My question for metrojacksonville: Doe the current city-county government help or hinder the development of downtown? I ask this because I wonder if the urban core's interests are being best served by a consolidated government.
^ I would say they both hinder and help. Help in that there are fewer governing bodies that need to approve anything and ideally there would be a faster permitting/funding/approval process. Hurt in that the current administration reads at a 5th grade level an has no concept of urban development.
I also think the fact that funds are divided up by one group for such a large land area can open up the potential for handouts and favors, which there is strong evidence of in Jax. Too many hands reaching out for one pot of funds with no checks and balances.
Quote from: Jaxson on June 24, 2010, 08:23:28 AM
My question for metrojacksonville: Doe the current city-county government help or hinder the development of downtown? I ask this because I wonder if the urban core's interests are being best served by a consolidated government.
To answer the question , the Peyton administration has failed in the development of downtown jacksonville. But a (huge) majority of Jacksonville"s constituents dont care for downtown development. As bad as that is (and it is) many would be happy to see a vibrant downtown. This is a fact to me as ive heard such repeated time and time again.
If we can accept such a mindset, we can only then work a plan for DT development. I personally think of an aggressive residential development, aimed towards low income public housing. There could be some variation as in loft style housing towards documented artists, which is characteristic of all metropolitan areas. All of us know of the failures (or risks) of public housing, but after all these years, i feel its time to try it.
Another option is to write off all economical development of downtown jax. In terms of metropolitan areas, think of Los Angeles more than New York. Detroit is doing so now. DT jax would become the center of municipal operations. And little else. as it is today. It pains me to consider such, but this is the direction the city are taking today.
It seems to really go down political idealogy, in terms of the mayoral campaign, which is the most direct way we at metrojax can take action. Conservatives (republican) would execute the latter, while residential development would call for a strong liberal (democrat) approach.
QuoteWhen you have a thermonuclear dumbass in the office (presently it is held by Don Redman) then downtown is basically screwed because its most important section is controlled or neglected by a rep that has no clearcut benefit from helping any of the 400 residents of the downtown. District 4 effectively controls downtown, and yet downtown doesnt have enough residents to impress a candidate of regular intelligence.
Another reason to move aggressively for residential downtown development. Councilman Redman aint goin anywhere. Today, our best plan is to support an aggressive liberal approach (and candidate) in March 2011. Or accept the conservative strategy and embrace a (very) de-centralized metropolitan city as it is today.
As I have said many times before, if there were low income housing downtown I would move my family there. I am married with three children, I am sure it would be a nice change to see a family walking downtown to the library, hemming plaza, VMA, or wherever. But you will never see my family and I living downtown because we are working class and paying over 1200 a month seems extremely unreasonable to live in a downtown with so few amenities. I will add a little prospective,
I rented an apartment, granted it was only a 2br, for 1000.00 a month in Millbrook NY! AKA Mayberry... The apartment included heat (which can be astronomical in the winter in NY) and hot water. I was walking distance to this park.
(http://www.kwaree.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/dsc03833.jpg)
This library!
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Eiwce13X738/R6LydZYiusI/AAAAAAAABek/N7lLmDY4BCM/s400/Millbrook%2BLibrary%2Bcopy.jpg)
This diner!
(http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicc/cfiles38834.jpg)
Hell, this farmers market was literally spitting distance from my apartment!
(http://www.millbrookfarmersmarket.com/images/1.16.jpg)
And I was 20 minutes from the metro north train that would take me into Manhattan everyday for work.
Jacksonville offers some of this, but the incomes here are crap, and there is no downtown community. So, realistically I wouldn't pay more than 800.. a month for an apartment downtown. But, again, that ain't going to happen because these developers think that because their building looks like it belongs in a city where the rents are high that they can charge high rents when in reality they cant!
hillary supporter: Am I interpreting your post wrong? What I gleaned from your post in summary: Market rate housing is not economically viable, in its current form. We need subsidies for developers to make market rate, or even below market rate housing work. Therefore, we need a liberal councilman who will chuck big time bucks at developers to put cheap houses downtown?
That sounds like our policy with trying to create entertainment DT. Lets have the gov't build a billion dollars worth of stuff and let the people flood in. Didn't happen.
IF it wasn't a viable option to begin with, massive government subsidy won't save it. We need organic growth that will be successful and build on it self. The way to spark that is through policies that encourage and allow for that to happen. Not subsidy.
Quote from: hightowerlover on June 23, 2010, 09:43:06 AM
The Allman Brothers are from Macon,GA and Oliver Hardy is from Milledgeville, GA
The Allman Brothers formed their band right here in Jax.
One of the great features of this website is that it brings together people of very different political opinions who have a common vision for the future of the urban core and the city as a whole. The importance of a vibrant core and quality mass transit shouldn't be an issue of political ideology. There are people on both sides of the political aisle who are candidates or otherwise invested in this mayoral race who "get it" equally when it comes to the core, as best as I can tell from afar. John Delaney got it just as Jake Godbold did and Matt Carlucci would have as mayor. The Peyton administration certainly evinces a maddening lack of vision and a frustrating failure to comprehend what makes a vibrant downtown, and some of its polices have had me wondering if it's actually outright averse to a vibrant downtown without saying so. (Hence my inability to look at an image of the Main St. pocket park without becoming violently angry.) But the idea that all Republicans are averse to downtown development or smart growth doesn't hold water, although I will grant that the current administration certainly could convey that impression. The major aims expressed on this site shouldn't ever be a matter of ideological battle. They're common sense.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 24, 2010, 10:56:53 AM
hillary supporter: Am I interpreting your post wrong? What I gleaned from your post in summary: Market rate housing is not economically viable, in its current form. We need subsidies for developers to make market rate, or even below market rate housing work. Therefore, we need a liberal councilman who will chuck big time bucks at developers to put cheap houses downtown?
That sounds like our policy with trying to create entertainment DT. Lets have the gov't build a billion dollars worth of stuff and let the people flood in. Didn't happen.
IF it wasn't a viable option to begin with, massive government subsidy won't save it. We need organic growth that will be successful and build on it self. The way to spark that is through policies that encourage and allow for that to happen. Not subsidy.
Do you think that DT housing is appropriatly priced? I mean there arent many people living there so maybe the demand is low and the price is high.
