http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/09/uber-oakland-sears-building-uptown-lane-partners.html
QuoteEarlier this year, Oakland officials had been joking amongst themselves that "Google is coming" to the city.
Rumors flew about which company would occupy the former Sears building at 19th and Broadway, now known as Uptown Station. City Hall insiders weren't quite sure who would make the move, but invoking Google made for decent fodder.
Within the last couple months, things got more serious. News spread that building owner Lane Partners was in deep discussions with one company after touring the building. The developer had about 40 interested parties in past years that ranged from technology to professional service. In real estate circles, speculation centered on companies like Twitter (NYSE: TWTR), Google (NASDAQ: GOOG), Stripe, Pinterest, Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO) and Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL).
But the company that eventually took the building turned out to be Uber, which announced Wednesday that it bought the 400,000-square-foot building to house nearly 3,000 employees.
"I was chomping at the bit, meeting with Uber folks a few days ago – 'Is it true, is it true?' I'll bring out the big pom-poms," said Lynette Gibson McElhaney, an Oakland city council member.
The news has had major economic and social significance in the Bay Area, sparking debate about what the move means for Oakland now that it's become more attractive to global capital practically overnight. No major technology company had set up shop yet in Oakland, and Uber will already become one of the city's largest employers when in moves in 2017.
The deal made practical real estate sense for Uber at a time when fast-growing tech companies are all exploring nearly every big block of space in the region that sits near public transit. Increasingly, the largest of those companies, like Salesforce (NYSE: CRM) and Google, want to own their own real estate to have more control instead of staying chained to a landlord.
(Uber and Lane Partners refused to disclose the sales price, which should soon become public anyway.)
One-fifth of Uber's employees live in the East Bay, and the company expects a quarter to live there by the time the move occurs. "It enables our employees to spend more time at home with their families rather than on commutes," Uber's global head of people and places Renee Atwood said.
The company had been looking on and off at Oakland lately, and started talking with Lane Partners about three months ago. Lane Partners had discussions with other firms that wanted to split the building with other tenants, too. Uber also had initially discussed leasing before deciding to buy.
Secrecy was paramount, as is usually the case in the ultra-competitive technology world. Uber kicked the tires on other Oakland office development sites controlled by developers like Shorenstein Properties and SKS Investments, but those couldn't compete with a building already constructed and undergoing $40 million worth of renovations.
"We've had really strong tenant interest but at some point someone breaks away from the pack and that's what happened here," said Scott Smithers of Lane Partners.
Now that Uber broke away, it has questions to answer. At Wednesday's press conference, the heaviest questions focused on how Oakland lured the company there. But there were no tax incentives and no guarantees, officials said.
...
Guys, if Oakland of all places can do it, so can downtown Jacksonville.
Other quotes from the article:
QuoteThe city has 15,000 residential units in the pipeline, a downtown-specific plan getting underway, big affordable housing decisions to make, and a host of city-owned sites up for development. Developers say the move makes a lot of that development – including affordable housing requirements tied to it – more financially viable.
Riaz Taplin, a developer who recently announced he will build a couple apartment projects in East Oakland, said he got three text messages from his biggest institutional investors when the Uber news hit Tuesday night.
"It's such a stamp of approval – the same as a rating agency saying a bond is investment grade. Uber just said Oakland is investment grade. It's no different," he said.
Other developments recently proposed or underway in Downtown Oakland by bigger capital include:
345 units by Seth Hermalian in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/1900-Broadway-Rendering.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/08/33-story-oakland-tower-slated-for-approval.html
298 units by UDR in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Lake-Merritt-Boulevard-Apartments-Rendering-2015.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/07/controversial-oakland-tower-deal-could-be-illegal.html
206 units by Gerding Edlin in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/1700-Webster-Oakland.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/08/refined-designs-and-timing-for-206-unit-oakland-tower.html
(http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6008501/1505281700-webster*750xx2800-1575-0-176.jpg)
source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/05/oakland-housing-tower-gerding-edlen-perkins-will.html
223 units by Lakeshore Partners in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2270-Broadway.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/03/plans-for-24-story-oakland-tower-with-223-apartments.html
330 units by Carmel Partners in Jack London Square
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fourth-and-Madison-Rendering-1.jpg)
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fourth-and-Madison-Rendering-5.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/09/refined-designs-and-moniker-for-330-unit-oakland-development.html
Really the list goes on and on. Oakland hit < 10% office vacancy for the first time since 2008 this past year and it's now around 7% vacant, which is extraordinarily low. There are a couple of office tower proposals that will come to fruition if having a large Uber office in Oakland translates to additional high brow tech firms locating offices there:
renderings and info at each site:
600K sf in 23 floors by Shorenstein
http://shorenstein.com/portfolio/investments/property?id=2795
310K sf in 20 floors by SKS
http://1100broadway.com/pdf/factsheet.pdf
Yes, Jax doesn't have spillover from a larger, booming city. But some of the issues that Oakland has are a lot worse than the issues Jax has. Oakland's whole quality of life is questioned daily, and it truly truly is a dangerous city. Honestly, not really sure all that much what Oakland is "doing" to get this kind of investment, but it begs the question and is worth looking into.
The future blossom of Oakland was inevitable.
Access to transit.
Cheaper housing
Same vistas as SFO
Its getting so bad in SFO that Google bus drivers are sleeping in their cars now.
So Uber breaking through and buying the Sears property will no doubt start the movement off the peninsula they have been waiting for.
Personally having dealt with the Valley mentality, the mass idea of being colocated from SFO down to San Jose is somewhat defeating.
The Valley will price themselves out eventually as the cost of existence or reaching the space becomes unreachable.
Great news for Oakland. Outside of dinner at Jack London Square and a drive through the city's streets to reach Redwoods Regional Park, I didn't get much of a chance to explore the city this summer but I came away believing it had potential. Regarding its skyline, it seemed pretty small for a city its size. Given the boom occurring in SF and Oakland having direct connectivity via BART, I'm not surprised to see some spillover starting to happen.
What issues do you believe that Oakland has to deal with that are more difficult to overcome than Jax?
Kind of reminds me of Jacksonville 7 to 8 years ago before the 2008 economic crash and downturn; we had a lot of developmental projects, both business and residential, proposed or nearing approval downtown. I don't know whether Oakland's leaders are pursuing these interests and developments or its just luck, but I know that Jax can achieve the same.
Quote from: simms3 on September 25, 2015, 01:59:36 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/09/uber-oakland-sears-building-uptown-lane-partners.html
QuoteEarlier this year, Oakland officials had been joking amongst themselves that "Google is coming" to the city.
Rumors flew about which company would occupy the former Sears building at 19th and Broadway, now known as Uptown Station. City Hall insiders weren't quite sure who would make the move, but invoking Google made for decent fodder.
Within the last couple months, things got more serious. News spread that building owner Lane Partners was in deep discussions with one company after touring the building. The developer had about 40 interested parties in past years that ranged from technology to professional service. In real estate circles, speculation centered on companies like Twitter (NYSE: TWTR), Google (NASDAQ: GOOG), Stripe, Pinterest, Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO) and Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL).
But the company that eventually took the building turned out to be Uber, which announced Wednesday that it bought the 400,000-square-foot building to house nearly 3,000 employees.
"I was chomping at the bit, meeting with Uber folks a few days ago – 'Is it true, is it true?' I'll bring out the big pom-poms," said Lynette Gibson McElhaney, an Oakland city council member.
The news has had major economic and social significance in the Bay Area, sparking debate about what the move means for Oakland now that it's become more attractive to global capital practically overnight. No major technology company had set up shop yet in Oakland, and Uber will already become one of the city's largest employers when in moves in 2017.
