As an aside to this article, it looks like Monroe will not be reopening in front of the Courthouse. How will this effect the site's development? I guess dropping someone off in "front of the courthouse" won't be happening? How about handicapped drop-offs? Bus/public transit drop-offs? It will be a full block walk to the center of the building from Julia or Pearl. Or from Adams and Clay to what will be the front door at the previous Monroe and Clay. Will the back door on Duval become the main entry point? That would be a wonderful failure of architecture. Just another reason why the courthouse design was a poor choice.QuoteCity looking at more two-way streets downtown
Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-09-22/story/city-looking-more-two-way-streets-downtown
By Matt Galnor
Jacksonville’s push for a more pedestrian-friendly downtown could result in two major one-way corridors opening for traffic in both directions through the teeth of the core city.
The city is finalizing details to pay just under $200,000 to a local engineering firm for a study on converting four streets to two-way traffic and scrapping plans to reopen Monroe Street once the new Duval County Courthouse is finished.
The city expects the results by the end of the year and could end up making all of the changes, just a few or none at all, said Ron Barton, executive director of the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission.
The courthouse, scheduled to open in summer 2012, will transform the west end of downtown, Barton said, and the city needs to get its traffic grid in the best position to capitalize on it.
“It’s a wasteland in today’s environment,†Barton said.
Downtowns across the country have converted streets to two-way to slow down traffic, get people to pay attention to storefronts on both sides of the street and encourage people to walk around.
“It just creates an environment where people want to linger more,†said Terry Lorince, executive director of Downtown Vision, an organization founded in 2000 by downtown property owners.
The study, to be performed by King Engineering, will look at:
n Converting north-south corridors Pearl and Julia streets to two-way between State and Bay streets, though a three-block stretch of Pearl is already two-way.
n Switching Adams Street, now one-way westbound, to two-way between Jefferson and Main streets.
n Changing Monroe Street, now one-way eastbound, to two-way between Pearl and Main streets.
n Keeping Monroe closed from Broad Street to Pearl Street in front of the new courthouse, rather than jogging Monroe around the building.
Although the latest ordinance on the courthouse budget in 2007 does not address Monroe Street, the previous bill requires it to reopen once the courthouse opens.
Because the courthouse now sits in the middle of what used to be Monroe, the street would have to be rerouted in front of the building and almost on top of Adams. Monroe has been closed since construction began in spring 2009.
“It will have been closed for three years and certainly our circulation pattern in downtown hasn’t fallen apart because of it,†Barton said.
When Wachovia left the Ed Ball Building about four years ago, Big Pete’s Pizzeria on Pearl Street lost 120 customers a day, owner Nathan Siva said.
Three nearby restaurants have closed, leaving Big Pete’s on an island in a barren section of downtown.
“There is no other reason why they should come all the way down this way,†Siva said.
Half of Siva’s customers drive to his business. More foot-traffic and other businesses that give people a reason to come downtown could help, Siva said.
The study comes after a preliminary analysis, also by King, that looked at ways to make Adams Street more pedestrian friendly. That first look, which cost $28,000, was used to see if it could be feasible and whether further study would be worth it.
Mayor’s office spokeswoman Misty Skipper said the city has contracted the study because it does not have the expertise or the manpower.
The city has converted some small stretches to two-way in recent years: Water Street between Laura and Newnan streets just east of the Jacksonville Landing and Laura between Monroe and Duval by the new Main Library.
A remaining four-block stretch of Laura between Monroe and Water will be converted to two-way as part of a $2.7 million streetscaping project that began this year.
The Laura Street project includes widening the sidewalks, adding a tree canopy and adding decorative cross walks â€" which likely wouldn’t be part of the early phases on these newer two-way streets, Barton said.
Siva said he’d like to see how Laura Street works for businesses and increasing traffic before the city just changes things on his side of downtown.
“If it doesn’t do any good over there,†Siva said, “there’s no point in spending more money if it’s not going to help.â€
Main ST needs to be two-way.
We said Monroe would be remain closed years ago.