Quote from: JC on June 24, 2010, 10:50:52 AM
As I have said many times before, if there were low income housing downtown I would move my family there. I am married with three children, I am sure it would be a nice change to see a family walking downtown to the library, hemming plaza, VMA, or wherever. But you will never see my family and I living downtown because we are working class and paying over 1200 a month seems extremely unreasonable to live in a downtown with so few amenities. I will add a little prospective,
while The Parks @ Cathedral townhomes downtown are owned, several of the units rent for around $1000-$1200 for 2-3 bedrooms....the complex includes a pool and mini-park...and several families with children reside there.
I think the current options downtown (especially the southbank) are not reflective of the market for downtown housing at all. Since when have the rich been the pioneers for housing and neighborhood development?? Never.
Our current housing stock is a result of massive speculation and the real estate bubble. We do need more affordable housing downtown, but it doesn't need to come on the back of massive government assistance. I think the Laura Trio project will offer more accurately priced lodgings, which is a step in the right directions. I think smaller scale projects are needed in the core to build the residential base before we try to do it 200 units at a time.
I agree with your point. I do not agree with what I think Hillary Supporter was recommending.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 24, 2010, 12:29:56 PM
I think the current options downtown (especially the southbank) are not reflective of the market for downtown housing at all. Since when have the rich been the pioneers for housing and neighborhood development?? Never.
Our current housing stock is a result of massive speculation and the real estate bubble. We do need more affordable housing downtown, but it doesn't need to come on the back of massive government assistance. I think the Laura Trio project will offer more accurately priced lodgings, which is a step in the right directions. I think smaller scale projects are needed in the core to build the residential base before we try to do it 200 units at a time.
I agree with your point. I do not agree with what I think Hillary Supporter was recommending.
I totally agree Zissou. We need some affordable, market range housing downtown. The prices of the The Carling and 11 E are ridicoulos. I think if the pricing was more afforable, people would flock to downtown. I just recently moved and could only afford 600-700 a month. I looked at the Carling and 11 E and turned right back around. I wanted to stay in the core (because its 3 minutes away from my job) but I could not stomach those prices.
I agree that it is far to expensive to try to move to downtown Jacksonville. The residences are nice, but too rich for my blood. And, for those who currently live in downtown apartments, there is little to no retail/services that would make it worth their while.
If it cost $200 a square foot to develop residential space from permitted start to permitted finish, would $20,000 a year be unreasonable rent for a 1000 square foot apartment? That's $1667 a month. So called "affordable housing" may no longer exist outside the ghetto, and even there, a room in a ramshackle boarding house goes for $100 or more a week.
It exists quite a bit. Of course, you don't start with designing something that costs $200 a square foot.
While I agree with Jerry Moran about the need to recoup developers' investments, I do not believe that we have to focus exclusively on high-overhead, luxury apartments. The singles and 'bohemian' crowd don't require as many amenities and can help to make an area 'trendy' enough for others to follow. Greenwich Village in NYC is one example of how this gentrification can work...
My friend stays in Orlando and says that one of the high rise condos in their downtown has started taking section 8! LOL I dont want use to resort to that, but some affordable housing project needs to be created. For example, I stay in a gated apartment comunnity in Baymeadows and pay $633.00 a month, for a huge apartment, upgraded kitchen with washer and dryer. That's what I mean by affordable! (with a few extras) "Affordable" does not necessairly mean "ghetto" or "hood".
Quote from: Jerry Moran on June 24, 2010, 01:35:51 PM
If it cost $200 a square foot to develop residential space from permitted start to permitted finish, would $20,000 a year be unreasonable rent for a 1000 square foot apartment? That's $1667 a month. So called "affordable housing" may no longer exist outside the ghetto, and even there, a room in a ramshackle boarding house goes for $100 or more a week.
Jerry, are you Joking?? If your cost to build is $200/ sq ft and you rent at an annual rate of $200/ sq ft, you break even in a year. Considering the traditional financing mix of 20/80 equity to debt, you're looking at 465% profit in year two after debt service assuming you pass through maintenance costs to your tenants. Everyone and their mother, father, sister/wife, and red neck uncle would be building condos if that was the case.
A good investment returns about 20% cash on cash per year.
$1,600-$2,200 should be the upper end of 2 bedroom rentals in Jax. $1,400 should be the absolute ceiling for 1 bedrooms, and that should make up less than 5% of the housing stock, as that is how our demographics are constructed. Market rate should be $1,100-$1,500 for to bedroom and $600-$900 for single.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 24, 2010, 02:11:57 PM
Quote from: Jerry Moran on June 24, 2010, 01:35:51 PM
If it cost $200 a square foot to develop residential space from permitted start to permitted finish, would $20,000 a year be unreasonable rent for a 1000 square foot apartment? That's $1667 a month. So called "affordable housing" may no longer exist outside the ghetto, and even there, a room in a ramshackle boarding house goes for $100 or more a week.
Jerry, are you Joking?? If your cost to build is $200/ sq ft and you rent at an annual rate of $200/ sq ft, you break even in a year. Considering the traditional financing mix of 20/80 equity to debt, you're looking at 465% profit in year two after debt service assuming you pass through maintenance costs to your tenants. Everyone and their mother, father, sister/wife, and red neck uncle would be building condos if that was the case.
A good investment returns about 20% cash on cash per year.
$1,600-$2,200 should be the upper end of 2 bedroom rentals in Jax. $1,400 should be the absolute ceiling for 1 bedrooms, and that should make up less than 5% of the housing stock, as that is how our demographics are constructed. Market rate should be $1,100-$1,500 for to bedroom and $600-$900 for single.
$2000 / 4br - Clean, bright, new renovated 4br hardwood floors NO FEE! (W159St/Bway) (Inwood / Wash Hts)No Fee! New renovated apt! Apt is located at 504 West 159th Street between Broadway & Amsterdam Avenue in diverse and historic Washington Heights. It is a prewar walk-up building that we work hard to maintain a good condition. Building has security camera for tenant security.
Apt is newly re-done, freshly painted, clean and brand new kitchen appliances, faucets, sinks, vanity, fixtures and doors, repolished hardwood floors, new tiled kitchen and bath floor. Separate windowed kitchen for the chef of the house, separate bedrooms can be used as a home office.
