses to better integrate their establishments with the street.

Here are a couple of exampes:

Example 1: Java Junction

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1077843030_9Xqe7-M.jpg)
Java Junction is a small coffee bar inside of the lobby of BOA along Laura Street.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1077843050_w9JJs-M.jpg)
Here's what Java Junction's space looks like from Laura Street, a corridor we're pumping $2 million into to make it more pedestrian friendly.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/463688830_JMADC-M.jpg)
How difficult would it be to allow them to put some seating umbrellas or signage up to indicate to the outside world that there's actually a businesses on this prime block of the Northbank core?


Example 2:FBC Cafeteria

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/785728056_FQuqk-M.jpg)
Stretching nearly a block, this may be downtown's largest eatery.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/785751028_SXjfF-M.jpg)
From the street, it appears to be a warehouse.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/785726827_3Bea2-M.jpg)
How difficult would it be to replace the glass block with transparent windows, add some awnings and maybe an entrance off of Laura Street?

This scene is repeated on almost every block in the Northbank that has an open business in it.  While I've participated in some heated debates regarding the need for a new convention center (I support that idea), I do believe public money will stretch much further and get us better results by simply exposing the retail (we already have) to the street.  

Focusing on stuff like more streetscapes, landscaping, pressure washing, etc. is a waste in terms of stimulating foot traffic and vibrancy.  The focus should be on pedestrian scale connectivity, which involves both foot traffic synergy in the heart of DT and transit connectivity to the surrounding urban core neighborhoods (immedietly brings in the residential population that DT doesn't and won't have for years to come).

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-nov-creating-downtown-vibrancy-by-exposing-secret-retail

Hey Ron...when are you moving downtown...never?...thought so...with the convervative leadership of this city...our downtown probably will never come back...or not in our lifetimes...sorry but the truth hurts...I'd like to know one city that's as conservative as ours that's been brought back by the conservatives....i can guess that there are'nt any...rightwing conservatives don't have in thier brains to do something like this..i may involve a bar or two...maybe we could tax the hell out of that church down there...that'd bring some cash back...they should have been paying all these years anyways...the infrastructure it take for them just to be there cost this city about 2 million a year...i wonder if they'll pay that for us?....

Quote from: Garden guy on January 30, 2011, 07:15:42 AM
Hey Ron...when are you moving downtown...never?...thought so...with the convervative leadership of this city...our downtown probably will never come back...or not in our lifetimes...sorry but the truth hurts...I'd like to know one city that's as conservative as ours that's been brought back by the conservatives....i can guess that there are'nt any...rightwing conservatives don't have in thier brains to do something like this..i may involve a bar or two...maybe we could tax the hell out of that church down there...that'd bring some cash back...they should have been paying all these years anyways...the infrastructure it take for them just to be there cost this city about 2 million a year...i wonder if they'll pay that for us?....

so wait...now you're nattacking Ron Littlepage...pretty sure he's liberal?

as for conservative cities...in general terms, I agree with you....but there are several on the upswing...Phoenix, Dallas, Charlotte, and Salt Lake City come to mind.

Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2011, 08:28:54 AM
I wonder where Ron thinks we should be discussing or debating DVI policy ideas?

What happened to my post? I've been to DVI board meetings.

They don't really allow that, you know.  Their plans are simply released and then they start lobbying for them.  There isnt a public forum to have them discussed that isnt tightly controlled and or immediately ignored.

Except this one of course.

It would be nice to have a little dialogue with the DVI board, actually.

What happened to my post?
I've been to DVI board meetings.

Don't know. You must have accidentally hit something that erased it. When I first got started on the forums, it used to happen to me quite often.

Quote from: Garden guy on January 30, 2011, 07:15:42 AM
Hey Ron...when are you moving downtown...never?...thought so...with the convervative leadership of this city...our downtown probably will never come back...or not in our lifetimes...sorry but the truth hurts...I'd like to know one city that's as conservative as ours that's been brought back by the conservatives....i can guess that there are'nt any...rightwing conservatives don't have in thier brains to do something like this..i may involve a bar or two...maybe we could tax the hell out of that church down there...that'd bring some cash back...they should have been paying all these years anyways...the infrastructure it take for them just to be there cost this city about 2 million a year...i wonder if they'll pay that for us?....

