The phase 1 'Tower' is postponed indefinitely. Landmar will pursue a mid-rise mixed-use urban village instead. This is due to the market downturn. They expect to have a new plan in place in 6 months or so.
You can't claim you didn't see this coming. The price point has always been questionable and the real estate market certainly does not help. Landmar has also stopped building many of their suburban residential projects. Nevertheless, didn't they have construction deadline dates to meet with the deal they cooked up with the city?
Because it takes less time to build a mid-rise vs. a high-rise, the finish dates will be similiar. I think they have til 2010 or 2011 to have something either started or completed.
I was thinking they had to start construction in 2007. Maybe that was just the riverwalk?
Quote from: vicupstate on October 16, 2007, 09:38:52 AM
The phase 1 'Tower' is postponed indefinitely. Landmar will pursue a mid-rise mixed-use urban village instead. This is due to the market downturn. They expect to have a new plan in place in 6 months or so.
a mid-rise project makes more sense anyway....while some on this site want to see high-rise condo and office buildings all over downtown, its the low and mid-rise buildings that help generate street activity without blocking the sun!
I agree. Personally, I'd love to see them work some kind of urban street grid into that site.
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 16, 2007, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on October 16, 2007, 09:38:52 AM
The phase 1 'Tower' is postponed indefinitely. Landmar will pursue a mid-rise mixed-use urban village instead. This is due to the market downturn. They expect to have a new plan in place in 6 months or so.
a mid-rise project makes more sense anyway....while some on this site want to see high-rise condo and office buildings all over downtown, its the low and mid-rise buildings that help generate street activity without blocking the sun!
also, it seems like we should maybe walk before we run, aka build medium before giants. i don't know what size they were planning on building, though, and that might be too much of a generalization summed up into one statement, though.
The cancelted tower was supposed to be around 38 stories in height, or a little taller than the Peninsula.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 16, 2007, 12:15:13 PM
The cancelted tower was supposed to be around 38 stories in height, or a little taller than the Peninsula.
that does seem a little tall for the current market, especially with a tower currently being built and another starting soon across the stream there. do they know how tall they're thinking for a mid-rise, mixed-use etc yet? i realize there isn't a plan yet, but i was wondering if anyone had heard any ideas.
Waiting on the St. John to say the same thing. In this market, 300K for a one bedroom was a bit steep.
Just hard to believe that with all the really large companies here, and a hand full of fortune 500's or 1,000's we can't seem to bust the 30+ story bar.
I agree at a sea of 20's is great, but I for one would love to see a 70+ rise from the core. Something that makes a statement to the rest of Florida... Like the FINGER in San Francisco!
Ocklawaha
Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 16, 2007, 02:13:44 PM
Just hard to believe that with all the really large companies here, and a hand full of fortune 500's or 1,000's we can't seem to bust the 30+ story bar.
I agree at a sea of 20's is great, but I for one would love to see a 70+ rise from the core. Something that makes a statement to the rest of Florida... Like the FINGER in San Francisco!
i think the problem might be all that empty land around jtb and similar areas that have room for companies to build short/stubby buildings with 40+ acres of parking around them for cheaper than downtown. is the land that much cheaper, or do they desire that area that much more? there are ways the city could change both if they tried hard enough. the question would be how much does the city actually want business downtown?
what's this finger in san francisco?
What everyone has to take into consideration with 30+ story buildings in Florida is the massive insurance required on the building, and to construct one on the water in Jax, where the riverfront is basically a man made dock and therefore a horrible flood zone, is absolutely astronomical. Also, LandMar lost a ton of money when Auchter pulled out and had to wait for a new contractor to write up contracts and pricing, which took them forever to find, and they had to settle with aiming at a smaller risk to entice anyone into the mix, lest they become the next Auchter-like scenario.
Its really a series of bad situations, coupled with city planners allowing for and facilitating increased development on the outskirts of town., all the while singing the praises of downtown development. What really should be happening is lower density on the outskirts in order to beef up density in the city center.instead of the other way around. Otherwise we're going to end up with an even more fragmented county like Atlanta's suburbs. Can you imagine a 30+story tower at St. Johns Town Center? Better believe it!
Quote from: chris on October 16, 2007, 02:44:54 PM
Can you imagine a 30+story tower at St. Johns Town Center? Better believe it!
they're not far off with buildings close to there.
Quote from: big ben on October 16, 2007, 02:37:40 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 16, 2007, 02:13:44 PM
Just hard to believe that with all the really large companies here, and a hand full of fortune 500's or 1,000's we can't seem to bust the 30+ story bar.
I agree at a sea of 20's is great, but I for one would love to see a 70+ rise from the core. Something that makes a statement to the rest of Florida... Like the FINGER in San Francisco!
i think the problem might be all that empty land around jtb and similar areas that have room for companies to build short/stubby buildings with 40+ acres of parking around them for cheaper than downtown. is the land that much cheaper, or do they desire that area that much more? there are ways the city could change both if they tried hard enough. the question would be how much does the city actually want business downtown?
I think you hit the nail on the head. I think it is both. The cost will always play a factor, but also the city's big businesses (Fidelity excepted) do not see the inherit value in a successful, vibrant DT.
In Charlotte, Downtown (called Uptown) is "THE" corporate address. There is a huge 'peer pressure' biase in city government and the white collar business sector to be there, rather than the suburbs. The DT office vacancy rate there is the lowest in the nation and the third lowest of ALL US metro's areas since 1985. Jax's Dt class A vacancy rate bobs between 12-20% versus 1-2.5% in Charlotte. This is despite the fact DT Charlotte lease rates are about $10 per foot higher.
After reading the article at Jax.com about the change in plans I have some comments and questions.
