How Did We Get Here?
In 1992, at the behest of elected officials and prominent businessmen, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) began the planning process to widen Riverside Avenue and Forrest Street. The most vocal advocate of this project was Preston Haskell of The Haskell Company, an architecture, engineering, and construction firm headquartered along Riverside Avenue. The impetus of this planning process was the impending construction of a new $152 million interchange at I-10 and I-195, dubbed ‘The Big I’. That project would include the construction of an on/off ramp at Forest Street, providing a major gateway into downtown from the interstate highway system. In 1995, the Brooklyn area was designated as an Enterprise Zone, thereby allowing for various tax incentives for new infill development.
An aerial view of the new interchange built that provides direct interstate highway access to Brooklyn. Image courtesy of England-Thims and Miller.
Both the Big I and Riverside Avenue/Forest Street widening were complementary projects that came on the heels of the $153 million replacement of the Acosta Bridge. The Acosta Bridge project began in 1990, was partially opened to vehicular traffic in 1993 and was fully completed by 1994. The new bridge would provide high-speed connections between the bridge of both directions of Riverside Avenue.
With the eastern span of the new Acosta Bridge completed, work begins on the western span in this August 1993 photo courtesy of The AberdeenGroup / Smith Aerial Photography
By 2000, FDOT had begun to spend more than $25 million to acquire and demolish about 25 buildings along a half-mile portion of Brooklyn to accommodate future road widening. By 2003, another $10 million was allocated to begin the roadway construction that would widen Riverside Avenue and Forrest Streets to six lanes. As buildings began to fall, community advocates and some elected officials started to question the massive roadway project that would not only produce two expressway-equivalent roads, but also include a series of cul-de-sacs that permanently cut off Brooklyn’s historical street grid pattern.
Today’s transportation network in Brooklyn rearranged this historical street grid pattern in favor of a series of cul-de-sacs that dead end streets.
By 2004, the pushback ratcheted up after the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission (the precursor to today’s Downtown Investment Authority) paid Urban Design Associates (UDA) $205,000 to produce the Brooklyn Riverside Avenue District Study. Although the City had produced numerous planning documents for downtown over the preceding four decades, this was the first study that specifically focused on ways to use Brooklyn’s natural assets in order to attract mixed-use development throughout the neighborhood
The 10/I-95 interchange reconfiguration, aka The Big I, begins to take shape in this image from Archer Western.
Walter Kulash, a leading transportation consultant and part of the UDA consultant team, began to raise serious questions as to how FDOT’s plans would negatively impact Brooklyn’s ability to become a walkable, mixed-use destination. At the time he wrote that the effect of the proposed roadwork would be “degrading of the pedestrian atmosphere, from the ideal of closely spaced blocks with interesting frontage to the inevitability suburban-style development.” Kulash recommended several infrastructure modifications to facilitate the use of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel modes while retaining the roadway and intersection capacity needed to maintain effective vehicular traffic operations. He concluded that both Riverside Avenue and Forest Street could be reduced to four-lane roads, and could include on-street parking and additional pedestrian facilities (wider sidewalks, pedestrian crossings and shade trees). Kulash also warned against the creation of dead-end cul-de-sacs, and suggested that two small, square-shaped retention ponds along Forest Street could be reconfigured as a three-block-long linear pond that would create a ‘central park’ feature. As roadway construction had already begun, any changes to the design would have only a minimal incremental cost increase- but the long-term benefits would be significant.
*A before/after image of Riverside Avenue depicting the loss of building stock due to right of way acquisition, necessary to expand the roadway into a six-lane thoroughfare. *
Despite calls from community advocates, the First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization (the precursor to today’s North Florida Transportation Planning Organization) and elected officials who represented the surrounding areas, FDOT (aided by then Mayor John Peyton) refused to consider any type of changes that would result in delaying the road widening. Aage Schroder, then the secretary for FDOT’s Northeast Florida district, scoffed at the notion that adding on-street parking was necessary. “The state would have never paid so much for property just to add on-street parking and landscaped medians. That would be folly,” Schroeder told the Florida Times Union in 2004. Threatening to halt other roadway projects in Duval County in retaliation, FDOT contended that any new changes to the Riverside/Avondale widening would cost $15,000 a day in design costs alone.
