Many individuals have expressed a desire to see the Jacksonville city core achieve a vibrancy similar to that of the mid-twentieth century; or, to put it another way ... the revitalization of the downtown core.
While many remember a core vibrancy, others only imagine it. In any case, I find myself pondering the probable characteristics of a revitalized core. I'm convinced that although it is possible to achieve a revitalized core, the existing overall dynamics in and around the county will not allow a replica of the old core vibrancy; that is, the inevitable vibrancy of the current core will have quite different characteristics.
Any definition of vibrancy must include lots of people -- every day -- living, working, shopping, socializing, visiting ... and simply enjoying the nature and essence of a city core which offers unique qualities not available in any suburban environment.
The apparent failure of the Jacksonville core, after decades of encouragement, to progress significantly toward any semblance of vibrancy and infill suggests two or three, maybe four fundamental causes.
The staged events we enjoy -- Art Walk, One Spark, Jazz Fest, Market Events, etc -- which are very necessary and positive for the core, should not be considered to provide a measure of success toward a revitalized city core. A revitalized core must possess a self-sustaining energy which, as a consequence of its permanent and natural activity, will draw investors, businesses, residents, workers, shoppers, and visitors into the core "every day of the year". The staged events are an interim, serving to increase the habit of visiting the core, and to ready the core for serious investment by permanent entities.
Whereas we currently must entice, invite, and encourage businesses to open in the core, and people to engage it via whatever staged events viable, a city core approaching vibrancy will, by the pressure of its energy and attractiveness, automatically draw investors, entrepreneurs, residents, workers, and visitors.
So, if we are to progress beyond wishing for vibrancy, and beyond staging events to create temporary energy, perhaps we should attempt identifying the three or four fundamental causes of the lack of progress toward true revitalization.
I suggest the following as one fundamental cause. I suspect there are two or three others. In any case, the cause I refer to is an infrastructure shaped so as to impede revitalization. It has to do with the lack of available "sidewalk access" spaces for leasing by small to medium businesses.
For example, review Laura Street. The "only" block, from the river north to State Street, which has any viable small sidewalk-fronting rental spaces is between Adams and Monroe. Observe between Bay and Adams. Nothing. Observe between Monroe all the way to State. Nothing.
To be fair, there "might" be some spaces available if and when the Steve Atkin's Barnett Bldg and the Trio project is completed. And there seems to be a space or two north of Duval, on the east side.
If one were to walk down each core street, how many small/medium sidewalk access spaces would be available? I suspect not enough to achieve full vibrancy and infill. And some, although suitable, are being used by businesses that contribute very little to the sidewalk energy level. For example, the Dalton Agency, a great asset for the core, but which certainly doesn't need a prime sidewalk access to prosper, is utilizing a space which could be used by one-to-three small entrepreneurs in a much more "vibrant" way -- thus providing a solid and necessary push toward the threshold needed for full revitalization.
Losing the sidewalk-lively establishment Boomtown (2009 ?) was a big loss for the struggle to move toward overall vibrancy in the core. If Boomtown had remained, it would have drawn in other, similar ventures, and if three or four other interesting and lively entrepreneurs had opened up, the core would have approached a valuable, although precarious, momentum toward achieving a self sustaining energy -- very similar to what has happened in Five Points, King Street, and Stockton.
The large retail operations which provided the core vibrancy and infill of the last century are all established in the suburban malls. I doubt if they will ever return. Therefore, the only type of retail suitable for the current downtown core will be the small to medium specialty shops. And this means that there "must" be enough small / medium sidewalk-entry spaces available for lease. The infrastructure must match the needs of the small investor / entrepreneur. History has shown that the large firms are not consistently loyal to the core, and tend to depart it for whatever reason. The habit has been that when a large firm enters the core, another departs ... net zero.
Compare the small spaces in Five Points, and in the Park and King vicinity, and even along Stockton. Of all the characteristics necessary for an emerging vibrancy in a desired area, "the" most important is the building infrastructure as related to small and medium spaces on walkable sidewalks.
Laura Street is basically ruined for the time being, if one is to measure its suitability for significant contributions toward true vibrancy. "If", Atkins is able to provide suitable sidewalk access spaces along Laura and Adams, it will greatly increase the ease with which future progress to revitalization can be achieved. And except for a small strip on the east side of Laura, the area north of the Library is lost as far as revitalization is concerned, as it is consumed by the monolithic First Baptist Church --- 13 blocks perhaps? How many linear feet of sidewalk in the church compound is lost, wasted so to speak, regarding potential contribution to revitalization?
