Is downtown fading?

[Anti redneck]

I know it's an old article, but still an interesting one.
http://m.jacksonville.com/business/2009-12-13/story/lights_dimming_on_jacksonvilles_bold_plans_for_downtown#dda

[urbanlibertarian]

As a DT resident for almost 9 years I'd say things have improved since 2009 and that DT seems to be a hot spot for new local businesses compared to the city as a whole.

[JeffreyS]

DT did fade but it has been improving for the last few years.

[Anti redneck]

I like how it mentions the plans that Sleiman had for the landing. I really wish that he could get some support on that and those plans could go forth.

[peestandingup]

Its def improved over the last couple years & there are new businesses, but its still not nearly up to snuff of what a DT in a city of this size should be. A lot of the new stuff is mostly bars & nightlife oriented. Downtown has to be more things to more people before the tides will truly turn. But you have to start somewhere I suppose.

[peestandingup]

BTW, here's the non-mobile version of the article: http://jacksonville.com/business/2009-12-13/story/lights_dimming_on_jacksonvilles_bold_plans_for_downtown

[WmNussbaum]

This is a continuation of the topic I began on Show Me the Money. The '09 T-U article fits right in to that topic. It poses a very specific question the concerns  me and should concern all of us: I believe the City is right to offer incentives and possibly even direct loans for downtown development. BUT, I firmly believe that neither should be done unless the developer - the one with the profit motive - has "some skin in the game." If not, then it's a "heads I win " (if there is  profit) or "tails you lose" (if the project tanks and the guy with the profit motive only loses the time invested). Maybe it is okay for the City to not directly participate if a project it helps is successful, because it will benefit indirectly from the success, but if the idea is "sharing" then there ought to be more than time and energy lost by the developer if the project fails.

I have worked downtown most of my professional life beginning in '65. I left in the late-80s and returned in 2005. I saw the big decline when the stores left, the Great Wall of China (a/k/a the Skyway) was built, the Landing opened and then lost its upscale retailers, the local owners of the large insurance companies sold and took their money and Independent and Gulf Life and Peninsular left, etc. (So why do we still have streets named after Independent and Peninsular?)

I don't see much change since the T-U article. Chew closed in favor of Five Points, Indochine opened (hope it's doing very well - it deserves to be), Everbank is coming (sort of big - credit column), Berkman II sits (pretty big - debit column).  The Laura Street "improvements" have been built - somewhat increasing the width of sidewalks - that few use - and decreasing the width of the street itself so that when one parallel parks, following traffic is halted.

In discussing downtown, I propose a thread on what I'll call the Maxwell House dilemma. A few years ago, when MH was maybe going to leave town,  we united to keep it here - a right move. But its manufacturing facility sits across the street from the Shipyards [not a] project. Okay, the aromas are strong but mostly acceptable, but the appearance of the factory is a bit out of place across the street from what was supposed to be upscale development. Suggestions anyone? 

The statement I originally posed still hangs there: Show me the money.

[WmNussbaum]

See this recent T-U article about City assisted projects that are pretty much dead in the water.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-03-08/story/jacksonville-projects-sit-idle-after-being-infused-city-taxpayer-money   

[Anti redneck]

This is a continuation of the topic I began on Show Me the Money. The '09 T-U article fits right in to that topic. It poses a very specific question the concerns  me and should concern all of us: I believe the City is right to offer incentives and possibly even direct loans for downtown development. BUT, I firmly believe that neither should be done unless the developer - the one with the profit motive - has "some skin in the game." If not, then it's a "heads I win " (if there is  profit) or "tails you lose" (if the project tanks and the guy with the profit motive only loses the time invested). Maybe it is okay for the City to not directly participate if a project it helps is successful, because it will benefit indirectly from the success, but if the idea is "sharing" then there ought to be more than time and energy lost by the developer if the project fails.

