Moving Forward: Oklahoma City

[AaroniusLives]

stephendare said:

I continue to be unconvinced of the retail follows rooftops mantra in an urban area.

While this is true for a suburb, a suburb is not really the complex living organism that a city is.

In fact I think Pericles nailed it a few thousand years ago with the simple pronouncement.

"All things good on this Earth flow into the City, because of the City's greatness."

Once you create a dynamic scene of commerce and activity, people are compelled to come live near it.

In fact our own American History I think disproves this suburban mantra for the cities.  No city became a booming metropolis because there were so many great rooftops that industries moved there.

They became metropolises because millions moved to be near the industries and the culture.

You need both the chicken and the egg. One of the dramatic reversals in terms of development over the last 60 some odd years has been this idea of monocultural development: residential zones specifically for houses; commercial zones specifically for business; industrial zones specifically for industry. You need mixed-use development, where one building combines residential with commercial for downtown to be successful, to recreate and rebuild a strong fabric of place.

Mind you, mixed-use development can also occur without housing everything in one building. If a condo building opens up, and across the street, some stores open up, you have a place for the residents to shop...but you can't have one without the other, especially when you are trying to create density in a downtown location.

People may be compelled to move near places of commerce and activity, but there has to be a base of people there first to facilitate that commerce and activity. Simplify this down: Let's say I have a plot of land. 5 people buy houses on that plot of land. 1 general store opens up on that plot of land. The people need to shop; the shops need to sell. Synergy. My plot of land is "mixed-use."

Mind you, this is only a recent debate in the terms of historical development. The automobile has made it possible for residents downtown to shop in the suburbs, for residents in the suburbs to drive for miles to work downtown, or for residents in the suburbs to bypass downtown entirely for their employment and shopping needs. In effect, a resident in one of Jacksonville's downtown condo/rental towers is living a suburban life in urban drag; since there's not a place for them to shop, they hop in their cars, wait for the parking deck gate to rise, and go drive to Target. That's because there's not an effective balance between the activities of commerce and residential in the Jacksonville downtown area.

What the other metropolii around the country did during the last boom was to attempt to create this balance between commerce and people. Jacksonville Landing could do this, if it weren't also obsessed with being a tourist site. Plop a damned Publix, an Old Navy, a Panera Bread and a drycleaners in there, and all of a sudden, a lot of downtowners have essential services a few blocks away.

Moreover, because so much of Florida is defined by the car-dependent pattern of living, it's hard to see how effective and historically proven mixed-use development is. A traditional city grid, where everything is connected, where shops and people meet, is mixed-use. It wasn't even thought of to create an environment in another way. And because modern cities that do feature mixed-use, walking development are somehow "tourist" attractions ("before the minivan, honey, people used to walk to the store,") it's hard to imagine just a compact place where people can live, work and play as existing.

[Rocshaboc]

Hi everyone. I come to this website every week, but I've never commented. I'm 34 years old and I've lived here since 1996. I'm so disappointed in Jacksonville because its so slow to do anything to improve the city's core. Where the Carlton Jones movie theater project? Will the next office building taller than 600ft ever be built? Why do the Shipyard fail every time? Whatever happen to the Brooklyn project? Why isn't the Friendship Fountain shooting 120ft in the air like it used to? Is anyone doing anything to get the ball(s) rolling around here? Its so hard to see that Oklahoma City is looking & doing better than Jacksonville. What is the problem?Please excuse my ignorance.

[ralpho37]

Rocshaboc:  I wish I had an answer for you.  I'd have to say its apathy.  Not only by the local government, but by the everyday citizen here as well.  At MetroJacksonville, we represent only a mere fraction of the people of Jacksonville.  Quite frankly, I think we are some of the only people in Jacksonville who care at all about their city.

On that note, add Oklahoma City to the list of cities who've got it together.  When will Jacksonville make that list?

[AaroniusLives]

Will the next office building taller than 600ft ever be built?

This, in many ways, is part of the mental problem regarding downtown areas in the country at large and Jacksonville in particular. Skyscrapers do not a vibrant, living, breathing downtown make. Density and mixed-use development do. So, if Jacksonville never built another skyscraper, but created a series of 5-8 story buildings that house a variety of functions, from housing to stores to schools and the rest, all within a dense grid of walkable streets, your downtown would be a success.