Rent includes heat and hot water. Rental features:
* 4 bedrooms * renovated bath
* renovated kitchen
* new tile floors
* stainless steel stove/ gas range
* custom granite countertop
* real cherry cabinetry
* stainless steel refrigerator
* high ceilings
* polished new hardwood floors
* new coat of paint
Serious inquiries only please call Sammy (646) 808-2233.
cats are OK - purrr
dogs are OK - wooof
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
Fee Disclosure: application & credit check fee
Listed By: soho properties
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/abo/1808380549.html
History
The series of ridges overlooking the Hudson were sites of villas in the 19th century, including the extensive property of John James Audubon.
In the early 1900s, Irish immigrants moved to Washington Heights. European Jews went to Washington Heights to escape Nazism during the 1930s and the 1940s. During the 1950s and 1960s, many Greeks moved to Washington Heights; the community was referred to as the "Astoria of Manhattan." As the nickname became widespread, Cubans and Puerto Ricans moved to the area. By the 1980s and 1990s, the neighborhood became mostly Dominican. By the 2000s, after years when gangsters ruled a thriving illegal drug trade, urban renewal began. Many Dominicans moved to Morris Heights, University Heights, and other west Bronx neighborhoods.[5] While gentrification is often blamed for rapid changes in the neighborhood, the changes in population also reflect the departure of the dominant nationality. Even though Dominicans still make up 73 percent of the neighborhood, their moves to the Bronx have made room for Mexicans and Ecuadorians, according to The Latino Data Project of the City University of New York.[6] The proportion of whites in Washington Heights has declined from 18 percent in 1990 to 14 percent in 2005.[7]
Transportation
Three of the bridges that cross the Harlem River are visible: the High Bridge (a pedestrian bridge that has been closed for many years); the Alexander Hamilton Bridge (part of Interstate 95); and the Washington Bridge. In this photo, looking north, the Washington Heights neighborhood of Manhattan is on the left and the Bronx is on the right.Washington Heights is connected to Fort Lee, New Jersey, via the Othmar Ammann-designed George Washington Bridge. The Pier Luigi Nervi-designed George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal is located at the Manhattan end of the bridge. The Trans-Manhattan Expressway, a portion of Interstate 95, proceeds from the George Washington Bridge in a trench between 178th and 179th Streets. To the east, the Highway leads to the Alexander Hamilton Bridge across the Harlem River to the Bronx and the Cross-Bronx Expressway. The Washington Bridge crosses the Harlem River just north of the Alexander Hamilton Bridge. High Bridge is the oldest Harlem River span still in existence, crossing the river just south of the Alexander Hamilton Bridge. Originally it carried the Croton Aqueduct as part of the New York City water system and later functioned as a pedestrian bridge that has been closed since 1970. It has been recently announced High Bridge will reopen after a 20 million dollar renovation project.
Subways
Washington Heights is served by the New York City Subway. On the Eighth Avenue Line (A and C) service is available at the 155th Street, 163rd Streetâ€"Amsterdam Avenue, 168th Street station. The C line ends at 168th St. The A train continues and stops at 175th Streetâ€"George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal, 181st Street, 190th Street, Dyckman Street and 207th Street, with Dyckman named for a family that once owned property in the area. Along the Broadway-Seventh Avenue Line, the 1 train has stations at 157th Street, 168th Street, 181st Street, 191st Street, Dyckman Street and 207th Street.This is all 15 minutes from central park, probably 5 minutes by bike to the bike path that runs the entire length of Manhattan along the west side highway, no lights just a long ride on the river! There are just too many things to list really.
Again this is not a diss on Jacksonville, I love the potential DT has but for freaking serious, 1200 for two beds?
I really dont know much about the city owned housing stock but it seems like renovating them, with the army of unemployed trades people living in Duval County would be a great place to start, then just charge tennants rent based on what it would cost to maintain the properties. DT needs working class people badly!
^ That sounds good to me. The city owns enough property for it. Unfortunately, the city prefers laborers of the illegal sort.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 24, 2010, 02:54:30 PM
^ That sounds good to me. The city owns enough property for it. Unfortunately, the city prefers laborers of the illegal sort.
Unfortunately you are correct!
why should downtown living necessarily be cheap?
When I was in college in Philly, I would have loved to live in Center City but couldn't afford it....so we lived at the periphery...just like Riverside, Springfield, and San marco offer here.
And when I looked to buy my first place in Tampa, I couldn't afford Hyde Park...so I got a place as close to it as I could (about 1/2 mile away).
Quotewhy should downtown living necessarily be cheap?
Because downtown does not offer a standard of living comparable to ANY peer cities... nor even its own surrounding neighborhoods. Currently, you're essentially paying higher rents than rental communities at the beach for absolutely no reason other than to say 'I live downtown'.
You have to walk before you can run. Currently, we are crawling downtown.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 24, 2010, 02:59:47 PM
why should downtown living necessarily be cheap?
When I was in college in Philly, I would have loved to live in Center City but couldn't afford it....so we lived at the periphery...just like Riverside, Springfield, and San marco offer here.
And when I looked to buy my first place in Tampa, I couldn't afford Hyde Park...so I got a place as close to it as I could (about 1/2 mile away).
Downtown living should not be cheap, downtown Jax should be cheap due to market economics. Low Demand+High Supply=CHEAP
Downtown prices increase because they are established neighborhoods with amenities and conveniences and luxury not offered elsewhere. People want to live there and enjoy this lifestyle of luxury, culture, and convenience, so they pay a premium. People out bid other people, and prices go up. Other than nice bathroom fixtures, our downtown has none of these things. Downtown Jax offers no justification for high prices other than the developers are trying to line their pockets.
That's like walking into a group and claiming "I'm in charge". When asked why, you respond "because I said so." Just because the downtown buildings say they're expensive, doesn't mean they should be. Our market has no need for 600 high end units on the south bank.
As for affordable, why is it preferable to have units that are expensive, but vacant?
I can tell you why they won't lower the price on units at the Peninsula. This is a quote, they "don't want to reduce the prestige of the building". Meanwhile, they are swimming in debt.
Let's see how their prestige holds up once they foreclose and end up completely abandoned.
Not too smart.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on June 24, 2010, 10:56:53 AM
hillary supporter: Am I interpreting your post wrong? What I gleaned from your post in summary: Market rate housing is not economically viable, in its current form. We need subsidies for developers to make market rate, or even below market rate housing work. Therefore, we need a liberal councilman who will chuck big time bucks at developers to put cheap houses downtown?
[/quote/]
I was thinking of purely low income public housing, in my mind , controlled directly by the city. Like the NYC Housing Authority. But, from the vibe of this thread and in recent years, it has been done in the matter you described and you are right it has failed. Big time. I felt this could be done with only a liberal mayor, not councilman, to execute a very radical approach for DT development.
