mtraininjax

December 15, 2009, 07:03:57 AM
At 6 AM on 12/15 the temperature in Oklahoma City is 18 degrees, with a projected high of 38 today. Nuff said.

civil42806

December 15, 2009, 08:13:36 AM
LOL well the temperature may be cold, but then again so is NYC and many others.  Worked in OKC before and after the downtown rebuild.  Warm temperatures hasn't helped downtown Jacksonville.   I was very suspect of the proposals that came out of the redevelopment of Bricktown, particularly the building of the canal.  But in this case it appears to have worked, great baseball park, bricktown Brewery, many great bars and nightclubs.

mtraininjax

December 15, 2009, 08:44:24 AM
Read today's TU, most of the people interviewed as living in 80 degree downtown Jacksonville, also work in downtown Jacksonville. You can create all the theme parks and gadget real estate centers you want, but at the end of the day, you need people working downtown to draw more businesses, residents and build an economic self-sustaining downtown.

Without more businesses downtown, it will never grow. You can't keep dumping people downtown and hoping new condos and apartments breed more people. Gate Parkway would say otherwise.

Sigma

December 15, 2009, 08:51:33 AM
Nice.  I'm glad you guys looked at Oklahoma City.  Bricktown is a very cool place.

vicupstate

December 15, 2009, 10:01:31 AM
Mtrain,


Retail follows rooftops, not the other way around.  Corporate leaders should be strongly encouraged to locate and expand DT, but the fact that Jax ALREADY has 60,000 people working DT proves that office workers alone will not do the job.  Few restuarants can make it off of one meal (Lunch) alone.  Residents will add the demand for Breakast and dinner and after-dinner/weekend entertainment.   The residents and/or the visitors have to be there before businesses can survive.      

The large geographic size of OKC also hightlights the nonsense that is the theory that sprawled out cities don't support strong DTs.  Indy, Nashville and Charlotte are other examples.  Like the FBC excuse, that one needs to be buried.  

OKC is well on its way to leaving Jacksonville in the dust, just as Charlotte, Nashville and Indy have already done.  Your nice temperatures and ocean water will not fill the void that only VISION and LEADERSHIP can provide.

zoo

December 15, 2009, 11:02:01 AM
Bricktown Canal = Hogans Creek

The difference is visionary plans, and the leadership/continuity to implement them. People always talk about rooftops in Jax, but continue to limit the boundaries of downtown. If the shape of it were shifted, and connectivity to Springfield improved, all of sudden, downtown/uptown would have a combined 7,100 residents.

Where are OKC's homeless services, jail and Greyhound stations?

fsujax

December 15, 2009, 11:10:37 AM
Are there any other cities stuck in neutral? or is it just Jacksonville?

Bwilkins09

December 15, 2009, 11:58:24 AM
Hey all, new to the site and this is my first post.

I think an idea like "bricktown" would work wonders in downtown. If they put as much effort into an area downtown like they did the Town Center, I think it will definately start getting more people there more often, including me!

thelakelander

December 15, 2009, 12:07:00 PM

I don't know about the homeless services but the jail is on the opposite far end of downtown from Bricktown, the convention center and other attractions.  Greyhound is near the center of downtown and a block away from Myriad Botanical Gardens.

thelakelander

December 15, 2009, 12:10:29 PM

Sure, we're not the only late one to the party. Toledo, Dayton and Richmond (although its a lot denser) are a few that have had their struggles as well.

AaroniusLives

December 15, 2009, 12:26:41 PM


Cold weather is a compromise for what you get in return, in my humble Floridian opinion. For example, it was 14 effing degrees up here in DC last January, but I got to see history take place when we, the people inaugurated the first minority president. Florida and Jacksonville have probably milked as much of "but it's not cold here" as they can.

Moreover, weather isn't everything, anyway. DC's weather suuuuuuuuuuucks. Outside of spring, the season's here are like a worst hits of weather: hot and humid in the summer; rainy and cold in the late fall; crazy windy and cold sans snow for most of the damned winter. Nonetheless, it's a great place to live, even if it doesn't possess abundant sunshine.

My father, who still lives in Florida (Parkland,) recently expressed the same sentiment regarding the weather and Florida. He loves DC, but hated the cold, so he was happy to go back to "sucky, but warm, Florida." So, I offer you this challenge: imagine a Jacksonville that doesn't just have a temperate climate going for it. Or Florida, for that matter.

