Northside's Parkway Shops Nearing Completion

[Metro Jacksonville]

Northside's Parkway Shops Nearing Completion



While much of Jacksonville's retail focus addresses what's new at St. Johns Town Center or what's lacking in downtown, the area around the Northside's River City Marketplace continues to see growth as well.  Here is a visual update on the status of the latest shopping center north of the Trout River: Parkway Shops

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-feb-northsides-parkway-shops-nearing-completion

[peestandingup]

Gross.

[I-10east]

Let more of the typical anti-suburban rhetoric begin...

[thelakelander]

A possible kick in the pants for the Regency area.  Nevertheless, this area should get another major economic boost with Shands moving forward on their project across the street.

[tufsu1]

Gross.

just curious...is your problem the location or the design of the center....in essence, if it were more walkable, would that be not gross?

[peestandingup]

Gross.

just curious...is your problem the location or the design of the center....in essence, if it were more walkable, would that be not gross?

Its gross because every single one of these places, scattered all across the country, look EXACTLY the same, have the same corporate giants occupying them (many stocked with Chinese made goods using slave labor), are completely car-centric with seas of parking lots surrounding them, stuck out on the boonies while the city cores (what actually defines a real city) looks like shit with no one living in them, etc.

Has nothing to do with being a hipster, or snob, or urban whore/suburban hater or anything else I'm sure people will try to label this as. Its gross because that's what we've become here in America & is a big problem with what's wrong with us as a society & a country. Hope that answers everyone's questions. Feel free to disagree, I just personally think its tragic.

[thelakelander]

I've always felt....and still do...that you can't blame site design on a private company.  Government controls this.  Dick's, CVS, Marshall's, etc. could ultimately care less about suburban vs. urban design, inner city vs. far flung store location, etc. as long as there is a viable market for them to do business in and their costs are the same.  Here, it's simply more difficult to put together a multimodal friendly site plan than the autocentric stuff the city's land use and zoning regulations promote. If you want change, it all starts at the local level, imo.

[fsquid]

I've always felt....and still do...that you can't blame site design on a private company.  Government controls this.  Dick's, CVS, Marshall's, etc. could ultimately care less about suburban vs. urban design, inner city vs. far flung store location, etc. as long as there is a viable market for them to do business in and their costs are the same.  Here, it's simply more difficult to put together a multimodal friendly site plan than the autocentric stuff the city's land use and zoning regulations promote. If you want change, it all starts at the local level, imo.

agree

[peestandingup]

I've always felt....and still do...that you can't blame site design on a private company.  Government controls this.  Dick's, CVS, Marshall's, etc. could ultimately care less about suburban vs. urban design, inner city vs. far flung store location, etc. as long as there is a viable market for them to do business in and their costs are the same.  Here, it's simply more difficult to put together a multimodal friendly site plan than the autocentric stuff the city's land use and zoning regulations promote. If you want change, it all starts at the local level, imo.

Sure. I don't blame the stores themselves or the companies who build these types of destinations. They're just doing what they do. Governments could ultimately stop it, many of them have (with urban growth boundaries & things of that sort). But thats usually not the norm. Its a complicated issue I believe. A lot of it has to do with cities relying on this type of outward growth instead of smart, localized growth, transportation alternatives & true life quality enhancements. Jax is certainly in that camp. We talk about that a lot on here of course, but we're not a unique city in that respect. It's what everybody's done pretty much. Add some mega banks making loans on crap cookie cutter housing, spending more money on gas and everything that goes along with that whole mess, and you've got yourself a giant turd sandwich of an economy & cities across the country that are a shell of their former selves.

Developers of course do benefit & I'm sure there's a lot of back room deals going on, but its ultimately up to the people & the governments who represent them to reject it. But fat chance of that usually happening. People it seems in general don't care enough to pay attention & will just go with the "norm" or with what corporate America tells them to do, and governments are more likely to take the easy way of just letting anything be developed anywhere, no matter if it makes sense or has people's best interests in mind or not.

The funny part is, all of this stuff will eventually die off anyway from the retail collapse thats currently happening before our eyes, so who knows. Maybe they'll turn it back into cow pastures or nature will just reclaim it when its abandoned.

[thelakelander]

A lot of it has to do with cities relying on this type of outward growth instead of smart, localized growth, transportation alternatives & true life quality enhancements. Jax is certainly in that camp.

Anytime a municipality relies on "growth" as an economic engine, its a major problem for long term fiscal sustainability.  All growth isn't good and in Jacksonville's case, we've developed a model that is ponzi scheme based.  It's ponzi scheme based because the subsidies we provide (roads, utilities, libraries, schools, police/fire, pensions, etc.) are typically more than the amount of overall revenue that low density development generates.  Thus, even after decades of growth, as soon as the growth stops, you're in the red and in need of budget cutbacks.  With that said, suburban development isn't bad and not all urban development is good.  There is a balance.  For our future, we should be making sure that all of our growth should be fiscally sustainable on the public level instead of enacting policy to boost the individual developer's profit margins.

[Doctor_K]

Not to mention the TONS of derelict, dilapidated, and abandoned strip malls so much closer to "town". 

How about "smarter growth" for the sake of rehabbing all of this vacant, existing property than growth and expansion for the sake of growth and expansion?

At what point does it end?

[thelakelander]

It can end several ways.  For example, it can end with the city ultimately filing bankruptcy.  This is occurring in some cities across the country such as Stockton, CA.  It can also end with the general public electing representatives that work to move us away from decades old policies that ultimately lead to bankruptcy.  We've seen this type of thing happening with Charlotte and now it appears that even Orlando is starting to follow a similar path.  Locally, I think we're at a point where we could go either way.

[peestandingup]

It can end several ways.  For example, it can end with the city ultimately filing bankruptcy.  This is occurring in some cities across the country such as Stockton, CA.  It can also end with the general public electing representatives that work to move us away from decades old policies that ultimately lead to bankruptcy.  We've seen this type of thing happening with Charlotte and now it appears that even Orlando is starting to follow a similar path.  Locally, I think we're at a point where we could go either way.

I think a lot of cities are going to be unable to handle what this type of growth model has done because they're either not recognizing it, or are just telling themselves it'll somehow magically get better & they can just get back to growing themselves out of anything. I mentioned collapse of retail because I believe it's going to be a giant shit storm for a lot of cities to handle & all the housing arrangements that have grown up around that type of big box industry. Kinda like Detroit did around the auto industry. Its an extreme example sure, but one that should be learned from. Now they don't know what to do with all the housing glut in the outer rims & are mowing it down to turn it back into green spaces, gardens, etc because they simply can't take care of it.

I honestly don't know what to think about Jacksonville. Some days I think its going to be OK & they'll come to their senses, some days I think its doomed when they talk about outer beltways, mobility fee moratoriums, & all that nice development that goes along with those things as a way to "grow ourselves" out of trouble. Thats obviously never going to work. So anyone who supports it, you know who you need to get rid of. Because they either have someone's hands down their pants, or are just too stupid to hold any kind of elected office or appointed chair that makes decisions over city matters.

[jcjohnpaint]

Supply side economics-  Exactly what some on our council want to promote with the moratorium.  We need to rid our selves of these selfish politicians.  That will be a start. 

[stephendare]

Supply side economics-  Exactly what some on our council want to promote with the moratorium.  We need to rid our selves of these selfish politicians.  That will be a start.

And replace them with politicians who know that there is just as much profit from infill and densification for developers.