Little can be done to large buildings such as the Bank of America to accommodate sidewalk energy. Imagine attempting to create a warm, welcoming environment, suitable to the opening of a small business, along sidewalks at buildings such as this? Possible ... but expensive, and in any case, any modifications would be in the future, when and if demand requires it.
I cannot stress enough the importance of encouraging residents into the core, as doing so will provide multiple kinds of momentum toward revitalization of the core. And I cannot stress enough the importance of effective mass transit, stretching out to the west, the southwest, the north, the east and the southeast.
I prefer the beautiful and clean streetcar, and what I believe is called light rail for the longer distances ... Orange Park, the beaches, and the growth up north for example. Imagine how the parking problem downtown, along with the parking ticket fears ... not to mention the pollution, will be soothed and solved when we finally do something creative about an effective and efficient mass transit system.
The homeless population is certainly not the problem. Nor is the parking ... or the parking tickets. They are peripherals ... incidentals, solved automatically when the fundamental and real problems are addressed and solved.
To wish and hope is not enough. Identify the most significant problems, the most significant cause of each, and force a solution.
You make many excellent points.
Good post!
Hopefully there will be more people willing to invest in housing downtown just like in Brooklyn. That's the only thing stopping the revitalization of our core. Out of all the people I know I can't name a single person who would want to live downtown. Currently our downtown has a bad reputation according to my friends/family. To them they see homeless people, abandoned buildings and annoying one way streets that make it difficult to navigate downtown. If we had a better mass transit plan that would help the people who are afraid to drive downtown but it still doesn't change the mindsets of those who don't like our downtown. I love our downtown I eat,walk, bike and drink there almost everyday.
Thanks for the comments Bold Boy and Ben Frank. I was beginning to believe that nobody could see my post but me ... that it was a trick of the site.
As one perceives an increase in the number of "useless" blocks (as far as the small investor is concerned) in the city core, one will continue to experience a fundamental and significant hindrance to the core's ability to move toward true vibrancy. To expect serious and effective moves toward infill by small investors along these dead zones is to expect the impossible. Observe Laura Street from Monroe to State Street.
Perhaps the plan is for core infill to gradually creep in from the west ... observe all the new construction along Riverside and Park -- very close to the Prime Osborne.
Thank goodness Bay Street bar strip is taking hold. I must begin to drink more devil's water to support the Volstead and the Bay strip. There seems to be little hot spots of development .. and some warm spots. There is hope.
Since it is becoming obviously difficult to invite the big dudes into the core, we need to discourage any new development of blocks which are fundamentally "dead zones" for the small investor. We might even consider retro-fitting current blocks to accommodate the needs of the small entrepreneur. What can a small investor do if he or she were invited into Laura between Bay and Forsyth, or between Monroe and State? Nothing.
Hi Ron,
excellent post and well thought out.
I feel that from the perspective of people coming to downtown in order to shop or live there, the questions are pretty basic.
1.) Why should I go to downtown instead one of the various malls / Jax Beach....
2.) Why should I live downtown rather than in Reiverside, a suburb, the beach....
It essentially comes down to downtown's unique selling points - what it it that would make people prefer downtown over the alternatives they have? The latter (the alternatives) is important to keep in mind.
Perhaps looking at other cities with more successfully revitalized downtowns we could find out what made people visit / shop / move there.
I feel that one hindrance is the destruction of much of downtown's (and surrounding areas') building stock / structure.
I also love the post. ronchamblin, you wrote:
QuoteThe large retail operations, which provided the core vibrancy and infill of the last century, are all established in the suburban malls. I doubt if ever they will return. Therefore, the only type of retail suitable for the current downtown core will be the small to medium specialty shops. And this means that there "must" be enough spaces available for lease -- spaces that are small to medium, and that have access to sidewalk entry.
I agree.
Now, what's the first viable, major step to make that helps encourage indigenous components of the city (those small to medium specialty shops) to move in that direction? How must the downtown plan(s) be tweaked to encourage a move in that direction?
QuoteA revitalized core must possess a self-sustaining energy which, as a consequence of its permanent and natural activity, will draw businesses, residents, workers, shoppers, and visitors into the core "every day of the year". The staged events are an interim, serving to increase the habit of visiting the core, and to ready the core for serious investment by permanent entities.
Again, agreed.
I think the admittedly uneven but continuing stabilization of Springfield helps the cause. The development of Riverside / Brooklyn definitely helps. The Fuller Warren's 12-foot-wide multi-use bike and pedestrian trail helps and if more can be done on the other bridges -- that would really help, too. All of these occurrences serve as enhancements that act to re-invite the traditional core back into neighborhood interaction and mix / flow. In other words, *natural* vibrancy.