Use me as an example. In theory, I'm of the demographic you'd like to attract. I'm an educated professional who straddles the business and the creative class. I'm not ideologically driven one way or the other on most issues. I don't commit crime. I spend money in stores, cafes and bars. I like museums, parks, cycling, forums, etc. I'm a ardent believer in New Urbanism. And I'm a native Floridian, born and raised.

So, consider this: I had to leave Florida to find the lifestyle I needed. "It's not cold there" wasn't enough to keep me, and I hate the cold. My first pit-stop was Atlanta, where I found a very vast business class of professionals, if not exactly the culture (the slogan of that city, outside of the High Museum of Art, should be "Atlanta: where smart people live cheap.") Nonetheless, Atlanta had ideal, brilliant weather. If climate were the only consideration for people, we'd all live in temperate, dry Atlanta, no? 9 months of pretty awesome weather, punctuated by 2 hot months and one kinda-sorta cold month.

But DC is the bee's knees. There's always life on the streets, always something to do, and there's not a need for a car (indeed, one can live in suburbia and still enjoy the Metro, the "fake downtowns" and the connectivity.) So, the weather sucks. So, it costs too much. So, there are too many goddamned Chipotles. Nonetheless, I took all my intellectual capital here, because outside of the weather, there's a lot here that doesn't suck.

When Florida gets their act together, and realizes that perhaps mere climate isn't enough to attract more than the lowest common denominator, what an amazing state that will be. I'll totally move back for "DC on the St. Johns."

Overstreet

December 15, 2009, 12:37:31 PM
I visted an architect office out there one year. Everything was brown. They had the worst drought in years. Fire hazard was very high. The only thing I really enjoyed about the trip with dinner at Cattleman's near the stockyards. Lamb fries were good. But then again I can get real fried oysters back home.

stephendare

December 15, 2009, 01:10:21 PM
I continue to be unconvinced of the retail follows rooftops mantra in an urban area.

While this is true for a suburb, a suburb is not really the complex living organism that a city is.

In fact I think Pericles nailed it a few thousand years ago with the simple pronouncement.

"All things good on this Earth flow into the City, because of the City's greatness."

Once you create a dynamic scene of commerce and activity, people are compelled to come live near it.

In fact our own American History I think disproves this suburban mantra for the cities.  No city became a booming metropolis because there were so many great rooftops that industries moved there.

They became metropolises because millions moved to be near the industries and the culture.

vicupstate

December 15, 2009, 01:36:14 PM
The 'industries' [60,000 jobs] are already there.  Yet the sidewalks are still rolled up at 5:00. 

The same thing could have been said for Charlotte 10 years ago.  Thousands of jobs, and even safe streets, but no nightlife whatsoever.  Only when the resident population reached nearly 10,000 did the transformation complete itself.

Name one city that did it any other way.   


People don't live where they WORK, they live where they PLAY, be it the lake, the beach, or a vibrant urban oasis. 

Bring in the residents or at least a steady stream of visitors, and the other (retail, restaurants, entertainment) will take care of itself.

hanjin1

December 15, 2009, 01:38:24 PM
fsujax
Today at 10:10:37 AM

Are there any other cities stuck in neutral? or is it just Jacksonville?

I believe you meant reverse

stephendare

December 15, 2009, 01:47:30 PM

Well having been a part of a few clustering phenomenons, across the country, I can name the belltown district in seattle as a pretty great example.

What actually happens in the circumstances that you describe, Vic, is that the process of bringing residents into the downtown invariably causes another process to take place:  And that is the radical rezoning of the areas to allow mixed use development, usually allowing people to live and work in the same area.  Philadephia's Avenue of the Arts is a perfect example of this process btw.

Technically it would be an example of my point that the arts development (rather than the residential development) created a huge success in the city, but the reality is that while the city was planning out the Avenue of the Arts, it simultaneously rezoned the entire district, allowing historic exemptions and live work space all along the district.

It usually happens that that first seed group of pioneers into an urban area is also the kind of group that wants to open up hip businesses and shops.  They presence of those shops and the resulting communities of interest that they create leads to more people wanting to move to the area.

Five Points and San Marco are local examples of this process, But Notting Hill in London, Multimedia Gulch and the SOMA district in San Francisco are also great examples.

So its not really that houses are being built (which is what the retail follows rooftops has sadly been simplified to) that causes the resurgence of activity, but that the zoning laws also change in the process allowing more organic urban communities to be possible.

AaroniusLives

December 15, 2009, 01:53:40 PM
stephendare said:


You need both the chicken and the egg. One of the dramatic reversals in terms of development over the last 60 some odd years has been this idea of monocultural development: residential zones specifically for houses; commercial zones specifically for business; industrial zones specifically for industry. You need mixed-use development, where one building combines residential with commercial for downtown to be successful, to recreate and rebuild a strong fabric of place.

