What Would Jax's Population NOW Be Without Consolidation?

[heights unknown]

Jacksonville Population from 1900 through the present (thanks Lake for the figures)

1900 28,429  65.3%
1910 57,699  103.0%
1920 91,558  58.7%
1930 129,549  41.5%
1940 173,065  33.6%
1950 204,275  18.0%
1960 201,030  −1.6%
1970 528,865  163.1%
1980 540,920    2.3%
1990 635,230   17.4%
2000 735,617   15.8%
2007 805,605 (Estimate)

The above figures are Jacksonville's population throughout the decades up until recently.  Figures from 1970 on are post consolidation figures.

We are all aware that before Jax consolidated, our City, in just about every aspect of it's make-up, infrastructure, and its population were on the downturn.  In 1960, our population was 201, 030.  I believe no one knows what the population would have been in 1970 had we not consolidated (if anyone knows please publish).  However, I often wonder if Jax had not consolidated, would it have annexed more neighborhoods, areas, etc., and if so, what areas would it have annexed and what would the population possibly be today?

In my own opinion I believe Jax would have eventually annexed more areas making its population increase, but the population would not have increased significantly and/or quickly, and Jax would still be below Orlando, St. Petersburg, and possibly even Fort Lauderdale in population.  I believe the 1970 and 1980 populations would have continued to be down with a rebound in 1990 and 2000 (with City Leaders finally getting around to annexing unincorporated areas surrounding urban incorporated Jax).

Lakelander gave a present day population of 112,500 (which would place us as the 12th largest city in Florida) taking into account the old pre-consolidation city boundaries; but again, those boundaries may not have been true today had the city not consolidated (taking possible annexation of some areas into account); we may have gobbled up more southside areas, eastside areas, and some west and northside areas.  Maybe a population of around 250,000 or even less (220,000?) would be about right given the overall appearance of the City, urban size, and size of the downtown skyline.

What do you think?


Heights Unknown

[thelakelander]

Its hard to tell, but I do believe Jacksonville's population would have still been larger than Orlando, St. Petersburg and Fort Lauderdale.  Imo, it would probably be around the same size as Tampa (250 - 350k).

I say this because annexation would still be pretty easy given the lack of nearby municipalities in Duval County.  However, I do think the three beach communities would be a lot larger with the Southside/Arlington area being the annexation battleground for Jacksonville, Atlantic Beach, Neptune Beach and Jacksonville Beach.  I could also see a new city or two springing up in the decades after 1968.

[reednavy]

If another city was to have been established w/o consolidation, I would imagine it would've been Mandarin.

Jax would still be much larger than Orlando, considering they just crossed 200,000 in 2005. St. Pete is declining because Pinellas County is completely built out. Fort Lauderdale is growing very slowly, and has fluctuated between pos. and neg. growth for many years because of completely being boxed in by other incoporated cities and towns. So I would estimate around 400 to 450,000 residents.

Now, Miami is something to watch closely. They continue to annex unincoporated areas of Miami-Dade County slowly, but when they do, it is sizeable chunks. Last series added around 20 sq. miles to the city and over 50,000 people I believe.(High-rise boom contributed somewhat)

If anything "significant" happens, I expect Baldwin to release it's charter and be absorbed by the city. Of course by 2020-2025 or so, at current rates, the city could cross 1 million.

[David]

I'd also imagine more smaller municipalities/towns popping up on the west side of Duval county. You know the west side definitely marches to its own beat.

[Joe]

Also keep in mind that if Jax hadn't consolidated, there might have been even more white flight out of the old city limits. Riverside/Avondale probably wouldn't have been designated an historic district, and even San Marco could have declined.

A lot of it probably depends on how a non-consolidated city would have built public housing in the early 70s. But it could have gotten really bad, really fast.

I generally suspect that, without consolidation, the orginal city limits would be even more depopulated than they are now.

[heights unknown]

I agree with you Joe; not to discount Lake and others opinions of being bigger than Orlando, St. Pete and Ft. Lauderdale, but without additional annexation I do believe Jax's population would not have increased by very much.  Looking at maps, there is quite a bit in Duval, close to the old pre-consolidated boundaries to annex, and it could have been possible to add a couple hundred thousand or so putting Jax at around 300,000 or more.

I think 400,000 or more is being optimistic and a bit too gracious.  As you said Joe, Jax was already on the decline within the old City boundaries, and you're right, without annexation, more "White flight" would have probably been more evident with a lower population within City boundaries without annexation.

With consolidation, Jax is having a hard time living up to being a big City close to a million people; quite a tall order to fill.  Miami, I think, in the next few years will get very close to Jax in population because there are so many areas, neighborhoods, and cities that can be annexed within the Miami area, and who want to be on the Miami bandwagon; Miami is indeed a world class city and an international class City as well.

Interesting info here.  I really welcome more opinion and insight on this subject.

Heights Unknown

[stjr]

Overall, I think the benefits of consolidation probably outweighed the negatives for Jax.  But, I would say the population of Downtown and surrounding communities may have ultimately rebounded to a point beyond where it is now WITHOUT consolidation.

