Consolidated Government's Effect on Downtown. Affordable Urban Core Housing Issues

[Jaxson]

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.

[Captain Zissou]

^ 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.

[hillary supporter]

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.

When 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.

[JC]

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. 




This library!



This diner!



Hell, this farmers market was literally spitting distance from my apartment!



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!

[Captain Zissou]

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.  

[JeffreyS]

The Allman Brothers are from Macon,GA and Oliver Hardy is from Milledgeville, GA

The Allman Brothers formed their band right here in Jax.

[Wacca Pilatka]

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.

[JC]

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. 

[tufsu1]

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.  

[Captain Zissou]

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.

[duvaldude08]

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.

[Jaxson]

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. 

[Jerry Moran]

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.

[jason_contentdg]

It exists quite a bit. Of course, you don't start with designing something that costs $200 a square foot.

[Jaxson]

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...