Mind you, mixed-use development can also occur without housing everything in one building. If a condo building opens up, and across the street, some stores open up, you have a place for the residents to shop...but you can't have one without the other, especially when you are trying to create density in a downtown location.

People may be compelled to move near places of commerce and activity, but there has to be a base of people there first to facilitate that commerce and activity. Simplify this down: Let's say I have a plot of land. 5 people buy houses on that plot of land. 1 general store opens up on that plot of land. The people need to shop; the shops need to sell. Synergy. My plot of land is "mixed-use."

Mind you, this is only a recent debate in the terms of historical development. The automobile has made it possible for residents downtown to shop in the suburbs, for residents in the suburbs to drive for miles to work downtown, or for residents in the suburbs to bypass downtown entirely for their employment and shopping needs. In effect, a resident in one of Jacksonville's downtown condo/rental towers is living a suburban life in urban drag; since there's not a place for them to shop, they hop in their cars, wait for the parking deck gate to rise, and go drive to Target. That's because there's not an effective balance between the activities of commerce and residential in the Jacksonville downtown area.

What the other metropolii around the country did during the last boom was to attempt to create this balance between commerce and people. Jacksonville Landing could do this, if it weren't also obsessed with being a tourist site. Plop a damned Publix, an Old Navy, a Panera Bread and a drycleaners in there, and all of a sudden, a lot of downtowners have essential services a few blocks away.

Moreover, because so much of Florida is defined by the car-dependent pattern of living, it's hard to see how effective and historically proven mixed-use development is. A traditional city grid, where everything is connected, where shops and people meet, is mixed-use. It wasn't even thought of to create an environment in another way. And because modern cities that do feature mixed-use, walking development are somehow "tourist" attractions ("before the minivan, honey, people used to walk to the store,") it's hard to imagine just a compact place where people can live, work and play as existing.

stephendare

December 15, 2009, 01:56:21 PM
aaronius.

i couldnt possibly agree with you more.  Apparently we were simultaneously typing as you can see from the post above yours.

You have pithily and perfectly stated one of the least discussed downfalls of modern planning, and I am excited to be reading such excellent ideas.

The idea that we deliberately zone whole areas of our cities to be unused for most of the day seems like madness.

Rocshaboc

December 15, 2009, 02:48:51 PM
Hi everyone. I come to this website every week, but I've never commented. I'm 34 years old and I've lived here since 1996. I'm so disappointed in Jacksonville because its so slow to do anything to improve the city's core. Where the Carlton Jones movie theater project? Will the next office building taller than 600ft ever be built? Why do the Shipyard fail every time? Whatever happen to the Brooklyn project? Why isn't the Friendship Fountain shooting 120ft in the air like it used to? Is anyone doing anything to get the ball(s) rolling around here? Its so hard to see that Oklahoma City is looking & doing better than Jacksonville. What is the problem?Please excuse my ignorance.

ralpho37

December 15, 2009, 03:22:36 PM
Rocshaboc:  I wish I had an answer for you.  I'd have to say its apathy.  Not only by the local government, but by the everyday citizen here as well.  At MetroJacksonville, we represent only a mere fraction of the people of Jacksonville.  Quite frankly, I think we are some of the only people in Jacksonville who care at all about their city.

On that note, add Oklahoma City to the list of cities who've got it together.  When will Jacksonville make that list?

AaroniusLives

December 15, 2009, 03:47:18 PM

This, in many ways, is part of the mental problem regarding downtown areas in the country at large and Jacksonville in particular. Skyscrapers do not a vibrant, living, breathing downtown make. Density and mixed-use development do. So, if Jacksonville never built another skyscraper, but created a series of 5-8 story buildings that house a variety of functions, from housing to stores to schools and the rest, all within a dense grid of walkable streets, your downtown would be a success.

One of the most, if not the most, beautiful and vibrant cities in the world, Paris, has minimal skyscraper influence outside of L'Defense. It is defined by its mixed-use density (5-8 story buildings with shopping on the ground level,) and not by its skyscrapers.

To define a downtown via tall buildings devoted to one purpose, and to encourage blocks on monoculturally-purposed buildings is to continue to make the same mistake regarding downtown Jacksonville. The only reason to even consider building a skyscraper, in my opinion, is because you've run out of space for development in the metropolitan area; if there are so many people that another normally-sized building will not handle the needs for space, then, by all means, go vertical. To build one without connectivity and density is to essentially suck the potential of density into one pod, and leave the rest to suffer vacantly. Just like Jacksonville does now.