Why spend millions to reconstruct it so close to Adams? Save that money and spend it making the proposed green between Adams and the main entry front worth visiting.
^FDOT road. Going two-way on that one is a much more difficult process because that road is not the city's.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 22, 2010, 09:22:37 PM
Why spend millions to reconstruct it so close to Adams? Save that money and spend it making the proposed green between Adams and the main entry front worth visiting.
Rather than rebuild Monroe, what about a circular drive, arcing between Pearl and Julia, with the "top" of the arc at the main entrance? This should leave most of the green space intact in the interior of the curve, between the driveway and Adams.
My real point wasn't that I was unhappy about Monroe closing so much as, that this is still being dealt with shows, once again, the failure of the City to properly PLAN anything from the get-go. I also wanted to point out, again, the weaknesses of this building's design. And, I see no answers to how "drop offs"/access for the handicapped will be accommodated.
I have always advocated that this building should have been a high-rise on one block like the Federal Courthouse. This building is a huge (7 city blocks) waste of an important piece of downtown real estate. Other than the lawyers' offices and the eateries to feed them and their clients, I expect this area to be mostly a downtown dead zone thanks to the City's poor urban planning. Its biggest asset will be moving office workers from the riverfront area which has higher and better uses to an area that is already mostly dead. That leaves the consolation that anything the courthouse impacts will look better by comparison. But, what could have been? Look to our long ago past.
well....having looked at this RFP very closely, I can say that the City has some good ideas....although I am concerned that the consultant chosen may not think as creatively as others might have.
stjr.......I'm with you on this one!! Just one more example of making a game plan up as you go along! We should not have to spend $200K to generate a "Study" that should have already taken place! I'm guessing JTA will be running a special shuttle for drop offs to the Court House (voter approved for $190/costing $350 Million....still have not figured out how the hell we are supposed to pay for this?) but wait..........you can't drive up to the Court House! I guess we just use the "Guest" entrance!
Quote from: stjr on September 22, 2010, 08:24:54 PM
As an aside to this article, it looks like Monroe will not be reopening in front of the Courthouse. How will this effect the site's development? I guess dropping someone off in "front of the courthouse" won't be happening? How about handicapped drop-offs? Bus/public transit drop-offs? It will be a full block walk to the center of the building from Julia or Pearl. Or from Adams and Clay to what will be the front door at the previous Monroe and Clay. Will the back door on Duval become the main entry point? That would be a wonderful failure of architecture. Just another reason why the courthouse design was a poor choice.
STJR, I told Lake and Company that it wouldn't reopen back when we first posted the plans. I had no inside information but experience told me that would be the case. On a certain April 19, I was in a downtown Post Office in Oklahoma City when someone in a yellow Ryder truck dropped a house on us. Since that day, nobody is building Courthouses or Federal buildings without built in blast absorbing space. Check out the front of the Federal Building downtown and you'll see what I mean about protection from flying Ryder Trucks. OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 22, 2010, 10:01:36 PM
stjr.......I'm with you on this one!! Just one more example of making a game plan up as you go along! We should not have to spend $200K to generate a "Study" that should have already taken place!
sorry CS, but a study is necessary.....at a minimum they have to prove to FDOT that there won't be a significant impact on state roads (State, Union, Main, Ocean, Bay, Forsyth)....also they have to figuir out if/how to retime the signals.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 22, 2010, 10:41:11 PM
Quote from: stjr on September 22, 2010, 08:24:54 PM
As an aside to this article, it looks like Monroe will not be reopening in front of the Courthouse. How will this effect the site's development? I guess dropping someone off in "front of the courthouse" won't be happening? How about handicapped drop-offs? Bus/public transit drop-offs? It will be a full block walk to the center of the building from Julia or Pearl. Or from Adams and Clay to what will be the front door at the previous Monroe and Clay. Will the back door on Duval become the main entry point? That would be a wonderful failure of architecture. Just another reason why the courthouse design was a poor choice.