The deal made practical real estate sense for Uber at a time when fast-growing tech companies are all exploring nearly every big block of space in the region that sits near public transit. Increasingly, the largest of those companies, like Salesforce (NYSE: CRM) and Google, want to own their own real estate to have more control instead of staying chained to a landlord.
(Uber and Lane Partners refused to disclose the sales price, which should soon become public anyway.)
One-fifth of Uber's employees live in the East Bay, and the company expects a quarter to live there by the time the move occurs. "It enables our employees to spend more time at home with their families rather than on commutes," Uber's global head of people and places Renee Atwood said.
The company had been looking on and off at Oakland lately, and started talking with Lane Partners about three months ago. Lane Partners had discussions with other firms that wanted to split the building with other tenants, too. Uber also had initially discussed leasing before deciding to buy.
Secrecy was paramount, as is usually the case in the ultra-competitive technology world. Uber kicked the tires on other Oakland office development sites controlled by developers like Shorenstein Properties and SKS Investments, but those couldn't compete with a building already constructed and undergoing $40 million worth of renovations.
"We've had really strong tenant interest but at some point someone breaks away from the pack and that's what happened here," said Scott Smithers of Lane Partners.
Now that Uber broke away, it has questions to answer. At Wednesday's press conference, the heaviest questions focused on how Oakland lured the company there. But there were no tax incentives and no guarantees, officials said.
...
Guys, if Oakland of all places can do it, so can downtown Jacksonville.
Other quotes from the article:
QuoteThe city has 15,000 residential units in the pipeline, a downtown-specific plan getting underway, big affordable housing decisions to make, and a host of city-owned sites up for development. Developers say the move makes a lot of that development – including affordable housing requirements tied to it – more financially viable.
Riaz Taplin, a developer who recently announced he will build a couple apartment projects in East Oakland, said he got three text messages from his biggest institutional investors when the Uber news hit Tuesday night.
"It's such a stamp of approval – the same as a rating agency saying a bond is investment grade. Uber just said Oakland is investment grade. It's no different," he said.
Other developments recently proposed or underway in Downtown Oakland by bigger capital include:
345 units by Seth Hermalian in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/1900-Broadway-Rendering.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/08/33-story-oakland-tower-slated-for-approval.html
298 units by UDR in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Lake-Merritt-Boulevard-Apartments-Rendering-2015.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/07/controversial-oakland-tower-deal-could-be-illegal.html
206 units by Gerding Edlin in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/1700-Webster-Oakland.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/08/refined-designs-and-timing-for-206-unit-oakland-tower.html
(http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6008501/1505281700-webster*750xx2800-1575-0-176.jpg)
source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/05/oakland-housing-tower-gerding-edlen-perkins-will.html
223 units by Lakeshore Partners in downtown
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2270-Broadway.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/03/plans-for-24-story-oakland-tower-with-223-apartments.html
330 units by Carmel Partners in Jack London Square
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fourth-and-Madison-Rendering-1.jpg)
(http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fourth-and-Madison-Rendering-5.jpg)
source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/09/refined-designs-and-moniker-for-330-unit-oakland-development.html
Really the list goes on and on. Oakland hit < 10% office vacancy for the first time since 2008 this past year and it's now around 7% vacant, which is extraordinarily low. There are a couple of office tower proposals that will come to fruition if having a large Uber office in Oakland translates to additional high brow tech firms locating offices there:
renderings and info at each site:
600K sf in 23 floors by Shorenstein
http://shorenstein.com/portfolio/investments/property?id=2795
310K sf in 20 floors by SKS
http://1100broadway.com/pdf/factsheet.pdf
Yes, Jax doesn't have spillover from a larger, booming city. But some of the issues that Oakland has are a lot worse than the issues Jax has. Oakland's whole quality of life is questioned daily, and it truly truly is a dangerous city. Honestly, not really sure all that much what Oakland is "doing" to get this kind of investment, but it begs the question and is worth looking int
Yes Simms, I agree, "if Oakland can do it then Jax can as well," but I would add to that, "if we have leaders that are visioned, motivated, and also know how to manage our finances and pocketbook so that we have money set aside for such developments that are interested in building in Jax, and/or who want to relocate or invest in Jacksonville. I think we need to really pay attention and investigate into what Oakland is doing, or not doing, or what is drawing these developments, investments, and business to their city.
Quote from: heights unknown on September 27, 2015, 01:57:48 PM
Kind of reminds me of Jacksonville 7 to 8 years ago before the 2008 economic crash and downturn; we had a lot of developmental projects, both business and residential, proposed or nearing approval downtown. I don't know whether Oakland's leaders are pursuing these interests and developments or its just luck, but I know that Jax can achieve the same.
We still have a lot on paper (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-aug-urban-jax-development-project-construction-list ). Our challenge is to get them off paper and into reality...
I think Jax could do it, too - if it were located in the SF Bay area. That gives Oakland a bit of a leg up. I'm not saying Jax couldn't do better - I honestly think it could - but this isn't a very fair comparison.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 27, 2015, 02:26:57 PM
Quote from: heights unknown on September 27, 2015, 01:57:48 PM
Kind of reminds me of Jacksonville 7 to 8 years ago before the 2008 economic crash and downturn; we had a lot of developmental projects, both business and residential, proposed or nearing approval downtown. I don't know whether Oakland's leaders are pursuing these interests and developments or its just luck, but I know that Jax can achieve the same.
We still have a lot on paper (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-aug-urban-jax-development-project-construction-list ). Our challenge is to get them off paper and into reality...
You're right Lakelander, we have to get them OFF PAPER and to FRUITION AND REALITY. Can't do that though without the right people in positions of leadership to get off their ass and get the ball rolling to get them off of the paper and right in front of our eyes (reality); in essence, THEY NEED TO DO THEIR JOB!
Another interesting read came out today with more renderings and projects underway or proposed:
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/09/mapping-oakland-housing-pipeline-14-000-uber.html
Quote from: thelakelander on September 26, 2015, 06:27:45 AM
Great news for Oakland. Outside of dinner at Jack London Square and a drive through the city's streets to reach Redwoods Regional Park, I didn't get much of a chance to explore the city this summer but I came away believing it had potential. Regarding its skyline, it seemed pretty small for a city its size. Given the boom occurring in SF and Oakland having direct connectivity via BART, I'm not surprised to see some spillover starting to happen.
What issues do you believe that Oakland has to deal with that are more difficult to overcome than Jax?
Oakland doesn't have any 400+ footers in its skyline, so from that perspective it could look small. But it's quite dense and contains about as much office space as Downtown, Midtown, or Buckhead Atlanta (~15-17 million sf depending on range, 12 million of that in privately owned/leased buildings). Most downtown and surrounding neighborhoods have a residential density of 20-40K ppsm, which is at its bottom end the peak measured for Midtown Atlanta during 2010 Census. I only reference Atlanta because it's a good reference point for people in Jax/South.
I agree, it "seems small", but in fact it's not as small as it may appear.
Oakland has far far far worse crime, and issues stemming from activist politics and incompetent city leaders. One could argue that leadership in Oakland is even worse than it is in Jax, and crime is undoubtedly magnitudes worse, not to mention that while San Francisco voters and populace are activist and sometimes crazy, the voters in Oakland/Berkeley are probably the most extreme and difficult to please/deal with in the entire country, probably by a long shot and it wouldn't even be close.
The "issues" in Oakland are too numerous to even list out. Most companies/investors are spooked and blacklist Oakland and much of the East Bay, so to see this turning point with residential projects and the Uber announcement is huge.