Mind you, Tampa and Orlando also have no real need for skyscrapers, either. Their metropolitan areas, while nearly double or more than double the size of Jacksonville's are also sprawling, and also have lots of room for both new and infill development. The only region that rightly needs skyscrapers (despite the impracticality of being in Hurricane Alley,) is South Florida. They are out of room, and thus, are both infilling with mixed-use on the fringe and going vertical in the core. At 397 people per square mile, the Jacksonville MSA is way behind the Tampa Bay MSA at 1,070 people per square mile, and even sprawling Orlando's at 494.8 people per square mile. More than that, it's less than 1/2 as dense as South Florida at 890 people per square mile...and that's including the 2/3s of those counties that are Everglades. Removing the swamp, South Florida has a population density of a whopping 4,851 people per square mile. There's a need to scrape the sky, just not in Jacksonville.

Consider this: if no building in downtown Jacksonville was more than 5 stories tall, all of those folks now sponged into high-rises would be occupying vacant blocks on the street by necessity. Even if they built it wrong (monocultured blocks of office, residential and retail, separated and security-gated, all surrounded by parking decks,) the downtown would, at the very least, look less empty, and each parcel of land would be generating revenue.

There's this almost phallic need for cities to have skyscrapers, as if the tall buildings prove an arrival of some sort. Detroit has several. Paris has nearly none. Guess which one never left?

JaxNative68

December 15, 2009, 03:48:30 PM
I have had many out of town friends come to Jacksonville with the idea of entertaining job opportunities that have been presented to them.  After their visit, not one of them has wanted to accept any of the jobs offered to them.  The main reasons I have always heard are: it is to small town, it is to redneck, there isn’t enough culture, and it feels like one giant strip mall, I don’t want to be car dependent, the school system is horrible, downtown is depressing and the entire city is too suburbia.  But one thing they can agree on is: the weather is nice, or it would be nice to live near the beach, the job was a good offer, no income tax.  Unfortunately the likes never outweigh the dislikes.

finehoe

December 15, 2009, 04:29:05 PM

As you're probably aware, DC tried to create a bustling neighborhood in SE (an area similar to downtown Jacksonville in that it contained many empty blocks and was/is plagued by a perception of being unsafe) by building a baseball stadium and then encouraging developers to build dozens of condo buildings, but the area is a flop because there are no stores there.  It's a walkable grid, well served by transit, but you still have to drive to Virginia to go to the grocery store.  Consequently, it's been a failure.

north miami

December 15, 2009, 05:02:18 PM

"What most people don't realize is that there is just as much money-or more-to be made out of wrecking a community as there is from the upbuilding of one" -  Margaret Mitchell

I see many references to potential newcomers deciding against Jacksonville,and many existing residents leaving or planning too.A double whammy.

(Bear with me here-"Downtown" is the subject........)
Dr.Arthur R. Marshall,the father of South Florida Everglades restoration,was unusually successful in that he clearly tied the health and well being of the urban area with the everglades system.He was fond of quoting the then new environmental ideology:"We can never do just one thing".Art resided in Putnam County,and he easily applied his outlook to Jacksonville and the entire region.

It is so obvious that Downtown is 'connected' to regional forces that it is easy to miss the connection.The state of Downtown affairs reflects the very core and soul of Northeast Florida.Surrounding counties have grown due to a subtle yet militant anti Duval theme.Like a confused,incompetent adolescent Duval is a willing partner,through JEA expansionism schemes,booster mentalityand a Regional Chamber of Commerce circular firing squad.Mayor Delaney's hand in key permitting events enabling the sprawl inducing Beltway but one (unreported) example.Only now,with TPO 'in place' will the Florida Times Union editors allow the open discussion of Downtown job loss,suburban angst.

Perhaps the best thing going for Duval and Downtown is location location location.The 'best' places were built on long ago.How long do we wait?

rjp2008

December 15, 2009, 05:03:52 PM
Wow - that Bricktown area is a TREMENDOUS example of SMART urban planning!

Convention center, two hotels, b-ball arena, baseball park and nightlife/canal ride RIGHT on top of each other. Brilliant planning, unlike SuburbJacksonville.

AaroniusLives

December 15, 2009, 05:04:02 PM

Well, the retail, mixed-use component of that area hasn't opened yet, and unfortunately we have this pesky recession, so it's not a whole-hearted success. However, those people living in the Ballpark District do have access to shopping, dining and retail via the metro. People are moving there and are supporting the limited commerce. So it's perhaps not correct to label the area a failure. Is it the success they were looking for? Not yet, anyway.

