A Closer Look At Riverside YMCA's Development Plans

[MEGATRON]

Read the recent TU article about demand downtown. Its extremely high and The Strand wouldn't charge such high prices if there wasn't high demand for riverfront living. You are also forgetting Berkman Plaza and the other one on the Southbank (name escapes me).

The reason that so few have been built is that the cost to acquire riverfront land makes it cost prohibitive. Which is precisely why I said its a great opportunity to make it a mixed use project with residential. Especially when considering that residential and The Y are symbiotic uses. The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble. Win-Win. Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property, plus an on-site gym/pool already built. YMCA would make extra money from the developer and/or perhaps even the cost of a parking garage, plus a 4th or 5th floor Y would have much better scenic views of the river/DT than it would at the 1st or 2nd floor.

I'm not saying that its is a sure thing, just something that I hope the Y has seriously considered or reached out to developers about.

Please link the article.  I'd love to read it.

So, you want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price?  Why should the Y give a develop a reduced cost on riverfront property?

[MEGATRON]

The market has changed since the economy went into recession four to five years ago.  All I'm saying is you can't simply state there's no demand for anything.  You may struggle to land a specific desired use at a predetermined targeted price point but that doesn't mean there's no demand for anything.

If the Y has been sitting on that property 50 years (which I believe its somewhere in that neighborhood), why would that want to sell at a low point in the market?  Of course there is demand if the price is lowered substantially.

[CityLife]

Read the recent TU article about demand downtown. Its extremely high and The Strand wouldn't charge such high prices if there wasn't high demand for riverfront living. You are also forgetting Berkman Plaza and the other one on the Southbank (name escapes me).

The reason that so few have been built is that the cost to acquire riverfront land makes it cost prohibitive. Which is precisely why I said its a great opportunity to make it a mixed use project with residential. Especially when considering that residential and The Y are symbiotic uses. The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble. Win-Win. Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property, plus an on-site gym/pool already built. YMCA would make extra money from the developer and/or perhaps even the cost of a parking garage, plus a 4th or 5th floor Y would have much better scenic views of the river/DT than it would at the 1st or 2nd floor.

I'm not saying that its is a sure thing, just something that I hope the Y has seriously considered or reached out to developers about.

Please link the article.  I'd love to read it.

So, you want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price?  Why should the Y give a develop a reduced cost on riverfront property?

You can find it just as easily as I can. Go to Jacksonville.com

You got that I want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price from my posts? Really? I was saying the Y should let a developer build an extra few floors of residential in the same building with the same footprint.

[JaxNative68]

Who is the architect for this project?

[fsujax]

Probably Haskell or RS&H.

[MEGATRON]

Read the recent TU article about demand downtown. Its extremely high and The Strand wouldn't charge such high prices if there wasn't high demand for riverfront living. You are also forgetting Berkman Plaza and the other one on the Southbank (name escapes me).

The reason that so few have been built is that the cost to acquire riverfront land makes it cost prohibitive. Which is precisely why I said its a great opportunity to make it a mixed use project with residential. Especially when considering that residential and The Y are symbiotic uses. The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble. Win-Win. Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property, plus an on-site gym/pool already built. YMCA would make extra money from the developer and/or perhaps even the cost of a parking garage, plus a 4th or 5th floor Y would have much better scenic views of the river/DT than it would at the 1st or 2nd floor.

I'm not saying that its is a sure thing, just something that I hope the Y has seriously considered or reached out to developers about.

Please link the article.  I'd love to read it.

So, you want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price?  Why should the Y give a develop a reduced cost on riverfront property?

You can find it just as easily as I can. Go to Jacksonville.com

You got that I want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price from my posts? Really? I was saying the Y should let a developer build an extra few floors of residential in the same building with the same footprint.

I looked.  Can't find it.  That's why I asked.  Don't worry about it.

"The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble...Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property. "  Yeah, somehow I got that a developer would not have to pay market cost for the property.  Imagine that.

[PeeJayEss]

The old Southside Generating Station sits vacant.  The entitled project next the the Aetna building could not get off the ground.  The front of the Haskell property has not moved.

Isn't the Southside Generating Station a brownfield site? And I believe it is also still owned by JEA. So, that would fall under the same category as the Shipyards plus it needs to be rehabilitated (unless I'm wrong and is has been rehabbed since closing?). The front of the Haskell property is not riverfront, and next to the Aetna building is not vacant. Having ideal development and having demand are two different things.

[Ocklawaha]

Once they start plopping down 600 apartments, once the streetcar line is under construction and once the commuter trains are within sight, you won't be able to get Brooklyn/LaVilla property at any price.

