Should We Pay Professionals To Live Downtown?

[Metro Jacksonville]

Should We Pay Professionals To Live Downtown?



As I continue to research how other communities are addressing many urban issues Jacksonville faces, various innovative strategies pop up every now and then.  Despite Jacksonville's growth over the last half century, I've always seen our urban core as having eerily similar problems to Detroit over the same time period.  

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-jan-should-we-pay-professionals-to-live-downtown

[Adam W]

I think it's a great idea. I've actually long supported incentives like this for people to move downtown. You need to get bodies downtown (and staying downtown for an appreciable period of time) for a reasonable amount of infrastructure/amenities to develop - shops, restaurants, etc. It can work, I think.

[vicupstate]

Does the funding come from the city alone?  What has been the response thus far?

[Redbaron616]

Rather than dumping it on the taxpayers, which too many "progressive" solutions always want to do, try selling much of the city-owned real estate downtown and let private enterprise develop it.

[thelakelander]

Does the funding come from the city alone?  What has been the response thus far?

From what I can tell, it appears the funding comes from a couple of companies with major operations in or near downtown.  The city is broke, so I can't imagine them pouring much money into this concept.

[thelakelander]

Rather than dumping it on the taxpayers, which too many "progressive" solutions always want to do, try selling much of the city-owned real estate downtown and let private enterprise develop it.

I've always been a fan of getting back to the basics while eliminating restrictive policy/regulation and letting the free market take more control. Long term, that also means addressing our policies that basically subsidize private development in the city's fringes at the urban core's expense.  However, if you want to change things around quick, you have to get pretty aggressive.  Paying people to move there is pretty aggressive but in reality, that's something we already do indirectly in our suburbs.

[Noone]

No. When is the next DIA meeting?

[civil42806]

well I have to say since no one else  will "thats the only way it will happen"

[Tacachale]

Not sure this would be a great idea for Jax at this stage. I don't think there's any lack of demand for downtown living; what we lack are places to live. The options that exist now usually stay pretty full.

What we need is more residential infill and better connections between inhabited areas; I'd argue that's what should be incentivized first.

[Captain Zissou]

Companies in Jacksonville don't have the commitment to downtown needed to fund these programs.  If the same program were to take place here, you'd be paying people to move to southside, because that's where the jobs are.  Short of the hospitals, FIS, and Everbank, what companies are really downtown that could afford this??

I heard something like this being offered in North Dakota (maybe South) in an NPR segment a few weeks ago.

[fsujax]

^^CSX to name one, but i dont see it happening.

[thelakelander]

Not sure this would be a great idea for Jax at this stage. I don't think there's any lack of demand for downtown living; what we lack are places to live. The options that exist now usually stay pretty full.

There isn't a lack of demand for residential living in downtown Detroit, Midtown, and New Center either.  Those are the best spots in that city for urban living and already more vibrant than the area we refer to as downtown Jax.  There just appears to be an effort from the corporations there to kick infill growth into overdrive.  They may have around 5,000 or so living in this area now (I'll have to go back and confirm).  I've seen reports where they want to increase that population to 15,000 by 2015.  You get that many people pouring in and infill development opportunities come along as well.  For example, as a result, a Whole Foods is now under construction there.

What we need is more residential infill and better connections between inhabited areas; I'd argue that's what should be incentivized first.

I agree on the importance of connectivity and evidently so does Detroit and this group of companies.  The companies have also raised $100 million in private dollars for a three mile starter modern streetcar line and the city is adding over 100 miles of bike lanes and trails to the area over the next 2-3 years.

[thelakelander]

Companies in Jacksonville don't have the commitment to downtown needed to fund these programs.  If the same program were to take place here, you'd be paying people to move to southside, because that's where the jobs are.  Short of the hospitals, FIS, and Everbank, what companies are really downtown that could afford this??

I heard something like this being offered in North Dakota (maybe South) in an NPR segment a few weeks ago.

How much money did we give in incentives to Everbank, 220 Riverside, and Riverside Park?  I wonder what would be the city's return on investment if a similar amount of money was put into a similar styled program where you invest in people?

[Mathew1056]

From what I understand Shands of Jacksonville already has a program in place where they give an incentive to their employees to buy in Springfield. I'm not sure of the end and out of it, but I have a neighbor who used the program. That's proof positive enough for me.

[Tacachale]

Not sure this would be a great idea for Jax at this stage. I don't think there's any lack of demand for downtown living; what we lack are places to live. The options that exist now usually stay pretty full.

There isn't a lack of demand for residential living in downtown Detroit, Midtown, and New Center either.  Those are the best spots in that city for urban living and already more vibrant than the area we refer to as downtown Jax.  There just appears to be an effort from the corporations there to kick infill growth into overdrive.  They may have around 5,000 or so living in this area now (I'll have to go back and confirm).  I've seen reports where they want to increase that population to 15,000 by 2015.  You get that many people pouring in and infill development opportunities come along as well.  For example, as a result, a Whole Foods is now under construction there.

What we need is more residential infill and better connections between inhabited areas; I'd argue that's what should be incentivized first.

I agree on the importance of connectivity and evidently so does Detroit and this group of companies.  The companies have also raised $100 million in private dollars for a three mile starter modern streetcar line and the city is adding over 100 miles of bike lanes and trails to the area over the next 2-3 years.

I'd imagine there's a difference in the amount of underused downtown residential, and buildings suitable for adaptation, between our cities. From the website it appears that Detroit has a lot more of it than we do. We've never had much residential in the downtown core, and most of what we do have is already pretty full up. What I'm saying is that at this stage, it looks like what we're really lacking is places for people to live, no matter how many people would chose to live there if they could.