Conversely, Columbia Heights built mixed-use development, anchored by a Target and Giant grocery store and is a success beyond anyone's imagination. Mount Vernon Square, also very mixed-use in development, anchored by a Safeway "urban lifestyle" grocery store, has been a huge success. Even Prince George's Plaza, where they built mixed-use development around an existing mall and Metro station, has been a success, despite the retaining of the very suburban mall component. All three had empty blocks and were/are considered unsafe. Nonetheless, success stories, all.

You need both poultry and unborn young. Will every attempt work? Of course not. I could easily argue that it's the very presense of the landscraper stadium that's keeping SouthWest from truly being the neighborhood they're trying to build (that's a big slice of dead space to traverse around.) But to not try, and to continue to do the wrong things? That's just stupid.

finehoe

December 15, 2009, 05:31:15 PM
That's like saying people in Vienna have access to shopping, dining and retail via the Metro.  It sort of defeats the purpose of living in a dense, walkable area if you have to take the Metro to do basic shopping.  But my point is, you are correct, you need both.  Building one aspect in the hope that it will spur the other doesn't usually work.  And building a mega-project like a sports stadium in the belief that it will create a vibrant neighborhood is even more far-fetched.

(BTW, the area where the stadium is and that I was talking about is Southeast, not Southwest.)

thelakelander

December 15, 2009, 05:32:50 PM
finehoe are you sure about that?  I just went on Google Earth and the first image that popped up in that area was of a TOD being constructed and a Safeway grocery store.







I don't know what the original expections were, but if this is considered failure, what do we call what's happening locally?

finehoe

December 15, 2009, 05:47:22 PM
That TOD is in the Southwest quadrant, not the Southeast.  It is a good 10-12 blocks from the ballpark area, and one has to walk through housing projects to get to it.

finehoe

December 15, 2009, 06:00:48 PM
I don't know what the original expections were, but if this is considered failure, what do we call what's happening locally?

The original expectations were that it would be a lively 24/7 neighborhood with entertainment venues there that would attract people from across the region.  What they have is a lot of empty office buildings and even more empty condos, with a few retail outlets that cater mainly to the few office workers that are there.  The only thing that attracts people from outside the neighborhood is the ball park, but they tend to just come in and then just leave, because there are no bars or resturants around there for them to go to before or after the game.

thelakelander

December 15, 2009, 06:11:28 PM
I've always felt that 24/7 neighborhoods evolve organically, especially entertainment districts (although Oklahoma City's Bricktown seems to be an exception).  Has the development that's taken place been heavily subsidized or is it market rate?

JaxNative68

December 15, 2009, 06:12:14 PM
the photo above shows the Navy Yard Metro Station.  If my memory serves me correctly from my days of living there, that is in the Southeast quadrant, pretty much on the border of the Southwest.

AaroniusLives

December 15, 2009, 06:40:29 PM

You are technically correct...although they are calling that rapidly developing area "Near Southeast." I'm uncertain as to the TOP in Southeast-Southeast that you are referring to, unless it's the never-ending attempt to revive Anacostia, which makes waking up Downtown Jacksonville look like turning on a clock-radio in comparison.

So, it would help to know which TOD you're talking about...

...although, perhaps not. Not every attempt is going to work. Does that mean you shouldn't try? Does that mean you should continue to make the efforts that have proven fruitless? Most TOD development has proven to be successful using mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly ideals.


Errr, not quite. That Metro station, as you very well know, is a commuter station on the end of the Orange Line. It's designed to park and ride car-dependent commuters into the city, or into Rosslyn. It is not remotely located in a pedestrian-friendly environment whatsoever. It has been criticized numerous times as an example of a failure to capitalize on the Metro, usually as a contrast to the success of the Arlington urban villages concept. It only gets a walkscore of 34, as it's not designed to be walked around upon. But, you knew that.

Read more here http://virginiaplaces.org/vagupnova/smarttransportation.html:


 
The Ballpark District/Near Southeast gets a Walkscore of 88. Isherwood ST NE, knee-deep in crack town, gets an 87. Barnaby Woods, the lowest scoring 'hood in DC, gets a Walkscore of 44, higher than the Vienna Metro station area by ten points.

tufsu1

December 15, 2009, 07:09:23 PM

correct...this station is at most 4 blocks from the stadium

finehoe

December 15, 2009, 08:31:26 PM
So, it would help to know which TOD you're talking about...

