Riverside Avondale an American Top 10 Neighborhood

[Steve]

I'll bite.

Honestly, I think it comes down to three things:

1. Residents: In the scheme of things, no one lives downtown. RAP and Riverside and Avondale have been fighting for their neighborhood.

2. Historic Preservation: Don't underestimate this one. People like Riverside and Avondale because it's something different. They aren't building any more old buildings, and it something that sets Riverside and Avondale apart. Downtown has refused to embrace this.

3. Overcomplication: We've overcomplicated downtown. We tend to invest in "big money" projects downtown, yet ignore the little things. This kind of goes back to the residents. Having residents exposes the "little" problems more because residents complain, and they get solved.

My $.02

[ChriswUfGator]

I agree with Steve, and also wanted to add a real biggie here;

Riverside didn't summarily tear down every vacant building, thereby creating a cost prohibitive situation for residents and businesses wanting to occupy the area. If there is little left to occupy, you're looking at the cost of building from scratch, which is a burden most restaurants, residential families, retail, etc., cannot afford. This is probably more responsible than any other one thing for the disparity in Riverside vs. Downtown, or even other historic neighborhoods that have failed to turn around like Springfield.

Preserving the properties is not only the ethically correct thing to do with regard to preservation initiatives, but it's the financially necessary component to an area ever being able to undergo a resurgence. 99% of people and small business can't afford to build from scratch. But they can afford to buy an old place and fix it up. When you remove this from the equation, the cost barriers to entry become too high, and so nobody does, with the result that the area suffers perpetual stagnation.

[thelakelander]

Like the others have stated, there are several reasons for the different outcomes. Us overplanning and complicating simple things in downtown probably accounts for the largest difference. We ripped apart  downtown's economic structure in the name of revitalization, create new plans every decade, half ass implement them and wonder why things haven't worked out.

[Dog Walker]

You can say the basic reason Riverside/Avondale has been successful in two words.

Wayne Wood

He started everything when he saw the first beginnings of demolition/road building/conversion zoning.  And he has kept at it for thirty-five years; steadily, good-naturedly, and with creativity.

[Dashing Dan]

Kudos to Wayne Wood, but Wayne has been as strong an advocate for downtown as anybody.  I've heard great things about the station celebrations that he used to organize.

So how come Wayne's efforts were more successful in his own neighborhood than they were downtown?

[thelakelander]

Another thing to consider is Riverside and downtown have different economic structures.  What works in Riverside, San Marco and Ortega might not turn out the same for downtown, Brentwood and Durkeeville because of different economic and social issues.

[Dashing Dan]

Another thing to consider is Riverside and downtown have different economic structures.  What works in Riverside, San Marco and Ortega might not turn out the same for downtown, Brentwood and Durkeeville because of different economic and social issues.

San Marco and Ortega are different from downtown and Riverside.

Riverside has its share of upscale residents, but downtown does too.

[thelakelander]

They are all pretty different, socially, economically and culturally.  So its pretty hard to compare a residential dominaed neighborhood like Riverside/Avondale in an apples to apples situation with a denser highly commercialized district like downtown.  Not saying there aren't certain situations that overlap but just noting the differences in background context, which have a direct impact on the final product.

[Dashing Dan]

There are plenty of cities that have planned well for their downtowns, as well as for their neighborhoods. 

My question is why has Jacksonville done so well with planning for at least one of its neighborhoods, while planning for downtown has languished?

[thelakelander]

Overplanning in downtown. We've stripped apart the economic structure and have not stuck with any type of development plan long term. Thus, we now have a downtown landscape with many parts that don't go together in a manner that stimulates vibrancy. Luckily, other than LaVilla, Brooklyn, Sugar Hill and East Jacksonville, the majority of our urban neighborhoods have eluded this over zealous level of public scrutiny.

[Dashing Dan]

That's bad planning, not overplanning. 

[thelakelander]

If that type of terminology floats your boat but "bad" or "over" probably depends more on how each individual defines those terms and applies them to specific situations (sort of like describing a sofa as a couch or vise versa).  Nevertheless, I'm not going to say that creating and poorly implementing an excessive amount of master plans within a short time period couldn't be viewed as "bad."

[Dashing Dan]

So why all of those missteps downtown and not elsewhere?

[thelakelander]

Perhaps a higher focus by political leaders over the years, due to higher exposure and regional revelance, combined with a long term embracement of poor urban planning concepts.

[ChriswUfGator]

That's bad planning, not overplanning. 

+1