Consider that if consolidation had not taken place, those in the core city might have been more focused (out of the need for self-preservation) on its preservation and development than a consolidated government dealing with everything from Downtown high rises to horse barns in the country.   Remember, in 1968, most of Duval County was rural.

After consolidation, the power structure was much more oriented to the suburbs and outlying areas which I believe led to more neglect and/or a lower prioritization of Downtown needs and possibilities.   This was due, in large part, to suburban real estate developers and contractors who became significant power brokers and insured that the areas they operated in would be the recipient of much attention and resources with little thought or caring for the inner city where they did not operate.  Needless to say, there was little, if any, of the entrenched white power structure caring much about Downtown after 9 to 5.  Had consolidation not taken place, perhaps the "voices" of Downtown would not have been so readily dismissed, diluted, or drowned out.

Downtown clearly declined in the years following consolidation, Independent Life (Modis) and the Bellsouth (ATT) towers notwithstanding, while the suburbs grew.  Yes, there were little "projects" like rebuilding the one way Main Street and Hemming Plaza (can you say, "lipstick on a pig?"), but never the assembly of a community-wide supported visionary master plan that was to take Downtown to the next level or into the next century .  During this time, many other downtowns began addressing historic preservation, livability issues, creation of new/enlarged green spaces and landscaping, and improved transit.  Even to this day, most of these items remain more talk than reality. Other than the Arena, Baseball Grounds, and Stadium, what part of the Better Jax Plan was designated for Downtown?

Following this line of thought, maybe Downtown would be better preserved, more trend setting, and more vibrant than it is now.  And, if the bar was raised Downtown, maybe the suburbs would, in a competitive mode for residents and business, be better planned and less bland.  One can only speculate.  Compare the vibrancy today of Downtown Jax with most any other major Florida city.  Or Atlanta, Charlotte, Savannah, Charleston .....  I say we are sadly lagging in exploiting our potential vs. other cities.

[heights unknown]

What a great post and response stjr; I never looked at it from the angle that you lay out; well done.

If what you say could be the case, that is, because of consolidation there has been a trend to neglect or not pay whole attention to downtown, then maybe someone should draw up new boundaries through annexing as much unincorporated areas in Duval as can be annexed, put out a vote to the public to deconsolidate, and see where Jax could go from there; sure, we would catapult from the 12th largest city in the nation to probably around (between) 40 and 50th, but it may be worth it.

I know, there's no turning back now and I agree, we shouldn't turn back or look back; keep forward, press on, but realize that this consolidation thing is still in the works and still is being figured out 40 years later. Jax is still trying to figure out how to make consolidation work to its advantage and make it (Jax) the world class city that it is trying to be.

Again, I see Jax trying hard to live up to the 12th largest city (in population) in the nation, and trying to show everyone that Jax is the little city that can.  I hope that this one day materializes and Jax does indeed become a world class and international city.

Heights Unknown

[vicupstate]

Given the complete failure of Jacksonville to annex between 1932 and 1968, despite several attempts, I see no reason to believe that there would have been more annexations had consolidation not taken place.  Maybe one or two minor ones might have happened, but nothing too significant

Distrust in government increased tremendously after Vietnam, Watergate, etc.  That would have only made things more difficult.  

If consolidation had not happened, the tax base and population would have continued to erode.  Also, with the haphazard, duplicative, and corrupt government in place before consolidation, it is hard to believe things would have turned for the better.  

Jax might very well be the Detroit of the South, if consolidation didn't happen.

As far as  stjr's comments, downtowns suffered downturns in virtually every city in the '60's and '70's, regardless of size, or consolidation status.  I don't think consolidation had anything to do with the previous and current state of Jax's Downtown. The LEADERSHIP of the city determines the importance of DT more than anything.

Indianapolis and Nashville are both consolidated and from everything I know of them, DT is at the forefront of the city's consciousness.  That is wthin both the leadership as well as the general population.  Charlotte is also very large in land area, but DT is the core focus of the city, anyone living there will tell you that.        

On a side note, Charlotte's population will exceed 700,000 in June, when a new round of annexations take effect.  That should move them up from 19th to at least 17th city in the US.          

[heights unknown]

Didn't many annexations happen during that period? I find it hard to believe that between 1932 and 1968 that Jax failed to annex during those years/decade. I think annexation is the reason why Jax's population kept growing up through 1950; I think Jax may have maxed out in the 1950's and there just wasn't much left to annex (outside of the urban core and old boundaries).  Nothing grew outside of those boundaries until around the 1980's and on.

Heights Unknown

[stjr]

As far as  stjr's comments, downtowns suffered downturns in virtually every city in the '60's and '70's, regardless of size, or consolidation status.  I don't think consolidation had anything to do with the previous and current state of Jax's Downtown. I don't think consolidation had anything to do with the previous and current state of Jax's Downtown. The LEADERSHIP of the city determines the importance of DT more than anything.