Giuliani was a disaster in NYC 

Quote from: tufsu1 on January 30, 2011, 09:08:26 AM

Quote from: Garden guy on January 30, 2011, 07:15:42 AM
Hey Ron...when are you moving downtown...never?...thought so...with the convervative leadership of this city...our downtown probably will never come back...or not in our lifetimes...sorry but the truth hurts...I'd like to know one city that's as conservative as ours that's been brought back by the conservatives....i can guess that there are'nt any...rightwing conservatives don't have in thier brains to do something like this..i may involve a bar or two...maybe we could tax the hell out of that church down there...that'd bring some cash back...they should have been paying all these years anyways...the infrastructure it take for them just to be there cost this city about 2 million a year...i wonder if they'll pay that for us?....

so wait...now you're nattacking Ron Littlepage...pretty sure he's liberal?

as for conservative cities...in general terms, I agree with you....but there are several on the upswing...Phoenix, Dallas, Charlotte, and Salt Lake City come to mind.

San Diego is not exactly liberal either, or Indianapolis, Orlando...I'm sure the list can go on the further one researches. Why do I not think the majority of problems in Jacksonville's downtown core are simply the result  of social conservatives ruining this would be "party town"?  If it were only that easy, great; expose them and find the better alternatives anywhere. (And I say this as no social conservative)  

Quote from: thelakelander on January 30, 2011, 10:15:01 AM
Don't know. You must have accidentally hit something that erased it. When I first got started on the forums, it used to happen to me quite often.

Lake I was attempting to tie in your connectivity with the streets and the simultaneous connectivity with the River Downtown. Basically "Use The River."

Stephen, I've never debated Downtown Vision but Terry and the board when I would be there were very gracious with there time to allow me to share a concern that I felt wasn't only applicable to Downtown but the community as a whole.

Most recent 2010-604- City regaining control of the failed Shipyards/Landmar property and the omission of the Promised 680'Downtown Public Pier from the 2007 Downtown Action Plan.

2010-675- USS Adams and the one Finance amendment that provides the language for a future city council or Mayoral taxpayer bailout.

2010-856 the most recent transient vendor ban and why somebody on the city council needs to attach an amendment that would exempt the Waterways of the St. Johns River our American Heritage River especially in our Downtown Jacksonville Overlay Zoning District-2003-627.

Whatever happens moving forward in our Downtown will require legislation.

Signage. Signage. Signage.

Signs will clue people in to the fact that there are actual BUSINESSES downtown. The city ordinance may not be 100% to blame - I've heard some building owners don't like their properties plastered with signage - but cumon. You want around downtown and it looks like an office park. Get some attractive signs on the sides of these buildings - "Oh, there's a CAFE here!" "Look - this building has a restaurant on the top floor!"

Getting people downtown won't do any good if they don't know where to go when they get there. Spend no city money. Stop enforcing the sign ordinance. Make it go away. Allow businesses to advertise themselves.

Also, stop parking enforcement. At least until downtown becomes a place people are willing to risk a parking ticket to come visit.

Quote from: Bativac on January 30, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
Signage. Signage. Signage.

Signs will clue people in to the fact that there are actual BUSINESSES downtown. The city ordinance may not be 100% to blame - I've heard some building owners don't like their properties plastered with signage - but cumon. You want around downtown and it looks like an office park. Get some attractive signs on the sides of these buildings - "Oh, there's a CAFE here!" "Look - this building has a restaurant on the top floor!"

Getting people downtown won't do any good if they don't know where to go when they get there. Spend no city money. Stop enforcing the sign ordinance. Make it go away. Allow businesses to advertise themselves.

Also, stop parking enforcement. At least until downtown becomes a place people are willing to risk a parking ticket to come visit.

Sounds good to me.

Quote from: Bativac on January 30, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
Signage. Signage. Signage.

Signs will clue people in to the fact that there are actual BUSINESSES downtown. The city ordinance may not be 100% to blame - I've heard some building owners don't like their properties plastered with signage - but cumon. You want around downtown and it looks like an office park. Get some attractive signs on the sides of these buildings - "Oh, there's a CAFE here!" "Look - this building has a restaurant on the top floor!"

Getting people downtown won't do any good if they don't know where to go when they get there. Spend no city money. Stop enforcing the sign ordinance. Make it go away. Allow businesses to advertise themselves.

Also, stop parking enforcement. At least until downtown becomes a place people are willing to risk a parking ticket to come visit.

+100K, and doesn't cost a dime

+1

I for one applaud Ron for talking about downtown needs. Some of the ideas presented seemed to be the standard supply ones from DVI. But there are others as Lake has pointed out that are simply good marketing principles any business should know about. 

DVI could also press landlords of vacant properties to fix up their buildings and offer lower rents to small business and non-profits who are spunky people willing to be in an urban space. Sure they don't pay big bucks, but something is better than vacant. Plus, they eat lunch, spend money shopping and populate downtown.