One of the most, if not the most, beautiful and vibrant cities in the world, Paris, has minimal skyscraper influence outside of L'Defense. It is defined by its mixed-use density (5-8 story buildings with shopping on the ground level,) and not by its skyscrapers.

To define a downtown via tall buildings devoted to one purpose, and to encourage blocks on monoculturally-purposed buildings is to continue to make the same mistake regarding downtown Jacksonville. The only reason to even consider building a skyscraper, in my opinion, is because you've run out of space for development in the metropolitan area; if there are so many people that another normally-sized building will not handle the needs for space, then, by all means, go vertical. To build one without connectivity and density is to essentially suck the potential of density into one pod, and leave the rest to suffer vacantly. Just like Jacksonville does now.

Mind you, Tampa and Orlando also have no real need for skyscrapers, either. Their metropolitan areas, while nearly double or more than double the size of Jacksonville's are also sprawling, and also have lots of room for both new and infill development. The only region that rightly needs skyscrapers (despite the impracticality of being in Hurricane Alley,) is South Florida. They are out of room, and thus, are both infilling with mixed-use on the fringe and going vertical in the core. At 397 people per square mile, the Jacksonville MSA is way behind the Tampa Bay MSA at 1,070 people per square mile, and even sprawling Orlando's at 494.8 people per square mile. More than that, it's less than 1/2 as dense as South Florida at 890 people per square mile...and that's including the 2/3s of those counties that are Everglades. Removing the swamp, South Florida has a population density of a whopping 4,851 people per square mile. There's a need to scrape the sky, just not in Jacksonville.

Consider this: if no building in downtown Jacksonville was more than 5 stories tall, all of those folks now sponged into high-rises would be occupying vacant blocks on the street by necessity. Even if they built it wrong (monocultured blocks of office, residential and retail, separated and security-gated, all surrounded by parking decks,) the downtown would, at the very least, look less empty, and each parcel of land would be generating revenue.

There's this almost phallic need for cities to have skyscrapers, as if the tall buildings prove an arrival of some sort. Detroit has several. Paris has nearly none. Guess which one never left?

[JaxNative68]

I have had many out of town friends come to Jacksonville with the idea of entertaining job opportunities that have been presented to them.  After their visit, not one of them has wanted to accept any of the jobs offered to them.  The main reasons I have always heard are: it is to small town, it is to redneck, there isn’t enough culture, and it feels like one giant strip mall, I don’t want to be car dependent, the school system is horrible, downtown is depressing and the entire city is too suburbia.  But one thing they can agree on is: the weather is nice, or it would be nice to live near the beach, the job was a good offer, no income tax.  Unfortunately the likes never outweigh the dislikes.

[finehoe]

You need both the chicken and the egg.

As you're probably aware, DC tried to create a bustling neighborhood in SE (an area similar to downtown Jacksonville in that it contained many empty blocks and was/is plagued by a perception of being unsafe) by building a baseball stadium and then encouraging developers to build dozens of condo buildings, but the area is a flop because there are no stores there.  It's a walkable grid, well served by transit, but you still have to drive to Virginia to go to the grocery store.  Consequently, it's been a failure.

[north miami]

"What most people don't realize is that there is just as much money-or more-to be made out of wrecking a community as there is from the upbuilding of one" -  Margaret Mitchell

I see many references to potential newcomers deciding against Jacksonville,and many existing residents leaving or planning too.A double whammy.

(Bear with me here-"Downtown" is the subject........)
Dr.Arthur R. Marshall,the father of South Florida Everglades restoration,was unusually successful in that he clearly tied the health and well being of the urban area with the everglades system.He was fond of quoting the then new environmental ideology:"We can never do just one thing".Art resided in Putnam County,and he easily applied his outlook to Jacksonville and the entire region.

