I stepped out of Peaches Restaurant on Farish Street the other day after stopping in to hear Dorothy Moore sing and to celebrate her recent album release. When I got to the curb, my feet turned away from the car and headed south down what there is of the sidewalk that borders the torn-up street. This, I thought, is the Entertainment District. In a word, it's a mess. But, I thought, it seems to be a little less of a mess than it was a few months ago.

Maybe it was the way the early evening sunlight filtered through the facades of the buildings that are still (barely) standing-combined with the second Corona I'd decided to drink, thanks to Peaches' all-too-reasonable beer prices-but all the sudden I got a good feeling about the Farish Street Entertainment District.

I still have my worries-and most of them center around the idea of a 'Hard Rock Farish' replacing some of the wonderful neighborhood places like Peaches-but I also got a sense of hope that there will, once again, be parties on that wonderful, historic street. And it would be just the right kind of plot twist for Farish if it turned out to hold one of the keys for bringing this city together around its downtown.

I think some folks in the developer community and city government feel about the same way this month, after the Aug. 4, 2003, announcement that the Electric Building downtown is being sold by Entergy to Duckworth Realty, Inc., which plans to renovate the 10-story structure into a 'mixed-use' project that includes office space, luxury residential space and ground-floor retail. The deal, which only took six months to bring to fruition, is seen by Mayor Harvey Johnson as a boon-he calls it a 'new milestone' that will hopefully encourage other downtown development.

John Lawrence, president of Downtown Partners, noted that seven new restaurants had opened in the past 18 months and office occupancy rates are at 90-94 percent. He also said that the excitement in Fondren was a huge catalyst for making the Electric Building deal happen, and he and developer Ted Duckworth agreed that it took a strong public-private partnership.

The exact financial participation by the City of Jackson isn't yet clear. The City and Hinds County are kicking in a property tax abatement so that improvements to the property's value won't be taxed for 7-10 years, depending on the final deal. And the project expects a $3 million historical preservation tax credit by being included in the Smith Park historical district.

The Electric Building will be restored by the Johnson Bailey Henderson McNeel (JBHM) architectural firm to its original 1927 appearance, and the entrances will be restored to resemble the original design. The top two floors will be 'executive condominiums,' a rooftop terrace will be added overlooking St. Andrews Cathedral, and a total of seven floors will be renovated for offices-five for Entergy, one for JBHM and one up for grabs to the first takers. (It won't be the priciest office space in Jackson, but suffice to say that the JFP isn't likely to have enough cash to get a spot on the waiting list.) The project will be completed by mid-year 2005, according to the timeline provided.

Meanwhile, more big downtown news looms-the sealed bids for the King Edward project are to be accepted by the Jackson Redevelopment Authority mere hours after the JFP goes to press. The city and JRA don't have a timeframe for reviewing or recommending the bids and, so far, doesn't plan any public meetings or discussions regarding the building. In a press conference at his office, Mayor Johnson said that the City is seeking a developer with experience pulling off this sort of project in terms of both the financing and the know-how.

When we'll know the exact nature of the King Edward plan is still on the horizon, although the Mayor seems determined to offer his assurances that the King Edward process is moving forward.

So that's where we're at downtown-Farish, Electric Building, King Edward, Telecom Center, Union Station-you probably know the list. So where do we-regular Jacksonians-fit into this plan?

On the JFP web site an interesting discussion cropped up the other day when readers began posting their own 'wish lists' for downtown Jackson. The suggestions ranged from making Capitol Street a two-way street again (which would make it more friendly for pedestrians) to building a minor-league hockey stadium downtown. Other suggestions include a Caribbean restaurant, a coffee shop that shows independent films and some sort of public gardens development at One Jackson Place.

What's interesting about the wish lists is not just the items on them-which are all pretty fascinating-but the spirit in which they're offered. For the first time in a while, people are excited and brainstorming about downtown Jackson in a positive way. I think that's the most important energy that we can put into this project.

At his press conference, I asked the Mayor what can be done, given all this downtown excitement, about Capitol Street between Congress and President, where buildings have broken windows and no tenants. He responded by saying that in Shreveport, La., he'd seen vacant storefronts used for artist studios or open markets to get people downtown and interested in renewing their taste for urban lifestyle.

Good idea. I say, let's take him up on that. If you want open-air art studios and markets downtown on Capitol, then write Mayor Johnson a letter or e-mail and let him know. (Or send them to us, and we'll publish them.) Let's make that happen.

Me? I like the idea of a Caribbean restaurant, a 'micro'-theater and a vibrant walking scene at night-used bookstores, coffee places, restaurants with live music.

And I've got a humble suggestion for One Jackson Place. Whatever the green-space project is, I recommend that it include a statue of Medgar Evers and a hands-on Civil Rights monument to the Woolworth lunch counter sit-in of 1963. Both might do wonders for Jackson on many levels. Got your own opinions? First, decide what you want in downtown and fill out your wish list. Second, start thinking about how you can make it happen. If you want to do something yourself-start a business, open a storefront-get a hold of someone in the city and start talking about it. If you don't want to talk to the city, stop by a JFP Lounge and talk to others about it. See if you can't figure out a way to make it go.

