Jville's Brooklyn Renaissance: Planning for the Future

[thelakelander]

^Pretty much.

For the intents of the video update and the title of this thread, the topic focuses on the new developments in Brooklyn, which all happen to be north of Forest Street. Both Forest and Riverside Avenue are recently widened six lane roads that already include wide sidewalks, bike lanes, easily identifiable crosswalks, lighting and landscaping to support denser infill development and growth in the immediate area. There will be no roadway congestion from these infill developments.


Riverside Avenue, north of Forest Street.

Taking a step back, have we asked ourselves why people like living in urban core environments across america?

In many American cities, people are moving back into downtowns, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as within a two-mile radius of City Hall. Data from the 2010 census (PDF) said that 16 million people, or about 6% of America's 258 million metro-area population, were living in downtowns.

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/27/downtown-living-in-vogue-census-says/

Have we asked ourselves why across the country, people are willing to pay more for less space to live in an area with high densities?  Some of these promotional quotes from across the country may provide answers:

Indianapolis

Living Downtown provides convenient, walkable access to the city’s best restaurants, performing arts, entertainment, sports, museums and parks. It means skipping the daily commute and suburban traffic jams and having time after work for family, friends and fun.
Leave your car behind and let your feet take you where you want to go.

http://www.indydt.com/livebackgrounder.cfm


From a DT Salt Lake City Resident:

The title of this post should really be: Why I live(and love) Downtown and so should you.And....stop judging me for how much I payed for my condo, acting surprised if I tell the average sq ft for the neighborhood and look as though I must have lost my mind. THEN gasp again when I tell you I have a husband, child, a dog, a garden and that we are a one car family.(then you usually shake your head and tell me I will move when I come to my senses) and by the way you have to go so you don't catch traffic.

Since that title is well, impossible in SO many ways we'll just stick to the more print-worthy one above.

I would like a chance to explain, if not defend my choice to spend more on my location and neighborhood than maybe you suburbanites may have and maybe even make a case as to how I may be out-cheaping you in the end.

For a minute lets assume that all things are equal. That you too can walk out of your front door and within minutes(and by minutes I mean 5--without a car) be walking into the doors of a children's museum, a planetarium, a library, 2 malls, dozens of restaurants, a movie theater, FREE public transit, the grocery store, an NBA game, 2 live theaters, a symphony, the farmers market, a train to the airport, YOUR JOB. And let's leave out another intangible: the TIME in your day that you travel to get to that sprawling home you payed so little for.

full comparison: http://www.saltlakeurbanite.com/2012/04/why-i-live-downtownand-so-should-you.html


St. Louis

What makes Downtown, St. Louis such a great place to live? Walkability! Explore our distinct districts and unique neighborhoods. Discover the growing number of nearby shops, restaurants, services and amenities that make downtown living so, well, livable . . . and fun.

http://www.downtownstl.org/Live.aspx


Pittsburgh

Downtown living. What’s the attraction? For many, the incredible convenience of walking to work is a perfect reason to start. But that’s only the beginning. The views are spectacular. The green spaces, including riverfront trails, are plentiful. Theater, nightlife, great restaurants and exciting sporting events are all within easy walking distance.

http://www.downtownpittsburgh.com/live

Anyone think being able to get around without relying or being forced to drive a car has something to do with it?  Do you visit a Manhattan, San Francisco, Portland, New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah or St. Augustine to drive from destination to destination? If walkability is a major reason people are attracted to downtown/urban environments shouldn't it be safe to assume that creating a more attractive and economically viable downtown Jacksonville means enhancing walkability is at the top of the list of things to accomplish?


This proposed Brooklyn development is located across the street from the JTA Skyway's Operations center.

If the major selling point of urban living is being easily accessible to a mix of uses, without the need for a car, how does Brooklyn's infill promote this concept for residents, workers and visitors in the Northbank and Southbank?  How does this infill promote this concept for its future residents? Specifically for Brooklyn, these projects resolve the issue by packing hundreds of apartments with 70,000 square feet of retail/dining/grocery, etc., including a better version of the Northbank's Hemming Plaza with programming, all across the street from thousands of existing employment centers. In essence, it becomes its own isolated urban panacea and anyone outside of that particular zone will still be driving to reach services/needs like getting grocery or commodities from the neighborhood pharmacy? For those living in or visiting on the Southbank, these developments have no more impact on their walkability than the Walmart on Philips or Publix in Five Points.

