Tarbert’s target: Getting Downtown Jacksonville past the resident tipping point

[Tacachale]

Excellent interview with DIA's new CEO Colin Tarbert. I told him the other day it's refreshing that he saw right through the 10k residents myth and is refocusing DIA's goals in that regard. Well worth reading the whole thing if you can:

Tarbert's target: Getting Downtown Jacksonville past the resident tipping point

Downtown Investment Authority CEO Colin Tarbert questions whether 10,000 residents is enough and shares his goal for bringing vitality to the city's core.

By Ric Anderson | 5:00 a.m. December 19, 2025

For decades, Jacksonville residents were told that Downtown revitalization would reach a tipping point when 10,000 people were living in the city's core.

The new head of the Downtown Investment Authority offers a different message.

"I don't know if it's the magic number," CEO Colin Tarbert said of the 10,000 threshold.

Tarbert, who joined the DIA in August, said he believes a key to success is creating critical mass in and around what is traditionally considered Downtown, versus the entire footprint that includes Brooklyn and the Southbank.

"If you build RiversEdge (a mixed-use development on the Southbank) and on the Duval County Public Schools site, how much is that really going to transition to Laura Street? I'm not sure," he said.

Laura Street is in the heart of the Downtown core on the Northbank.

Tarbert said he's focused on doubling the population to 8,000 in the area spanning LaVilla, City Center, NorthCore, Cathedral Hill and the Sports and Entertainment District.

His objective is to create adequate support for a sustainable environment of restaurants, nightlife, retail, parks and activities.

As in other cities that have undergone downtown redevelopment, the idea is to create a wheel effect in which greater activity and an improved quality of life draw in more residents, employers, visitors and commerce.

Reaching Tarbert's goal will require development of about 2,500 residential units in his six target districts, he said. About 750 are under construction or starting to lease to renters.

"If we're able to do nine or 10 (more) apartment projects in that geography over the next couple of years, I think that would be pretty meaningful," he said.

Tarbert, who came to the DIA after leading the Baltimore Development Corp., said he believed the goal of 10,000 residents was easily achievable and that the city should aim at least twice as high.

The population across all eight Downtown districts is nearing 9,000, according to the nonprofit advocacy organization Downtown Vision Inc.

Those residents are spread across 3.9 square miles stretching from Brooklyn on the west to the Working Waterfront east of EverBank Stadium, and including the Southbank.

"A typical Downtown is going to house somewhere between 2% and 5% of the city's population," Tarbert said.

"So if you do those numbers, you're somewhere between 20,000 and 50,000 people."

...

Council concerns

One factor that could influence Tarbert's pace is the extent to which Council will continue to support taxpayer-supported incentives for projects.

Members Will Lahnen and Nick Howland, in particular, have advocated for the city to instead use Recapture Enhanced Value Grants, which are property tax refunds and do not directly draw down the city's general fund.

During a Nov. 24 meeting of the Council Special Committee on the Future of Downtown, members questioned Tarbert on a potential request for about $48 million in incentives – including a $28.5 million completion grant – from the Gateway Jax development partnership for the Publix-anchored mixed-use tower it has proposed on the site of the former First Baptist Church main auditorium.

Committee members, echoing concerns raised in relation to other projects, expressed that the city was overcommitting on completion grants amid upcoming payouts for projects such as $38.95 million for Jaguars owner Shad Khan's Shipyards development, $39 million for Miami-based Related Group's proposed 25-story Southbank residential tower and grants for Gateway itself. Those include $38.95 million in completion funding in a $98.58 million incentives package for four blocks of Pearl Square.

Tarbert said his impression was that in past years, Council tended to approve projects on their individual merits without necessarily considering their cumulative effect on future budgets.

Now, he said, Council members are seeking to make decisions on projects with an eye toward long-term budget impact.

That shift began in 2022, when Council member Ron Salem requested that Council auditors start maintaining a spreadsheet showing when project completion grants would come due.

During the Nov. 24 meeting, Salem requested that auditors provide that information for any Downtown incentive discussion by Council and its committees. 