If you just want to enjoy a wonderful new downtown, that's fine too-talk it up when you can and, when there's an opportunity to go downtown, do it. Go to the restaurants, the shows, the exhibits, the museums and the planetarium. If people start hitting the sidewalks downtown, it will thrive.

Downtown Jackson will be vibrant if enough people take an interest. Sure, it takes developers and public servants and bankers and dealmakers. But it also takes citizens and small business owners and people willing to say what's on their mind and hold their leaders' feet to the fire (or their ears to the phone) until they follow through to make things happen and find new solutions. And, yeah, we can even praise those leaders a bit when they get it right.

Now, with so much attention focused on downtown, is a great time to put the pressure on our city-and ourselves-to improve downtown Jackson.

Todd Stauffer is publisher of the JFP.

Previous Comments

ID

68418

Comment

PART 1 - Jackson Downtown Development It sounds like a great idea in concept. However, I'd like to float this trial balloon to see what you all think. Mixed use zoning (residential-light commercial-parks) certainly makes sense because (1) you don't have to waste time using your car to get from A to Z. - which (2) reduces stress in traffic jams (of no small significance given the long term health effects stress has) (3) reduces the traffic jams themselves (more traffic efficiency, less air pollution from crawling vehicles) (4) less car use keeps the air cleaner (5) reduces the demand for fossil fuels (means petroleum could be cheaper, given the same level of production - though I seriously doubt this would come to pass except in the short run) (6) staying put in a certain spot - though not without its disadvantages (namely greater insularity, for one) - allows you to get to know your neighbors better (and benefits in potentially reduced crime because you know your neighbors, and almost certainly helps you develop a social network that is necessary for job and lifestyle connections) (7) Because of the above, I would think mixed use zoning would greatly curtail large scale urban abandonment, which preserves the city's tax base and urban unemployment (due to abandonment of businesses to higher income areas of a metro area) (8) Given this country's strong income/poverty/skills split largely along racial lines, greater mixed use zoning could very well be vital in reducing the ethnic gap in this regard, and thus might very well be a large part of solving the Creative City Dilemma (working and service class people who are nevertheless intrinsicly creative themselves abandoning Creative Areas for other areas - thus driving out the very creative elements that originally made the area special. This is already seems to be a disturbing trend in Austin) Because of all the above, it's cheaper in the long run to have mixed use zoning. Just to what extent it would be cheaper, I'm not prepared to say since my list of ideas is very hypothetical.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-02-08T10:01:05-06:00

ID

68419

Comment

PART 2 Now, I'd like to float another hypothetical and see what you all think. Class ghettoization (as opposed to strictly racial) could be solved by looser residential / mixed use zoning regulations (i.e. no dozens upon dozens of square miles of housing between 1,500 to 3,000 square feet, while other, equally large geographic areas have housing no more than 1,200 sq feet, and so forth). In other words, it may be ok to have such zoning in a 1/2 square mile area of whatever geometric shape but have the neighboring areas be a random mixture of housing of all income sorts. While this might reduce the value of the upper income properties due to their proximity to lower income housing, it could also stabilize the value of lower income houses because such house are located next to high valued homes (the high valued properties nearby could help reduce the crime rate because police are more liable to take seriously crime complaints from upper income people). A similar idea goes for commercial areas - have the restaurnat Ben's Catfish & BBQ Grille just a few dozen yards down from a restaurant with a name like La Madeline. The higher income generating properties would help stabilize the lower income generating properties - thus reducing urban blight. So even though I'm pretty firmly capitalist in my beliefs and even - God Forbid (!) - somewhat pro-corporate (can I ever hear Donna scream as though Jason were pursuing her ), this is a way to "spread the wealth" to lower-income members of society - albeit in a roundabout way. What's more, I think the upper classes ought to be gleeful about this because I don't see how we would even need to substantially increase income and business taxes to accomplish this (!). BTW, my slight pro-corporate ideas are very much tempered with a sense of corporate responsibility to society - especially to the community. So see there, Donna, I'm not a heartless cad But remember, all the above is conditional on the idea that mixed used zoning - especially for the central cities themselves - does indeed come to pass. In fact, I'd like to see the concept expanded to including even corporate workspaces within these mixed-use neighborhoods too. This is not advocating "concrete and steel" architecture, or even large office buildings. My vision is to have small segments of corporate operations in each neighborhood in order to produce more satisfied employees (as in have a 30 person operation in Fondren, a 30 person operation in Poindexter, another such one up by Tougaloo, another by JSU, and so forth).

Author

Philip

Date

2004-02-08T10:03:40-06:00

ID

68420

Comment

PART 3 How about that! Employees of Magnolia Biotics (a hypothetical biotech company), workforce of 2,500...could have offices and labs employing 50 or so people at each location scattered throughout the city - from MetroCenter to Old Canton Road -- spreading the wealth through property value increases city-wide to the places that need it most and without substantially taxing these companies to death in order to pay for road repaving and cop and firefighter salaries. Plus, "MagBi's" employees would be just a 10 to 15 minute walk from not only house and home, but also from both T-Bone's Fish Market and Chez Qui - given them extra dining options during their lunch break!!! Perhaps only a 10 to 15 minutes walk from their kids' schools besides!!! Now if THAT doesn't qualify as a cool place, then I can't see how the phrase "cool city" has any meaning!!