[thelakelander]

The market has changed since the economy went into recession four to five years ago.  All I'm saying is you can't simply state there's no demand for anything.  You may struggle to land a specific desired use at a predetermined targeted price point but that doesn't mean there's no demand for anything.

If the Y has been sitting on that property 50 years (which I believe its somewhere in that neighborhood), why would that want to sell at a low point in the market?  Of course there is demand if the price is lowered substantially.

We're way off on a red herring, in regards to this point of this thread, which is the building's design.  My main point I was attempting to make in response to your original statement about there being no demand for anything is that, that's simply not true.  There's too much currently going on in the area to lend any validity to the concept of that stretch of Riverside Avenue being useless.

[MEGATRON]

The old Southside Generating Station sits vacant.  The entitled project next the the Aetna building could not get off the ground.  The front of the Haskell property has not moved.

Isn't the Southside Generating Station a brownfield site? And I believe it is also still owned by JEA. So, that would fall under the same category as the Shipyards plus it needs to be rehabilitated (unless I'm wrong and is has been rehabbed since closing?). The front of the Haskell property is not riverfront, and next to the Aetna building is not vacant. Having ideal development and having demand are two different things.

All of the riverfront sites are brownfields.  The fact that its a brownfield only provides additional development incentives.  Several groups have made runs at the SGS property and can't make the numbers work.

[MEGATRON]

The market has changed since the economy went into recession four to five years ago.  All I'm saying is you can't simply state there's no demand for anything.  You may struggle to land a specific desired use at a predetermined targeted price point but that doesn't mean there's no demand for anything.

If the Y has been sitting on that property 50 years (which I believe its somewhere in that neighborhood), why would that want to sell at a low point in the market?  Of course there is demand if the price is lowered substantially.

We're way off on a red herring, in regards to this point of this thread, which is the building's design.  My main point I was attempting to make in response to your original statement about there being no demand for anything is that, that's simply not true.  There's too much currently going on in the area to lend any validity to the concept of that stretch of Riverside Avenue being useless.

Hold on.  I am not saying its useless at all.  I am, however, saying that forcing the Y, right now in this current market, to develop a portion of the property for some use other than the Y is absurd. 

[thelakelander]

Would making them follow the area's design guidelines be absurd?  After all, there is no conversation if the guidelines are followed.

[CityLife]

Read the recent TU article about demand downtown. Its extremely high and The Strand wouldn't charge such high prices if there wasn't high demand for riverfront living. You are also forgetting Berkman Plaza and the other one on the Southbank (name escapes me).

The reason that so few have been built is that the cost to acquire riverfront land makes it cost prohibitive. Which is precisely why I said its a great opportunity to make it a mixed use project with residential. Especially when considering that residential and The Y are symbiotic uses. The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble. Win-Win. Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property, plus an on-site gym/pool already built. YMCA would make extra money from the developer and/or perhaps even the cost of a parking garage, plus a 4th or 5th floor Y would have much better scenic views of the river/DT than it would at the 1st or 2nd floor.

I'm not saying that its is a sure thing, just something that I hope the Y has seriously considered or reached out to developers about.

Please link the article.  I'd love to read it.

So, you want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price?  Why should the Y give a develop a reduced cost on riverfront property?

You can find it just as easily as I can. Go to Jacksonville.com

You got that I want the Y to sell its property at a reduced price from my posts? Really? I was saying the Y should let a developer build an extra few floors of residential in the same building with the same footprint.

I looked.  Can't find it.  That's why I asked.  Don't worry about it.

"The land is already being built on, so a developer would just have to pay for the increased costs of a taller building and little extra to the YMCA for the trouble...Developer has a significantly reduced cost for riverfront property. "  Yeah, somehow I got that a developer would not have to pay market cost for the property.  Imagine that.

Uhhhh, the developer would not be paying market cost because they would just be paying for the increased costs of vertical construction, plus some sort of bonus to the Y for partnering with them (on a site that was getting developed anyways). Its really not that complicated of a concept....They wouldn't be acquiring the property, simply partnering with the Y on an existing development.

[MEGATRON]

Would making them follow the area's design guidelines be absurd?  After all, there is no conversation if the guidelines are followed.

No, not at all Lake.  I was more responding to an early post in which a poster stated that the Y should be forced to issue an RFP for frontage development within X years.  I don't like that idea.  That front commercial/residential component will come together when the time is right.

[MEGATRON]

CityLife, what the hell would the Y go for that???  The Y has been trying to sell that property for 10 years.  Why would it turn around and sell the development rights at less than market value (and, yes, what you are referencing is less than market value).