Hallmark Partners Planning Wellness-Focused Hotel adjacent to 220 Riverside

[CCMjax]

Are they showing surface parking all the way to Park?  That would be a mistake.  No more big surface lots right on the main streets, have we not learned?  Park isn't much now, but who knows what will be going on there in the next decade.  This big surface lot could kill any sort of momentum northwest of Park.  Someday, someone is going to come along and want to fix up and develop the area along McCoy Creek because it is just waiting to be rediscovered and parts of Park and they will "man it is a shame there is a giant parking lot right on Park."

Ok I just went off on a tangent.  If it's not even going to Park and I'm misunderstanding the rendering then I'll shut up.

[thelakelander]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

[edjax]

Earlier mentioned an Even Hotel. But the pic here that is on their website shows the hotel to be an AC Hotel by Mariott.  Perhaps a change?  Would not think they would show a brand on their website if not moving forward.

[brainstormer]

I would love to see a few townhomes incorporated into development of the other sites. Perhaps townhomes could "enclose" some of the planned surface lots. I think diversifying the types of housing available in the neighborhood would really add to it. It also would be kind of cool to build some "look alike" shotgun houses as a throwback to the history of Brooklyn. I know "look alike" houses aren't ideal, but infill housing in Springfield has worked out pretty well at maintaining the look of the historic district.



It also wouldn't be much more expensive to make the first few floors of the office building parking. This would raise the height of the building, and also put the offices above 220 Riverside and provide beautiful views of the river and surrounding area. Having parking built into the footprint of the building would eliminate the need for so many surface lots. I agree, the developers should do everything possible to avoid surface parking that fronts the street.

[johnnyliar]

Whoa! Where is that rendering from! ^

[brainstormer]

^ New LEED Platinum homes in New Orleans.

[brainstormer]

These are brand new hurricane resistant houses. 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 672 sq. ft. A row of these could easily be a buffer between the street and a surface parking lot. They don't have garages and residents could just park in the parking lot behind their houses.

[ProjectMaximus]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

Perhaps it is my naiveté, but wouldn't it be ok to have a surface lot until future development warrants higher density? Like, if the suntrust garage had been done correctly? They could certainly plan a parking structure into future phases right? Maybe it's unwarranted, but so far I'd give the Hallmark Partners the benefit of doubt when it comes to proper urban design. The Brooklyn-Riverside guys? Not so much.

Earlier mentioned an Even Hotel. But the pic here that is on their website shows the hotel to be an AC Hotel by Mariott.  Perhaps a change?  Would not think they would show a brand on their website if not moving forward.

haha, maybe Rummell stole them away with his Healthytown plan.

[thelakelander]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

Perhaps it is my naiveté, but wouldn't it be ok to have a surface lot until future development warrants higher density?

Most of the Northbank was demolished under the same idea. I'm not sure I'd give anyone the benefit of the doubt after 40 years of overall failure.

[CCMjax]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

Perhaps it is my naiveté, but wouldn't it be ok to have a surface lot until future development warrants higher density?

Most of the Northbank was demolished under the same idea. I'm not sure I'd give anyone the benefit of the doubt after 40 years of overall failure.

Yeah, if they do a big surface lot there now I would imagine it would be there for a very long time.  It looks like it would be private property owned by the hotel, maybe their strategy is just to absorb as much land around them so another hotel can't go in there.  I don't think they would sell it off down the road, and they wouldn't add on most likely.  What's that hotel at the end of Atlantic that has the huge surface lot facing downtown Atlantic Beach?  It would turn into that and just be a wasted space for decades owned by the hotel.

[CCMjax]

I would love to see a few townhomes incorporated into development of the other sites. Perhaps townhomes could "enclose" some of the planned surface lots. I think diversifying the types of housing available in the neighborhood would really add to it. It also would be kind of cool to build some "look alike" shotgun houses as a throwback to the history of Brooklyn. I know "look alike" houses aren't ideal, but infill housing in Springfield has worked out pretty well at maintaining the look of the historic district.



It also wouldn't be much more expensive to make the first few floors of the office building parking. This would raise the height of the building, and also put the offices above 220 Riverside and provide beautiful views of the river and surrounding area. Having parking built into the footprint of the building would eliminate the need for so many surface lots. I agree, the developers should do everything possible to avoid surface parking that fronts the street.

Cool concept.  I was also thinking townhomes and similar more urban detached single family homes tucked away closer to McCoy's Creek.  Does everyone else see how fantastic that area would be if they cleaned up the creek and made a nice public park with lit walkways along the creek?  And then yes, had the mix of homes on those adjacent streets.  You would have the quite creekside park on one side and the huge riverfront just down the street, not to mention Unity Plaza.  Great public spaces!