Indianapolis and Nashville are both consolidated and from everything I know of them, DT is at the forefront of the city's consciousness.  That is wthin both the leadership as well as the general population.  Charlotte is also very large in land area, but DT is the core focus of the city, anyone living there will tell you that.        

On a side note, Charlotte's population will exceed 700,000 in June, when a new round of annexations take effect.  That should move them up from 19th to at least 17th city in the US.          

Vicup, I fully agree that consolidation addressed many issues from which it was born:  corruption, duplication and inefficiency of roughly equal county and city governments, erosion of the tax base, etc.

However, I don't think, with respect to the development of Downtown and the core city, that consolidation benefitted this area, heretofore, to any great extent, if not the other way around.  To some degree, I believe my point is reinforced by your post .  Leadership is the critical factor.  And, leadership is often reflective of the community it leads and the support that it can garner from that community.  I think Jax leadership very much reflects our community's actual (not stated) priorities - an emphasis on development apart from Downtown and in favor of the outlying suburbs.  Had Downtown been the purview of a leadership serving mostly core city constituents and NOT had its energies spread among over 800 square miles of Duval County - who knows? - maybe that inspired leadership would have appeared by now and been effective for the benefit of Downtown. Perhaps such leadership toward a downtown revitalizaiton does arise from an inspired consolidated community (historically, I haven't seen much of that in Jax!), but I would suggest the probabilities of its appearance would be greatly enhanced by an un-consolidated community.

Yes, many cities suffered declines in the 60's and 70's.  But, this caused many of those same cities to self-examine and focus on themselves, and, as previously stated, in an effort toward self-preservation, to find new and innovative ways to begin revitalizing themselves. Today, many of these cities are thriving like never before, reaping the fruits of their visionary leaders and community investments.  I believe Jax's response since the 60's and 70's was to hasten investment and focus on the suburbs rather than to address how to keep Downtown alive.

Detroit has unique problems - ongoing corruption and being a one-horse, or should I say, one-auto, town.  Out of dozens of cities, there are always going to be a few bad apples that strayed.  On the whole, most major American cities have made remarkable comebacks.

[vicupstate]

Didn't many annexations happen during that period? I find it hard to believe that between 1932 and 1968 that Jax failed to annex during those years/decade. I think annexation is the reason why Jax's population kept growing up through 1950; I think Jax may have maxed out in the 1950's and there just wasn't much left to annex (outside of the urban core and old boundaries).  Nothing grew outside of those boundaries until around the 1980's and on.

Heights Unknown

Look at the Duval County population figures from the during the period you are referring to, and you will see otherwise.  You have to remember prior to the advent of interstates, nearly everyone not living on a farm lived inside their city's limits.  Suburbs didn't really exist until after 1960 in the South (although somewhat earlier in the other parts of the country).

I will double check my sources, but I believe the 1932-1968 period was void of significant annexation.  I am certain there was a long period prior to consolidation without any.   

[Steve]

I agree with stjr - think of it this way:

If I'm the city (not the consolidated city), and a company comes to me and says they are interested in relocating here, then I'm sure not taking them to Gate Parkway - I'm showing them downtown (or one of the surrounding areas).  I also think that if we were not consolidated, we would actually be able to pronounce the word "infill", since I have no vacant land to burn.

However, there are a lot of benefits to consolidation, however they don't tremendously help the urban core.

[Steve]

South Jacksonville was annexed in 1932. - Prior to that, the city didn't cross the river.

I don't know about Ortega, however.

[vicupstate]

Yes, many cities suffered declines in the 60's and 70's.  But, this caused many of those same cities to self-examine and focus on themselves, and, as previously stated, in an effort toward self-preservation, to find new and innovative ways to begin revitalizing themselves. Today, many of these cities are thriving like never before, reaping the fruits of their visionary leaders and community investments.  I believe Jax's response since the 60's and 70's was to hasten investment and focus on the suburbs rather than to address how to keep Downtown alive

Macroeconomic trends nationwide more than overwhelmed ANY city's attempt to counter what was going on in their Downtowns in the '60's and '70's.  Specifically I am referring to the 'Malling of America', increased crime in cities, white flight, women joining the workforce, etc.  

Jax spent tons on money DT during the '60's and '70s and '80's [new city hall, new courthouse, Hemming plaza, fostering the construction of the building the skyline, etc.].  But it was wrongheaded.  The DESIRE was there, the good decisions weren't.   That said, Jax wasn't doing any better or worse than any other city in that regard.

The turnaround of Downtowns did not begin in ernest until well into the 1980's, and really the 1990's.  Many cities have been quite successful at it, although Jax has not been yet.  But if you look at the history of those other cities, the turnaround came only after decades of decline in their respective downtowns.  Some cities escaped some of the really bad 'urban renewal - tear everything down' mistakes, which turned out to be beneficial later (a remaining urban fabric to simply renew, rather than re-create).  But such cities are the exception.  

You would be hard pressed to name a city that had a improving and thriving downtown during the period of the 1960's through the mid '80's.  The turnarounds all came after that.