I was talking about the Safeway in Lake's first photo, which is quite a hike from the residences around the ballpark, necessitating crossing a busy arterial road and then traveling through the projects.  The other pictures s/he posted are indeed of TOD around the Navy Yard stop near the ballpark, but as the huge banner on the one building shows, they are far from full.

Your recitation of the walkability scores of various Metro stops misses the point.  If someone moves to a dense, walkable 'hood, it's generally so they can partake of urban living, like walking to the grocery store, going around the corner to have a drink, or meeting friends at the restuarant down the street.  If they have to get on the subway to do that, they might as well live in Vienna.

rjp2008

December 15, 2009, 11:54:42 PM
Jax is stuck in the 1950's and 60's. Everything seems old. Changes happen very, very slowly. I lived there briefly in 99, then returned last summer for the first time since. I was shocked how little had changed if at all. At the start of the decade, it seemed like a city on the rise, even though back then I almost NEVER went downtown.

One thing going for it is that it's a very pro-family area. With the abundance of suburbia, there's not a lot of concern for entertainment life or being some kind of east coast attraction. People care about working hard, raising decent families, participating in church and community, and that's it.

Ocklawaha

December 16, 2009, 01:56:55 AM

AaroniusLives

December 16, 2009, 11:20:25 AM


That's changing your argument.


Since nobody who lives near the Vienna Metro considers it to be a walkable area, it doesn't compare well to Near Southeast, or for that matter Anacostia, where both are walkable, and yet both are not exactly blessed with essential retail. However, unlike Vienna, where one would take their life in their hands to get to the Metro station, and one would freeze or burn on the never-ending parking lot, one could walk to a Metro station in Near Southeast or Vienna and go to a Safeway, Giant or Target in a few minutes. 

finehoe

December 16, 2009, 12:09:26 PM

How so?  My argument is that if you are to have successful infill development, you need to have more than just shiny new buildings in a neighborhood.  If the residents need to get in their car, hop on the subway, take a bus, ride a horse and buggy, whatever, to another neighborhood to partake of urban life, then the project can't be called successful and they are little better off than if they lived in suburbia.


Jeez, talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees.  It's not about effing Vienna.  I could just as easily said Fort Totten or Grosvenor, or any one of the stations where there is no there there.  It's about planners/developers/politicians thinking that by plopping some condos down somewhere without the attendant services and amenities that make it a desirable place to live believing that they have succeeded just because they have built some new buildings.  My whole point is that this is exactly the trap Jacksonville often falls into, and the ballpark area illustrates that you need more than just a few condos and some office buildings, you need stores, restaurants, nightlife, etc. Otherwise the venture will not work the way you want.

It's hilarious that you are arguing with me about this since I was throwing it out in support of your point about the chicken and the egg.

stephendare

December 17, 2009, 05:18:29 PM
Some great comments on an Oklahoma City Forum:

http://www.okctalk.com/okc-metro-area-talk/20125-maps-3-news.html

stephendare

December 17, 2009, 05:20:31 PM
Also a really great article about Jacksonville in response to our article about Oklahoma City

http://downtownontherange.blogspot.com/2009/12/jacksonville.html

thelakelander

December 17, 2009, 05:44:23 PM
Wow, Metro Jacksonville definitely gets the news out there.  I had no idea, Oklahoma City people would have discovered the Metro Jacksonville story so quick.

stephendare

December 17, 2009, 05:48:38 PM

Its not just Oklahoma City People, Lake.

Consider this recent email to the editors:

Wacca Pilatka

December 17, 2009, 06:06:18 PM
My sister worked in Bricktown at the start of this decade, in the Oklahoma Hardware building.  It was just in the early stages of its comeback then; the ballpark and canal were in place along with a smattering of restaurants and nightlife, but the residential, Bass Pro Shops, and Sonic HQ were not.  There was not very much foot traffic day or night, though the potential was obvious.

Oklahoma City is one of the few cities whose people are as friendly as Jacksonville's, so I'm glad to see it doing well.  Out of curiosity, did you happen to see the Automobile Alley neighborhood north of Bricktown?  I found this to be a fascinating strip--old car dealership buildings not unlike the Claude Nolan pre-remodeling, lots of well-preserved auto signage--but not much was going on there at the time other than themed banners and a coffee shop.  It's nice to see in the OKC article Stephen posted that it has become a loft district.  I really wanted to see it take off, but I haven't been back there since late '02 or so.