But i also pointed out that the more conservative approach would be to continue to move as we are and accept the fact of a metropolitan area (culturally) not centered on its downtown. This is the plan currently and the one which a majority of Jacksonville voters support.
Isnt a lot of municipal housing projects located throughout the city now? i do know that many now recieve monthly subsidies to supplement their housing (rental) costs ( through HUD).
QuoteI was thinking of purely low income public housing, in my mind , controlled directly by the city. Like the NYC Housing Authority. But, from the vibe of this thread and in recent years, it has been done in the matter you described and you are right it has failed. Big time. I felt this could be done with only a liberal mayor, not councilman, to execute a very radical approach for DT development.
But i also pointed out that the more conservative approach would be to continue to move as we are and accept the fact of a metropolitan area (culturally) not centered on its downtown. This is the plan currently and the one which a majority of Jacksonville voters support.
Isnt a lot of municipal housing projects located throughout the city now? i do know that many now recieve monthly subsidies to supplement their housing (rental) costs ( through HUD).
I just don't see how this is a political argument? Charlotte and Orlando's(two peer cities) downtown core are experiencing a rebirth... and they didn't get their b/c of the political party of the mayor in office, rather the policies they put into place to foster development of their downtown(s).
I don't see how a bunch of Section 8 housing filling up downtown highrises would all of a sudden reverse the toxic policies our downtown operates under. You'll have to explain how that would reverse the current tide of business leaving downtown(mainly due to the cost of operating downtown), and the fact that our current residents lack basic amenities and a quality of life that is much poorer than that of the downtown in any peer cities?
Though it's probably true that the majority of Jacksonville voters, and many power brokers in the city, are averse to centering on downtown, the right leadership can sway that opinion, and it's happened from both sides of the political aisle: Godbold with the Billion Dollar Decade, Delaney with the sales tax increase under the Better Jacksonville Plan.
I just want a leader raised up for Jacksonville who can get the city collectively behind that core-centered focus again. I don't think the political party of that leader matters. It seems to me that there are at least four candidates in this election who would advocate for the major leitmotifs of this site, representing both major parties.
More significantly, when I think of Godbold and Delaney, I think of two leaders who got people thinking positively about Jacksonville again and at least temporarily broke the cycle of self-deprecation that seems to hang over this city I love and hold back its potential, of which Stephen has so eloquently written and recently reposted. I think of Godbold's inauguration speech about creating a community of believers, and of Delaney's eulogy for Bill Foley in which he spoke of how we all knew he (and Godbold) loved the city and by extension made everyone love it.
Glorious Johnson's speech on "a city deferred" hits me square in the heart in the same way those moments did. I am thankful she, Jim Bailey, Rick Mullaney, and Audrey Moran are candidates in this election because they give me every indication that they are committed to breaking the negative pall and embracing the common sense policies that can turn the core around. Their political party affiliations do not matter to me because I do not think those affiliations in any way define what their policies will be.
QuoteI just don't see how this is a political argument? Charlotte and Orlando's(two peer cities) downtown core are experiencing a rebirth... and they didn't get their b/c of the political party of the mayor in office, rather the policies they put into place to foster development of their downtown(s).
I think these two examples work because business was successfull in venturing to the downtown areas. For whatever reasons, business has been successfull in these downtown areas. In Jacksonville the 95 south corriddor has offered great financhial benefits to major companies, even to the point of relocation from downtown. With even cheaper rates and incentives since meltdown 08.
My term of conservative policy is based along free market, minimal govt intervention of economical (business) development.
My term of liberal policy is govt intervention, highly regulated, along the lines of social policy (residential development) .
Its realistic to conclude that true policy will be a mixture of both, but , IMO, towards overall development of DT, we would need a heavily leaning liberal (Keyesian) policy geared socially towards residental growth as current residental DT presence has been a failure.
Quote from: fieldafm on June 24, 2010, 03:10:00 PM
Because downtown does not offer a standard of living comparable to ANY peer cities... nor even its own surrounding neighborhoods.
as a downtown resident, I completely disagree...I'm not sure there is another part of Jax. I would want to live in...on any given day, I can walk to the library and a bookstore, riverfront restaurants, shows, and sporting events....where else can you do that?
btw...for those who think downtown is overpriced now, just wait until it is actually a fully vibrant place....you won't find apartments for less than $1200 and condos/townhomes for less than $400,000
Quote from: stephendare on June 24, 2010, 09:56:48 PM
Let me ask you TUFSU, what neighborhood to you dine out in most often? Excluding lunches.
well since my office isn't downtown, lunch is hardly ever here...dinner, on the other hand, is downtown more often than not.
and thanks for saying you loved living downtown Stephen....clearly there is room for improvement, but some on this site seem to imply that downtown is enirely unlivable...and while maybe not the best place to raise a small child, several young families w/ kids living at the Parks show it isn't impossible.
QuoteI really dont know much about the city owned housing stock but it seems like renovating them, with the army of unemployed trades people living in Duval County would be a great place to start, then just charge tenants rent based on what it would cost to maintain the properties. DT needs working class people badly!
Quote^ That sounds good to me. The city owns enough property for it.
Exactly, this is what i was suggesting, supplemented by obama dollars . Rent would be adjusted by income which would cover maintainace costs minimum.
Quote from: hillary supporter on June 24, 2010, 11:23:29 PM
QuoteI really dont know much about the city owned housing stock but it seems like renovating them, with the army of unemployed trades people living in Duval County would be a great place to start, then just charge tenants rent based on what it would cost to maintain the properties. DT needs working class people badly!
Quote^ That sounds good to me. The city owns enough property for it.
Exactly, this is what i was suggesting, supplemented by obama dollars . Rent would be adjusted by income which would cover maintainace costs minimum.
Well, we are doing something similar to that now with the Off The Grid project(something that has proven to work in other urban communities)... giving artists unoccupied spaces rent free while they agree to pay utilities/etc.
My question about an idea to give trades people rent free homes downtown is.... where would they work? There isnt necessarily a huge demand for that type of labor currently.
How exactly would these scenarios benefit downtown? I don't ask sarcastically, I really am curious to the reasoning behind your views?
