Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/photos/i-WCBZ9kz/0/L/i-WCBZ9kz-L.jpg)
A look into a plan to leverage affordable housing as a solution for neighborhood revitalization in Jacksonville's Historic Eastside.
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/affordable-housing-as-revitalization-strategy/
Would it make sense for the city to test improving the homes in those areas? Like do a lottery for 100 homes within a relatively small area. Gut them, replumb and rewire, improve the facade, fix sidewalks, lighting and street. The original owner retains the right to the home and must pledge to continue ownership for 3-4 years. Build out something to serve the area (like the armory thing Lake posted) and draw in outside business. Encourage locals to start businesses similar to Potters House.
This would help modernize the look of the area and incentivize others to move in / continue making it better. It could boost property values for the home that didn't get updated and give those people the option to cash out or wait for the values to further increase. With an ownership pledge it could help to keep the demographics from changing too much / furthering gentrification.
It's probably a terrible idea, but I'm just spit balling literally anything other than what the current leadership is doing (blowing things up, building luxury low rises, etc). lol
Quote from: jaxjaguar on November 15, 2021, 02:10:55 PM
Like do a lottery for 100 homes within a relatively small area. Gut them, replumb and rewire, improve the facade, fix sidewalks, lighting and street. The original owner retains the right to the home and must pledge to continue ownership for 3-4 years.
COJ did something similar in Springfield in the 90's. Vacant homes were auctioned off for nothing, new owners had to renovate and live in them for X number of years afterward. It was successful, created stability and stakeholders where there was none.
Springfield was *MUCH* worse off then, than the Eastside is now, however. Residents and community leaders of the Eastside are worried about the impact of investment, not the lack of it - two very different things. Everyone sees the slow moving wave coming.
Interesting. Thanks for the info. I assume the current residents don't want investment because they think they'll get more traffic / pushed out?
I'm looking forward to seeing how this goes for the Eastside. My dad's street in Durkeeville had many vacant homes until last year and they've all been renovated or under renovation now and a more diverse demographic is moving in. It's great seeing the neighborhood come back to life but I'd love to see more missing middle housing being built
Quote from: jaxjaguar on November 16, 2021, 10:41:09 AM
Interesting. Thanks for the info. I assume the current residents don't want investment because they think they'll get more traffic / pushed out?
Residents *do* want the benefit of investment, but without the negative impact it may have on some. Hence the point of this article. The negative impact that concerns some is gentrification, not traffic.