Author

Philip

Date

2004-02-08T10:04:36-06:00

ID

68421

Comment

Philip, did you ever read Ecotopia? I need to dig out my copy of that, because one of the things proposed in that book is this very notion. For those of you who haven't read it, it's from (I think) the 1970s, and it describes life in the Pacific Northwest after they have seceded from the country to form "Ecotopia." It's a funny little novel, and very idealistic, but it may be time to break it out again, and see how the old ideals fit into the new theories on 'creative class' and such. That being said, the older I get, the more i realize how much I really hate suburbs. Even Fondren feels almost too suburban. I'd love to live in a place where I could walk to everything. And have a 'hermit house' out in the country, away from everything. So - yay Philip. When are you running for mayor?

Author

kate

Date

2004-02-08T14:31:29-06:00

ID

68422

Comment

Philip: It's been a few years now since I read Suburban Nation, so maybe Matthew would be better to comment on this. But I think you're hitting on some of themes of New Urbanism, particularly as it relates to in-fill development. The suburban pod-development and stratification of family or business incomes (Ridgecrest Farms from $120,000-140,000 dollars...Hornhilll Estates from $140,000-175,000...) makes for a relatively stable environment for property values, at least until a suburban business district dies or languishes, as we see with suburban malls over a 20-25 year lifecycle or so. But, pod development can have a negative effect on quality of life and community. I think Creative Class concepts can dovetail with that, if only because certain knowledge/creative/middle class workers and businesses thrive in locations that promote third place and mixed use. Plus, a lot of creative work relies on loose networking affiliations -- as a theoretical biotech startup, I may need a PR specialist or a videographer or a writer or an engineer, and I need to make those relationships without a formal HR process and so on because I'm not a megacorp, but a small creative business looking for contract help. Common sense urban densities, at the very very least, makes the landscape more interesting both for living and for working. I think what we sometimes don't realize in this discussion is the extrodinary government subsidies we pour into suburban (and suburban-style) development that we then call it "free enterprise." Suburban developers, big box retailers, multinational corporations -- we tend to subsidize them in massive ways that, ultimately, are detrimental to authenticity, community and local ownership. Of course, there's a democratic process in place, so the presumption would be that people WANT these things -- suburban development and so on. But there are also big books of street design and planning Convention Wisdom that make suburban planning mistakes into "best practices" for the industry. (The Metro Parkway project is an excellent example.) And what we end up subsidizing is high-profit suburban development, while what we end up planning for and paying for, more than anything else, is an overemphasis on the automobile. Suburban Nation points to more examples of what you're talking about when you stop subsidizing and designing streets and neighborhoods for the automobile. Walkable neighborhoods, by definition, have homes that vary greatly in value and aesthetics within five minutes of an urban core. Student apartments are over the garages of doctor's and lawyer's homes. The added advantage is that the students stay up late offer an unpredictable presence that, for instance, fights crime. Anyway, I think you're going down the right road with this (so to speak) -- maybe we should all make Suburban Nation the book of the month and re-read it a bit.

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2004-02-08T16:04:10-06:00

ID

68423

Comment

Todd, Kate, Thanks for the replies. As you can see, I'd been putting a lot of thought into this so it's great to see someone acknowledge these posts. I haven't read either of the books you two brought up, but I'll be sure to put them on my "to read" list. Sadly for you, Kate - right now, I'm not even in a state that borders Mississippi, let alone in Jackson. So that will have no small effect on my eligibility to be mayor. But it's nice that you would vote for me at some level Todd "we tend to subsidize them in massive ways that, ultimately, are detrimental to authenticity, community and local ownership. Philip Yep, local ownership is vital to long-term prosperity, since faraway owners will most likely use the money earned on local property for their own personal uses. Todd Of course, there's a democratic process in place, so the presumption would be that people WANT these things " Philip If our elected officials were more responsive to the people's desires regarding big box retailers, we probably wouldn't have this problem to this extent in the first place. Of course, consumers (i.e. voters) benefit too from the availability of cheap merchandise, so I'd have to say that it's as much "We The People's" fault as much as the governments who subsidize the big-box chains. Todd But there are also big books of street design and planning Convention Wisdom that make suburban planning mistakes into "best practices" for the industry. (The Metro Parkway project is an excellent example.) Philip My speculations about how the construction industry, zoning commissions, banks, and local government's conspire to produce this situation could easily take another series of posts as long as the above one. The short version of the story is (1) follow the money, (2)Capital needs to take a longer term view of things, and (3) Can't we just all get along (at least as much on political ideology as on race, btw)! Unfortuantely, the cure for the problem of people's hearts and minds must be as complex as the philosophical support structures and assumptions that created the current mess in the first place.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-02-09T09:21:32-06:00