I have worked downtown most of my professional life beginning in '65. I left in the late-80s and returned in 2005. I saw the big decline when the stores left, the Great Wall of China (a/k/a the Skyway) was built, the Landing opened and then lost its upscale retailers, the local owners of the large insurance companies sold and took their money and Independent and Gulf Life and Peninsular left, etc. (So why do we still have streets named after Independent and Peninsular?)

I don't see much change since the T-U article. Chew closed in favor of Five Points, Indochine opened (hope it's doing very well - it deserves to be), Everbank is coming (sort of big - credit column), Berkman II sits (pretty big - debit column).  The Laura Street "improvements" have been built - somewhat increasing the width of sidewalks - that few use - and decreasing the width of the street itself so that when one parallel parks, following traffic is halted.

In discussing downtown, I propose a thread on what I'll call the Maxwell House dilemma. A few years ago, when MH was maybe going to leave town,  we united to keep it here - a right move. But its manufacturing facility sits across the street from the Shipyards [not a] project. Okay, the aromas are strong but mostly acceptable, but the appearance of the factory is a bit out of place across the street from what was supposed to be upscale development. Suggestions anyone? 

The statement I originally posed still hangs there: Show me the money.

Hmmm..... you got me on MH. Asking them to build a factory elsewhere in the city is rather risky and could drive them to pack up and leave. Incentives might help, but it could still threaten them. I would like to see some of the old Kuhn projects revived. I don't know what that would take. A good argument could be that this country hit rock bottom during those times. Those were some good projects. I know I keep bringing up the landing, but I remember seeing the plans for what Sleiman wanted to do with it. They were nice plans. I still hope he is fighting for that, because I believe that the landing is somewhat of a key to help downtown out. "If you build it, they will come." I know that hasn't been the case in the past, but I still believe.

[thelakelander]

The chasing off of industrial, maritime, and railroad facilities is the main reason for downtown's decline. IMO, Maxwell House should stay and we should consider a working waterfront over a passive one lined with condos.

[Gators312]

If the Jail is staying, there is no sense in running off MH. 

[Ocklawaha]

Moving the jail, police station and the myriad bail bond offices to another location such as Imeson or Cecil would go a long way toward making downtown a bit more friendly.

Accomplishing such a 'clean-up' and an active recruitment of unique anchor retail to a site like the Shipyards would bust the erroneous thought that downtown is somehow uniquely vacant and dangerous.

If the city could function as a mixed use project developer and we could attract several unique anchor stores such as Ikea or Bass Pro,  and develop an upscale entertainment complex along Hogans Creek, the pedestrian sidewalk and Riverwalk traffic would hit new highs.

[Anti redneck]

Moving the jail, police station and the myriad bail bond offices to another location such as Imeson or Cecil would go a long way toward making downtown a bit more friendly.

Accomplishing such a 'clean-up' and an active recruitment of unique anchor retail to a site like the Shipyards would bust the erroneous thought that downtown is somehow uniquely vacant and dangerous.

If the city could function as a mixed use project developer and we could attract several unique anchor stores such as Ikea or Bass Pro,  and develop an upscale entertainment complex along Hogans Creek, the pedestrian sidewalk and Riverwalk traffic would hit new highs.

I agree. Move the jail. There's condos next to it. Who wants to live near a jail?

[thelakelander]

Where would the money come from to move the jail? It would be cheaper to move the condos (I'm not suggesting moving Berkman, lol).  However, I wouldn't get to caught up on the jail. Fort Lauderdale has a jail on its river and its downtown is still vibrant. In fact, its tallest condo tower and vertical Publix are both within a two block walk of it.

[Ocklawaha]

Does Fort Lauderdale allow the clutter of run down half way houses, bail bond, bounty hunter and soup kitchens, as we allow to be wrapped around our Jail? If not then that might be a good place to start a clean up for the purposes of getting more high value property off the public dole.

Ours wouldn't be cheap to move, that's a given, but if the entire police complex were to seek another location it would free up some amazing real estate for tax paying development. There might also be federal and or state grants to move an old, overcrowded Jail into a more state-of-the-art facility. I know a few places that have up dated and created a completely new complex for the criminal justice system.