Walkable Commercial Districts: 8th & Main
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1321407663_dKvjMBf-M.jpg)
In our series of focusing on Jacksonville's long-overlooked historic, walkable commercial districts, we visit Springfield's 'central business district': 8th & Main.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-sep-walkable-commercial-districts-8th-main
dead on
Another great work.
Love the food trucks.
1. Tactical Urbanism Waterways in Dist.7?
love a food truck crawl too
That stretch of road despirately needs some mature trees.
Sad that weeds are already growing out of many of the newly-restored sidewalk pavers.
Quote from: finehoe on September 12, 2011, 11:09:04 AM
Sad that weeds are already growing out of many of the newly-restored sidewalk pavers.
This happens all the time in Jacksonville and it drives me nuts. What good does it do to dump money into sprucing up an area if it isn't going to be maintained?
I think the absence of weeds and keeping existing sidewalks in good repair makes an area look far better than a new sidewalk overgrown with weeds. And the new side walks don't seem to be leading to a slew of new development. But I guess they look good from your car at 40 MPH.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-1315-p1010694.JPG)
Is this sidewalk less attractive because it only provides concrete, shade trees and regular light posts instead of pavers, high maintenance landscaping and specialty light posts?
I throw souped up sidewalks in the same category as JTA's faux trolleys and buses. They don't spur economic development but they can help improve the atmosphere of pre-existing activities and connectivity between existing destinations. Anyway, I think the way we streetscape our streets should be completely revamped. Providing a regular sidewalk (skip the expensive pavers) and low maintenance native landscaping will provide just as much benefit for a reduced cost to the taxpayer. Unfortunately, we've fallen in love with making the simplest things more difficult and expensive than they have to be.
Quote from: Bativac on September 12, 2011, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: finehoe on September 12, 2011, 11:09:04 AM
Sad that weeds are already growing out of many of the newly-restored sidewalk pavers.
This happens all the time in Jacksonville and it drives me nuts. What good does it do to dump money into sprucing up an area if it isn't going to be maintained?
I think the absence of weeds and keeping existing sidewalks in good repair makes an area look far better than a new sidewalk overgrown with weeds. And the new side walks don't seem to be leading to a slew of new development. But I guess they look good from your car at 40 MPH.
The city is horrible for this. They seem like they're just handing out projects instead of making well though out plans, good policies that spur growth from the people who are actually willing to take a chance, & maintaining what they already have in place while building upon it. This line of thinking has been going on for decades & it still is. Its the reason why half of our downtown has been demolished & has vacant/surface lots everywhere. And It'll never be anything with any real substance unless the city leaders stop thinking they can just wave a magic wand, have some guys come in to redo a street & expect growth from that. It's lipstick on a pig.
QuoteFTA: Unlike many established urban core commercial districts, Springfield's Main Street continues to draw high interest from urban pioneers looking to bring life to the corridor. However, years after the completion of Main Street's streetscape beautification project, revitalization has continued to be a slow process. Unfortunately, the natural revitalization process has been negatively impacted by neighborhood politics, poor existing building conditions and overzealous lease rate expectations by property owners within the district. This proves that sometimes it takes more than a physical makeover of the public realm to encourage private investment.
I personally think the physical makeover hurt much more than it's helped. They essentially took away the walkability pedestrian friendliness of what a Main Street is supposed to be a replaced it with a highway. Even if the sidewalks are wider, it's not easy to play chicken crossing 4 lanes of traffic & a big median. It's simply not as accessible & "open feeling" as say parts of Riverside, Avondale, etc. And even if you only stayed to one side of the sidewalk, it's still just not a pleasant experience to be walking or sitting there with that big artery & all of that metal whizzing by going 40 (and a lot of times 50+) MPH. Its pretty much the equivalent of eating at a lunch table right beside of Blanding Blvd.
I don't know how you fix something like that.
^+1. Part of the problem with the middle median that was installed is also that it only allows cross traffic (vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle) on 4-5 streets, thereby reinforcing the use of the road as a highway. If more cross sections had been put in, with more lights and cross walks, then it would slowed traffic more and allowed more connectivity between East and West Main Street and East and West Springfield in general.
Quote from: finehoe on September 12, 2011, 11:09:04 AM
Sad that weeds are already growing out of many of the newly-restored sidewalk pavers.