TuFSU, I genuinely wanted to live downtown on two seperate occassions. I'm downtown quite a bit in the evenings(not so much during the weekdays as I work on the Southside). But, I can ride my bike into town in a few minutes and yet still live in a neighborhood that offers amenities downtown simply doesn't. Would I like someday for it to be advantageous to move downtown? Yes, at which point I would move in a heartbeat. But however much I love spending time downtown(I genuinely do), I find it MUCH better to live in one of the surrounding urban neighborhoods.
If we had a downtown even rivaling Orlando... there is no question I would make the move. But unfortunately, we are not Orlando, Charlotte, etc.
Quote from: fieldafm on June 25, 2010, 10:39:07 AM
Quote from: hillary supporter on June 24, 2010, 11:23:29 PM
QuoteI really don't know much about the city owned housing stock but it seems like renovating them, with the army of unemployed trades people living in Duval County would be a great place to start, then just charge tenants rent based on what it would cost to maintain the properties. DT needs working class people badly!
Quote^ That sounds good to me. The city owns enough property for it.
Exactly, this is what i was suggesting, supplemented by obama dollars . Rent would be adjusted by income which would cover maintainace costs minimum.
Well, we are doing something similar to that now with the Off The Grid project(something that has proven to work in other urban communities)... giving artists unoccupied spaces rent free while they agree to pay utilities/etc.
My question about an idea to give trades people rent free homes downtown is.... where would they work? There isnt necessarily a huge demand for that type of labor currently.
How exactly would these scenarios benefit downtown? I don't ask sarcastically, I really am curious to the reasoning behind your views?
TuFSU, I genuinely wanted to live downtown on two seperate occassions. I'm downtown quite a bit in the evenings(not so much during the weekdays as I work on the Southside). But, I can ride my bike into town in a few minutes and yet still live in a neighborhood that offers amenities downtown simply doesn't. Would I like someday for it to be advantageous to move downtown? Yes, at which point I would move in a heartbeat. But however much I love spending time downtown(I genuinely do), I find it MUCH better to live in one of the surrounding urban neighborhoods.
If we had a downtown even rivaling Orlando... there is no question I would make the move. But unfortunately, we are not Orlando, Charlotte, etc.
We are not Orlando or Chalotte, however we can get there. Both of their downtowns were dead for a very long time as well. And Actually my friend that's stays in orlando says that the downtown is still pretty much empty, especially at night. Then to Charlotte, Bank of America was a key componet of the revitilization of their downtown. And we dont have a coporation with that type of moo-la here. So lets stop comparing and just work on Jacksonville. I think we too often compare Jacksonville to ther cities too much.
QuoteSo lets stop comparing and just work on Jacksonville. I think we too often compare Jacksonville to ther cities too much.
I think they are especially relevant b/c we are one of the last few major cities in the country that havent caught up to the new urbanist revilatilization sweeping the country. As Lake continually says, we just have to look at what works elsewhere and try to apply those same succesful principles here. We don't have to reinvent the wheel.
That's what this site is all about.
I think what other similar cities are doing is totally relevant. Why spend energy figuring out how to do something when someone else has already successfully blazed the trail?
Quote from: fieldafm on June 25, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
QuoteSo lets stop comparing and just work on Jacksonville. I think we too often compare Jacksonville to ther cities too much.
I think they are especially relevant b/c we are one of the last few major cities in the country that havent caught up to the new urbanist revilatilization sweeping the country. As Lake continually says, we just have to look at what works elsewhere and try to apply those same succesful principles here. We don't have to reinvent the wheel.
That's what this site is all about.
Agreed. But I say that because every city has their own unique situation. For example, Orlando's downtown might have had different issues than we do in regard to why the DT died or wasnt as vibrant as it could have been. For example, we know that the consilidation in 1968 is what zapped our DT area, and lack of attention by leadership over decades. But whose to say that was orlando's and charolettes issue? It is definately ok to model ourselves after other cities, however we have to get to the root of OUR problems in order to be sucessful. Hope that makes sense. :-\
QuoteIt is definitely ok to model ourselves after other cities, however we have to get to the root of OUR problems in order to be successful. Hope that makes sense.
On the bullseye. I believe OUR problem is lack of residential presence. As noted earlier, as successfully as Orlando's endeavor is, its very quiet at night. We ve tried to introduce residency to DT but its failed up to now. Perhaps because private development doesn't have the resources of the municipality. Those developers of the failing skyscrapers wont cater to jax market conditions because they accept a fate of filing bankruptcy and turning over the liability to the banks who financed the construction. Then the banks will board up the buildings and solicit an investor to purchase the buildings trying to take as little a loss as possible. Thats when the skyscraper is boarded up and sits in limbo until the mortgagee gets just the right price. Time is of no factor, losses are written off taxes and corporations have immortality. Stephen is right that the economy is the leading factor in just a scenario.
QuoteMeh. It doesnt really have anything to do with political ideology. In fact, thats bunkum.
The idea of serious low income public housing has historically been enacted by democratic leaders. In todays political spectrum, i cant imagine anything close to this idea coming from a republican mayor of Jacksonville. And the main reason is that the situation today of a metropolitan Jacksonville , without a cultural center in DT is agreeable with a majority of Jacksonville voters. Moved forward by the 2 republican administrations, the only republican mayors elected since reconstruction. Dont fix the clock if it aint broken.
Quote from: hillary supporter on June 25, 2010, 01:14:30 PM
And the main reason is that the situation today of a metropolitan Jacksonville , without a cultural center in DT is agreeable with a majority of Jacksonville voters. Moved forward by the 2 republican administrations, the only republican mayors elected since reconstruction. Dont fix the clock if it aint broken.
I certainly wouldn't disagree as to the Peyton administration, but I'm curious as to what specific reasons you have for concluding this about the Delaney administration. From my outside perspective, Delaney was pro-urban core and gave it far more than just lip service, and seemed to get high marks for his dedication to smart growth principles from all over the political spectrum.
Of course, I wholeheartedly agree that it will take real leadership to overcome a majority indifference or aversion to urban core revitalization.
Also, as to low income public housing--again, just out of curiosity as to your idea--are you specifically referring to Section 8? Workforce housing with subsidies/tax credits/other incentives to developers to allow for market-rate rents? A mix of the two like the Hope IV in Brentwood?
I guess I have to disagree with one statement... downtown Orlando has WAY more restaurants, bars, and clubs than Jacksonville. Nightime streetlife in DT Orlando is about three times that of Jacksonville.
DT Orlando has about a 10 block core that is VERY walkable, and the fruits of that accessibility can be seen both at night and during the day.