I'm with ya JJ... but...

QuoteDVI could also press landlords of vacant properties to fix up their buildings and offer lower rents to small business and non-profits who are spunky people willing to be in an urban space. Sure they don't pay big bucks, but something is better than vacant.

We always assume something is better than vacant... but is it?  Given the history of the area one must come to the conclusion that the landlords DO NOT feel that way.  My question is why?  Why do the landlords of downtown and for that matter Springfield seem to prefer no rent instead of some rent?

Could insurance and liability be an issue?

I have some tenants and you always pay insurance and liability whether the building is vacant or fully rented. We chose to lower the rents to keep the tenants.
I think Bridge is right to some degree ... It's a darn habit. Some landlords are letting a property agency handle the property. They may live somewhere else and don't get it about downtown vacancy rates. Asking is the first thing and DVI should do that asap.

doing nothing is always easier than dealing with negotiations.

That certainly would be horrible.  Rents spiral lower until businesses and apartment renters find downtown a desirable place to live and do business...  And worse yet...  Soon enough they would be able to actually raise rents as businesses and renters compete for desirable space downtown...  Good god... eventually we might have to enact rent control... thehorrorthehorror

Sorry... I couldn't help it... :)

Hey Ron, nice that SOMEONE cares enough to get this in front of the TU's readers. Give me a call, I'd like to show you a plan that could electrify your column AND downtown's redevelopment.


(http://lh6.ggpht.com/_bQsuhPJduqQ/TUTJjOQRD1I/AAAAAAAAEKM/Vo6xviCksdA/s800/MYtrolleyimage-1.jpg)

Quoteknowing many of them, I can tell you that the majority of them are afraid that if they accept less rent, it will start a wave of rent wars.

Could these people actually be colluding to to keep rents high??  If so to what end?

Quote from: BridgeTroll on January 30, 2011, 03:12:08 PM
That certainly would be horrible.  Rents spiral lower until businesses and apartment renters find downtown a desirable place to live and do business...  And worse yet...  Soon enough they would be able to actually raise rents as businesses and renters compete for desirable space downtown...  Good god... eventually we might have to enact rent control... thehorrorthehorror

Sorry... I couldn't help it... :)

Good one.

Quote
Downtown accounted for 13.5 percent of the city’s property tax base 20 years ago. Today, it’s at 3.2 percent.

This is going to cause a big problem for justifying spending on the core, IMO.  We do need more businesses downtown, but more parks and cleaner sidewalks aren't going to fix that.  We need it to be profitable for business owners to locate downtown.  Until then, we're wasting our time.  Once people have a chance to make a buck downtown, people will move in.  When people move in, tax revenue goes up.  When tax revenue goes up, then we can work on the big money capital projects.  When we start funding some big projects, we're headed straight to the moon and there's no looking back.

So if one landlord could be convinced to reduce rates large enough to induce renters... the others might follow suit?

Garden Guy, Littlepage lives in Avondale, on the eastern side.  He has a lovely historic brick home in a great neighborhood.  I'm guessing that's closer to downtown than you live.  

Lots of ideas, suggestions and plans.

Little political will or desire.

Apathy on behalf of the taxpayer, who only see downtown when the Jags play or when showing up for jury duty.

If the taxpayer has "no need" for downtown, why would they care?

Flip the coin a little and think perhaps the downtown model is dead?

I know its desirable here in this forum, but maybe taxpayers are not pro-urban?

Perhaps Jacksonville should be thinking with a "post-urban" model where a central part of the city serves a purpose outside the housing of jobs, sidewalk cafes and cement and steel towers.

Perhaps re invigoration starts when we stop thinking Jax should be like other urban centers.

Quote from: spuwho on January 30, 2011, 04:08:26 PM
Perhaps re invigoration starts when we stop thinking Jax should be like other urban centers.

I'm sure there are many who share this opinion, however, it seems to me that this is exactly how we have been operating for many years.  If this model worked, then there would be no need for re-invigoration.  And our city finances wouldn't be so stretched out due to the high cost of running a sprawled-out city.

Quote from: dougskiles on January 30, 2011, 04:18:16 PM
  And our city finances wouldn't be so stretched out due to the high cost of running a sprawled-out city.

As compared to what? Our finances wouldn't be stretched if we were 100 percent urban? were a non-consolidated city?

Actually, in this case, I think consolidation has been an asset. A tax base outside of its traditional city boundaries that can be tapped when the urban core is weak.