Quote from: heights unknown on September 27, 2015, 01:57:48 PM
Kind of reminds me of Jacksonville 7 to 8 years ago before the 2008 economic crash and downturn; we had a lot of developmental projects, both business and residential, proposed or nearing approval downtown. I don't know whether Oakland's leaders are pursuing these interests and developments or its just luck, but I know that Jax can achieve the same.
Oakland's leaders are pursuing these for sure. They need the tax base and they want the city to turn a corner in the spotlight (i.e. go from constant national bad spotlight to blend in, or maybe even positive spotlight).
Quote from: heights unknown on September 27, 2015, 02:12:39 PMYes Simms, I agree, "if Oakland can do it then Jax can as well," but I would add to that, "if we have leaders that are visioned, motivated, and also know how to manage our finances and pocketbook so that we have money set aside for such developments that are interested in building in Jax, and/or who want to relocate or invest in Jacksonville. I think we need to really pay attention and investigate into what Oakland is doing, or not doing, or what is drawing these developments, investments, and business to their city.
Oakland's leaders are equally bad at balancing the books and while they may be more engaged in projects such as these, there are a host of incompetent people in that town that muck things up. Almost better if they were not engaged, sometimes.
Quote from: Adam White on September 27, 2015, 02:49:00 PM
I think Jax could do it, too - if it were located in the SF Bay area. That gives Oakland a bit of a leg up. I'm not saying Jax couldn't do better - I honestly think it could - but this isn't a very fair comparison.
That's a cheap shot. Nashville, Charlotte, Orlando, and other towns aren't in the shadow of a city like San Francisco. And for what it's worth, being in another city's shadow comes with good and bad. I'll agree, though, that the Bay Area economy is on fire, and that certainly helps Oakland, but it still needs to overcome a ton of issues for it to actually benefit/capture value-add from this economic wave of fortune. It doesn't just happen without any work or corrections involved.
Just had coffee with a buddy who has gone off on his own from working for an institutional developer for a long time, and he is originally from New York City and couldn't help but call Uptown Oakland the "Williamsburg of the West Coast" multiple times this morning when describing a deal he has put together that is underway in that area. He says apartment rents have gone up 14-15% annualized for the past 10+ months in all of Oakland, leading the nation, and in areas like Uptown they have gone up 20-40% due to lack of supply and overwhelming demand.
While before BART's limited nighttime service (not 24 hour) was a threat to Oakland's viability, Uber Pool and Lyft Line have largely solved that problem, allowing people to cross the Bay Bridge for a reasonable price. In his words over 200 new storefronts have opened Uptown and along Telegraph in the past 3-4 years. He predicts office rents could hit $45-50 by next year, and all of the current apartment proposals above are no longer proposals as most have broken ground and the remainder are all backed by institutional capital from the likes of Blackstone, funds run by some of the major banks, etc.
The mayor (newly elected by the way) apparently calls tech companies up all the time to ask when they're going to move to or expand to Oakland. My buddy said that his buddy at Gap says the mayor even calls them. She has apparently hired a small army of new staffers with competency to improve the entitlement process and speed the process up, which now in some cases can take as little as 3 months (the same process would take at least 15 months in SF).
Still a lot of kinks to work out, but he described a whole culture that has kind of been there, but has grown and really helped to curate a certain good Bay Area vibe/feel for the area. There are two major event/music venues, the Fox and the Paramount (each are vastly bigger and older and more established than Jacksonville's own Florida Theater), Lake Merritt as a beautiful urban city park around a well kempt lake, plus you have the neighborhoods stretching towards Berkeley and Berkeley itself. No height limits to contend with and in his mind, a less hectic political environment than in San Francisco, though that's not what it looks like from my perspective watching there from afar and living in the city (SF).
The overriding theme in his mind is that Oakland has officially turned a corner, and he says to watch out for a couple more big announcements on the office front coming soon.
So if you asked me, based on what I heard this morning (we really just caught up to discuss something I did for the first time this year and he does every year in September, among other things, and then real estate came up) Oakland's leaders are indeed more proactive than Jacksonville's to get things done there, and that could be the big difference. Sounds like Libby Schaaf, the new mayor, is very gung ho about tapping into the Bay Area's economic boon and bringing some of the results to the town she now oversees. By the way, this mayor does not have a pedigree, so to speak, really all that much politically, in business, or in money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Schaaf
Thought I would provide an update. It will be interesting to watch Oakland, and I definitely think there are going to be plenty of lessons learned from yet another city for Jacksonville to follow.
Quote from: simms3 on September 30, 2015, 03:30:55 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 27, 2015, 02:49:00 PM
I think Jax could do it, too - if it were located in the SF Bay area. That gives Oakland a bit of a leg up. I'm not saying Jax couldn't do better - I honestly think it could - but this isn't a very fair comparison.
That's a cheap shot. Nashville, Charlotte, Orlando, and other towns aren't in the shadow of a city like San Francisco. And for what it's worth, being in another city's shadow comes with good and bad. I'll agree, though, that the Bay Area economy is on fire, and that certainly helps Oakland, but it still needs to overcome a ton of issues for it to actually benefit/capture value-add from this economic wave of fortune. It doesn't just happen without any work or corrections involved.
I don't understand how that's a cheap shot. The bay area is thriving and is the home of (or one of the homes of) the USA's technology industries as well as a major port, home of lots of big deal companies, etc. The economy of the region is larger that of most countries. It only goes to figure that less salubrious areas in close proximity to the expensive and in-demand areas will benefit. It certainly has happened where I live.
Jax doesn't have that. If Jax was a suburb of Miami or Atlanta, then maybe it would reap some benefits of that nature. But whereas Oakland can ride the coat tails of its more desirable and prosperous neighbors, Jax has to go it alone and do it itself.
Edit: I realize that Charlotte, etc aren't in the shadow of a more prosperous neighbor. But they didn't land Google.
Article from today that's quite relative with details on programs that Oakland is looking to implement to solve housing and other issues affecting the city. Reading the specifics gives insight into how Oakland's leaders are thinking about tackling the issues and what it is they are doing and how they are going about doing them.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/10/oakland-housing-crisis-city-council-policy.html
Also has a fairly recent overhead aerial of Oakland with SF in the background to show the size/scope of the area. Oakland may "seem small" at quick glance because no buildings exceed 30 stories, but in looking at the aerial, one can quickly see that it is actually one of the densest and most built up cities in the country and it's downtown is definitely not small from a footprint perspective. It's vastly larger than Jacksonville, for instance, and you won't find the apparent surface lots that one does in the South.
Quote from: Adam White on October 01, 2015, 01:03:05 PM
Quote from: simms3 on September 30, 2015, 03:30:55 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 27, 2015, 02:49:00 PM
I think Jax could do it, too - if it were located in the SF Bay area. That gives Oakland a bit of a leg up. I'm not saying Jax couldn't do better - I honestly think it could - but this isn't a very fair comparison.
That's a cheap shot. Nashville, Charlotte, Orlando, and other towns aren't in the shadow of a city like San Francisco. And for what it's worth, being in another city's shadow comes with good and bad. I'll agree, though, that the Bay Area economy is on fire, and that certainly helps Oakland, but it still needs to overcome a ton of issues for it to actually benefit/capture value-add from this economic wave of fortune. It doesn't just happen without any work or corrections involved.
I don't understand how that's a cheap shot. The bay area is thriving and is the home of (or one of the homes of) the USA's technology industries as well as a major port, home of lots of big deal companies, etc. The economy of the region is larger that of most countries. It only goes to figure that less salubrious areas in close proximity to the expensive and in-demand areas will benefit. It certainly has happened where I live.