Hillary... why again would housing projects revitalize downtown Jacksonville? I don't think I seem to understand the correlation of your answer about builders willing to foreclose on projects and how that relates to adding more Section 8 housing downtown as an answer to the core's problems. I really am curious about your idea.
Mass transit + MIX = Explosive economic change.
Put that in your notes under OCKLAMATH...
OCKLAWAHA
QuoteHillary... why again would housing projects revitalize downtown Jacksonville? I don't think I seem to understand the correlation of your answer about builders willing to foreclose on projects and how that relates to adding more Section 8 housing downtown as an answer to the core's problems. I really am curious about your idea.
Posted on: Today at 02:36:58 PM
Housing projects would bring downtown residents, which in my opinion, is the problem with development DT. I have conceded that business presence in DT is not going to happen at this time. Free market standards are failing to bring residents DT as pointed out by many of the posters. City govt has not been able to lure commerical entities to provide services for the residents because said entities dont want to risk on a venture with no residents today.
I am not sure about Section 8 housing, but it would be nice to have more diverse housing choices downtown...
Quote from: Jaxson on June 25, 2010, 07:35:18 PM
I am not sure about Section 8 housing, but it would be nice to have more diverse housing choices downtown...
at this point, im willing to entertain about any option, including section 8 housing to populate downtown. and even with such an alternative, i feel the odds are heavily against us. i spent 2 1/2years in DT at the metropolitan, which had to be the most expensive building, and tried to buy no less than 5 buildings, all of which were dilapidated. in oct 08, i just accepted it wasnt to be, moved to riverside and am very very happy, content. zthat being said, i still find a fire in me to make DT no less than a southern greenich village. I know we have it. the Skyway is nothing less than a state of the art fixed rail mass transit system. Such a blessing could take us to a level beyond any in the south. We need to develop a united plan all together and maintain activism to accomplish this. now i would like to hear other ideas and keep rolling, march 2011 is coming soon!
For some reason I doubt our current city leaders and citizens can make public housing work as well as this city:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore
"The majority of the residential housing developments in Singapore are publicly governed and developed and about 85% of Singaporeans live in such houses. HDB flats are affordable for the masses and their purchase can be financially-aided by the Central Provident Fund. The apartment flats are not actually purchased but leased in a 99 year lease-hold.
These flats are located in housing estates, which are self-contained satellite towns with schools, supermarkets, clinics, hawker centres, as well as sports and recreational facilities. There are a large variety of flat types and layouts, generally classified into three-room, four-room, five-room and executive flats (the living room counts as one room)."
Quote from: cityimrov on June 25, 2010, 09:16:34 PM
For some reason I doubt our current city leaders and citizens can make public housing work as well as this city:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore
"The majority of the residential housing developments in Singapore are publicly governed and developed and about 85% of Singaporeans live in such houses. HDB flats are affordable for the masses and their purchase can be financially-aided by the Central Provident Fund. The apartment flats are not actually purchased but leased in a 99 year lease-hold.
These flats are located in housing estates, which are self-contained satellite towns with schools, supermarkets, clinics, hawker centres, as well as sports and recreational facilities. There are a large variety of flat types and layouts, generally classified into three-room, four-room, five-room and executive flats (the living room counts as one room)."
shame on us.
Quote from: hillary supporter on June 25, 2010, 09:11:52 PM
i still find a fire in me to make DT no less than a southern greenich village. I know we have it. the Skyway is nothing less than a state of the art fixed rail mass transit system. Such a blessing could take us to a level beyond any in the south. We need to develop a united plan all together and maintain activism to accomplish this. now i would like to hear other ideas and keep rolling, march 2011 is coming soon!
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/2955369894_5079a79e97.jpg)
You just GOT TO CONNECT IT!
Really Jacksonville? Wouldn't a simple vintage style streetcar system have been MUCH more effective back in 2002? Consider we paid for 4 1/2 "streetcar systems" and that San Diego built 15 miles of LIGHT RAIL from downtown to the Mexican border for less then half the cost of our Skyway, I would seem to be vindicated.
That being said, you are correct, the SKYWAY as a MONORAIL (a wise change) makes a hell of a lot more sense and can be sped up, and expanded more economically then the DPM.. The trouble might be that now we have a technology that can easily make 55 mph and travel a couple of miles or more between stations, trying to be a horizontal elevator in the old DPM mold. Perhaps a few more downtown stations as the system expands would make sense, Brooklyn, Blue Cross, Annie Lytle, Bay & Newnan, Hyatt-Convention Center, Randolph, Stadium, Hilton, San Marco, FCJ, Health Dept, Veterans Clinic, Shand's... Beyond that, we could stretch any further expansions into several mile leaps. I would however use a formula that FIRST rules out Commuter Rail, BRT, LRT, or Streetcar as an alternative on ANY longer distance expansion of the Skyway beyond the original goals. For those that liked my FRANCIS LYTLE SKYWAY TOD CONCEPT, you might be delighted to learn that we recently found no less then 5 Skyway route proposals that put the line within 200 feet of the old school!
Because of expense and the likelihood of several better alternatives, I really don't think we'll see any expansions beyond those original terminals (IE: Shands, Stadium, San Marco (FEC & Atlantic), Riverside (Annie), Jacksonville Terminal). In the wildest success expectation for the little monorail system, one might dream of additional lines of study including a Saint Nicholas-Memorial Hospital route, A San Marco Station-Baptist Hospital route, A new Matthews Bridge with a Stadium-JU route, and a Jacksonville Terminal-Farm Market route at which time we close the book on the Skyway, hunker down and run the wheels off the thing 24/7/365!
Remember folks, appoint me "BURGERMEISTER OF JTA" and we will see change! hee heeOCKLAWAHA
Quote from: hillary supporter on June 25, 2010, 09:57:25 PM
Quote from: cityimrov on June 25, 2010, 09:16:34 PM
For some reason I doubt our current city leaders and citizens can make public housing work as well as this city:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore
"The majority of the residential housing developments in Singapore are publicly governed and developed and about 85% of Singaporeans live in such houses. HDB flats are affordable for the masses and their purchase can be financially-aided by the Central Provident Fund. The apartment flats are not actually purchased but leased in a 99 year lease-hold.
These flats are located in housing estates, which are self-contained satellite towns with schools, supermarkets, clinics, hawker centres, as well as sports and recreational facilities. There are a large variety of flat types and layouts, generally classified into three-room, four-room, five-room and executive flats (the living room counts as one room)."
shame on us.