I don't believe the taxes drawn from the outer parts of the city are enough to cover the costs of providing services.  But, I admit I don't have any data to back that up.  It has just been a perception that I need to research.  I just did a quick internet search but didn't find anything.  I keep hearing it over and over again from various members on the forum and perhaps they can provide the backup.

The basic question is "Do surburban neighborhoods pay enough taxes to cover the costs of basic services?"

If anyone has an answer, I would be interested in seeing the data.

As far as consolidation goes, it has been a benefit in that it has reduced the duplication of services.  But to the question above, I don't know if it has resulted in an increase of funds available for the urban core.

Going back to the original concept of fixing downtown, I don't know that it is a matter of more money.  We've already thrown lots of money at it.  I believe that more than anything, we need to get out of our own way.

Downtown should be a self sustaining urban neighborhood.  Once we stop trying to attract suburbanites, realize that and all ow for it to happen, we'll find revitalization to be quite easy and affordable.

Quote from: dougskiles on January 30, 2011, 06:49:00 PM
The basic question is "Do surburban neighborhoods pay enough taxes to cover the costs of basic services?"

If anyone has an answer, I would be interested in seeing the data.

No, they don't.  Bill Killingsworth has some data they've conducted that indicates the actual numbers.

Quote from: thelakelander on January 30, 2011, 07:13:19 PM

Quote from: dougskiles on January 30, 2011, 06:49:00 PM
The basic question is "Do surburban neighborhoods pay enough taxes to cover the costs of basic services?"

If anyone has an answer, I would be interested in seeing the data.

No, they don't.  Bill Killingsworth has some data they've conducted that indicates the actual numbers.

So, why not increase the property taxes in those areas to cover them?  I know the answer (nobody wants to upset the voters in those areas) but I think it is worth asking.

Quote from: spuwho on January 30, 2011, 05:45:06 PM

Quote from: dougskiles on January 30, 2011, 04:18:16 PM
  And our city finances wouldn't be so stretched out due to the high cost of running a sprawled-out city.

As compared to what? Our finances wouldn't be stretched if we were 100 percent urban? were a non-consolidated city?

Actually, in this case, I think consolidation has been an asset. A tax base outside of its traditional city boundaries that can be tapped when the urban core is weak.

Water lines, water resources, sewerage, electric lines, streets, mass transit, fire, police, jails, rescue, schools, teachers, public health, pollution control, libraries, parks, maintenance, traffic control, administration, planning, just to name a few of the things that MUST be continuously extended farther and farther out in order to support suburban development. IN FACT, it is the opposite of what you speculate on here, the suburban model has collapsed and in no small part is responsible for the economic mess we find ourselves in today. Somewhere I have a list someplace of the things required each day just to keep pace with the rapid growth in our state in the last decade, and it's downright scary.

When a developer throws in streets and and 500 new homes, who do you think pays for that support which must be in place BEFORE the new residents arrive? HINT: IT AIN'T THE DEVELOPERS. A much more compact model is far easier to support, and a vertical city is less of a burden on those that already live there, then a horizontal sprawl.

OCKLAWAHA

QuotePedestrian scale connectivity at street level is a vital component to any successful downtown.  The easiest thing we can do to start facilitating that connectivity is to modify policy and "strongly" encourage or property owners and existing businesses to better integrate their establishments with the street.

Lake, this is exactly what I thought when I read the article.  It would be nice if Ron soaked up the diversity of ideas here before picking his horses to ride.  I am with him on some things but others he tends to way over simplify on.  It's like he doesn't think his audience (or maybe himself) can handle the full depth of the issues.  I credit him, though, for at least keeping these necessary subjects in the public eye.  Any discussion is better than none at all, even if it is off the mark some.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on January 30, 2011, 09:04:52 PM

When a developer throws in streets and and 500 new homes, who do you think pays for that support which must be in place BEFORE the new residents arrive? HINT: IT AIN'T THE DEVELOPERS. A much more compact model is far easier to support, and a vertical city is less of a burden on those that already live there, then a horizontal sprawl. [/b]

OCKLAWAHA

As far as I can tell, the impact fees, the CDD fees and property taxes, motor fuel taxes, sales taxes, along with my user fees pay for services rendered.

I agree with dougskiles, I would like to see Killingsworth's data. Having lived in many urban and suburban areas, if the model in consolidated Duval/Jax isn't viable, the fault isn't in the suburban approach, it's how it was executed in this area. North New Jersey, DuPage County in Illinois, Multnomah County in Oregon, King County in Washington, all areas where the suburban approach has been viable and successful. So I don't buy that the suburbian way is evil in all forms, on the flip side I have seen excellent and very poor urban execution,sometimes in the same city.