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2025/dec/19/tarberts-target-getting-downtown-jacksonville-past-the-resident-tipping-point/

[jcjohnpaint]

It would be nice if you guys could repost some of those old articles from Metro Jacksonville. I think Donna is great because she was aware of the media scene and paid attention to what the smart people were saying on sites like this. Politicians like Curry live in another world. It is obvious when he comes on WJCT to rant. Since she has taken office, she completed all of the low-hanging fruit.The last three administrations only talked about it, but did nothing. How long have we been talking about making streets two-way?

[Tacachale]

It would be nice if you guys could repost some of those old articles from Metro Jacksonville. I think Donna is great because she was aware of the media scene and paid attention to what the smart people were saying on sites like this. Politicians like Curry live in another world. It is obvious when he comes on WJCT to rant. Since she has taken office, she completed all of the low-hanging fruit.The last three administrations only talked about it, but did nothing. How long have we been talking about making streets two-way?

Perfect example. DIA had been advocating for years and had even picked the streets that would be the lowest hanging fruits. The administration just failed to fund and execute the projects. It would be one thing if there were other key public works projects they were pursuing instead, but there weren't. Total failure of leadership.

[marcuscnelson]

The terms "transportation" "transit" "travel" "mobility" and "connection" do not appear once in this interview.

While obviously transportation is not Tarbert's responsibility, it strikes me as rather concerning how people are meant to get to, around, and between the environments he wants to create Downtown. Especially if the goal is more nightlife and activities, there needs to be some consideration as to what the City's options and assets are supposed to be for those things. The idea that everyone in the downtown of a major city is going to continue needing to drive themselves to everything they plan to see or do can't be expected to work.

[Jones518]

The terms "transportation" "transit" "travel" "mobility" and "connection" do not appear once in this interview.

While obviously transportation is not Tarbert's responsibility, it strikes me as rather concerning how people are meant to get to, around, and between the environments he wants to create Downtown. Especially if the goal is more nightlife and activities, there needs to be some consideration as to what the City's options and assets are supposed to be for those things. The idea that everyone in the downtown of a major city is going to continue needing to drive themselves to everything they plan to see or do can't be expected to work.

I agree 100%.

Improved transportation, transit, and overall mobility have to be part of any serious conversation about revitalizing Downtown. You can build great places, nightlife, and cultural destinations, but if people can't reasonably get there, those investments won't reach their full potential.

I've lived Downtown before and currently live on the Southside, and I want to spend my time and money Downtown. I'd much rather patronize Downtown businesses, bars, and restaurants than default to the Beaches.

Recently, my car was in the shop. I still wanted to go Downtown, support local businesses, and be part of that environment—but the reality was a 2–3 hour bus trip just to get there. That simply wasn't practical. As a result, I stayed on the Southside and spent my money in my immediate area instead.

That's not a unique experience...it's likely happening every single day across Jacksonville. When transportation options are unreliable, slow, or inconvenient, people don't choose not to support Downtown; they're effectively forced not to.

If the goal is a more active, vibrant, and inclusive Downtown—especially one with nightlife and events, then transportation can't be treated as an afterthought. It's foundational. People shouldn't have to own a car, pay for parking, or spend half a day commuting just to participate in the city's core.

Downtown success isn't just about what gets built..it's about how people get there, move around, and get home safely and efficiently.

Start by cutting the U2C and expanding the Skyway, at minimum adding a stop in Brooklyn along Riverside Avenue near the existing facility adjacent to the shops, restaurants, and the residential density (Visita Brooklyn, One Riverside, lofts at Brooklyn, etc.) that already exist. That's low-hanging fruit and an immediate win.

Next, the City (with the help of the state) needs to seriously explore adding a pedestrian right-of-way on the Matthews Bridge and/or the Hart Bridge to improve walkability and connectivity between Downtown, Arlington, and other Downtown-adjacent Southside neighborhoods. Those connections matter if we actually want Downtown to function as a shared civic core rather than an island you have to drive to.

This isn't theoretical. A 72-year-old woman was killed on Christmas Day while trying to cross the Arlington Expressway, highlighting the real consequences of unsafe, car-oriented infrastructure. I doubt the lady was headed towards downtown, but my point still stands. If this same older lady was looking to come downtown instead, there wasn't a practical walking way there. Without safe, direct connections between Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods, Downtown's long-term sustainability as a walkable, inclusive, and economically resilient civic core remains out of reach.