One quibble with the linked article from OKC, though: while it makes many valid points, I take issue with its presumption that the Jaguars are leaving and the somewhat haughty comment that OKC continues to sell out Thunder games.  Considering the Thunder have only been around for two years, that'd be like our trumpeting our NFL attendance in 1995 or 1996.

thelakelander

December 17, 2009, 06:39:14 PM
I'm loving the Oklahoma City discussion about Jacksonville.  Its really telling to hear people who visit the city giving their opinions of it.

reednavy

December 17, 2009, 06:50:51 PM
Let's take over City Hall and the CVB.

Keith-N-Jax

December 29, 2009, 02:03:56 AM
Reednavy the city/cvb are well aware of this site. Unfortunately comprehension is not required to be a city leader or mayor for that matter in the COJ. If it were we'd probably not be having this discussion. Anyway another nice piece of work. It's obvious that people have learned to live with cold weather as well as hurricanes, earthquakes, and tornadoes.

finehoe

January 27, 2010, 02:08:10 PM
"...much of the revival of downtown is being financed by taxpayers, who have a history of approving taxes to improve the city. In 1993, city voters approved a temporary one-cent increase in the sales tax to redevelop the riverfront, renovate the fairgrounds and build a ballpark, sports arena, library, trolley system, and a mile-long canal. For the next 15 years, residents have voted to continue paying for renovations on all the city’s public schools and the river. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/realestate/commercial/27devon.html?scp=1&sq=Oklahoma%20City&st=cse

fsu813

February 09, 2010, 02:03:39 AM
RANTS & RAVES: Jacksonville could learn from Oklahoma City

Ron Littlepage's opinion piece in Sunday's paper is spot-on. I live in Jacksonville but married into a family from Oklahoma City. Jacksonville and Oklahoma City are very similar in many ways except we have a lot more waterfront. For about 10 years I have watched the sales tax initiative, called MAPS, in Oklahoma City transform Bricktown, a blighted industrial area adjacent to their downtown, into a thriving urban core. On a recent flight to Oklahoma City, a woman asked me about Jacksonville. Puzzled, she asked, "That river is beautiful - why doesn't anyone use it?" How long will we argue and wonder about what type of city we want to live in? Do we, the citizens of Jacksonville have the courage to step boldly toward a better future? If so, Oklahoma City provides a good guide.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-02-09/story/rants_raves_jacksonville_could_learn_from_oklahoma_city

fsujax

February 09, 2010, 11:02:37 AM
Went to a meet the Mayor breakfast sponsored by ULI this morning. The Mayor talked about the three projects  for Downtown (Frienship Fountain, etc.) and the Convention Center, but when asked about mass transit.....well, let's just say it wasn't good. He did mention the JRTC and busways, but said that "light rail" is probably still 20 years away. Looks like you guys still have some major selling to do!

thelakelander

February 09, 2010, 11:12:13 AM
We're selling but we can't do it all alone.  We'll need you guys too.  I think its pretty well known that Peyton isn't going to embrace the concept.  Its not in his DNA.  2011 is where people should be focused.

fsujax

February 09, 2010, 11:14:39 AM
oh i am trying too! just seems to fall on deaf ears. We need the business community to play a more active, selling role!

tufsu1

February 09, 2010, 11:22:00 AM

I spoke with 2 major mayoral candidates last week....the first one said the same thing as the Mayor...

And the other, while agreeing that we are way behind, didn't seem to have enough knowledge about how we could catch up....so I offered my assistance.

Will be heraing from a 3rd mayoral candidate soon...but expect that person to be the last one to grab onto the transit notion (or anything else progressive for that matter).

thelakelander

February 09, 2010, 11:37:12 AM
I've met with two so far and plan to speak to another on Monday.

One (Johnson) has always agreed and the other (Mullaney) agreed after a four hour meeting with MJ a few weeks ago.  He believes we already have the money for these things, education and more but that our funding priorities must change (ex. get our financial house in order).  I plan to meet Moran on Thursday.

Lunican

February 09, 2010, 12:40:40 PM
Here is a link to the article by Ron Littlepage.
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/columnists/ron_littlepage/2010-02-07/story/lets_follow_oklahoma_citys_path_to_success_in_jac

thelakelander

February 09, 2010, 02:14:34 PM
I wonder why Oklahoma City doesn't believe rail is 20 years away from implementation in their city?  What are we lacking that they don't?

fsujax

February 09, 2010, 03:42:43 PM
Leadership!

reednavy

February 09, 2010, 03:45:15 PM

Exactly, a Republican mayor that isn't afraid of seeing the big picture ahead, unlike our mayor.

kells904

February 09, 2010, 04:55:27 PM
Hello MJ...