So while I know many are focused on approach, in this case I think it really is execution.

     We are fortunate to have this forum through which we can discuss the city core problems and possible solutions.  I wish I had more time to contribute more to the issues related to revitalization.

     This coming April will be three years that I’ve been in business in the city core.  Today, Sunday, while talking on the phone with a customer, a female type, who wanted to pick up a book from the bookstore, I received what has become a frequent response to my question as to whether they wanted to pick up the book from the Roosevelt store or from the Laura street store.  I will try to remember her exact words.  “Oh, you are downtown? …..  I never go downtown.”  I said “Well, its okay … we are right here at Hemming Park …. Its quite convenient.”  “Oh no, I don’t want to go near Hemming Park… not alone.”  I said… “But really, its quite safe down here… we are open until five o’clock.”  “Just please just take the book to the Roosevelt store and I will pick it up there.”

     It is amazing to me how many of these reactions I get from customers who have the perceptions either that the downtown is unsafe, or that they will have too much difficulty parking.   

     Some customers ask why I closed the Roosevelt store on Sundays, as they remembered that I did good business when opened on that day.  I inform most that my intention is to keep the Roosevelt store closed on Sunday because it causes or forces some customers who get the urge to browse for books on a Sunday, to actually enter the city core.  This seems to be working, as our Sunday business is increasing with new customers.  We are actually staying quite busy on Sundays.  The ideal would be to place more businesses in the city core that offer something not available in the suburbs; such as is the case having the main library, MOCA, and the entities like the courthouse in the core. 

     I have thought occasionally, but lightly, as I don’t have the funds right now, about the idea of purchasing a large building, at least 50,000 sq. ft. in the city core, closing the Roosevelt bookstore and the current Laura street store, and having only the large downtown location as a bookstore/café.  It would be important that the parking be adjacent, and adequate for customer convenience.  I wonder how many customers I would lose because they would refuse to come into the city core.  If accomplished successfully, the move into the core would encourage more people to experience the city core.  There is a risk however in that, seeing an opportunity, a large bookstore competitor may open in the suburbs, thereby giving an alternative to those who wish to avoid the city core.  Of course, once a momentum of business was built, I believe that the city core location would thrive.                 

      As a side interest, regarding the “homeless”….  I have found that it is not difficult to keep the occasional individual who hasn’t bathed in a week or so, one of the so-called homeless types, out of the store and the café.  I simply tell them that they smell, and that the smell encroaches on the comfort of my customers, and that they will have to leave.  Life is good….. books, ideas, espresso, fresh air.   

 



     

Ron, as I read your post, it occurred to me that in many respects, the average citizen sees Downtown as a "gated community".  But, unlike a suburban gated community, where the gates keep the riff raff OUT, the downtown "gates," in the perception of those who think like the customer you quoted, are seen as keeping the riff raff IN.

What "walls" hold the "gates" of Downtown?  Psychologically, I would suggest they are elevated I-95 to the south and west, the river to the south and east, and the elevated MLK/20th Street Expressway to the north.  These "walls" are all massive physical dividers that only let citizens through at designated entry points (the "gates"), mainly bridges, overpasses (such as Park and Riverside Ave.), and exit ramps.  Few streets (Beaver, King/Union, North Main) enter downtown at grade.  This lack of perceived connectivity creates in many minds the idea that going downtown is akin to the "adventure" of wading through a swamp or climbing a mountain.

Now, imagine how that image might be challenged by a continuous and visible street car line guiding downtown visitors, for example, from your Roosevelt Store through Ortega/Avondale/Riverside and straight to the core of downtown.  Even if that customer avoided riding the streetcar, she could "follow the yellow brick road" ("steel rail") straight to downtown and not feel she is blazing a virgin path along the way but rather a well traveled one. She can immediately take comfort that she will not journey alone or arrive at her destination downtown stranded among a sea of inactivity.  

I live in WGV, (yeah, guilty as charged) I pay about $4,000 a year in CDD fees --- FOREVER. There are about 500 homes here which means something like $2 million dollars a year go to St. Johns County. Think that covers it? One highway overpass can cost $150 million, and at the rate of our CDD fees it would take 50 years just to pay for one lousy overpass. Check this out:

Here's a sampling of project construction costs:

+ SR 18 widening in rural King County - about $24.5 million per mile.
+ US 12 widening south of Tri Cities - about $3.7 million per mile.
+ I-5 widening in Vancouver â€" about $20.2 million per mile.
+ I-90 truck climbing lanes east of Cle Elum and at Vantage â€" about $1 million per mile.
+ I-5 HOV lanes from Tukwila to Fife â€" about $7 million per mile.