[ProjectMaximus]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

Perhaps it is my naiveté, but wouldn't it be ok to have a surface lot until future development warrants higher density?

Most of the Northbank was demolished under the same idea. I'm not sure I'd give anyone the benefit of the doubt after 40 years of overall failure.

Not sure that demolishing buildings is the same thing as not building one. In any case, this is exactly what they did to begin with, right? Phase 1 is utilizing the lot to the east of the apts for parking, while phase 2 will see that area developed? I've been on this site long enough to know the pitfalls of crossing your fingers and hoping things are done right (or done at all) but my point is simply that Alex Coley has said and done all the right things to make me at least give him a chance (pushing mixed-use, community space, engaging the arts and creatives, road diet for Riverside ave). If I were developing this space and market conditions required multiple phases, I'd hope others could trust the vision too.

Yeah, if they do a big surface lot there now I would imagine it would be there for a very long time.  It looks like it would be private property owned by the hotel, maybe their strategy is just to absorb as much land around them so another hotel can't go in there.  I don't think they would sell it off down the road, and they wouldn't add on most likely.  What's that hotel at the end of Atlantic that has the huge surface lot facing downtown Atlantic Beach?  It would turn into that and just be a wasted space for decades owned by the hotel.

That's One Ocean Resort. And you have a point...on this site it's actually the obvious point. I'm just suggesting that the alternative could turn out ok in the long run, it's not beyond possibility that the entire site is developed eventually. I know that at one point Hallmark was trying really hard to acquire much of the land north of the plaza and possibly Park St. Now if only the skyway (in whatever incarnation) could be tied into this area very soon.

[thelakelander]

I hope that changes. Nevertheless, yes, that's a huge surface parking lot along Park.

Perhaps it is my naiveté, but wouldn't it be ok to have a surface lot until future development warrants higher density?

Most of the Northbank was demolished under the same idea. I'm not sure I'd give anyone the benefit of the doubt after 40 years of overall failure.

Not sure that demolishing buildings is the same thing as not building one.

Examples of blocks of buildings lost to new proposals that never came to fruition:



JEA tore this block down in the 70s. The plan was to build a new headquarters complex. They ended up buying the Universal Marion Building. This theatre district block ended up with a two-level metal garage on it. The Forsyth Street side of that block is shown in the two images below:






^This block of business owners were literally kicked out and their buildings torn down for future new development. Three decades have past and we're still waiting. Now the best prospect for new development on it is a parking garage for the Trio project.


^Knights of Pythias Building was the tallest structure on Ashley Street.  It contained a hotel, meeting rooms, and street level retail.  It was demolished in 1957.  In a scenario that plays out time and again, the project planned to replace it never made it off the drawing board.


^The worst of all....LaVilla. Ripped down for revitalization.

No individual, company or personal vision is bigger and more important the community they live and invest in. This is where a "Learning From" to a place like Savannah or Charleston is good. Jax has no identity, vibe or whatever because most of what made it visually unique and dense has been destroyed for failed dreams and visions that never came true. Those other two cities still have their character.

I'm not saying there's something special worth keeping about the trophy center and whatever else is on that block. I'm just saying it's general a bad idea to demolish your character and building fabric for "what ifs", regardless of who's behind the "what if." In the examples pictured above, many people behind had good intentions. Things happened and the intentions didn't play out the way originally envisioned.

In any case, this is exactly what they did to begin with, right? Phase 1 is utilizing the lot to the east of the apts for parking, while phase 2 will see that area developed?

Most of that area was demolished for the widening of Riverside Avenue in the early 2000s. It's taken nearly 15 years to get to this point and that area still has a long way to go. It's kind of funny because that was one of the most expensive widening projects the state had ever done and now we want to go back to 4-lanes because the road is too wide.  Like Sugar Hill, most of the west side of Brooklyn was lost to a failed HUD urban renewal project from the 1970s. 40 years have passed and we're still waiting for redevelopment there. One of my concerns with continued demolishing for things that may or may not happen a decade or two down the road is that you kill the historic character. Park is definitely one of the last few strips in the area where there's a chance to integrate old with new and for it all to be pedestrian scale and unique in its own right. Revitalization with turning existing building fabric into temporary surface lots will give you a better chance at recreating East Baymeadows moreso to anything remotely urban and pedestrian scale over an extended amount of land area.

[acme54321]

This parking deck is one of the worst things going downtown.  That site is basically the gateway to downtown and a 2 story crappy steel parking deck from the 60s is about the worst thing I could think of there.  The only thing worse would be an empty lot with hobo camps and drum fires.

[ProjectMaximus]

I agree with you Lake (but perhaps a bit less cynical). I just misunderstood you to be in favor of the demolition with a different layout. If you want the hotel to front Park St with surface parking in back I'm simply saying the given layout could still be ok. Obviously reusing the building fabric would be ideal.