Hundreds of people each day walking down the sidewalks would stomp out the weeds before they ever get a chance to be noticeable. Empty sidewalks allow the weeds to grow knee high. Activate these sections of the street and part of the maintenance gets taken care of without anyone ever knowing it.
Great article Ennis.
I like your 3 ideas to improve Main Street. They are totally do-able.
I do agree about the mature trees: the photo from the 1930s looking south on Main from 8th Street is gorgeous with the tree canopy.
Gosh, we had a movie theatre on Main Street?
We really were the place to be, huh?
In our current real estate market, Springfield gives you the best bang for your buck when its comes to the house. The neighborhood is diverse: one has to be okay with that, but what we most need is a Main Street with viable businesses. Something is better than nothing, and you have to start somewhere. I have friends on SAMBA, but I am not sure what their mission specifically is and if "taking on Main Street" is within that vision.
I am struck by two-things in your article.
The ground floor lease rate for the bank is quoted at $12.00 per square foot. That figure to me is astounding. I think a similar looking area in San Diego would fetch maybe $2.00 per square foot. If your figure is correct, how could anyone afford to open a small business? I do not see a flood of national chains in your photos either, so that should tell the wannabe landlords their rates are too high.
Second, the weeds and other evidence of lack of maintenence are a sign of lack of neighbourhood pride. Here in San Diego, several districts pay a Business Improvement District (BID) tax that goes to everything from funding local enternainment events to maintaining the public rights of way. Because we have so little rain, some commercial areas even steam clean their sidewalks on a regular basis. The reasoning is that they have to compete with privately owned shopping malls. People like clean, reasonably safe well-maintained commercial areas, do to be successful, one has to provide just that.
Most of the weeds appear to be in the courtyard at 9th and Main. This is off the sidewalk, in front of the restaurant, on private property. I did see some weeds on the sidewalk in front of the vacant lot where Jennifer Holbrook took that building down, but for the most part, the sidewalks are weed free from what I can tell by the pictures.
Dougsandiego, the unrealistic rental rates commanded by Main Street owners has been the bane of Main Street for years. It seems they would rather see the building sit vacant than rent them for a reasonable amount. :-(
Quote from: Debbie ThompsonMost of the weeds appear to be in the courtyard at 9th and Main. This is off the sidewalk, in front of the restaurant, on private property. I did see some weeds on the sidewalk in front of the vacant lot where Jennifer Holbrook took that building down, but for the most part, the sidewalks are weed free from what I can tell by the pictures.
Dougsandiego, the unrealistic rental rates commanded by Main Street owners has been the bane of Main Street for years. It seems they would rather see the building sit vacant than rent them for a reasonable amount. :-(
Exactly! The sidewalks aren't really filled with weeds, unless it's growing out from the lot where buildings were taken down. So that's really not an issue...the issue is the ridiculous amount(s) being asked for rent. That's one of the major issues that's keeping Main street empty...that, and the empty/vacant buildings that need to be restored.
When we first opened the thrift store, we paid less than $ 5.00 a SF. The talk when we close it was for between $ 7.50 and $ 9.00 per SF. It was a struggle to get enough business to walk down Main in the best of times, it got harder when the bus stops and routes changed.
All the talk about how bad the improved Main Street is is totally non-productive. It is a state highway. It would be a pot holed filled wasteland if it wasn't and we would be much worse off. Frankly, the lack of left turns and the medians should not be complained about, they should be used to show how to make an area like this walkable in today's world. Is Main Street the only commercial corridor that is a state highway like this and facing these issues? I think not.
Pocket parking lots in the 1/2 blocks off of Main. Concentrate on 8th to 6th where the buildings still are. Go after businesses that can service all of the residents of Springfield. The businesses must be able to be supported by the residents that often do not drive and ride the bus. Which makes the bus stops and routes even more important. Businesses also need to draw people for other than lunch. Lunch clientele seldom has the time to explore so they do not seem to help retail much.
Truly want a successful and walkable Main Street? Get streetcar here first. Think we need bike lanes? Then work on the alleys to accomplish that. That would also add a second business street presence for the businesses along Main Street.
By the way, the only paved pocket parking lot on Main Street was done years ago with a grant to help the businesses on Main Street. The city had so much vision during the heady times a few years ago that they gave it away to SRG. Wonder who has control of it now?