(http://lh6.ggpht.com/_bQsuhPJduqQ/TUTJjOQRD1I/AAAAAAAAEKM/Vo6xviCksdA/s800/MYtrolleyimage-1.jpg)

    Interesting image Stjr…. the way you surrounded the city core by the various elevated streets, the river etc.  I presume you encourage providing something like a streetcars connecting outlying areas to the core.  Makes sense.  This permanent steel road would serve as “easy connection image” to anyone who had not yet become comfortable with traveling to the city core.  Also, it would be great in that workers and customers wouldn’t have to worry about parking in the core.  And, to be honest, I have always enjoyed riding streetcars and subways…. just because, in some odd way, they are different from the standard bus.  Yes … I’ve always thought it best for several reasons….. efficiency, air quality, parking solutions… to bring “things” like streetcars and trains back into the city’s transportation scenario.  The automobile has its place, but too many in a city environment?  Well, there is a limit, especially if we are to have a well functioning downtown. 

Typically cafeterias like FBC's (opposed to restaurants) on campus-like settings (churches, colleges, hospitals etc) don't have signage that's visable from the street. Think on how impractical street level signage showing Shands cafeteria would be.   

Quote from: ronchamblin on January 30, 2011, 10:07:17 PM
     We are fortunate to have this forum through which we can discuss the city core problems and possible solutions.  I wish I had more time to contribute more to the issues related to revitalization.

Ron, thanks for taking the time.  I find your thoughts very insightful.

Quote
     I have thought occasionally, but lightly, as I don’t have the funds right now, about the idea of purchasing a large building, at least 50,000 sq. ft. in the city core, closing the Roosevelt bookstore and the current Laura street store, and having only the large downtown location as a bookstore/café.  It would be important that the parking be adjacent, and adequate for customer convenience.  I wonder how many customers I would lose because they would refuse to come into the city core.  If accomplished successfully, the move into the core would encourage more people to experience the city core.  There is a risk however in that, seeing an opportunity, a large bookstore competitor may open in the suburbs, thereby giving an alternative to those who wish to avoid the city core.  Of course, once a momentum of business was built, I believe that the city core location would thrive.                 

For me personally, the downtown location is more convenient than Roosevelt.  I would love to see a large store that you describe and would support it frequently.

Quote from: I-10east on January 31, 2011, 06:08:32 AM
Typically cafeterias like FBC's (opposed to restaurants) on campus-like settings (churches, colleges, hospitals etc) don't have signage that's visable from the street. Think on how impractical street level signage showing Shands cafeteria would be.   

The majority of those that aren't visible from the street (in any form) were constructed in the latter decades of the 20th century (ex. 1960s - 1980s).  That was an era where it was popular to isolate new development from the surrounding urban context. 

Now that we know better, we should strive to do better.  Signage, outdoor seating, awnings, transparent window openings, lighting or a combination of all are small affordable things we can do to expose many of our businesses to the street. 

In FBC's case, something as simple as transparent window openings can change the complexion of an entire city block.  In BOA's case, something as simple as umbrella seating outside the main entrances can change the feel of that entire city block.  Both of these represent easy to do things that we can accomplish overnight by policy change or working with building owners for the greater good of the environment they exist in.

Do these businesses want what you are proposing?  Are there reasons the businesses themselves are not pushing for those changes?  For example... the cafeteria may not want a clear view of the urban streetscape.  The BOA may have decided that outdoor seating is too much of a hassle or would not generate enough business to justify.

BTW... I wholeheartedly agree with your ideas... just looking for reasons why they have not happened already.

Mr. Chamblin,

Thank you for your insight and your committment to downtown.

I love your downtown store and go there every time I visit Jacksonville.

Quote from: BridgeTroll on January 31, 2011, 07:26:35 AM
Do these businesses want what you are proposing?  Are there reasons the businesses themselves are not pushing for those changes?  For example... the cafeteria may not want a clear view of the urban streetscape.  The BOA may have decided that outdoor seating is too much of a hassle or would not generate enough business to justify.

Overall every case may be different.  The solution would involve not only modifying policy where needed but also convincing property owners and businesses to buy into an overall downtown vision of vibrant streetlife.  With that said, I believe that selling those who have already invested in downtown on affordable concepts that improve the value of the surrounding environment (which is a direct benefit to them) is easier to accomplish right off the bat, than selling the entire city on subsidizing millions on one-trick ponies for DT (ex. convention centers, Publix, Macy's, aquariums, $30 million into Metro park, etc.)