And don't even get me started on how car ownership and car dependency trap people in cycles of poverty...between insurance, maintenance, gas, and repairs, transportation alone can determine whether someone can access jobs, nightlife, education, and opportunity in this city.

Transportation isn't just about convenience...it's about equity, access, and economic/social mobility. We need a more walkable environment! We need better public transportation!

[simms3]

How long have we been talking about making streets two-way?

Still a dumb idea.  Even with no traffic downtown I can't tell you how many times a week I see something stupid as a result of the two-waying of Adams/Forsyth.  Not to mention now it is actually more inconvenient as a pedestrian, as well, having to look around multiple directions before crossing the road.  Are we going to get more shopping and dining downtown now as a result?  Doubtful.  It will be other factors that help retail/dining downtown, not the two ways.

But everything else you said I agree with I just don't mind being that lone voice still crying over $15M+ to make things worse downtown with the two-way "fiasco" as I like to call it.  If downtown office workers come back en masse, the two way thing will be an absolute nightmare.  Right now it's not so bad because downtown is literally so dead...but I still see stupid traffic patterns and things that wouldn't be there if it were still one-ways.

[Tacachale]

How long have we been talking about making streets two-way?

Still a dumb idea.  Even with no traffic downtown I can't tell you how many times a week I see something stupid as a result of the two-waying of Adams/Forsyth.  Not to mention now it is actually more inconvenient as a pedestrian, as well, having to look around multiple directions before crossing the road.  Are we going to get more shopping and dining downtown now as a result?  Doubtful.  It will be other factors that help retail/dining downtown, not the two ways.

But everything else you said I agree with I just don't mind being that lone voice still crying over $15M+ to make things worse downtown with the two-way "fiasco" as I like to call it.  If downtown office workers come back en masse, the two way thing will be an absolute nightmare.  Right now it's not so bad because downtown is literally so dead...but I still see stupid traffic patterns and things that wouldn't be there if it were still one-ways.

The two waying projects have already had a positive impact on traffic speeds and pedestrian safety. That would be a plus even without the psitive impact on businesses that'll come downstream of that. But not everyone likes every change.

[Tacachale]

The terms "transportation" "transit" "travel" "mobility" and "connection" do not appear once in this interview.

While obviously transportation is not Tarbert's responsibility, it strikes me as rather concerning how people are meant to get to, around, and between the environments he wants to create Downtown. Especially if the goal is more nightlife and activities, there needs to be some consideration as to what the City's options and assets are supposed to be for those things. The idea that everyone in the downtown of a major city is going to continue needing to drive themselves to everything they plan to see or do can't be expected to work.

I agree 100%.

Improved transportation, transit, and overall mobility have to be part of any serious conversation about revitalizing Downtown. You can build great places, nightlife, and cultural destinations, but if people can't reasonably get there, those investments won't reach their full potential.

I've lived Downtown before and currently live on the Southside, and I want to spend my time and money Downtown. I'd much rather patronize Downtown businesses, bars, and restaurants than default to the Beaches.

Recently, my car was in the shop. I still wanted to go Downtown, support local businesses, and be part of that environment—but the reality was a 2–3 hour bus trip just to get there. That simply wasn't practical. As a result, I stayed on the Southside and spent my money in my immediate area instead.

That's not a unique experience...it's likely happening every single day across Jacksonville. When transportation options are unreliable, slow, or inconvenient, people don't choose not to support Downtown; they're effectively forced not to.

If the goal is a more active, vibrant, and inclusive Downtown—especially one with nightlife and events, then transportation can't be treated as an afterthought. It's foundational. People shouldn't have to own a car, pay for parking, or spend half a day commuting just to participate in the city's core.

Downtown success isn't just about what gets built..it's about how people get there, move around, and get home safely and efficiently.

Start by cutting the U2C and expanding the Skyway, at minimum adding a stop in Brooklyn along Riverside Avenue near the existing facility adjacent to the shops, restaurants, and the residential density (Visita Brooklyn, One Riverside, lofts at Brooklyn, etc.) that already exist. That's low-hanging fruit and an immediate win.