Unfortunately, for the Northbank and Southbank, the amount of retail going into Brooklyn is going to reduce their ability to attract similar uses.  This creates a downtown environment where walkability remains a challenge to achieve. If left unchecked, you could create a situation where one sub-district benefits at the expense of another. If your downtown environment doesn't offer great walkability to a mix of uses, what's the selling point again?  It sure isn't the public schools, housing stock diversity, historic preservation, parks and parking cost.


Skyway's existing O&M center across the street from the proposed Brooklyn development shown above.

Luckily, there's a easy and affordable way to resolve this issue.  It comes in the form of a $184 million, downtown circulator called the Skyway, that already connects the North and Southbanks.  Its operations center also already happens to be in Brooklyn, directly across the street from Fuqua's proposed 53,000 retail center and Pollack's proposed 310 apartments. The only thing that needs to be added is the ability to serve passengers at the Operations center. No land acquisition, elevated station, elevators, escalators, lengthy guideway extensions, etc.  Accessibility can be achieved going "no-frills" in the form of ground level station similar to what's shown in the image below:



Something this simple means, someone can live at the Carling and be a transit stop away from CVS, Walgreens, Fresh Market, Panera Bread or whatever else ends up opening in Brooklyn. It means someone staying at the Southbank's Hilton Garden Inn is now in walking distance of Unity Plaza's 260 annual programmed events.  It means, one can live in Brooklyn and work at Everbank, Baptist Medical, Aetna, BOA, Wells Fargo, JEA, COJ, the Duval County Courthouse, etc. and not worry about driving or finding parking.  Furthermore, by tying the Skyway into land uses with 24/7 activities, you help grow its ridership numbers to support its existence while simultaneously enhancing development opportunities around its other eight Northbank and Southbank stations.



In short, the Brooklyn Skyway access issue isn't about relieving automobile traffic congestion or gridlock. This development/transit issue is about the need to create and promote the concept of a walkable, pedestrian scale downtown where all its sub-districts positively feed off each other's success. 

[thelakelander]

^That most likely is probably the result of a change in public policy a few decades ago, making it more difficult for private uses to penetrate public space.  It's very noticeable, not only in Jacksonville, but most in this country. Context Sensitive Streets policies can change this.

[thelakelander]

Not really.  Progress and change happens incrementally, so we're not starting from scratch. As we discover the root of bad policies that have negative impacts on walkability, we have to work to reverse them.  Nevertheless, Tapestry Park, Black Sheep, 1661 Riverside, San Marco Square's new park, etc. are all great examples of incremental change that improves walkability.  Both of these Brooklyn projects and Unity Plaza will end up adding to that list.

Bringing this back to the Brooklyn Skyway situation, it would be great to have fixed transit all over town.  However, it's not laughable to at least establish Skyway service to these developments or move Amtrak back downtown before figuring out how to immediately fund a regional-wide commuter rail, streetcar or LRT system.

[Tacachale]

^Pretty much.

For the intents of the video update and the title of this thread, the topic focuses on the new developments in Brooklyn, which all happen to be north of Forest Street. Both Forest and Riverside Avenue are recently widened six lane roads that already include wide sidewalks, bike lanes, easily identifiable crosswalks, lighting and landscaping to support denser infill development and growth in the immediate area. There will be no roadway congestion from these infill developments.


Riverside Avenue, north of Forest Street.

Taking a step back, have we asked ourselves why people like living in urban core environments across america?

In many American cities, people are moving back into downtowns, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as within a two-mile radius of City Hall. Data from the 2010 census (PDF) said that 16 million people, or about 6% of America's 258 million metro-area population, were living in downtowns.