STJR, I told Lake and Company that it wouldn't reopen back when we first posted the plans. I had no inside information but experience told me that would be the case. On a certain April 19, I was in a downtown Post Office in Oklahoma City when someone in a yellow Ryder truck dropped a house on us. Since that day, nobody is building Courthouses or Federal buildings without built in blast absorbing space. Check out the front of the Federal Building downtown and you'll see what I mean about protection from flying Ryder Trucks.
OCKLAWAHA
In addition to security, there is also the neo-traditional concern with having a public building once again look stately and intimidating at whatever costs to practicality. The plucking out of the 20th century modernist tooth and all it stood for has left the blaring gap between the 21st and the 19th, uniting the ideals of these two in a sort of 'form follows absurdity.'
At least we build with elevators and wheel chair ramps now. Think how many people used to have to be carried up a flight of stairs just to get the "stately" courthouses in most of the 3,000+ counties of this country. I know of several courthouses in the Midwest facing the towns from the tops of high bluffs. One in particular, and not even the most extreme example, has its front facade and main entrance about 40-50 vertical feet and 150 horizontal feet from the street it faces, topping off a grand (fancy speak for "grueling"?) staircase going up the hill. Its rear entrance (the now ADA compliant one) faces a street on the hilltop, but that entrance is still a good 120 feet from the nearest drop-off point, because the courthouse sits in the middle of a 400'x600' park.
The great irony of
using-one's-legs-or-wheelchair-for-a-block-or-two being something that "comes with the territory" of a dense, urban center is that, these days, suburbanites walk farther from their car to the pair of pants they want to buy at a mall or big box store than anyone is forced to for practically
any task in our present day downtown. We've essentially landed ourselves with an Avenues Mall but with courtrooms. I think our suburban populace can handle it. I just wish they could have handled it elsewhere.
Make them all two way again, all of them. This can only improve the pedestrian friendly aspect of downtown in addition to making people want to "cruise" around and check things out, park, and maybe get out and walk.
"HU"
Except for entry to the new Court House.............$350 Million and there is no drop off zone? Talk about plannig ahead!
Your drop off zone would probably be at Adams and Clay. The front door really isn't that far from that intersection. Pearl and Monroe could also be used as one. That intersection sits between the old post office, city hall annex and new courthouse, making it a more centralized location for the complexes uses.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 22, 2010, 09:48:54 PM
^FDOT road. Going two-way on that one is a much more difficult process because that road is not the city's.
I *heard* there was money available for this, but it had not been done.
Lake, Adams and Clay is still a full block to the entrance at the former Monroe and Clay. A building like the Courthouse is sure to have more than its fair share of handicapped visitors and this will be an issue if its the only solution.
By the way, it's not as bad, but the Arena has the same issue with its extended front entry plaza. I once had to drop someone off on crutches there and it was very strenuous to make it that far, especially if its raining. It doesn't help that the City closes off the front street during events as well. Needed to clear a police line just to reach the plaza curb.
All buildings should have a doorway close to the curb for such drop offs.
How about adding a circular drop off that ties in with Clay Street? It could be integrated into some sort of entry plaza in the middle of the green that could include fountains and outdoor seating areas. This solution would get the physically challenged near the entrance without requiring spending extra money on a full block of road infrastructure.
Quote from: uptowngirl on September 23, 2010, 07:09:10 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on September 22, 2010, 09:48:54 PM
^FDOT road. Going two-way on that one is a much more difficult process because that road is not the city's.
I *heard* there was money available for this, but it had not been done.
I heard from someone with the city, that the city had received approval from FDOT to two-way Main St. between State and Union, but that the city did not want to spend money (about $100,000+, I believe) on redoing the signals at those intersections.
Even making Main two-way between State and Union would allow people to turn left from Union onto Main to head into Springfield. Of course, now, people have to do that weird jog around Ocean and Orange to head north.
Heights Unknown, I am with you, make them all two-way. I know a lot of people who avoid Downtown because they get confused/frustrated with the traffic patterns and are scared of turning the wrong way down a one-way street after dinner and a few drinks.
Also, why does this "study" cost $200,000? Do we really need a study? Isn't there a better way to do this like maybe having some townhall style meetings with residents and downtown business leaders, sending out mailers/surveys, etc.? It just seems excessive and wasteful. Especially at a time when the city is having trouble with its budget.