Jax doesn't have that. If Jax was a suburb of Miami or Atlanta, then maybe it would reap some benefits of that nature. But whereas Oakland can ride the coat tails of its more desirable and prosperous neighbors, Jax has to go it alone and do it itself.
Edit: I realize that Charlotte, etc aren't in the shadow of a more prosperous neighbor. But they didn't land Google.
Put it this way...Oakland has sat out no less than 3 boom tech cycles without benefiting, despite having the features you described further up (transit, vistas like SF for executive housing, and geographic convenience). I wouldn't say that Oakland is necessarily "riding coat tails" to see benefit from such regional booms for the first time, really ever, as it is just now seeing this go around. It has done something or is doing something *on its own* that is allowing it to benefit for the first time when before it never really did.
And your view on Charlotte is contradictory and makes no sense. Charlotte actually took Bank of America from San Francisco. That's definitely a Google equivalent of the financial sector. Not to mention Charlotte has had solid leadership and done many things right on its own to get to where it is today. But we are talking geography. Given traffic and topography, Google's offices in Mountain View, CA may as well be as far away from Uptown Oakland as Charlotte is from Atlanta, GA. For all intents and purposes, Charlotte is a burgeoning city in relative geographic isolation doing just fine for itself. It's an example for Jax in the way I was making it, similar to Austin, Raleigh, Nashville, Orlando, etc.
One can say Jax benefits from being in a warm weather no-state-income-tax state that is the 3rd largest by population in the country. 2 hours from Orlando, 3 from Tampa, 5 from Miami, 6 from Atlanta, with convenience to cultural/historic touristy cities such as Savannah and Charleston just 2-3 hours up the road and St. Augustine 30 minutes south. I'd say Jacksonville has many nearby cities and sits in a region that gives it plenty of its own coattails to ride.
So, I contend to say that Oakland is purely riding coattails and much or most of what is happening there has nothing to do with Oakland itself or its leadership and much or mostly to do with who it sits by is a cheap shot.
Part of the reason (or likely the reason) BoA went to Charlotte was because it was purchased by Nations Bank, which was based in Charlotte. It didn't just pick up and move there because it was an attractive location.
I think I preferred you when you were all about Atlanta. Any possiblity you can break out some of your old material? I'm feeling a bit nostalgic.
Edit: sorry, that was mean. Also, perhaps saying Oakland is riding SF's coat tails is a bit harsh - but I think Oakland has clearly benefitted from its neighbors. And in this case, Uber certainly chose Oakland (in part) due to its location.
Additional edit: the other big reason was probably cost considerations.
^^^Huh? "Preferred me when I was all about Atlanta"? I actually have one post/thread to my name about Oakland and don't know much about it. But it's been in the news a lot and I just happened to have coffee with a buddy doing some stuff there this morning (and like I said, we met to discuss Burning Man frankly and Oakland/real estate simply came up). I wouldn't call myself a homer for a place I don't even live in, have never even mentioned in breath on this forum until this week, and outwardly state that I don't know much about but clearly it's a city worth looking into to see what it is they're doing over there given all that is now happening.
If there is any city that is a red-headed stepchild, it is Oakland. It's constantly in the national news like Ferguson is in the national news, and it scares companies and people almost like no other. It sat out the 2003-2007 boom. It sat out the Dot Com boom. It had all the same things then that it has now, but only now (and there is a brand new mayor less than 12 months in office I should point out) is it seeing all of this new investment and revitalization. You think it's just riding coat tails? Sure, it has a higher chance of benefiting from a Bay Area boom than some city not in the Bay Area, but it hasn't really previously. Why now?
I get your point about Nationsbank, but keep in mind the whole corporate office almost relocated to Chicago for neutrality, but it did end up going to Charlotte. If you know anything about Charlotte, then you know leadership in that city has consistently been quite strong and people have made appropriate decisions to get that city to where it is today. What have they done that Jax hasn't? What is Oakland doing now that it hasn't before and what is it doing that Jax isn't? Nothing wrong with asking these questions or pointing things out to get Oakland on the radar of readers of this forum that like to monitor other cities/development.
Jax isn't 'riding on anyone's coattails', I don't buy that at all. For one thing, Jax is oldest major city in FL. Most cities like Charlotte, Miami, Austin etc have HUGE suburbs (and even cities like Ft Lauderdale, St Petersburg etc) to really bolster their metro population unlike Jax.
Jax is only trailing MIA and ORL (major cities) growthwise in the state BTW, before everyone act like we are the next thing to Casper, WY....
Quote from: simms3 on October 01, 2015, 02:04:23 PM
^^^Huh? "Preferred me when I was all about Atlanta"? I actually have one post/thread to my name about Oakland and don't know much about it. But it's been in the news a lot and I just happened to have coffee with a buddy doing some stuff there this morning (and like I said, we met to discuss Burning Man frankly and Oakland/real estate simply came up). I wouldn't call myself a homer for a place I don't even live in, have never even mentioned in breath on this forum until this week, and outwardly state that I don't know much about but clearly it's a city worth looking into to see what it is they're doing over there given all that is now happening.
If there is any city that is a red-headed stepchild, it is Oakland. It's constantly in the national news like Ferguson is in the national news, and it scares companies and people almost like no other. It sat out the 2003-2007 boom. It sat out the Dot Com boom. It had all the same things then that it has now, but only now (and there is a brand new mayor less than 12 months in office I should point out) is it seeing all of this new investment and revitalization. You think it's just riding coat tails? Sure, it has a higher chance of benefiting from a Bay Area boom than some city not in the Bay Area, but it hasn't really previously. Why now?
I get your point about Nationsbank, but keep in mind the whole corporate office almost relocated to Chicago for neutrality, but it did end up going to Charlotte. If you know anything about Charlotte, then you know leadership in that city has consistently been quite strong and people have made appropriate decisions to get that city to where it is today. What have they done that Jax hasn't? What is Oakland doing now that it hasn't before and what is it doing that Jax isn't? Nothing wrong with asking these questions or pointing things out to get Oakland on the radar of readers of this forum that like to monitor other cities/development.
Simms, as I said before, I think Jax could do a lot more. And we're likely in agreement that the leadership (or lack of it) is one of the things that really retards Jacksonville's growth and limits its potential. But I guess my point is that being a lower-rent bedroom community of a large, prosperous city gives a place a leg up that somewhere like Jax just doesn't have. Sure, SF isn't really that important internationally, but it's easily in the top 10 most important cities in the USA (probably in the top 5). And the bay area is big economy that draws people from all over (and has the attendant high cost of living, etc).
So I was just saying that while it's great that Oakland found a way to lure Uber, etc, it's not as simple as saying, "If Oakland can do it, surely Jacksonville can". Had the article been about Charlotte or Richmond or Kansas City or someplace like that, I'd be a bit less sceptical. That's all.
Agree to disagree on many points you raise.
1) SF is very important internationally and both the size of its economy, its demographic makeup, and the number of international visitors it receives are all very indicative of that. It's probably 3rd wheel behind NYC and LA if you look at its demographic makeup, size, size of economy, international visitation, etc. But then you'll take me saying all of this as a gesture to making your point for you, which is not the case, because Oakland is analogous to Jacksonville's northside, which could easily be "forgotten" as a place of investment in a gold rush cycle if certain things aren't in place or something hasn't happened to spur some gold up that way.