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/27/downtown-living-in-vogue-census-says/

Have we asked ourselves why across the country, people are willing to pay more for less space to live in an area with high densities?  Some of these promotional quotes from across the country may provide answers:

Indianapolis

Living Downtown provides convenient, walkable access to the city’s best restaurants, performing arts, entertainment, sports, museums and parks. It means skipping the daily commute and suburban traffic jams and having time after work for family, friends and fun.
Leave your car behind and let your feet take you where you want to go.

http://www.indydt.com/livebackgrounder.cfm


From a DT Salt Lake City Resident:

The title of this post should really be: Why I live(and love) Downtown and so should you.And....stop judging me for how much I payed for my condo, acting surprised if I tell the average sq ft for the neighborhood and look as though I must have lost my mind. THEN gasp again when I tell you I have a husband, child, a dog, a garden and that we are a one car family.(then you usually shake your head and tell me I will move when I come to my senses) and by the way you have to go so you don't catch traffic.

Since that title is well, impossible in SO many ways we'll just stick to the more print-worthy one above.

I would like a chance to explain, if not defend my choice to spend more on my location and neighborhood than maybe you suburbanites may have and maybe even make a case as to how I may be out-cheaping you in the end.

For a minute lets assume that all things are equal. That you too can walk out of your front door and within minutes(and by minutes I mean 5--without a car) be walking into the doors of a children's museum, a planetarium, a library, 2 malls, dozens of restaurants, a movie theater, FREE public transit, the grocery store, an NBA game, 2 live theaters, a symphony, the farmers market, a train to the airport, YOUR JOB. And let's leave out another intangible: the TIME in your day that you travel to get to that sprawling home you payed so little for.

full comparison: http://www.saltlakeurbanite.com/2012/04/why-i-live-downtownand-so-should-you.html


St. Louis

What makes Downtown, St. Louis such a great place to live? Walkability! Explore our distinct districts and unique neighborhoods. Discover the growing number of nearby shops, restaurants, services and amenities that make downtown living so, well, livable . . . and fun.

http://www.downtownstl.org/Live.aspx


Pittsburgh

Downtown living. What’s the attraction? For many, the incredible convenience of walking to work is a perfect reason to start. But that’s only the beginning. The views are spectacular. The green spaces, including riverfront trails, are plentiful. Theater, nightlife, great restaurants and exciting sporting events are all within easy walking distance.

http://www.downtownpittsburgh.com/live

Anyone think being able to get around without relying or being forced to drive a car has something to do with it?  Do you visit a Manhattan, San Francisco, Portland, New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah or St. Augustine to drive from destination to destination? If walkability is a major reason people are attracted to downtown/urban environments shouldn't it be safe to assume that creating a more attractive and economically viable downtown Jacksonville means enhancing walkability is at the top of the list of things to accomplish?


This proposed Brooklyn development is located across the street from the JTA Skyway's Operations center.

If the major selling point of urban living is being easily accessible to a mix of uses, without the need for a car, how does Brooklyn's infill promote this concept for residents, workers and visitors in the Northbank and Southbank?  How does this infill promote this concept for its future residents? Specifically for Brooklyn, these projects resolve the issue by packing hundreds of apartments with 70,000 square feet of retail/dining/grocery, etc., including a better version of the Northbank's Hemming Plaza with programming, all across the street from thousands of existing employment centers. In essence, it becomes its own isolated urban panacea and anyone outside of that particular zone will still be driving to reach services/needs like getting grocery or commodities from the neighborhood pharmacy? For those living in or visiting on the Southbank, these developments have no more impact on their walkability than the Walmart on Philips or Publix in Five Points.

Unfortunately, for the Northbank and Southbank, the amount of retail going into Brooklyn is going to reduce their ability to attract similar uses.  This creates a downtown environment where walkability remains a challenge to achieve. If left unchecked, you could create a situation where one sub-district benefits at the expense of another. If your downtown environment doesn't offer great walkability to a mix of uses, what's the selling point again?  It sure isn't the public schools, housing stock diversity, historic preservation, parks and parking cost.


Skyway's existing O&M center across the street from the proposed Brooklyn development shown above.