Overall, the area needs to be unique . Something to get people to want to come from other parts of Jacksonville or it will not succeed.
Just some thoughts from someone who has been there.
Doug...it's $12/SF a year, not month. That's as cheap as you'll ever see rent for small tenant spaces anywhere, whether it's the ghetto or a struggling neighborhood center. Aka, a dollar a square foot.
I TOTALLY agree that right now the area should take what it can get. There may never be a Starbucks or Trader Joes in that area in our lifetime, so in the meanwhile a discount store that serves the current community and pays the rent is bueno.
I also agree that we wasted money on sidewalks/streetscaping there. Nobody uses either. What's the traffic count on Main? 8th? We all know the people count is lowwww. It's not a congested area. The irony of this streetscape as opposed to others was that it (along with the St. Nicholas thing) was meant to spur economic development and foot traffic. You're absolutely right...just because now it's a pretty sidewalk with 5 ft weeds does not mean people will all of a sudden want to use it. Once an area becomes vibrant and there is foot traffic and a need to improve it, then do that.
I don't think food trucks there are a good idea, and they wouldn't work. Not nearly enough people or foot traffic. There are lots of food trucks where I live (and unfortunately they are highly regulated up here), and they locate to designated surface lots in otherwise extremely dense areas. They rely on walk-up business from office workers, strollers, and nearby residents. Nobody is going to drive to pick up food on wheels, especially not to Springfield.
Regarding food trucks, the article refers to crawls instead of permanent lots. Crawls are special events (like music festivals or art walks) and in an urban location like Main Street, can be quite successful as long as the property housing them meets regulations and their promoted. We're actually bouncing around the idea of pulling one together. As for a permanent lot, some in the city and sit down restaurants would probably be against the idea but a lot would work well in the vicinity of the new courthouse when it opens.
I think the crawl is a great idea, lakelander. It is a special event that could pull people from out of SPR down here. I think SPR folks would love it and come out for it. And it is a great way to highlight the area. Food Trucks all the time there isn't traffic for, but the crawl is a grea idea.
QuoteWhat's the traffic count on Main? 8th? We all know the people count is lowwww. It's not a congested area.
Main Street south of 8th - 10,600
By comparison of another commercial district:
St. Johns Avenue west of the Shoppes of Avondale - 8,800
That's still low. St. Johns is a low capacity road, but Main is 4 divided wide lanes, not too far off the capacity of Peachtree in front of my office building in Buckhead (AADT of 45,000 in front of my building).
A crawl would work, and a permanent location near the courthouse would also work. There are already hot dog and similar stands nearby.
Just pointing out that vibrancy is not necessarily dependent on traffic counts.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20Heritage%20Trolleys/streetcarkenoshamedian.jpg)
SOLUTION?
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 13, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20Heritage%20Trolleys/streetcarkenoshamedian.jpg)
SOLUTION?
OCKLAWAHA
Yes.
Does anyone have the ridership number comparisons between Riverside/ ST Vincents and Springfield/ Shands?
$12.00 per square foot per year is more like it, but if the interiors are so deteriorated, I can see the deterrent for people trying to start small businesses on a shoe string.
The property owners should get together and offer sweetners such as free rent for the first three-months or provide improvements to the point where a prospective tenant has an inhabitable "shell" they can finish. It is in the best interest of the owners to get their buildings occupied.
I own a small 19th century building on Fourth Avenue in San Diego. It was very presentable, but I still offered a free month's rent to allow the tenant to do his improvements. He did a wonderful job and now has a thriving business, WetStone Wine Bar, and I have a rented space with a quality small business who provides a part time job to one of the tenants in the apartments above. I agree with Lakelander. Don't go for homeruns. It is the accumulation of small improvements that creates a lively city.
^^^^^ tell that to the people who hamper our growth. We all get it. They (landlords, owners, and some other ninnies,) don't get it.
Most landlords may provide either abatements (usually 1 month is really low, never happens), tenant improvement allowances that can range from either $10/SF on the low end to $100/SF on the high end (do the math yourself...if rent is $12/SF, then $10/SF in TI is basically like 10 months free rent to use that money for improvements).