As you can see I don't post very often.  I feel smarter just by reading all of your posts.  Anyway, it goes without saying lake, that you guys do need all of us to join in the fight with you on this.  Election season is absolutely CRITICAL to the future of the City, and to avoid keeping us all in this Mayberry mentality for another 20 years.  Right now I live in Va. Beach...in some ways this area is almost exactly like Jacksonville--as you guys have pointed out before.  There's 5 different incarnations of an interstate (I-64, 264, 464, 564, 664), HOV lanes and four- and five-lane highways.  And STILL, traffic sucks.  These people know that building more roads isn't the long-term answer, and they've broken ground on a light rail project that'll eventually connect the Seven Cities and try to reverse sprawl.  Why COJ and JTA think building miles and miles of more roads for a bunch of clumsy ass buses--buses that no one is going to ride--is such a splendid idea infuriates me.
Our City Hall needs to know that NOT ONE OF THEM IS SAFE, and can get booted at any time they conveniently "forget" that they work for us, and it's not the other way around.  That, in my opinion, is the only way to effect change.  The next mayor has to understand the importance of damn near everything discussed on this site; if none of the candidates running meets this criteria, then it's up to us to let them know that none of them are good enough, and we won't vote for them.  Yes, that's a monumentous undertaking on our part to actually have an election that matters, but I don't think we have much of a choice this time.

finehoe

June 01, 2010, 11:17:52 AM
Ballpark renaissance striking out in D.C.
By: Bill Myers
Examiner Staff Writer
June 1, 2010
 
The Washington Nationals were supposed to be the symbol of D.C.'s economic renaissance.

But half a decade after the city's leaders plunked down hundreds of millions of tax dollars to bring baseball back to the nation's capital, many Washingtonians are still waiting for their dividends.

"What did it bring here besides the stadium?" said Victor Williams, who lives in the neighborhood near Nationals Park.

The $611 million stadium -- nearly all of it paid out of public coffers -- was packaged as the best way to build up the long-moribund neighborhoods around the Navy Yard and the Anacostia River.

"This ballpark really is about ... the rebirth of the Anacostia waterfront," then-mayor Anthony Williams said at the 2006 groundbreaking.

But the collapse of the economy and the team's futility have conspired to keep people and businesses from the area. Half Street SW is still advertising about 75,000 square feet of space and is, as one resident described it, "a giant bowl of mud."

It didn't help that one of the neighborhood's top developers was Monument Realty, whose main financier, Lehman Brothers, shut down in the recession.

Attendance at Nationals games was projected to average nearly 30,000, meaning suburbanites would help pay for the stadium with every ticket, hot dog and beer. But the Nats reached that milestone only in 2005, the club's first year in the District -- in Robert F. Kennedy stadium. This year, in the Nats' third year in their new park, fewer than 21,000 are coming to each game.

That means D.C. businesses are shouldering the biggest burden in paying the stadium off. From fiscal 2005 to the end of this fiscal year, more than $269 million in baseball-related revenues will have come into the city's coffers, records show. Barely a quarter of those revenues will have come from stadium sales taxes or stadium rent; the rest will have come from two citywide taxes on businesses.

Still, the ballpark is producing cash. The city finance office projects that baseball will have netted more than $135 million by the end of fiscal 2010.

"For all the anti-baseball people out there, we are balancing the budget on the profits of the stadium," said Councilman Jack Evans, D-Ward 2.

Stephanie Hession, a real estate economist from CoStar Group, said the ballpark is a victim of poor timing: The shovels were breaking ground just as the economy was heading south.

"It has nothing to do with D.C.," Hession said. "It has everything to do with overall trends."

Nationwide, baseball attendance is down by about 400 customers a game, according to Baseball-Reference.com.

The vacancy rate for offices near the ballpark is more than 13 percent, Hession said. That's a slight improvement from last year. And she said a recent study showed the area's population more than doubling from last year.

The citywide vacancy rate has been about 15 percent.

"The submarket is emerging," Hession said. "It takes time to develop into a viable area."

In the meantime, the economic slump has made landlords and real estate agents desperate.

"They're throwing in the kitchen sink to get folks to move there," Capitol Hill staffer Alex Johnson told The Washington Examiner about his apartment near the ballpark.

Councilman David Catania, I-At Large, was an ardent foe of the stadium deal. He said, though, that the city has to make the best of it.

"As it turns out, we've paid a huge cost, and we're still waiting for the benefits," Catania said. "In the long run, it'll pay off."



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Ballpark-renaissance-striking-out-in-D_C_-95284144.html#ixzz0pc9JP425