(04-06-2022, 12:14 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote:

(04-06-2022, 12:12 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: Do you even know the layout of downtown?  500 feet is nothing.  There is plenty of developable real estate further away than 500 feet from any of the 'C' buildings downtown, and yet, it doesn't develop.  Again, case in point, the Landing.  Why?  Also, all that property is lumped together for those 'C's.  How is that strategic?

I said parcels of land.

I didn't say buildings.

Literally anything owned by the "C". It could be 15 feet of nothing... but if it's next to something that could be a fun place? Nope. Stays a nothing building that just deteriorates.

Oh and I was wrong.. it's 500 feet if you're selling liquor.

There shall be not less than 1,500 feet from an established school or church for the on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages, not in conjunction with the service of food, except as specifically provided herein.

So bars and nightclubs? 1,500 feet..... basically... this city has been screwed for a very long time by a very specific group of people. Like pretty much all of downtown is within 6000 feet (obviously not square footage... but look at the width and length of downtown...its not much)... and if they own 30 properties all within that?

Point taken.

If it's truly vacant parcels, then that's a stupid rule and should be changed (if it already hasn't), tho I'm not sure how a vacant parcel translates to becoming a 'church', since it's not being used as such. That's like saying that raw land that I might own becomes zoned residential because I own another parcel somewhere with a house on it. Outside of the obvious structures, I wouldn't be aware of how the ownership of vacant land breaks out.

It still really doesn't fully explain the lack of development tho. From Adams Street down to the river front, there are currently places that have served alcohol, and they were there during the 30 years I worked downtown. There have been nightclubs on Adams/Bay/Monroe Streets, all that have come and gone. The Landing had retail shopping and nightclubs/bars/restaurants. As far back as when I started working there in 1981. So no, it can't all be explained by/blamed on the "C" word.

Some better explanations:
Crime/perception of crime
Limited parking
Jacksonville by nature and by City Charter being a decentralized city limit (Consolidation)
Government property occupying valuable river front land (former City Hall, former JEA Southside Generating Plant)
Ugly industry (all of Tallyrand Avenue, Maxwell House, City Jail)
Poor/corrupt City Planning
No downtown residential presence to support small businesses beyond the breakfast/lunch periods, or to support nightlife establishments.
Poor/incomplete public transportation (monorail unconnected to suburbia)
Terrible inner city schools
Limited consumer infrastructure (gas/food/retail shopping)

There are plenty of abandoned buildings that could be converted to residential housing. A couple have actually happened during the last 25 years. Meanwhile, this same gentrification has happened in other cities with much better results. Some that I am personally familiar with due to work travel are NYC/St Louis/Chicago/Philly/San Fran/San Diego and Seattle. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think that alcohol/nightlife is the only factor for people in choosing to live downtown. For a certain demographic, maybe. But more than a single demographic will be needed to get downtown developed. And it will take more than a glitzy entertainment center that many may want to visit but few want to live next to.

---