The difference between abatements and improvements is in when the money is collected (or "saved"). A lease usually stipulates that a tenant occupy the premises within a certain time frame. Rent commencement begins at occupancy. Before occupancy, there is usually a scramble of interior buildout so that the lease is not nullified and some provision missed. Often times upon occupancy, a lease will stipulate the hours a business is to stay open and for what days. This is especially true for local tenants in depressed centers or areas.
If a tenant is given tenant improvement allowances, there might be draws like a construction loan, but it is front ended. It may be reimbursed and balanced out, but it all happens before occupancy. The lease will stipulate construction details no matter if there are TI allowances or not. In abatements, the tenant must cover the improvements his or her self, possibly having to take out a loan, which is difficult to do nowadays and risky for both parties. The tenant then "saves" that money or a portion thereof over the period of the abatement by not paying base rent. The tenant would still probably be on the hook for common area maintenance, insurance, real estate taxes, and other reimbursable expenses, or would have to pay all or most of that himself if it is some type of net property.
Long story short, $12/SF does not tell the whole picture. The tenant improvement allowances would tell a much better picture. If they are basically limitless, allowing any tenant who signs an LOI to lease space on Main to do whatever he needs to do, and there are STILL no tenants coming to the area, then that is indicative more of the area than the landlord.
With unique spaces like these, if the Landlords were to start building the spaces out to make them look more presentable, that might limit who would use that space (and there is already an extremely tight limit on available tenants over there). I think it's smart that they keep the buildings standing, present a picture of what could be, and go for more creativity on the tenant's part. Many of the highest rent buildings near me are 19th century wood/brick shells. Was just at a contemporary art center in an old warehouse that had gallery space and 14 studios for local contemporary artists to work. It looked like a stable with a few nice finishes and white walls here and there.
Quote from: cline on September 13, 2011, 11:42:45 AM
Just pointing out that vibrancy is not necessarily dependent on traffic counts.
Aside from pedestrian malls, all of the "vibrant" places I have ever been are congested with people, bikes, and/or cars. Main is congested with none. Vehicular traffic is about the most important measure for retailers and other tenant types in every market/submarket/street aside from a streets in a few cities here in NA. Billboards and LED displays along highways in LA, Houston, and Atlanta fetch 5th Ave type prices because 300,000+ cars pass by every day. Tenants who want to put up a logo on a visible building along a highway with same traffic counts pay dearly for it.
Few national/credit retailers will locate to any space on a street with less than 20,000 cars going by a day. High end tenants want either a major urban shopping street, a major mall in a wealthy area, or a street in a nice area with at least 50,000 cars going by a day.
I can see tumbleweeds blowing down Main at its current state. I hope that it improves, but cars or not, it's not vibrant, and cars are the best measure for vibrancy here in America, even in Manhattan (along with sidewalk people counts).
Sweet Pete's and Three Layers both prove that a quality business product doesn't need 200,000 cars a day. I don't think anyone is deluded into thinking we're going to turn Main Street or 8Th into a small version of Town Center, but then who would want to? If you've seen one Walgreen's or Target store, you've seen them all, it's the unique, cutting edge, organic shops that bring real vibrant interest, witness 5-Points, or San Marco. Had SPAR not fallen in with a bunch of narrow minded thugs, 8Th and Main would already be there.
OCKLAWAHA
^^^That's two small businesses, not on Main, catering specifically to the local residents, within an entire square mile area. Main was once a commercial strip with dozens of similar small businesses. I suppose there is City Kids (is that still there?) and a couple businesses, but I question those who only lay blame at the landlords and I must point out at some point traffic/visibility does play an important role, even and especially for small businesses.
What has SPAR done specifically to prevent businesses from coming to the area? What businesses have looked at expanding or locating to Springfield? I'm sure there are few and SPAR seems to have quite a bad rap...I just don't know the details.
I object. Three Layers and Sweet Pete's do not cater specifically to local residents. Quite simply they would not survive. They have built reputations (Three Layers) or come with reputation (Sweet Pete's) and found their niche in Jacksonville. Locals go, don't get me wrong, but they don't survive on us.
Main Street was better back in 2007. Then it died. A primary reason for commercial properties to sit vacant (the same with residential properties) is deadbeat and absentee owners. Period. Fat Cat Grocery is currently for sale around 4th/Main and at last look it was at the 130k mark. That's not a bad price for Main Street commercial, and the property is in good shape. It's about the best thing for sale/rent wise we have.