Just to add, Singapore is a rather unique area and had a rather strong political leadership so the comparison is a bit different. Imagine if the US kicked out Jacksonville and we had to survive on our own with hostile enemies surrounding us and no land or natural resources to survive off of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Republic_of_Singapore
That would be Singapore. A city-state created by unity and necessity of survival.
QuoteJust to add, Singapore is a rather unique area and had a rather strong political leadership so the comparison is a bit different.
Now our discussion is going somewhere. Outside the box, literally.
The only thing worse than losing our Jacquars is losing the Skyway. But, for me, stjr and others argument must be heard, my primary concern towards DT development is utilizing the Skyway, and having that "strong political leadership" is our first step.
I am not sure section 8 is the answer for Jacksonville. I could understand it in a place where rents are astronomical (for substantiated reasons). For obvious reasons, everyone benefits from having low income working class people in their community. The problem is that developers are just too proud of their properties!
A. The Law of Demand
The law of demand states that, if all other factors remain equal, the higher the price of a good, the less people will demand that good. In other words, the higher the price, the lower the quantity demanded. The amount of a good that buyers purchase at a higher price is less because as the price of a good goes up, so does the opportunity cost of buying that good. As a result, people will naturally avoid buying a product that will force them to forgo the consumption of something else they value more. The chart below shows that the curve is a downward slope.
(http://i.investopedia.com/inv/tutorials/site/economics/economics3.gif)
Housing costs and wages are out of whack all around the state, still, but it just seems particularly shocking in DT J'ville.
Does anyone have data on how many vacant finished apartments there are and how many unfinished potential units exist?
JC, the true answer to your questions about affordable housing in DT lie with mass transit. If you reconnect DT and the surrounding "urban neighborhoods" (they were built to accommodate three times their current density) with fixed transit (the thing that caused them to develop originally), people will be able to live the urban lifestyle and enjoy the entire core's (DT included) assets for a mix of prices. For example, if you can't afford to live on the river, a community like a Durkeeville or Brooklyn could provide you with the same walkable lifestyle for a reduced price. For comparison's sake, while most can't afford Manhattan, Hoboken and Jersey City are one train stop away enabling people to take advantage of Manhattan's assets without paying Manhattan style rents and mortgages.
Thanks, Stephen. And, btw, thanks for your reply to my question.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 27, 2010, 01:06:33 PM
JC, the true answer to your questions about affordable housing in DT lie with mass transit. If you reconnect DT and the surrounding "urban neighborhoods" (they were built to accommodate three times their current density) with fixed transit (the thing that caused them to develop originally), people will be able to live the urban lifestyle and enjoy the entire core's (DT included) assets for a mix of prices. For example, if you can't afford to live on the river, a community like a Durkeeville or Brooklyn could provide you with the same walkable lifestyle for a reduced price. For comparison's sake, while most can't afford Manhattan, Hoboken and Jersey City are one train stop away enabling people to take advantage of Manhattan's assets without paying Manhattan style rents and mortgages.
Yes, I agree, I am commenting on what seems to be artificially inflated prices. I could understand having higher prices in the core if your example existed in Jacksonville, but it doesnt, not yet anyway.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2010, 09:36:30 AM
Only because of consolidation. Despite this, in terms of absolute numbers, Miami, Tampa and Orlando all added more people. If we were the same size as these communities, we would have probably recorded a loss right along with Memphis and Detroit. Being consolidated helps mask the fact that we're more like misplaced rust belt city than anything else.
I think this point may apply to this thread as well. Maybe values aren't dropping because of this masking?
QuoteYes, I agree, I am commenting on what seems to be artificially inflated prices. I could understand having higher prices in the core if your example existed in Jacksonville, but it doesnt, not yet anyway.
Exactly, the current prices do not reflect reality. The quality of life in the core does not merit today's pricing structure. I would love living downtown, if the prices matched up with the experience. So, for now I am content in the surrounding core neighborhoods.
I believe all make up the "core" so I tend not to try an isolate the central Northbank. How does the pricing of the central Northbank compare with Riverside or San Marco?
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2010, 11:18:25 AM
I believe all make up the "core" so I tend not to try an isolate the central Northbank. How does the pricing of the central Northbank compare with Riverside or San Marco?
Sorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards. If I were single or married with no children I would consider it but I am not going to move my children to any of those neighborhoods. I can handle empty streets, homeless people and the occasional prostitute or drug dealer but.... meh... I dont know!
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
I don't think the neighborhoods of Riverside and San Marco fit this description.
Quote from: cline on June 28, 2010, 02:34:56 PM
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
I don't think the neighborhoods of Riverside and San Marco fit this description.
Yeah you are right, San Marco isnt bad Riverside is a bit spotty though.
Quote from: JC on June 28, 2010, 02:41:14 PM
Quote from: cline on June 28, 2010, 02:34:56 PM
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
I don't think the neighborhoods of Riverside and San Marco fit this description.
Yeah you are right, San Marco isnt bad Riverside is a bit spotty though.
if you're worried about crime, it can happen anywhere...in fact, downtown is statistically the safest neighborhood in Jax.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 28, 2010, 03:03:43 PM
Quote from: JC on June 28, 2010, 02:41:14 PM
Quote from: cline on June 28, 2010, 02:34:56 PM
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
I don't think the neighborhoods of Riverside and San Marco fit this description.
Yeah you are right, San Marco isnt bad Riverside is a bit spotty though.
if you're worried about crime, it can happen anywhere...in fact, downtown is statistically the safest neighborhood in Jax.
Why wouldn't downtown be safe? There's nobody there. No people, no crime.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 28, 2010, 03:03:43 PM
Quote from: JC on June 28, 2010, 02:41:14 PM
Quote from: cline on June 28, 2010, 02:34:56 PM
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
I don't think the neighborhoods of Riverside and San Marco fit this description.
Yeah you are right, San Marco isnt bad Riverside is a bit spotty though.
if you're worried about crime, it can happen anywhere...in fact, downtown is statistically the safest neighborhood in Jax.
What are you calling downtown?
QuoteSorry but the surrounding neighborhoods are not very desirable in my opinion. I don't want to live in a place where a stray bullet can hit my sleeping child, or where the police kill innocent people in their own front yards.
???
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2010, 11:18:25 AM
I believe all make up the "core" so I tend not to try an isolate the central Northbank. How does the pricing of the central Northbank compare with Riverside or San Marco?