Next, the City (with the help of the state) needs to seriously explore adding a pedestrian right-of-way on the Matthews Bridge and/or the Hart Bridge to improve walkability and connectivity between Downtown, Arlington, and other Downtown-adjacent Southside neighborhoods. Those connections matter if we actually want Downtown to function as a shared civic core rather than an island you have to drive to.

This isn't theoretical. A 72-year-old woman was killed on Christmas Day while trying to cross the Arlington Expressway, highlighting the real consequences of unsafe, car-oriented infrastructure. I doubt the lady was headed towards downtown, but my point still stands. If this same older lady was looking to come downtown instead, there wasn't a practical walking way there. Without safe, direct connections between Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods, Downtown's long-term sustainability as a walkable, inclusive, and economically resilient civic core remains out of reach.

And don't even get me started on how car ownership and car dependency trap people in cycles of poverty...between insurance, maintenance, gas, and repairs, transportation alone can determine whether someone can access jobs, nightlife, education, and opportunity in this city.

Transportation isn't just about convenience...it's about equity, access, and economic/social mobility. We need a more walkable environment! We need better public transportation!

From my perspective, this is a longterm problem of siloing. JTA reports up one way to its board, DIA another way to another board and Public Works, Planning and other city departments to the CAO and mayor. There are many strengths to this setup, but it does mean that than projects like the Emerald Trail segments where they're all coordinating from the start, it takes special effort to get all the different stakeholders on the same church pew let alone singing from the same hymnal. But we did it with the Downtown train station - the mayor called meetings of all those stakeholders (including the feds in that case) and dedicated staff to facilitate the coordination, and we were able to get real movement on the project for the first time in 20 years. We're working on ways to do that more efficiently with other transit projects which I hope will be effective. Hopefully I'll have more to report on that before long.

[jaxlongtimer]

^ Another issue is JTA's portfolio.  They should be limited to a MASS TRANSIT agency only.  Not allowed to build roads or the Emerald Trail (give those to Public Works, Parks or create another independent agency) and judged strictly on how many passengers they serve satisfactorily per standard national measurements. 

JTA should then have a separate "mass transit" zone broken out with its own success metrics that covers the entire urban core (old City limits?) such as Downtown, Riverside/Avondale/Brooklyn/Murray Hill, Springfield, East Side, Rail Yard District/Durkeeville and San Marco and that features internally mapped routes only.  DIA and City Hall should be involved with this somehow, also.

Given the increasing multi-county regionalization, JTA can sit at the table with the North Florida TPO (who should have a separate "mass transit" department that competes for transit priorities and funding) who should lead on planning and finding funding for new "mass transit" projects such as intercity/light rail, street car, trolley, etc.  JTA can be the contracted implementer/operator for mutually approved projects with the TPO. 

Right now, JTA is all over the place... and it and its board have no real focus on mass transit like they should. Plus, they have inadequate oversight (other than their board, a joke, who else?) and fail to collaborate (see recent comments by the CEO plus no coordination with City Hall, DIA, community, etc.) with other interests they impact, or could impact, outside of their own.  A real s--t show, a run away train (irony intended!).

[Tacachale]

^ Another issue is JTA's portfolio.  They should be limited to a MASS TRANSIT agency only.  Not allowed to build roads or the Emerald Trail (give those to Public Works, Parks or create another independent agency) and judged strictly on how many passengers they serve satisfactorily per standard national measurements. 

JTA should then have a separate "mass transit" zone broken out with its own success metrics that covers the entire urban core (old City limits?) such as Downtown, Riverside/Avondale/Brooklyn/Murray Hill, Springfield, East Side, Rail Yard District/Durkeeville and San Marco and that features internally mapped routes only.  DIA and City Hall should be involved with this somehow, also.

Given the increasing multi-county regionalization, JTA can sit at the table with the North Florida TPO (who should have a separate "mass transit" department that competes for transit priorities and funding) who should lead on planning and finding funding for new "mass transit" projects such as intercity/light rail, street car, trolley, etc.  JTA can be the contracted implementer/operator for mutually approved projects with the TPO. 