Main Street is the thorough-fare for folks working downtown and coming from the north. There is indeed a lot of traffic. However there is nothing there for them. No retail, few eateries, and few reasons to stop. Because it is a highway, there are limited stops and when you are driving too fast on this highway, what can you see?
I love Springfield. There is so much potential. There needs to be incentives to come to Main Street. All business owners need to be welcomed (something is better than nothing, right?) as abandoned blight = no bueno. We have talked about this adnosium on other threads. We need clusters of like businesses, bohemian style, thrift/vintage/retro style. Springfield has to be nice to any new business coming in, most times I think we (Springfield) are our own worst enemy.
Springfield will not improve if Main Street remains as it does currently. That's a great big duh.
Everyone assumes the businesses like Three Layers and Uptown are doing great. Even the owners may tell the average person so. However, the cold reality is often much different when they sit down and pay those bills. Any small business has it hard, even in the best of times. Here today in Springfield competing with all of Jax, it is about as difficult as it comes.
The building owners are not these blinded by greed villains. They are realists. They see the rents charged in other areas. They see what it costs to own and maintain the buildings. While a few of them have failed miserably in the maintaining department, it is mostly because they can not justify the additional costs on what is a huge loss to start with. Not condoning the lack of maintenance, but simply explaining it.
People bought high and now can't afford to maintain or even sell. I would say the majority of these so called "deadbeat owners" have invested in their properties. They care and they are trying hard to just hold on, pretty much like many of us out here. Just drive down Main and you will see that a decent number of buildings have freshened facades and are kept clean and tidy. They are still empty though, are they not?
Main Street was better in 2003 through 2007. While the reasons it is worse now are many and varied and while we often find specific things to blame, the bottom line is most likely the local economy just could not support the various businesses anymore and the owners got tired of coming out of pocket, pockets that were mostly empty by then anyway.
Main Street construction, as road construction always does, certainly hurt. Meanwhile, times change and places like pawn shops and tax preps are struggling. Building owners are desperate for enough rent income to cover the expenses and so listen to their realtors and try to rent to the store front churches which seem more able to pay higher rents then the retail Main Street needs.
Like we learned with residential, blaming the owners and trying to get them to pay for their "sins" does nothing in the end but hurt all of Historic Springfield. We need to help rather than hinder. Until we all learn that, Main Street will continue to have those tumble weeds.
On this block of Main/ 8th, there is new opportunity. With the new bank opening up, there will be foot traffic. Smart marketing of those store fronts and getting the trust of and therefore the cooperation of those building owners will be key.
Helping rather than hindering works. Now is SAMBA and Springfield up for the task?
^^^^Yes! That sounds very reasonable and realistic! There is not one deep pocket in Springfield, let's not forget that.
Jacksonville was hit so hard by the recession. Families that have been mentioned on this very site as set for life due to their holdings went bankrupt (or rather the basis/business that provided their wealth went bankrupt). It's hard to even say there are very many remaining wealthy working people in the city anymore, let alone the small time Springfield landlord. Businesses can't find loans to expand, people don't have the money to support the expansion anyway, etc. Just like the rest of us have home mortgages and bills to pay, Springfield landlords have the same situation, but took the added risk of additional mortgages (and those mortgages in particular may have short maturities).
Now, someone please tell me about SPAR? That organization does not seem to have any friends anywhere, so it must be doing something horribly wrong. What's the scoop?
Given the structural conditions of most of the buildings along Main, perhaps more help is needed than SAMBA and Springfield? It would seem like some sort of incentive program may be needed that makes things feasible for building owners and small business owners.
I have been saying that forever lakelander. There needs to be an incentive - like the city incentives that spurred residential development in SPR originally. If the LISC money had been used to bridge a rent gap between landlords and tenants for several years, that would be an incentive for both parties. LISC money gone, and with the city finances what they are, the incentive needs to be found somewhere else. Perhaps the city can give some type of tax relief for a certain amount of years to landlords who lower their rents to whatever price per square foot that would be amenable to small businesses. Just ideas, this isn't my area of expertise. But incentives are what will make a bridge between the landlords and tenants.
What happened to the LISC money? What was it spent on?
There are many spaces available that do not need the structural work some seem concerned about. Once those spaces are up and running, it would seem the incentive for those new roofs and structural issues would be the possibility of getting spaces rented.