QuoteOverall every case may be different.  The solution would involve not only modifying policy where needed but also convincing property owners and businesses to buy into an overall downtown vision of vibrant streetlife.  With that said, I believe that selling those who have already invested in downtown on affordable concepts that improve the value of the surrounding environment (which is a direct benefit to them) is easier to accomplish right off the bat, than selling the entire city on subsidizing millions on one-trick ponies for DT (ex. convention centers, Publix, Macy's, aquariums, $30 million into Metro park, etc.)

Exactly, embracing a pedestrian oriented culture downtown has been accomplished in much the same compact area that everyone is pushing for her... in downtown Orlando.  Selling property owners on the benefits of very inexpensive solutions isn't hard.  Successful business people like cheap solutions to make their properties more attractive to existing and potentially new tenants.

I can make a free powerpoint presentation in about an hour about this very issue that would be more effective to a vibrant downtown than a 25k-50k study on making Heming Plaza more water friendly which will never be enacted in the first place.

Sandwich boards and outdoor seating would cost less than the hanging plant baskets we have all around the core.  Think about that for a moment.

Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2011, 10:41:54 PM
The figures are national, spuwho.  Its the reason this country is in so much debt.

Too broad a brush stroke for me.

Quote from: BridgeTroll on January 31, 2011, 07:26:35 AM
Do these businesses want what you are proposing?  Are there reasons the businesses themselves are not pushing for those changes?  For example... the cafeteria may not want a clear view of the urban streetscape.  The BOA may have decided that outdoor seating is too much of a hassle or would not generate enough business to justify.

BTW... I wholeheartedly agree with your ideas... just looking for reasons why they have not happened already.

If these businesses' don't want the proposed changes they're crazy.  I have no reason to go in BoA and I didn't know the eatery existed.  However, if there was some draw from the outside I would stop and eat there.

Quote from: stephendare on January 31, 2011, 09:44:07 PM

Quote from: spuwho on January 31, 2011, 08:43:23 PM

Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2011, 10:41:54 PM
The figures are national, spuwho.  Its the reason this country is in so much debt.

Too broad a brush stroke for me.

how on earth so?

Are you linking suburban growth to our national debt, personal debt, both?

Loved Ron's brown boots on the Channel 12 special last night. He is better with his typewriter than with his wit.

Quote from: spuwho on February 02, 2011, 10:16:51 PM

Quote from: stephendare on January 31, 2011, 09:44:07 PM

Quote from: spuwho on January 31, 2011, 08:43:23 PM

Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2011, 10:41:54 PM
The figures are national, spuwho.  Its the reason this country is in so much debt.

Too broad a brush stroke for me.

how on earth so?

Are you linking suburban growth to our national debt, personal debt, both?

There is a direct correlation, both in personal wealth, productivity, and to a region's economy.  Take a look at the study entitled "Portland's Green Dividend", completed by the CEO for Cities organization.  http://www.ceosforcities.org/files/PGD%20FINAL.pdf

^That was a great paper about the benefits Portland reaps from having fewer vehicle-miles travelled per day than most cities.  I see this as a major issue facing Jacksonville - yet I have heard NOTHING about it from any of the mayoral candidates.  Are they all afraid of upsetting big donors who have benefited from Jacksonville's sprawling development?  Afraid that they will be called 'communist' by the Rush Limbaugh crowd?  Why the silence on an issue that has arguably resulted in a significant part of our city's budget problem?  We talk about 800 lb gorillas - this is clearly one of them.

The paper on Portland is a great perspective and should be used as a MetroJacksonville front page article.

There is so much research & content available - but it represents a big change from long established cultural Conventional Wisdom.  To use a recent metaphor from a NASA researcher on Global Warming and Climate Change:

"...it's like looking at an x-ray, seeing a spot on your lungs, and continuing to smoke..."

Hey it looks like something like latitude 30 is going to open up shop downtown 
http://www.myspringfield.org/General/cesery-talks-springfield.html        and that would be a big deal i think right? you know that will help so much i think too.  i hope so

Sounds great. I hope it's more like Lucky Strike instead of Latitude 30 personally.

One word I have never heard mentioned in Jacksonville is 'repositioning.'

I have been looking into various landlords and various downtown office building owners and their management companies, and I am not seeing very many brains (or reputable companies/owners).  Sure the city leadership is about as bad as it can possibly be, but I don't expect much from this group of landowners either.