Luckily, there's a easy and affordable way to resolve this issue.  It comes in the form of a $184 million, downtown circulator called the Skyway, that already connects the North and Southbanks.  Its operations center also already happens to be in Brooklyn, directly across the street from Fuqua's proposed 53,000 retail center and Pollack's proposed 310 apartments. The only thing that needs to be added is the ability to serve passengers at the Operations center. No land acquisition, elevated station, elevators, escalators, lengthy guideway extensions, etc.  Accessibility can be achieved going "no-frills" in the form of ground level station similar to what's shown in the image below:



Something this simple means, someone can live at the Carling and be a transit stop away from CVS, Walgreens, Fresh Market, Panera Bread or whatever else ends up opening in Brooklyn. It means someone staying at the Southbank's Hilton Garden Inn is now in walking distance of Unity Plaza's 260 annual programmed events.  It means, one can live in Brooklyn and work at Everbank, Baptist Medical, Aetna, BOA, Wells Fargo, JEA, COJ, the Duval County Courthouse, etc. and not worry about driving or finding parking.  Furthermore, by tying the Skyway into land uses with 24/7 activities, you help grow its ridership numbers to support its existence while simultaneously enhancing development opportunities around its other eight Northbank and Southbank stations.



In short, the Brooklyn Skyway access issue isn't about relieving automobile traffic congestion or gridlock. This development/transit issue is about the need to create and promote the concept of a walkable, pedestrian scale downtown where all its sub-districts positively feed off each other's success.

Lake, this post alone should be a featured article.

[JeffreyS]

Lake any guess what the cost would be to add a platform for the public to use the Brooklyn Skyway stop?  .5 mil or 5mil?

[thelakelander]

Lake, this post alone should be a featured article.

I thought about that after I posted it.  Since it probably won't get may hits concealed on page four of this thread, I'll most likely end up doing that in a week or two.

[thelakelander]

Lake any guess what the cost would be to add a platform for the public to use the Brooklyn Skyway stop?  .5 mil or 5mil?

That's probably a question Ock can better answer.  I can't imagine it being anywhere close to $5 million. Nashville's entire Music City Star commuter rail line was built at an average of $1.3 million per mile and that included six simple stations, some with park & ride lots.  What I'd suggest in terms of "no-frills" station would be something similar to Nashville's simplicity of providing just the basics. 

A ground level platform and some fencing along with a couple of glorified bus shelters.  I'd be highly surprised if the total 'no-frills' cost approached anything over $1 to 1.5 million.  Now once you start adding things like $5,000 palm trees, brick paving, etc, your costs will start to balloon.

[JeffreyS]

Well lets say it is 1 million. I will bet this City Council in hopes of appeasing an angry anti Mobility Fee Reductionatorium crowd could be coerced into heavily contributing to that number. JTA should be looking to do it anyway.  There is no reason not to do this. The Brooklyn stop would instantly become the most useful stop both as an origination point and destination point.

[simms3]

I think there is a danger in assuming Brooklyn is *the* route to go for extending the Skyway because of the current developments going up, etc.  Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but let's take a step back and look at what we have here:

A few developments going up that are in a nutshell nothing all too special, grandiose, transformative (I think we've already established that traffic or lack thereof won't change), etc.  Not trying to downplay the Brooklyn Renaissance in any way, but with almost no political will and no financial way, we've got to be really picky about how we go about public transit/fixed-rail improvements.  What's going on in Brooklyn is simply amplified on much larger scale in other cities...even the SS is seeing thousands more rentals UC, albeit in a non-transit-friendly setup.

Let's face it, everyone who moves to Brooklyn will have a car and be able to park for free and will still use their car 99% of the time.  Even with a CVS, Fresh Market, YMCA and whatever small shops (Subway, dry cleaner, T-Mobile, etc), the car will be king.  I've lived in much denser, much more walkable, much more amenity rich areas in the south and still used my car...it's the south and it's as far from NYC and SF as possible.

So is it best to extend Skyway to Brooklyn to benefit these few hundred units and potentially a few hundred more when totally built out, or is there another area of town with more potential in the long run?