2) The analogy to Oakland seeing this rebirth in Jacksonville is if Jacksonville on the whole were firing on all cylinders, yet the Northside continued to be an area seeing little to no new investment, crime problems of a national notoriety, and fits and starts that always seemed to take the community nowhere, or maybe even a step backward, while all around the Northside is economic boon. Oakland is equivalent to the Northside finally joining the team. Chicago's southside is another example. You could visit Chicago today and see cranes downtown, a clean downtown, the appearance of a wealthy, thriving global metropolis all around you and not realize that as the core/northside see massive economic benefit, the whole of the southside is just sitting there rotting while people are blasting each because they are desperate.
What's remarkable about Oakland is that it is literally a hole in the Bay Area...it's not a "side" as the northside Jax/southside Chicago are. There are prosperous areas all around much of Oakland (Walnut Creek, the Oakland Hills, Berkeley, Tri-Cities), and people/companies just go around it to get to other parts of the Bay Area.
As has been the case in previous cycles, Oakland has so many things wrong with it that it could just very well sit out every cycle and continue to be a very well known red-headed stepchild. How many positive things do you ever hear about Oakland? Probably none. Literally every news story deals with some issue, often crime related, going on there. There was the whole debacle with the port this year, along with violent riots seemingly every week, and the debacle with the Occupy movement at the port a few years ago. Highest homicide rate in the country at times. It's a place muttered more alongside Detroit than its neighboring city of San Francisco. The Oakland Raiders may leave for LA. The Oakland A's aren't happy and have tried to go to San Jose if not for a geographic non-compete there with the Giants. The Oakland Warriors are leaving, for San Francisco. Like, seriously?
There are enough qualities to Oakland that hold it back, perpetually, over the years, from actually benefiting by simply "being" in the Bay Area.
Why would I post an article on Charlotte? I believe I probably have before, as have countless other active members of this forum looking to produce what I just produced for Oakland. If you're in Jacksonville/the South, you're already familiar with Charlotte. How many people ever hear about Oakland? I live across a small body of water from the place and even I don't venture over there very much or pay much attention, or know precisely what's going on. But I can say without a doubt, in the last 6 months the place has been at the forefront of the business news cycle over here and all of a sudden for the first time in so many years of its history, it has so many positive things going for it. One big change I keep mentioning is its new mayor, Libby Schaaf. Is it coincidental all of this is happening now after a changing of the guard?
Another news story is the retailing of the city. We're talking about a city anchoring a sub-region of 2.6 million people with very very little retail. In fact, the least retail per capita of any major population center in this country, I believe (going off of memory). Now retail is coming back, yet it's not like demographics have changed that drastically in only a few short years. What's going on there? Why the sudden investment?
So while you want to lump Oakland as basically part of San Francisco, I can say without a doubt you really don't know the dynamic and you are misspeaking from a misguided perspective. The analogy people want to use is that Oakland is San Francisco's Brooklyn. I think it's certainly moving that direction, but it still isn't DoBro (Downtown Brooklyn), DUMBO, Fort Green, Williamsburg, Prospect Park, etc yet...it's probably where Brooklyn was 15-20 years ago. So what did Brooklyn do to become a powerhouse alongside Manhattan? It didn't just "be" and ride Manhattan...because for a while overflow from Manhattan went to Westchester, CT, or even NJ, but not to Brooklyn.
I'm simply opining that when we talk about cities doing something right, turning corners, whatever, that we consider looking at Oakland alongside Charlotte, Austin, Orlando, Nashville, Savannah, Charleston, etc etc. I will continue to disagree from a far more informed and localized perspective that Oakland is simply riding San Francisco's coat tails. Do I know everything going on? No. I'm trying to find out, myself!
So I do find it to be a cheap shot coming from [like I said before] an ill-informed perspective that Oakland doesn't count as an example because it has San Francisco to rely on as an overflow to a huge regional economy. It's a city worth researching and paying attention to if you're into this sort of thing.
I rest my case, continue to say whatever you're going to say...
Sure thing. It's certainly in the top 20-30 cities internationally, in terms of importance or influence (by most lists I've seen). What that means is somewhat relative, I suppose.
Maybe you should get out more? All my friends who work in SF (admittedly, fewer than 10) live in Oakland. So maybe you don't hear about it too much - or didn't - but maybe that's just you and the circles you run in. I'm no expert on Oakland (and apparently according to you, neither are you), but I don't think it matters one way or another for the purposes of this discussion. I don't think your analogy is quite accurate - Oakland would only be like the northside if downtown Jax was booming and one of the major cities in the US/world in a region that is one of the more important economies in the country and includes silicon valley. But Jax has a ghost town for a downtown and is relatively isolated - it's basically a one man show in NE Florida. It can and should do more, but that's quite a stretch from saying that Oakland is having a renaissance and managed to lure Uber so Jax should be able to do it to.
I think your comments about Brooklyn show you really aren't getting my point. But I can only try to make it so many times. I'm not saying Oakland (or Brooklyn) hasn't had to do things to change its fortunes. I'm saying the conditions in which it made those changes were materially different, so the dividends from those changes were greater. I could give examples based on where I live, but that would just bore everybody on this forum. But it's not unique to Oakland or Brooklyn.
Oakland is not literally a hole, by the way.
http://fortune.com/2014/10/17/oakland-business-growth/ (http://fortune.com/2014/10/17/oakland-business-growth/)
In 2011, Richard Stump and his business partner Michelle Mihvec started looking for a larger space for Fathom, their fledgling 3-D printing business. The company, which was founded in 2008, had been operating out of Mihvec's garage in San Ramon, Calif. at the time.
They looked at San Francisco and Silicon Valley, but considering the space the pair needed for their large printing equipment, Fathom was priced out of both markets.
In addition to space, top on their wish list was "low cost" and "access to creatives," Stump says.
He and Mihvec finally settled on Oakland, Calif.
Fathom now occupies 10,000 square feet of a former brass foundry built in 1901 located in Oakland's Jack London square, a few blocks from Oakland Inner Harbor. "It has tall wood ceilings; it looks amazing—the old architecture with the modernized equipment," Stump says.
He's just as happy with his company's new city. "For us, specifically, it offered a lower cost for our facility and offered access to creatives. It's a nice location: not far from Sacramento, close to San Francisco," he says. "Oakland in general is really an up-and-coming area. Just in the last two years, we've noticed new restaurants and nightlife. But a lot of it comes back to economics and being affordable."
The characteristics of Oakland that drew Stump to the city seem to be aiding other small businesses as well. With $5.6 million in revenue in 2013 and a five-year growth rate of 1785.62%, Fathom landed at No. 2 on this year's Inner City 100, a ranking of the fastest-growing inner city companies in the U.S. from the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City. It's joined on the list by six other Oakland businesses: Revolution Foods, a school lunch provider; Oaklandish, which designs and sells civic pride apparel; Arcsine, an architectural firm that serves hospitality, commercial, and residential clients across the country; organic food company Premier Organics; Blaisdell's Business Products, which supplies companies with office products and furniture; and Veronica Foods Company, which sells olive oil, balsamic vinegar, and other gourmet food items. With seven winners on this year's Inner City 100, Oakland was second only to Chicago, which had 13.
Chicago has been the Midwest's dominant city for quite some time. But for Oakland, the number of small businesses with stellar growth is indicative of a larger trend in a city that's always stood in San Francisco's shadow. Oakland, it seems, is finally having its own modern moment.
"There is a chip-on-your-shoulder feeling in Oakland, as if it's the second city," says Chris Rhomberg, a professor of sociology at Fordham University and author of the 2004 book No There There: Race, Class and Political Community in Oakland. "I think that it's finally coming around."
Why, exactly, is this happening now? Certainly, the factors that drew Stump and Fathom to the city play a big part.