The best help Springfield and SMABA could provide to those un-rent-able spaces might be to help "mothball" them - make them look presentable to help get the other spaces rented. Cheap and relatively easy to do. The hardest thing at this point would be to get the trust and then the cooperation of the disillusioned property owners.
An organization that actually succeeded at something on Main could get LISC or the city interested again which might help as well by providing limited funding to get emergency repairs made. Gap funding on rents would certainly help as well. That gap funding seems like it would also be incentive for the needed repairs.
Is there a database of ready to move in spaces readily available?
I think it's going to take more than rent cuts. Rent is already so low, lower than anywhere in the city and at the bottom of the rent pile anywhere. Potential tenants know how low the rent is. That's most likely not why they're not moving to Springfield. There are other underlying concerns and problems. Can we be brutally honest about the neighborhood and say that it could be the neighborhood itself, still?
It's one square mile, not a lot of people, especially middle class and higher consumers there. Not even when you pull parts of the northside. Tenants can lower their costs all they want by expanding or relocating to Springfield where rents are already as low as they can get, but they still have to make a certain profit margin for it to be worth it. They probably would have to take out a loan or open a line of credit, which is next to impossible nowadays. And when credit opens up more, it's not going to open up for risky business ventures in risky neighborhoods (or banks would not have learned a thing from the recession).
The city or someone needs to act as a small business lender for Springfield commercial to come back. It's that simple. SPAR needs to get out of the way to let this happen, etc. Just as multifamily developments require a construction loan that reverts to a mini-perm, a small business opening up in Springfield will need initial help to get built out and started, and then some sort of line of credit with frequent drawing power in the beginning to support getting started. Landlords may not have the pockets to give a tenant money for improvements, and simple rent abatement won't work because it's money saved rather than money put in your pocket.
Moreover, it will have to be a slow and steady process. Tenants are going to look at traffic counts as indicators of how they will do. I'm still blown away by how many people on here think that area is highly trafficked. It's a dead zone. There might be a 15 minute rush in the morning and afternoon, but nobody is driving Main and most of the people walking around during the day are not middle class and up consumers. That's the simple truth of the matter, and that's not going to attract tenants. Sweet Pete's is run by a guy that one can say has had success in the past and has fairly deep pockets. As someone said, Three Layers has a great reputation but is not a money tree.
Mack Bissette of Atlanta came down to Springfield and originally found successes. He has now left, and now with the hugeeee success of many larger neighborhoods in his own hometown, I'm sure in the back of his mind he is asking "what if I stayed put in Atlanta where the central county has an average hh income of $93K and white flight is occurring in reverse, still?"
Places like Springfield are going to have to become "cool" again before it is successful. The "cool" factor depends on a few influential people saying it is cool again. People are sheep. These influential people could be a local celebrity chef who decides to open up his next big restaurant there. It could be Jennifer Johnson deciding that her next gallery will be there. It could be Preston Haskell making some investments in the area. These kind of people get quoted in magazines, get press attention, have deep pocket friends, are respected, are known, etc. I think there are really only 2 locally known celeb chefs, and one is already expanding, so that's out for now.
The other problem is these kinds of neighborhoods do best with young, upwardly mobile professionals. Jacksonville does not have a large population of those. When I read the neighbor profiles on MySpringfield, it's always some navy family, or young family, or elderly gay couple, etc. Young singles or young couples *without* kids transform these kinds of neighborhoods better than anyone else. All of the Ortega/San Marco kids with poppa's money to buy first homes are doing jack diddly squat and moving to the beach or staying near mom and dad (they are NOT looking at Springfield or even downtown or anywhere else cool). It's just not cool yet to go to Springfield. Jacksonville in general is not yet a cool city like some of its peers or larger counterparts.
I can look at commercial space available on Main today. I think I already know what I'll find.
Quote from: simms3 on September 13, 2011, 07:36:19 PM
Quote from: cline on September 13, 2011, 11:42:45 AM
Just pointing out that vibrancy is not necessarily dependent on traffic counts.
Few national/credit retailers will locate to any space on a street with less than 20,000 cars going by a day. High end tenants want either a major urban shopping street, a major mall in a wealthy area, or a street in a nice area with at least 50,000 cars going by a day.
I can see tumbleweeds blowing down Main at its current state. I hope that it improves, but cars or not, it's not vibrant, and cars are the best measure for vibrancy here in America, even in Manhattan (along with sidewalk people counts).