This is a positive step in the right direction. Speaking realistically ALL the streets downtown need to be put back to 2-ways. As Metro Jacksonville discovered when it wrote the series of articles on the destruction of our urban core, the "loop" systems of 1-way streets were only enacted to support the development of pedestrian shopping districts, elevated walkways, etc., none of which ever came into existence. There is no reason whatsoever for this bungled system to remain. It confuses visitors and stifles business development.
Quote from: Jameson on September 23, 2010, 10:09:22 AM
Heights Unknown, I am with you, make them all two-way. I know a lot of people who avoid Downtown because they get confused/frustrated with the traffic patterns and are scared of turning the wrong way down a one-way street after dinner and a few drinks.
OK everybody, we need to keep this in perspective. We act as if this is a Jacksonville problem. There are many successful big cities with an abundance of one way streets. The reason why downtown currently isn't successful IS NOT because people want to avoid one-way streets.
^It is one reason however. No one is touting this as a cure all just an improvement.
Quote from: JeffreyS on September 23, 2010, 11:12:21 AM
^It is one reason however. No one is touting this as a cure all just an improvement.
Agree, and in some cases it is a large one, such as Main, State, and Union. These streets are used to get people THROUGH town, not into town. That is a big killer.
Quote from: videojon on September 23, 2010, 11:09:26 AM
Quote from: Jameson on September 23, 2010, 10:09:22 AM
Heights Unknown, I am with you, make them all two-way. I know a lot of people who avoid Downtown because they get confused/frustrated with the traffic patterns and are scared of turning the wrong way down a one-way street after dinner and a few drinks.
OK everybody, we need to keep this in perspective. We act as if this is a Jacksonville problem. There are many successful big cities with an abundance of one way streets. The reason why downtown currently isn't successful IS NOT because people want to avoid one-way streets.
We have this well in perspective, and the 1-ways are definitely not helping things down there.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 23, 2010, 01:14:16 PM
We have this well in perspective, and the 1-ways are definitely not helping things down there.
from a development and urban livability perspective, you are correct...but the folks interested in moving traffic (or as they like to call it, "commerce") would disgaree
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 23, 2010, 02:29:20 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 23, 2010, 01:14:16 PM
We have this well in perspective, and the 1-ways are definitely not helping things down there.
from a development and urban livability perspective, you are correct...but the folks interested in moving traffic (or as they like to call it, "commerce") would disgaree
tufsu If BRT is going in downtown as supposed, what commerce are you refering to? With no parking on street available where would a possible customer park at?
^ Commerce outside of downtown.
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 23, 2010, 03:55:06 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 23, 2010, 02:29:20 PM
from a development and urban livability perspective, you are correct...but the folks interested in moving traffic (or as they like to call it, "commerce") would disgaree
tufsu If BRT is going in downtown as supposed, what commerce are you refering to? With no parking on street available where would a possible customer park at?
Duh! They would take the BRT! :P
the term "commerce" in this case means freight and goods being moved....I'm not saying that downtown is the place to be worrying about moving traffic....but State & Union might qualify given that they connect I-95 with the Mathews Bridge
Well viewed in that context, why not have NO traffic (vehicles/trucks/JSO/fire/commercial) at all in a selected downtown point? Just for the sake of argument.......center on the Court House and make it...........oh 4 Blocks in all four directions! Offer business's JEDC help with relocation and tax incentives to move? I mean if Vescor can get a ten year moratorium on loan payback............DVI & JEDC can do something about it! Route all traffic around that area and make rail the only motive instrument of people and goods delivery! City could save lots of money by doing this and also increase foot traffic in that region!
Haven't heard anything about this (conversions to two-way streets) in a long time...
Still kicking around somewhere?
not sure the JEDC study ever got finsihed (it sure wasn't published)....but a few of us are looking into it.
At tonight's urban core CPAC meeting FDOT reported that they are still reviewing a request to return Main Street to two way traffic between State and Union