It is so obvious that Downtown is 'connected' to regional forces that it is easy to miss the connection.The state of Downtown affairs reflects the very core and soul of Northeast Florida.Surrounding counties have grown due to a subtle yet militant anti Duval theme.Like a confused,incompetent adolescent Duval is a willing partner,through JEA expansionism schemes,booster mentalityand a Regional Chamber of Commerce circular firing squad.Mayor Delaney's hand in key permitting events enabling the sprawl inducing Beltway but one (unreported) example.Only now,with TPO 'in place' will the Florida Times Union editors allow the open discussion of Downtown job loss,suburban angst.

Perhaps the best thing going for Duval and Downtown is location location location.The 'best' places were built on long ago.How long do we wait?

[rjp2008]

Wow - that Bricktown area is a TREMENDOUS example of SMART urban planning!

Convention center, two hotels, b-ball arena, baseball park and nightlife/canal ride RIGHT on top of each other. Brilliant planning, unlike SuburbJacksonville.

[AaroniusLives]

As you're probably aware, DC tried to create a bustling neighborhood in SE (an area similar to downtown Jacksonville in that it contained many empty blocks and was/is plagued by a perception of being unsafe) by building a baseball stadium and then encouraging developers to build dozens of condo buildings, but the area is a flop because there are no stores there.  It's a walkable grid, well served by transit, but you still have to drive to Virginia to go to the grocery store.  Consequently, it's been a failure.

Well, the retail, mixed-use component of that area hasn't opened yet, and unfortunately we have this pesky recession, so it's not a whole-hearted success. However, those people living in the Ballpark District do have access to shopping, dining and retail via the metro. People are moving there and are supporting the limited commerce. So it's perhaps not correct to label the area a failure. Is it the success they were looking for? Not yet, anyway.

Conversely, Columbia Heights built mixed-use development, anchored by a Target and Giant grocery store and is a success beyond anyone's imagination. Mount Vernon Square, also very mixed-use in development, anchored by a Safeway "urban lifestyle" grocery store, has been a huge success. Even Prince George's Plaza, where they built mixed-use development around an existing mall and Metro station, has been a success, despite the retaining of the very suburban mall component. All three had empty blocks and were/are considered unsafe. Nonetheless, success stories, all.

You need both poultry and unborn young. Will every attempt work? Of course not. I could easily argue that it's the very presense of the landscraper stadium that's keeping SouthWest from truly being the neighborhood they're trying to build (that's a big slice of dead space to traverse around.) But to not try, and to continue to do the wrong things? That's just stupid.

[finehoe]

those people living in the Ballpark District do have access to shopping, dining and retail via the metro.

That's like saying people in Vienna have access to shopping, dining and retail via the Metro.  It sort of defeats the purpose of living in a dense, walkable area if you have to take the Metro to do basic shopping.  But my point is, you are correct, you need both.  Building one aspect in the hope that it will spur the other doesn't usually work.  And building a mega-project like a sports stadium in the belief that it will create a vibrant neighborhood is even more far-fetched.

(BTW, the area where the stadium is and that I was talking about is Southeast, not Southwest.)

[thelakelander]

finehoe are you sure about that?  I just went on Google Earth and the first image that popped up in that area was of a TOD being constructed and a Safeway grocery store.







I don't know what the original expections were, but if this is considered failure, what do we call what's happening locally?

[finehoe]

That TOD is in the Southwest quadrant, not the Southeast.  It is a good 10-12 blocks from the ballpark area, and one has to walk through housing projects to get to it.

[finehoe]

I don't know what the original expections were, but if this is considered failure, what do we call what's happening locally?

The original expectations were that it would be a lively 24/7 neighborhood with entertainment venues there that would attract people from across the region.  What they have is a lot of empty office buildings and even more empty condos, with a few retail outlets that cater mainly to the few office workers that are there.  The only thing that attracts people from outside the neighborhood is the ball park, but they tend to just come in and then just leave, because there are no bars or resturants around there for them to go to before or after the game.

[thelakelander]

I've always felt that 24/7 neighborhoods evolve organically, especially entertainment districts (although Oklahoma City's Bricktown seems to be an exception).  Has the development that's taken place been heavily subsidized or is it market rate?

[JaxNative68]

the photo above shows the Navy Yard Metro Station.  If my memory serves me correctly from my days of living there, that is in the Southeast quadrant, pretty much on the border of the Southwest.