In 1989 as justification for the massive roadway widening project, FDOT forecasted that by 2010 42,200 vehicles a day would travel on Forrest Street and that 57,500 vehicles would travel along Riverside Ave daily. In 2018, Forest Street saw 14,274 daily vehicular traffic, or just under 15% of the roadway’s capacity. Riverside Avenue sees more activity, however in 2018 only 28,875 vehicles travel along the roadway each day. Only 57% of that street’s maximum vehicular capacity is used. Based on traffic data alone, it would be hard to make a case that the money spent more than two decades ago was used in the wisest way.
In 2017 the Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) awarded a $100,000 consulting contract to POND & Company and Dover, Kohl & Partners to study ways to make Brooklyn more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly. Their recommendations almost mirrored those of UDA more than a decade earlier.
Beyond traffic counts, POND used information from the Streetlight Data company, that compiles GPS information from major cell phone carriers. This data can be used to construct trips to include starting and ending destination of those driving, walking or biking. The GPS data revealed that 50% of the traffic in the Brooklyn neighborhood is passing through without stopping. This is an important justification that supports road lane reductions. As Brooklyn is not a primary destination for roughly half of the traffic along Riverside and Forest, if both streets were reduced from six to four lanes and roadway capacity is exceeded in the future- it is highly likely that this pass-through traffic could simply divert to another route.
POND, an architecture, engineering, planning and construction firm hired by the DIA, proposed changes to Riverside Avenue to promote walkability in the emerging Brooklyn neighborhood.
POND recommended that Riverside Avenue be reduced from a six way road, to four lanes with protected pedestrian crossings, two protected bike lanes and parallel parking in both directions. The firm recommended that Forest Street should be restriped to add a buffered bike lane and on-street parking, and include a bike box to offer cyclists a safe way to make a left turn from Forest Street onto Riverside Ave. Additionally, a new sidewalk on the west side of Magnolia Street and a midblock crossing at Magnolia Street should be installed. The firm estimated that these improvements would cost about $5.3 million dollars.
Recommended changes for Forrest Street are shown here.
On a per-mile basis, the Riverside Avenue and Forest Street roadway project was the single most expensive infrastructure project in Duval County’s history. In total, $305,000 was spent on consultants over a 13-year period, which indicated that a small fraction of the overall cost should be redeployed in order to create the necessary conditions to maintain and enhance Brooklyn’s walkable, urban environment.
Not all of Kulash’s recommendations were thrown by the wayside. And therein lies the creation of Unity Plaza. Brooklyn’s infrastructure had long been neglected. Even today, many of the residential structures located West of Park Street still lack access to municipal sewer lines. Inadequate stormwater management in the neighborhood, meant that untreated runoff drained into McCoys Creek and the St Johns River. This unmitigated runoff contributed to flooding issues along McCoys Creek and negatively impacted water quality flowing into the St Johns River.
Originally, FDOT planned two smaller stormwater retention ponds along the northern edge of Forrest Street. FDOT refused to pay for any changes to this system, but did agree to modify their plans if someone else footed the bill. In response, the City bonded out $20 million in 2005 for the Brooklyn Regional Stormwater System project that would support redevelopment efforts in the area.
Construction of the Brooklyn Regional Stormwater System is depicted here in this image from England-Thims and Miller.
Magnolia Street from Forest Street to Dora Street would be reconstructed and raised up 7 feet. Utilities would be upgraded, including the installation of new water, sewer, electric, gas and communication lines. All stomwater would be redirected through a 66” pipe buried beneath the ground that spanned the entire neighborhood. This runoff would flow through a master stormwater pond that would treat surface waters to remove pollutants, before returning that water to the St Johns.
This large stormwater pond became the foundation of what would become Unity Plaza, a 2.5 acre plaza containing a lake, flowing fountain, pathways and an amphitheater. It would serve two purposes: that of a stormwater treatment facility that served the entire neighborhood, and of a public gathering space that could be called Brooklyn’s ‘central park’.
With construction of Forest Street complete, work shifted to the creation of a large stormwater treatment facility at the corner of Riverside and Forest. Image courtesy of England-Thims and Miller.