Tie this in with the Friends of Hemming Park initiative, start to spiral out focal streets from there and (where possible) work to marry them up with those streets leading to the river and the RiverWalk.
Great article Ron. I have often wondered this push to get big monolithic companies downtown shouldn't be the priority until we have more vibrancy. I really would like to see Hemming Park, or that green space behind the library, turn out some sort of semi-permanent street stores. Get 10-20 vendors down there every day would really keep people coming back.
Really fantastic post, Ron.
Completely agree that the homeless and parking issues are largely red herrings.
Quote from: jaxlore on October 21, 2014, 03:54:58 PM
Great article Ron. I have often wondered this push to get big monolithic companies downtown shouldn't be the priority until we have more vibrancy.
Definitely agree - the big companies will follow once there is money to be made, i.e. the smaller businesses have prepared the ground.
I also feel that having many smaller businesses vs. few large ones is preferential since small businesses are probably more "loyal" in a sense that they have less options to simply move their business elsewhere.
One good way to get small businesses is imho the repurposing existing (old) building stock at reasonable rents rather than flattening downtown and having new (and expensive) buildings in their place.
There is a great reservoir of energy, creativity, skill, and money sequestered behind the floodgates. The reservoir contains thousands of small investors and entrepreneurs, waiting to revitalize the city core. What operates the floodgates?
According to my level of ignorance, a basic law in any revitalization effort is that:
"the small-to-medium investor entrepreneur is one of the most significant and powerful entities for revitalization".
A secondary law is that:
"a proper infrastructure must precede any successful investments by the small-to-medium entrepreneur."
By their shear number, the small entrepreneur investors act as powerful and independent packets of energy, and once enabled ... set free ..., become like the wind ... relentless and powerful ... going the distance. But the wind requires a suitable atmosphere within which to exert its power.
Expanding upon these "laws" ... one might suggest that it is almost foolish to expect an influx of small investor entrepreneurs unless a favorable infrastructure exists -- or, put another way -- an inadequate or poor infrastructure makes it "impossible" for the small investor entrepreneur to be successful in the city core. A consequence of this of course, is that revitalization will never occur under these circumstances. Observe the past two decades.
If infrastructure is so important, then what describes it? It is made up of things of differing significance --- things like safety ... cleanliness ... effective and interesting mass transit ... parking facilities ... small-to-medium building spaces for lease ... parks and greenery ... walkability ... the removal of parking meters as much as possible ... non-hostile parking enforcement ... non-hostile code and zoning agencies ... an attractive or beautiful overall environment ... staged events and festivals ... and a confidence that there is no single oppressive power hovering -- whether a church or a governmental entity ... waiting to squelch one's creative efforts, or to cause a loss of one's investment.
One might imagine that the floodgate is actually controlled by the quality of the infrastructure ... the atmosphere -- and that it is impossible for the gates to open until the quality of the infrastructure rises above a certain level.
Given that the average small investor is in a cash-poor condition, it is impossible for the small investor entrepreneur to pay for improvements in the infrastructure. Therefore, if improvements are to be, the city tax fund must act. It is also possible for wealthy individuals or entities to invest in infrastructure improvements by way of peripheral impacts. But this is unlikely to be enough in my opinion.
The core infrastructure has been in varying degrees improved by expenditures on things such as the giant Everbank TV screens, the skyway, the Hemming Park Activity funding, the Laura Street walkability improvements, Downtown Vision, the Jazz Festival, Art Walk, the Food Truck Events, and OneSpark. All of these actions and investments work toward the goal of full vibrancy and infill. However, most will sense that these things are not enough.
As a consequence of limited funds in the tax coffers, every action or project funded by the city, or allowed by the city, must be judged according to its real impact upon the fundamental infrastructure "shaped to invite and enable the small-to-medium entrepreneur investor."
Along with acknowledging the great impact possible via the small-to-medium entrepreneur investor, one must also acknowledge the great importance of increasing, by any and all means, the residential population in the core. After all "people" provide the essence of any definition of a city's vibrancy.
Along with residents living in the core, one might recognize the significance of residents living on the periphery of it.
Any large residential projects along the peripherals of the core -- Riverside, Brooklyn, and LaVilla can have a huge impact upon increasing the vibrancy and infill of the core "if" the mass transit is adequate enough, and exciting enough (streetcars) :) , to provide easy and frequent access to the core from these areas.