Sorry but what you're referring to are basically malls and lifestyle centers with a bunch of chains like SJTC, RCMP, and the Avenues. Yes, those places like high traffic counts. I'm referring to more organic community corridors such as Avondale, San Marco and 5 Points. These places don't have major chains but that doesn't make them any less desirable than say the SJTC (at least in IMO). Main Street can be vibrant in this way. I would seriously disagree with your assertion that cars are the best measure of vibrancy.
QuoteWhen I read the neighbor profiles on MySpringfield, it's always some navy family, or young family, or elderly gay couple, etc. Young singles or young couples *without* kids transform these kinds of neighborhoods better than anyone else.
I've met many people that live in Springfield that are both young singles and young couples. Young couples with kids as well.
Great posts. I'm really enjoying the discussion taking place on this topic and hope it will be a positive impact on the future of Main and other struggling commercial districts throughout the city.
Quote from: simms3 on September 14, 2011, 08:19:00 AM
The other problem is these kinds of neighborhoods do best with young, upwardly mobile professionals. Jacksonville does not have a large population of those. When I read the neighbor profiles on MySpringfield, it's always some navy family, or young family, or elderly gay couple, etc. Young singles or young couples *without* kids transform these kinds of neighborhoods better than anyone else. All of the Ortega/San Marco kids with poppa's money to buy first homes are doing jack diddly squat and moving to the beach or staying near mom and dad (they are NOT looking at Springfield or even downtown or anywhere else cool). It's just not cool yet to go to Springfield. Jacksonville in general is not yet a cool city like some of its peers or larger counterparts.
With no data to back me up at the moment, I'd say that Jacksonville does have its fair share of mobile young professionals, compared to second tier peer cities such as Memphis, Richmond, Norfolk and Louisville. However, there's a difference between a mobile young professional and an urban pioneer. Although there are exceptions to the rule, a mobile professional is more likely to move to a city that offers the lifestyle/urban atmosphere they seek than invest in a neighborhood that doesn't offer the environment that attracts them. This pretty much happens on a routine basis with a good segment the mobile population nationwide. They simply decide to leave or live in an area of town that gives them the most bang for their buck. When the craving comes for something a place like Jax may lack, they also travel.
QuoteThe other problem is these kinds of neighborhoods do best with young, upwardly mobile professionals. Jacksonville does not have a large population of those. When I read the neighbor profiles on MySpringfield, it's always some navy family, or young family, or elderly gay couple, etc. Young singles or young couples *without* kids transform these kinds of neighborhoods better than anyone else. All of the Ortega/San Marco kids with poppa's money to buy first homes are doing jack diddly squat and moving to the beach or staying near mom and dad (they are NOT looking at Springfield or even downtown or anywhere else cool). It's just not cool yet to go to Springfield. Jacksonville in general is not yet a cool city like some of its peers or larger counterparts.
I have been selling residential real estate in Springfield for close to 8 years now. The demographics of the people who are moving to SPR has changed in the past say 2-3 years. It used to be urban pioneers and people who were moving to Jax from other areas of the country who saw the potential in SPR. More recently it is people from Jax that are seeing that SPR is a great/cool neighborhood. People
are moving here from Riverside, San Marco, and the beaches. People buy in SPR now because of the community, not because of commercial stuff. They come to the events (and there are a ton of them) and they love the neighbors. It doesn't work like other communities where people drive around and decide to live there because of cool services within walking distance. The decision to buy happens when they begin interacting with the neighbors and seeing that there is a real sense of community here.
We would all love to see the commercial corridor develop, but the lack of services isn't stopping people from buying here.
I agree with Amanda. People who are buying in Springfield are not basing that decision on the commercial part of the neighborhood. As it grows it will be a bonus for all of us in the future. If you want to see just how hard it is to make a business thrive in these times take a look at all the businesses in the Riverside corridor that have closed in the last few years. Those areas are shopping destinations and they still have businesses going under. Main St is an even harder place to survive right now. I applaud those Springfield businesses like Uptown Market, Three Layers, Sweet Pete's, Tres Leches, and all the others that are riding out this recession in style. Now I just made myself hungry so which one is closest? Hmmm.
Hola, Chicken! Hola is close to you. Chicken Enchilada Verde....yum