"Oakland has always been relatively less developed or behind San Francisco, but its advantage is that it's still in the Bay Area and has a relatively affluent consumer market and an educated workforce," which is attractive to business owners, says Rhomberg. The median household income in Oakland was $51,683 from 2008 to 2012, according to the U.S. Census, just below the national median of 53,043. Unemployment there was 9.4% in August, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, down from a post-recession high of 17.6% in July 2010 but still above pre-recession lows that neared 6% and September's national average of 5.9%. The city's location makes it accessible by car, ferry, bike, and public transport. "Being able to commute to Oakland is a real advantage to employers in need of a workforce," Rhomberg says. Plus, it's now serving as a catch basin for spillover from San Francisco, where a tech boom is fueling sky-high rents.
This article makes my point better than I could. It goes on to say that Oakland's success isn't only due to its location, transport options and relative lower operating costs - it says Oakland is doing stuff to encourage its growth. Which is what I'm saying - that changes Oakland makes get better returns because of its location, etc. It's a combination of factors.
I'm certainly not saying Jax can't learn from Oakland's successes. But it's also true that people often mistakenly think that what works in one city is guaranteed to work in another. So who knows. What I do know is that Oakland and Jax are very different cities with their own unique challenges and selling points.
I think we're talking past each other at this point, as I have not necessarily denied that being adjacent to or in a booming region doesn't help. But Oakland has been left in the dust many a Bay Area boom, and still has inherent issues in some areas (crime for instance) that make Jacksonville's woes in those areas look like a cake walk. So to see all this investment and interest now, there's got to be something more there than just being there, where it is. You almost sound like you're arguing with me here, that you're trying to say there aren't valid comparisons or lessons learned for Jax because there are no analogies, that it's stupid to discuss Oakland because it's basically San Francisco, and that I need a lesson from you, who live in Jacksonville FL (while I practically live next to Oakland) on what's really happening there. It's a bit pompous, right?
I think you also are mistaking the absolute level of what I'm saying translates to Jacksonville. I'm trying to put Oakland on people's radar. No different than putting 10 routine cities like Charlotte or Orlando (or even Miami, on today's cover) on people's "Learning From" radar. Oakland's actually a better example than a lot of these cities. It has more to overcome despite being near San Francisco. And just because I said I don't have that much familiarity with it...take that with relativity. I friggin live 10 miles from Oakland, and I'm very involved in the real estate industry and by default as a result all the local economies. I don't need to take lessons or be shared some anecdotal story that I may have already read somewhere else, let alone a story that sounds like at least a dozen of other stories that I've heard directly in person.
I get the point you're trying to make. And to say Oakland is not a hole in the region is also showing how you don't know this region. Oakland has magnitudes higher crime, much higher unemployment, generally much higher vacancy, a huge percentage lower median income and educational attainment levels, and other disparaging traits that jurisdictions on literally *every* side of it don't share or vastly improve on (SF to the west, Berkeley to the north, Walnut Creek and Tri-Cities to east, Hayward/Fremont to south). It is a hole. For larger cities, it has the worst demographics on many fronts in the Bay Area, and it is right smack dab in the middle. That's not to say in this city of 400K that there are little areas like JLS, Uptown, Grand Lake, Lake Merritt, and Rockridge (all of these neighborhoods basically DT heading north towards Berkeley) that have positively amazing demographics on paper for justifying investment. But that's leaving out a good 75% of the city that is still amazingly depressed.
Quote from: simms3 on October 02, 2015, 05:27:19 AM
I think we're talking past each other at this point, as I have not necessarily denied that being adjacent to or in a booming region doesn't help. But Oakland has been left in the dust many a Bay Area boom, and still has inherent issues in some areas (crime for instance) that make Jacksonville's woes in those areas look like a cake walk. So to see all this investment and interest now, there's got to be something more there than just being there, where it is. You almost sound like you're arguing with me here, that you're trying to say there aren't valid comparisons or lessons learned for Jax because there are no analogies, that it's stupid to discuss Oakland because it's basically San Francisco, and that I need a lesson from you, who live in Jacksonville FL (while I practically live next to Oakland) on what's really happening there. It's a bit pompous, right?
I think you also are mistaking the absolute level of what I'm saying translates to Jacksonville. I'm trying to put Oakland on people's radar. No different than putting 10 routine cities like Charlotte or Orlando (or even Miami, on today's cover) on people's "Learning From" radar. Oakland's actually a better example than a lot of these cities. It has more to overcome despite being near San Francisco. And just because I said I don't have that much familiarity with it...take that with relativity. I friggin live 10 miles from Oakland, and I'm very involved in the real estate industry and by default as a result all the local economies. I don't need to take lessons or be shared some anecdotal story that I may have already read somewhere else, let alone a story that sounds like at least a dozen of other stories that I've heard directly in person.
I get the point you're trying to make. And to say Oakland is not a hole in the region is also showing how you don't know this region. Oakland has magnitudes higher crime, much higher unemployment, generally much higher vacancy, a huge percentage lower median income and educational attainment levels, and other disparaging traits that jurisdictions on literally *every* side of it don't share or vastly improve on (SF to the west, Berkeley to the north, Walnut Creek and Tri-Cities to east, Hayward/Fremont to south). It is a hole. For larger cities, it has the worst demographics on many fronts in the Bay Area, and it is right smack dab in the middle. That's not to say in this city of 400K that there are little areas like JLS, Uptown, Grand Lake, Lake Merritt, and Rockridge (all of these neighborhoods basically DT heading north towards Berkeley) that have positively amazing demographics on paper for justifying investment. But that's leaving out a good 75% of the city that is still amazingly depressed.
I thought you weren't going to answer me anymore. But here's all I have to say:
1) No, I was saying Oakland is not *literally* a hole. You are using the word "literally" when you mean "figuratively".
2) I don't live in Jacksonville and haven't since January 2007. I think you were in Atlanta or somewhere else at that time. But I think it's cute how you consider San Francisco to be such a big deal.
I think Adam makes very sensible points here. Oakland had to do a lot to improve, but it also has substantially more to work with. It (and the rest of the Bay Area) are less a separate community than one of the historically "rough" parts of a wider regional community that's starting to turn around.
And? So when we mention what other cities are doing and if there are any takeaways for Jax, Oakland should be excluded from that list because it's basically San Francisco for all intents and purposes? Makes no sense.
My original premise still is the same: if Oakland can turn around and see economic development in its downtown, given its challenges, many of which are similar to the challenges Jacksonville faces, some on even wider scales, then so, too, can Jacksonville. What is Oakland doing?
That is my whole OP in 2 sentences. Yet, I'm facing argument there. What is there to argue? Why argue it? Why try to argue that Oakland is not a good example for Jax, why try to debate the point of a thread just throwing some things up on the board about a town rarely mentioned.
I'll remember this next time Jacksonville does a learning from in Brooklyn or Fort Lauderdale or Saint Paul or Saint Petersburg, FL, or Tacoma, WA or wherever. Nothing to take away. No point in comparing. Any positive things happening are all because...New York City, Miami, Minneapolis, Tampa, Seattle, etc.
Quote from: simms3 on October 02, 2015, 06:21:28 PM
And? So when we mention what other cities are doing and if there are any takeaways for Jax, Oakland should be excluded from that list because it's basically San Francisco for all intents and purposes? Makes no sense.
My original premise still is the same: if Oakland can turn around and see economic development in its downtown, given its challenges, many of which are similar to the challenges Jacksonville faces, some on even wider scales, then so, too, can Jacksonville. What is Oakland doing?
That is my whole OP in 2 sentences. Yet, I'm facing argument there. What is there to argue? Why argue it? Why try to argue that Oakland is not a good example for Jax, why try to debate the point of a thread just throwing some things up on the board about a town rarely mentioned.