Hallmark Partners initially planned to break ground on an 83,000 square foot class A office building that would be anchored by Elkins Constructors and the Marks Gray law firm, a 130-room hotel and 250-space parking garage- flanked by a passive park space. When the economy soured, those plans were scrapped. By 2009, the development market started heating up for multi-family apartment buildings located in compact, walkable neighborhoods. 220 Riverside then morphed from primarily an office complex, into a new mixed-use building with a residential focus. To attract residents, the passive central park then evolved into something that would rival Portland’s Pioneer Square or New York City’s Byant Park.
Hallmark Partners initial plans for what would become 220 Riverside were more focued on an office user, as depicted in this image.
The newly imagined Unity Plaza was built by the developers of 220 Riverside for just under $10 million. The City agreed to contribute $2.6 million to the developers, to create a stage and tiered seating for the amphitheater. The City also paid $750,000 to a non-profit organization that would program, manage and provide maintenance for Unity Plaza in perpetuity.
Work on Unity Plaza nears completion in this aerial image from England-Thims and Miller.
Jen Jones was hired in 2013 to lead that non-profit organization. Unity Plaza officially opened in September of 2015. The hype behind the space was significant. Programming was to happen in the plaza 260 days a year, ranging from free yoga sessions to concerts from performing artists like Sheryl Crow and Adele. In addition to the amphitheater and adjoining retail spaces, planned amenities included vendor kiosks at the corner of Forest and Magnolia Streets, a band shell shad structure, a beer garden, a parking garage along Forest Street, a botanical garden, a speaker system throughout the 2.5-acre space and a 65-foot tall lotus flower sculpture placed in the center of Unity Plaza’s pond.
The original site plan for Unity Plaza.
For the first few months of operation, Unity Plaza did host regular programming, kicking off with a free concert by Edwin McCain. The non-profit also partnered with WJXT-TV to build a satellite station on site that would broadcast a new, daily television show called ‘River City Live’.
Further programming and capital improvements would come from millions of dollars of promised private sponsorships. Additionally, the retail spaces would direct a percentage of their rental payments to the non-profit entity to help fund programming that would in turn drive foot traffic into their doors. Two companies with corporate offices in Brooklyn would in fact step up with private sponsorships. Jax Federal Credit Union entered into a 10-year, $100,000 sponsorship of the commUNITY Center, a rentable community education room inside 220 Riverside. Servpro Jacksonville South and Arlington signed an in-kind sponsorship to clean the commUNITY Centerspace on a monthly basis.
Beyond these, private sponsorships were non-existent, and the slow trickle of activity in Unity Plaza would begin to dry up. Jones would step down from the non-profit by February of 2016. The commUnity Center closed and began to be used as a private event rental space operated by adjacent Hobnob in 2017. Today, the non-profit has ceased operations, the retail spaces that would provide a steady stream of funding to its operations sit empty, and the $750,000 cash infusion by the City has been exhausted.
Ultimately, three things led to Unity Plaza’s current state. First, the design configured the retail spaces around a central plaza that was meant to be highly programmed. These spaces had no visibility to the pass through traffic that has contributed to Brooklyn’s retail surge. Brooklyn’s vehicular traffic is still a significant driver of retail sales. Without visibility or convenient parking, people passing by had no reason to stop. That leads to the second challenge- the execution of the Unity Plaza non-profit was at best, poor. The residential density in Brooklyn has been slow to materialize. If the retail spaces relied on a heavily-programmed space to help drive foot traffic, the lack of fundraising and unwieldy spending of the non-profit tasked with programming the space failed miserably to deliver that promised customer base. Finally, the tenant mix simply missed the mark. While fast casual restaurants with mid-tier price points thrive next door at Brooklyn Station on Riverside, 220 Riverside’s tenants were all full service restaurants featuring high price points that didn’t keep up from a quality standpoint when compared to nearby competitors in San Marco, Riverside and Avondale. If you are going to spend $100+ on a meal, why do so in an area where parking is confusing and at a restaurant that might not offer the same experience as say that of nearby Orsay or Taverna?
Next: 220 Riverside’s Future