I would say favorable.
Say, you're looking to buy a loft. Churchwell would be comparable to Chelsea as for as pricing... but the location of the two are really polar opposites of each other.
If you're looking at renting in an apartment community then Villas at St Johns compares favorably with leasing rates at the Carling or 11E. But again, you step out the front door at Villas and you have a grocery store, a beautifal park, and restaurants and nightlife... compared to the Carling where you walk out to fac an empty lot and historical buildings in disrepair.
Again, I would be all for living downtown if the price matched up to the amenities the neighborhood offered.
Carling and 11E dont even have 3br apartments!
once again I cite my own downtown home...
I have a 3 bdr townhome with a garage in community that includes a pocket park, clubhouse, and pool....Winn Dixie is less than 2 blocks away and there are over 10 restaurants open at night within 6 blocks of where I live.
There's also the Sprinfield dog park (3 blocks), the Riverwalk (5 blocks), Main St pocket park (3 blocks), the Library/Hemming Plaza (4 blocks), the arena/ballpark (6 blocks) all within walking distance of my house.
Quote from: fieldafm on June 28, 2010, 04:01:56 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 28, 2010, 11:18:25 AM
I believe all make up the "core" so I tend not to try an isolate the central Northbank. How does the pricing of the central Northbank compare with Riverside or San Marco?
I would say favorable.
Say, you're looking to buy a loft. Churchwell would be comparable to Chelsea as for as pricing... but the location of the two are really polar opposites of each other.
If you're looking at renting in an apartment community then Villas at St Johns compares favorably with leasing rates at the Carling or 11E. But again, you step out the front door at Villas and you have a grocery store, a beautifal park, and restaurants and nightlife... compared to the Carling where you walk out to fac an empty lot and historical buildings in disrepair.
Again, I would be all for living downtown if the price matched up to the amenities the neighborhood offered.
I view Riverside and Five Points as a part of the urban core. I actually view them as being more "urban" than the Northbank. While the Northbank may have greater building density (so do a few of our industrial parks), it still lacks many elements that combine to make up a vibrant pedestrian scale atmosphere. By the same token, I believe if we address the mass transit situation, one could live in a place like Riverside or Brooklyn, enjoy the urban lifestyle and still take advantage of the Northbank's assets. With the transit issue in place, it won't really matter what the Northbank's land values are. By expanding the "urban" footprint, you expand the housing and pricing opportunities for those seeking to live the urban lifestyle.
QuoteBy expanding the "urban" footprint, you expand the housing and pricing opportunities for those seeking to live the urban lifestyle.
I would agree with that statement.
Tufsu, you live in one of the few housing developments that offers a decent alternative downtown(I considered a townhome their as well)... but I have several friends that have left Berkman, 11E and The Strand b/c their experience just did not match up to their expectations of urban living. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your downtown living experience thus far?
I'm beginning to see Lake's point more and more that the future of our urban center(maybe downtown should be called the center) is directly tied to the connectivity with the surrounding urban neighborhoods that have been cut off from the center over the last 20 years.
On a 1-10 scale, I would rate downtown living a 7...as mentioned above, there is a multitude of things going on...that said, it seemed on the cusp of exploding when I moved here in 2006...but then the real estate market and the economy collapsed.
I also agree with Lake that we need to start thinking of the whole urban core (I'm calling it InTown Jax for now)....one of the best things about living downtown is the easy access to Springfield, 5 Points, Riverside, and San Marco.
The idea behind the core is to focus limited resources in a concentrated area like the Laura Street from the Landing to Hemming Plaza. Let's not dilute the idea of "the core". Yes, Riverside and the rest are currently more urban right now but let us get downtown that way too. At the last Urban Jacksonville Live weekly podcast at the Five Points Theater, someone mentioned the need for a grocery and a Walgreen's downtown. If we can figure out what it will take for Publix to move downtown we'll get more residents too.
^That idea in and of itself will fail. At no point in the Northbank's history has it ever been a self sustaining entity with no to limited connections with the urban core neighborhoods surrounding it. There is no reason to believe what hasn't worked in nearly two centuries will work now.
The next urban core Publix will be in San Marco. There will be no Publix in the Northbank anytime soon. I heard this from their CEO myself at a presentation MJ did for the LEDC (Lakeland Economic Development Council) a few years back. The market is simply not there and there's already a full sized Winn-Dixie in operation.
While a Walgreens may be a viable option, such a store will have better success on a corridor like State & Union where it can pull thousands of "urban core" residents and pass by traffic, as opposed to the couple of people on Laura between the Landing and Hemming.
With this said, I'm not saying that DVI should not apply "their" limited resources in a concentrated area of DT. What I am saying is that we need to look at things from a holistic viewpoint and better utilize our existing resources and income coming in. DVI and other entities need to better educate and coordinate themselves on what's being proposed outside (and in) their borders by other public entities. One of the best things that DVI can do that is free is to vocally support some of the transit initiatives being discussed and planned locally, considering that the Northbank (Laura Street included) will be one of the places that benefits from them the most.
If this can be done, a discovery will be made that we can stretch out our limited resources further than originally imagined. Thus, in the same time period, we can end up with a vibrant small compact Northbank core (DVI's concentrated effort), directly connected to surrounding vibrant urban core neighborhoods with an urban quality of life asset that enables residents to get around without the use of a car (overall better utilization of existing citywide resources).
Quote from: gridsketch on June 28, 2010, 10:22:50 PM
At the last Urban Jacksonville Live weekly podcast at the Five Points Theater, someone mentioned the need for a grocery and a Walgreen's downtown. If we can figure out what it will take for Publix to move downtown we'll get more residents too.
once again, WE ALREADY HAVE A GROCERY STORE DOWNTOWN!!
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 29, 2010, 08:39:22 AM
Quote from: gridsketch on June 28, 2010, 10:22:50 PM
At the last Urban Jacksonville Live weekly podcast at the Five Points Theater, someone mentioned the need for a grocery and a Walgreen's downtown. If we can figure out what it will take for Publix to move downtown we'll get more residents too.
once again, WE ALREADY HAVE A GROCERY STORE DOWNTOWN!!
And it really is a self perpetuating myth. I have heard people pass it along asking how can people live there if downtown does not have a grocery store.
For those of you wondering what we are talking about it is Winn Dixie the home town chain and the one downtown is nicer than it used to be.