I'll remember this next time Jacksonville does a learning from in Brooklyn or Fort Lauderdale or Saint Paul or Saint Petersburg, FL, or Tacoma, WA or wherever. Nothing to take away. No point in comparing. Any positive things happening are all because...New York City, Miami, Minneapolis, Tampa, Seattle, etc.
Come down off your cross for a second and be reasonable. No one ever said any of that. All I said is that it's not as simple as "Guys, if Oakland of all places can do it, so can downtown Jacksonville" which was your original statement. It's not that Jacksonville can't learn from Oakland's experiences, it's just that it's not as simple as your original post seems to imply that it is and that there are things that might help "Oakland of all places" (and give it a leg up) that dowtown Jacksonville doesn't have.
Quote from: Adam White on September 27, 2015, 02:49:00 PM
I think Jax could do it, too - if it were located in the SF Bay area. That gives Oakland a bit of a leg up. I'm not saying Jax couldn't do better - I honestly think it could - but this isn't a very fair comparison.
I agree with this statement. It's ludicrous to think that Oakland being in that Bay area megapolis (with San Fran and San Jose, both larger cities) doesn't give them a huge boost, and it isn't the epitome of 'riding on other city's coattails'. Oakland also has one of the busiest ports in the country, which is basically 'No Cals port' Just like Savannah is 'GA's port'.
Despite this little urban renaissance in Oakland, let's not kid ourselves and pretend that everything as all rosy in Oakland; With its very high crime and gang problems. It's also one of the most inferiority complex cities, because of it's proximity to the far ritzier San Fran. How many times do you see the San Fran skyline, Alcatraz, Lombard Street etc during Oakland sports events? Virtually all of the time, with nothing showcasing Oakland; That's basically a microcosm of a much bigger picture.
Oakland's situation reminds me a lot of St. Petersburg's. For decades, St. Pete had a huge inferiority complex, when it came to being compared with the slightly larger Tampa, on the other side of the bay. Tampa was (and still is) clearly the Bay Area's business center and St. Pete was viewed as a sleeply place where old folks came to die.
In a way, one could argue that Jax has an inferiority complex itself. The region of comparison is just larger. For decades, we've made downtown and urban core mistakes, partially based on bad perspectives of trying to be more than just a gas stop and bathroom break for tourist heading to Central and South Florida. It still bubbles up today when you here crazy proposals and sentiment believing that a priority must be luring suburbanites to a place they clearly have no interest in.
In the case of St. Pete, the last two decades there has been a strong targeted effort on enhancing quality-of-life. While its still not the business center Tampa is, its core is certainly more vibrant and bicycle friendly. Today, its image isn't as bad as it was in the 1980s and 1990s.
Regarding Oakland, I'll admit that I didn't spend much time there this summer, but I did notice some things that could be applicable to places/issues in Jax. One was the redevelopment of Jack London Square. Knowing Sleiman's proposed layout for the Landing, while walking through Jack London Square, you could get a feel for what Sleiman wants to do.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Oakland-2015/i-VcHdQLN/0/L/DSCF6635-L.jpg)
Jack London Square
Also, in recent years, an automated people mover system was built between Oakland's airport terminal and the Coliseum BART station. In the event JTA decides to keep the Skyway was an APM but modify its operation, the Oakland APM is another example out there to evaluate.
(http://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/images/basic_page/OACtesting-3.png)
The Eastmont Town Center in East Oakland, also appeared to be an example of what to do with a failed mall in a demographically challenged area like Gateway. Abandoned by JCPenney and Mervyn's in the early 1990s, Eastmont was converted into a government/social services/retail center.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wUqNTl9EDtM/Ts_qDAC-9yI/AAAAAAAAYts/j8kSp1S05EY/s400/Eastmont%2BPlan_1974.jpg) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o1Yk-k6hf-w/Ts_qC0VFOwI/AAAAAAAAYtc/5XiYthjyiN0/s400/Eastmont%2BTown%2BCenter%2Bplan_2011.jpg)
http://mall-hall-of-fame.blogspot.com/search/label/San%20Francisco%20Bay%20Area%20Centers?updated-max=2007-05-06T13:36:00-05:00&max-results=20&start=100&by-date=false
Quote from: thelakelander on October 03, 2015, 09:42:58 AM
The Eastmont Town Center in East Oakland, also appeared to be an example of what to do with a failed mall in a demographically challenged area like Gateway. Abandoned by JCPenney and Mervyn's in the early 1990s, Eastmont was converted into a government/social services/retail center.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wUqNTl9EDtM/Ts_qDAC-9yI/AAAAAAAAYts/j8kSp1S05EY/s400/Eastmont%2BPlan_1974.jpg) (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o1Yk-k6hf-w/Ts_qC0VFOwI/AAAAAAAAYtc/5XiYthjyiN0/s400/Eastmont%2BTown%2BCenter%2Bplan_2011.jpg)
http://mall-hall-of-fame.blogspot.com/search/label/San%20Francisco%20Bay%20Area%20Centers?updated-max=2007-05-06T13:36:00-05:00&max-results=20&start=100&by-date=false
That's pretty cool. It's nice to see old malls being rehabilitated.
Quote from: I-10east on October 01, 2015, 03:09:51 PM
Jax is only trailing MIA and ORL (major cities) growthwise in the state BTW, before everyone act like we are the next thing to Casper, WY....
Um? I was thinking more like Hooker, OK...
Quote from: thelakelander on October 03, 2015, 09:30:29 AM
Also, in recent years, an automated people mover system was built between Oakland's airport terminal and the Coliseum BART station. In the event JTA decides to keep the Skyway was an APM but modify its operation, the Oakland APM is another example out there to evaluate.
(http://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/images/basic_page/OACtesting-3.png)
Be very careful what you wish for, JTA, as we know it is certifiably brain dead.
QuoteThe ribbon was cut Friday on BART's new $484 million Oakland Airport Connector, with a ceremony complete with the requisite speeches, live music, and even a raffle. Free rides were given to everyone who came.
The new cable-propelled system is elegant, clean, quiet, and relatively quick. But it's also a shining example of how BART can misplace its funding priorities by building a new flyover train to serve relatively few passengers while neglecting — and increasing — the maintenance costs of the starved larger rail network, as transit advocates argued throughout the years it took to plan and build the OAC. Its $6 fare will leave everyday BART riders paying for the lion's share of its operating costs of $18 to $21 per trip.
Quote... the Bart/ Oakland people mover costs $137M per mile
Quote"The Sugar House line is an excellent example showing what streetcars can do in American cities," says Siemens Rail Systems President Michael Cahill. "The economic development spurred by such lines is and will be considerable. When you have streetcars, you have on and off traffic; you have pedestrianism, and you attract bars and restaurants, which create a vibrancy in a city." Cahill quips, "Bars and restaurants follow people."
Bombardier, for its part, can point to Toronto as an example of supplying Flexity Freedom 100% low-floor streetcars for Toronto Transit Commission's legacy lines, while Flexity LRT variants are destined for newer LRT lines in the Greater Toronto area.
More such municipal "two-fer" business potential is likely. West Sacramento's proposed streetcar line will link with—and possibly be run by—Sacramento's Regional Transit District, which operates LRT serving the California state capital. Tempe, Ariz., served by Valley Metro LRT, seeks to build a 2.6-mile streetcar line augmenting LRT service in the Phoenix suburb. As plans for a new Hudson-Bergen Light Rail stop revive, Hoboken, N.J., is pondering a streetcar route to link the new station down its main commercial street en route to Hoboken Terminal, a major intermodal hub.