Right now, JTA is all over the place... and it and its board have no real focus on mass transit like they should. Plus, they have inadequate oversight (other than their board, a joke, who else?) and fail to collaborate (see recent comments by the CEO plus no coordination with City Hall, DIA, community, etc.) with other interests they impact, or could impact, outside of their own.  A real s--t show, a run away train (irony intended!).

One could argue for splitting the authority back into roads and transit, but the issue there is that JTA has always been a perfectly competent road builder. The transit system is where there have been more... issues. I really do believe a lot could be fixed by some better coordination (and a continuing mechanism for that to ensure it doesn't end when a mayor or CEO changes) while still keeping the independence that offers some protections -- we should keep in mind that a mayor getting too involved in the business of an independent authority is what led to the biggest corruptions scandal in Jacksonville history.

[Charles Hunter]

^ Another issue is JTA's portfolio.  They should be limited to a MASS TRANSIT agency only.  Not allowed to build roads or the Emerald Trail (give those to Public Works, Parks or create another independent agency) and judged strictly on how many passengers they serve satisfactorily per standard national measurements. 

The Legislature would have to amend Chapter 349 to remove the non-transit responsibilities in JTA's enabling legislation. It seems doubtful - minus some sort of scandal - that the Legislature would take this up without concurrence from the JTA.

JTA should then have a separate "mass transit" zone broken out with its own success metrics that covers the entire urban core (old City limits?) such as Downtown, Riverside/Avondale/Brooklyn/Murray Hill, Springfield, East Side, Rail Yard District/Durkeeville and San Marco and that features internally mapped routes only.  DIA and City Hall should be involved with this somehow, also.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying JTA's bus service should be restricted to those areas? What about Arlington, most of Southside and southwest Jacksonville, and other developed areas outside the old city?

Given the increasing multi-county regionalization, JTA can sit at the table with the North Florida TPO (who should have a separate "mass transit" department that competes for transit priorities and funding) who should lead on planning and finding funding for new "mass transit" projects such as intercity/light rail, street car, trolley, etc.  JTA can be the contracted implementer/operator for mutually approved projects with the TPO. 

JTA is a voting member of the TPO Board, along with other transportation agencies (JaxPort, JAA, St. Augustine Airport Authority [or whatever they call themselves now], and Fernandina's port authority [with a long name]) within the four counties comprising the TPO. However, the TPO has a long-standing policy of accepting the project lists from the member agencies as-is. When submitting lists of project priorities, they concentrate on highways and bicycle/pedestrian facilities (paths and trails) that receive federal or state funding.

Right now, JTA is all over the place... and it and its board have no real focus on mass transit like they should. Plus, they have inadequate oversight (other than their board, a joke, who else?) and fail to collaborate (see recent comments by the CEO plus no coordination with City Hall, DIA, community, etc.) with other interests they impact, or could impact, outside of their own.  A real s--t show, a run away train (irony intended!). For example, the TPO would not rank a New Mathews Bridge over the U2C.

And just a historical note on Tacachale's comment that came in while I typed.

One could argue for splitting the authority back into roads and transit, but the issue there is that JTA has always been a perfectly competent road builder.

There were never separate 'road' and 'transit' agencies. The Jacksonville Transportation Authority began in the mid-1950s as the Jacksonville EXPRESSWAY Authority to build expressways and connecting roads that the old State Road Department (precursor of FDOT) would not build. Using toll financing, the Expressway Authority began by building the Mathews and Fuller Warren Bridges and their connecting expressways, some of which eventually became part of I-95. The Trout and Hart Bridges and JTB came along later.
The private bus operator - Jacksonville Coach Company - was facing the same problems as private bus operators around the USA and about to fail. In 1971 [?] the Legislature added owning and operating a mass transit system to the powers of the Expressway Authority, and changed the name to the Jacksonville TRANSPORTATION Authority (note to all the local media outlets - it ain't the "Transit Authority").

I will reserve comment on the last part of Taca's sentence I quoted.

====
ETA - I just remembered, one of the rationales for adding transit to the existing expressway agency was that it would foster cooperation and coordination across the modes. That never happened. The transit and highway divisions have always been silos.