[thelakelander]

Well lets say it is 1 million. I will bet this City Council in hopes of appeasing an angry anti Mobility Fee Reductionatorium crowd could be coerced into heavily contributing to that number. JTA should be looking to do it anyway.  There is no reason not to do this. The Brooklyn stop would instantly become the most useful stop both as an origination point and destination point.

It's probably something that could be worked into the new CRA plan with funding that the DIA will have to create this year, assuming no traction with JTA could be gained.

[thelakelander]

I think there is a danger in assuming Brooklyn is *the* route to go for extending the Skyway because of the current developments going up, etc.  Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but let's take a step back and look at what we have here:

At this point, there would not be a Skyway extension.  You're simply allowing passenger service to be offered at the existing operations center.  Any discussion of physically "extending" the Skyway would have to be weighed and evaluated with plans for commuter rail and streetcar that are already a part of the North Florida TPO Long Range Transportation Plan.

So is it best to extend Skyway to Brooklyn to benefit these few hundred units and potentially a few hundred more when totally built out, or is there another area of town with more potential in the long run?

Opening passenger service at the Operations site would be beneficial to all of downtown.  The connectivity is probably more important to the future of the North and Southbanks than Brooklyn itself.  Give me a few minutes and I'll find and post a map of all proposed fixed transit routes in Jacksonville over the next 20 years.

[JeffreyS]

Simms3 it sounds like you are suggesting we do a 2million dollar ridership study before we build a 1million dollar platform.  BTW isn't a bus platform going in any way could we combine the two?

[simms3]

^^^You're assuming a lot.  As Lake mentioned, it's just a platform rather than an extension, which is what I thought the whole plan/talk was about.  Still, who knows what a people mover platform costs, and the costs of integrating this new station into an already overly complex maze of routes/timing?  I'm as anti-study in Jax as anyone (btw, I wonder what would be more expensive - hiring competent full-time MBAs to do these things internally, or continuing to 3rd party out to other cities'/companies' full-time MBAs to plan for us, LoL).

Brooklyn's exciting and what not, but also knowing there are limits to everything in Jax (level of excitement, political will, certainly financial capacity), I don't want us to mistakenly devote everything we have to Brooklyn at the expense of a greater impact to a larger thing down the road.

[thelakelander]

^How much did the new round-a-bout in front of the Landing cost?  How much did the Main Street Pocket Park cost?  How much money did we successfully keep from being spent when half of council wanted to pay to build a new Monroe Street in front of the new courthouse (this would have been around a $1 million itself)?  How much will a new scoreboard at Everbank Field cost?  It's hard to argue the financial burden of building a ground level platform, etc. in the name of enhancing downtown livability and revitalization when we have a history of wheeling and dealing things that may have a less ROI for taxpayers.

[simms3]

^Just trying to predict the future a bit here.  We spend however much on this platform, 50 people from nearby new rental communities use it occasionally for events, maybe commuting, etc, and we're going to hear about the "waste" forever more.  Let's say all ~600 units get built in Brooklyn, the Y, the Fresh Market (which will be drive and shop as it's on the "going home" side of the road for all the Ortega/Avondale commuters), and maybe some other stuff.

How many of the new residents do we think will use the Skyway on the reg?  The site of the proposed platform is already a few shadeless, semi-hostile blocks from the only development actually UC...and that's like a Guiness Record walk for anyone in Jax, even an urbanite.  Not trying to be a negative nancy, but if I lived in one of these new communities, I, too, would probably use my car as much as possible...and I hate even having a car, don't have one now!  Until you can ride the Skyway actually to somewhere useful outside of events going on downtown, there's not much reason to use it...and the headways are long, it's hot outside while you wait, it's slow (not in reality, just seems that way from a rider's perspective bc it doesn't zoom along as fast as a car in between lights), etc.

IF we build it and they don't come...by by Skyway (potentially LRT/Streetcar) forever.  It's politics.  People don't care that money was wasted on a pocket park or a roundabout.  Most people don't even know they exist and don't have this evil thought in their head towards parks and roundabouts like they do against transit.