Competition among suppliers therefore will remain intense, with Alstom (Ottawa), Brookville Equipment Corp. (Dallas streetcar), CAF USA (vehicles in Boston, Cincinnati, and Kansas City), Kinkisharyo, and United Streetcar LLC (Tucson, Ariz., and Washington, D.C.) bid for streetcar and LRT contracts as project possibilities mount. To be decided, possibly by the end of August: a car manufacturer for Detroit's M1 Rail, the Motor City's first modern streetcar line, for which construction started last month.
Complicating matters, at least for streetcar sales, are rising demands for options to traditional cars powered by overhead wire, as municipalities take an increasingly greater proactive role, and sometimes fiscal stake, in determining their needs. (See sidebar above.) Various dual-powered vehicle specification have flooded the marketplace, with cities such as Washington, D.C., and Fort Lauderdale, Fla., making it a priority consideration. Dallas' Oak Cliff neighborhood already has established the U.S. precedent, as it awaits four modern dual-power Liberty streetcars from Brookville Equipment Corp., due to begin revenue service next year.
Not that the customers automatically see the differences when it comes to rail submodes or modal power. Jason Kuehn, associate partner, vice present, transportation practice, for consultant Oliver Wyman, Inc., notes pointedly, "I don't think most people would notice." What riders do care about, he says, is the permanence of an LRT or streetcar route compared with buses. "If an area is unfamiliar, most people will opt for a fixed right-of-way, one they can see. Buses don't offer that," he says.
Is the preference for LRT over bus really significant? "Absolutely," Kuehn says. "Light rail [also] tends to connect major important places; stadia, shopping malls, airports." Travelers know, or at least intuit, that, he asserts.
Siemens' Cahill agrees. "The difference in passengers' perception between a bus line and a streetcar line is the permanence; a bus could get redirected." And it's not just potential passengers who care, he points out. "A bus line doesn't give business the confidence it might want. Fixed stations and fixed guideways do just that." SOURCE - RAILWAY AGE
^Oh I'm definitely not wishing for it. APMs are pretty expensive. IMO, we're better off with transit modes that can serve a much larger area at a much lower cost.
Article on new 171 for-sale townhouse development that broke ground today in West Oakland, but also as per most articles on Oakland, highlights the challenges. Still contend it's a city that is another good example in a long list of examples of cities facing steep challenges not unlike those found in Jacksonville, and finding ways to tackle some of them.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2015/10/west-oakland-housing-condos-city-ventures.html
QuoteThe 2008 recession was also devastating, with numerous homeowners suffering with foreclosures. Investors have purchased homes at steep discounts with the intent of capitalizing as rents rise. Neil Sullivan's REO Homes has paid for repairs on homes that it doesn't own in West Oakland in an effort to gentrify the neighborhood faster and boost rents. (This reporter also lives in West Oakland.)
Crime remains a concern in West Oakland. Last week, artist Antonio Ramos was shot and killed while painting a mural in West Oakland. The New York Times covered the story and cited the incident as another setback amid burgeoning investment. The paper also made yet another comparison of Oakland to Brooklyn, an oversimplification that ignores many of the governmental and financial differences between the regions. (For one, Brooklyn is part of a five-borough city government with a $78.5 billion budget in 2016 and immense resources for affordable housing and other services. Oakland has a $2.4 billion budget for two years and barely any money for affordable housing.)
This sort of national coverage has a real influence on what investors decide to fund projects in Oakland, according to land brokers. At least one major housing deal fell apart due to protests last year.
Gentrification transforming face of Oakland
The movement of middle-class people into low-income neighborhoods is profoundly and rapidly reshaping the urban core of the Bay Area, from San Francisco's Mission District to the farthest reaches of East Oakland, according to a sweeping report released Tuesday.
It's called gentrification, and those most adversely affected - the poor and working class, African Americans and Latinos - are suffering financially as well as physically, according to the report, "Development Without Displacement: Resisting Gentrification in the Bay Area."
Oakland lost almost half of its African American population from 1990 to 2011, and fewer African Americans own homes, says the report from Causa Justa, an Oakland housing advocacy group, and the Alameda County Public Health Department. Rents in neighborhoods that were once predominantly African American, such as North Oakland and West Oakland, have risen so high they're now closing in on those in Rockridge and Montclair.
In fact, Oakland had some of the country's highest rents and rent increases in 2013, real estate data show.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Gentrification-transforming-face-of-Oakland-5387273.php
Another interesting article comparing the leadership in SF that has brought the Warriors over from Oakland to the leadership in Oakland, which is struggling to keep the Raiders. It's a very good tit for tat piece that leaves out important details, but calls out important truths.
Tale of two cities: Warriors, S.F. get creative, while Raiders, Oakland go silent (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2015/10/golden-state-warriors-oakland-raiders-athletics.html)
Quote...As I've written before, the appearance now and over the past two decades has been no leadership from the city, the county, Raiders boss Mark Davis or A's managing partner Lew Wolff.
Meanwhile, in San Francisco ...
Like him or not, San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee pulled off the political equivalent of a triple-double Tuesday with a deal between the Warriors, UCSF and city.
Lee helped hammer out a deal with the city's largest employer and a signature project that creates a plan that doesn't appear to use any public money and, with an arena challenge that really was shaping up as a de facto referendum on the Ed Lee regime, he undercut the competition.
What's more, the Warriors' arena strategy has been much like if Steve Kerr drew up the team's response to challenges in the Western Conference finals and NBA Finals: watch, listen and adjust. When the Warriors' initial plan to move to the Embarcadero was met by strong, deep, community-based opposition, the team (and Lee's administration and powerful friends) shifted to Mission Bay.
When opposition with ties to the arena's potential neighbor — the University of California, San Francisco — emerged this spring, the Warriors and the city stayed in the game. They tweaked designs for the privately funded development, which includes two office towers and a Union Square-like plaza with restaurants, with city staff and the Warriors often standing side by side.
And it wasn't just the Warriors' politically savvy community outreach team. Warriors President Rick Welts has attended several neighborhood meetings and is willing to answer direct questions.
In the end, the Warriors and the city listened to those who like the project as well as those who still worry about how 18,050 basketball fans will blend with hundreds of UCSF hospital employees, patients and their families. Not to mention the hundreds more UCSF students and faculty who already often feel trapped when there are San Francisco Giants games less than a half-mile down Third Street at AT&T Park.
That's been the beef all along by the Mission Bay Alliance, though maybe the group of UCSF benefactors, nurses union and faculty spent too much time putting it in those terms. The group still could file a legal challenge to the city's environmental impact report on the arena development, but the deal announced Tuesday between the Warriors, UCSF and the city, left alliance spokesman Sam Singer calling UCSF Chancellor Sam Hawgood a "sell out."
The deal creates a fund of at least $10 million annually — fed by Warriors arena receipts — that would be spent on a range of potential traffic solutions, including new light-rail cars and increased train and bus service and more traffic control officers. What's more, the deal sets a "special circumstances cap" of 12 arena events of 12,500 people or more that conflict with Giants' games — if there are ongoing traffic and congestion problems during dual events.
It may be a flawed solution, but it's a creative one, that keeps public money on the sideline and moves a key project toward a groundbreaking early next year and a Warriors tip-off for the 2018-19 season.
At this point, we don't know where the Raiders will play even next year. It's up to Schaaf, Cappio, Alameda County — and the Raiders and A's — to demonstrate the same kind of leadership as Lee and the Warriors.
Just highlights, very high level, the leadership challenges that Oakland also faces, amongst its crime issues and hot-handed politics. If Oakland ends up keeping the Raiders, it won't be due to some miracle (or mere proximity to San Francisco), there will be a story there.