For instance, the AT&T Tower is owned by Elad National Properties and is the group's *only* office property (is that their version of diversification? and not to mention they certainly didn't diversify by location!...basically only in FL...I wonder how their books look).  They clearly don't know what the hell to do with it AND they even go so far as to label it Class A (my ass!...I guess maybe for Jacksonville...they might actually do better by truthfully calling it Class B and marketing it as such to smaller companies, though the huge floorplates don't help that).  There is some major empty space in that building now or soon from what I understand and no bites to replace it (hmmm, I wonder why).

Then on a smaller scale we have a bunch of smaller property owners of smaller 2-3 floor commercial properties, many with historical value.  They have rents as if they think that there are tenants that actually want to be in the downtown market...HA!  And if some of them are serious about not permitting signs or opening up to the sidewalk, then there is only so much the city can do without forcing these guys to permit signs and open up to the sidewalk.  These landowners don't even do *anything* to make their properties marketable!  A small investment can reap huuuggggeeeee rewards, but I guess none of them have figured that out yet.

Oh Jacksonville, at this point I have no plans to ever come back... :(

Quote from: comncense on February 05, 2011, 02:49:40 PM
Sounds great. I hope it's more like Lucky Strike instead of Latitude 30 personally.

what is lucky strike??

hey jsimm if you dont want help change things and just complain about things then why do talk on this website then  do you know what im saying?

Lucky Strike is the same concept pretty much. Bowling, bar, food, art, music... Minus the kids and arcade factor. Personally when I'm out drinking or for a happy hour, I don't wanna see little kids running around. I think Miami is the only place in Florida that has Lucky Strike though. I've been to the ones in Vegas and LA.

http://www.bowlluckystrike.com/

Quote from: letters and numbers on February 05, 2011, 06:21:33 PM
if you dont want help change things and just complain about things then why do talk on this website then  do you know what im saying?

simms generally isn't one of them, but that seems to be the norm for some posters

Simms look for another name on the AT&T building very soon.

Quote from: simms3 on February 05, 2011, 05:02:40 PM
One word I have never heard mentioned in Jacksonville is 'repositioning.'

I have been looking into various landlords and various downtown office building owners and their management companies, and I am not seeing very many brains (or reputable companies/owners).  Sure the city leadership is about as bad as it can possibly be, but I don't expect much from this group of landowners either.

Oh Jacksonville, at this point I have no plans to ever come back... :(

Simms,

Everyone has different reasons to be in commercial RE. For some its merely an investment by which better margins reap profits. For some they need losses to carry forward to avoid some level of taxes. Others do it because they actually enjoy it. Others are mere 'flippers' who simply see RE as a distressed asset that can be turned over and help them acquire some cash reward.

Many would agree that some CRE developers have a limited set of creativity. For some, it is simply a by the numbers exercise that helps them meet some fiscal or accounting goal.

For every successful downtown (anywhere) RE development, there are many that never make it or reach build out. There are some that reach build out, but can only carry an anchor tenant, but no more. Even further, there are speculative build outs that have no tenant at all!

For example the Chicago Spire designed by Calatrava http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Spire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Spire)

Looks like this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Chicago_Spire_pit.jpg/250px-Chicago_Spire_pit.jpg)

The Chicago Spire story gives a good example of just how many pieces have to come together to make a project work.

A building a few blocks away, started just 3 years sooner fared much better;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Tower_Chicago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Tower_Chicago)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/db/Trump_Tower_Chicago.JPG/220px-Trump_Tower_Chicago.JPG)

Different objectives, marginally different time periods, yet one failed, the other succeeds.

Both developments make little use of street or urban access design, because they were 'off traffic' locations. If anything the Trump development had more possibilities being on the Chicago River and it was built on top of a railroad ROW! (since removed).

Trump and Chicago traded many volleys on designs that he considered 'wasteful and expensive' but urbanists felt were necessary to have the build out compatible with contemporary urban design and have it interface with the South Rush "backdoor" to Michigan Ave. (The Mag Mile).

Trump won most of those fights because the City wanted it built very badly and he made it clear he wouldn't make money if they made him do it.

What does it have to do with Jax?

If the city planning department doesn't demand urban access in any large scale developments in the urban core, then why would a developer design one? We rue the fact that these building have little access at the street level, but who has held the city accountable on that?

Just one piece of the puzzle when putting together a solid urban layout.

^Timing is infinitely more important than location, but for the rest of the responses: thanks for the headsup on ATT name change (that's such an ATT building what else can it be?)).  I can't help that I'm turning into a snob that's enjoying wonderful opportunities in cities further north and hardly looking back (and I join at least half my former high school classmates).  Spuwho: I'm involved in CRE/finance :)