First I'm dissappointed because I felt the tower designed by Architectonica was finally breaking the bland and boring mold of most of Jax's architecture. I have a feeling we will see more of the same conservative blandness that is our signature.
Does anyone know if the fact that Ed Burr could not gain back control of his company? I've learned when denials are made, that is generally a part of the reason these kind of changes are made.
Of course I understand the market is weak right now but we are looking at 2 or 3 years before this tower would be complete.
Also the TU stated that 150 people had reservations for units. Granted not all those would buy but that seems like a fairly high amount of interest. Isn't that nearly half the units?
How will these changes effect the public pier and the original design?
Will they scrap the iconic sculpture they had planned?
Will these plans drastically effect the timetable of the public part of the plan?
According to my understanding of the article they will get a year extension to resubmit a plan, and this will include all? or part of the public space.
It that's the case we will be looking at another moonscape on the river for at least 2 or more years.
I'm really becoming more and more cynical about all the aborted projects downtown. It seems that in the last 4 or 5 years almost EVERY project has met a similar fate.
I understand the market dictates what is built, but if all these denser vertical projects keep going down in flames we will never have a vibrant community downtown.
I know there was some resistance to price for the project, but let's face it, nothing on the river is ever going to be cheap.
I just hope Novare does build an affordable building downtown somewhere, and it of course will not be on the river.
I'm hoping someone on this site can clarify the questions I have about this latest turn of events.
With the mostly horrilbe empty blocks of flat parking, the JEA site, the Riverwalk in front of the Hyatt and Courthouse area and the Shipyards, it's sad sometimes to ride or walk around downtown.
Quote from: avonjax on October 17, 2007, 11:25:22 AM
After reading the article at Jax.com about the change in plans I have some comments and questions.
First I'm dissappointed because I felt the tower designed by Architectonica was finally breaking the bland and boring mold of most of Jax's architecture. I have a feeling we will see more of the same conservative blandness that is our signature.
Does anyone know if the fact that Ed Burr could not gain back control of his company? I've learned when denials are made, that is generally a part of the reason these kind of changes are made.
Of course I understand the market is weak right now but we are looking at 2 or 3 years before this tower would be complete.
Also the TU stated that 150 people had reservations for units. Granted not all those would buy but that seems like a fairly high amount of interest. Isn't that nearly half the units?
How will these changes effect the public pier and the original design?
Will they scrap the iconic sculpture they had planned?
Will these plans drastically effect the timetable of the public part of the plan?
According to my understanding of the article they will get a year extension to resubmit a plan, and this will include all? or part of the public space.
It that's the case we will be looking at another moonscape on the river for at least 2 or more years.
I'm really becoming more and more cynical about all the aborted projects downtown. It seems that in the last 4 or 5 years almost EVERY project has met a similar fate.
I understand the market dictates what is built, but if all these denser vertical projects keep going down in flames we will never have a vibrant community downtown.
I know there was some resistance to price for the project, but let's face it, nothing on the river is ever going to be cheap.
I just hope Novare does build an affordable building downtown somewhere, and it of course will not be on the river.
I'm hoping someone on this site can clarify the questions I have about this latest turn of events.
With the mostly horrilbe empty blocks of flat parking, the JEA site, the Riverwalk in front of the Hyatt and Courthouse area and the Shipyards, it's sad sometimes to ride or walk around downtown.
Avonjax.... I feel your pain.
I have no insight regarding the public areas. Has any work started on these? If not, them I would expect them to be postponed too. If the improvements are well underway, then they likely would be completed, but that is semi-educated conjecture on my part.
From my conversation with the representative, (the post that started this thread) the tower is postponed, not cancelled. Given the money spent on those plans, etc. I doubt they would scrape them. 150 reservations is good normally, but given the market, and the fact that these reservations weren't 'hard' the news isn't surprising.
Another thing hurting DT is that the 'public money' spent on the BJP projects is either already spent or on hold (courthouse). The boom times from 5 year ago were 'gassed up' by those projects and the incentivised projects such 11e, Carling, etc. The city has stopped incentives and stopped spending on its' own construction projects. Private money follows public money.
In this environment the city needs to channel efforts into AFFORDABLE housing DT and getting the courthouse underway.
For those who don't know the LEFT COAST, San Francisco, has the Trans-America Pyramid Tower. It is the highest building in this very hilly City. Not unlike our own South-bank towers, sometimes, depending on the angle it is hard to tell which is highest. The Pyramid was a very hip design when built, it wasn't until then that the local "hippies" thought it looked like a giant finger, pointed to the rest of the World. It's a nickname that has stuck and today "THE FINGER" says it all when asking for directions downtown. The appearance may be completely accidental, but it sure says something about attitude! This is why I wish Jacksonville had it's own FINGER pointed at the heart of the Mouse, Miami, Tampa, Atlanta, Charlotte and company... Just call it me a rabid Jacksonville booster and incurable romantic...
(http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/61838.jpg)
(http://static.flickr.com/1228/1106965611_687979b81f_m.jpg)(http://static.flickr.com/26/36154005_5066415f00_m.jpg)
(http://static.flickr.com/235/444878374_fa166ce344_m.jpg)(http://static.flickr.com/30/46756638_dbc128a700_m.jpg)
Ocklawaha
It's been several months since I've reported on any of this, but I'll take a shot at a few of your questions, Avon.
Of course I understand the market is weak right now but we are looking at 2 or 3 years before this tower would be complete.
That's true, but in order to get financing for construction, a company like LandMar needs to show proof that a certain number of units have sold or are likely to sell. Banks are very wary about lending money to condo projects right now, and while I don't know this for a fact, I imagine that pre-sale requirements for construction are even higher than they were a couple years ago.
Also the TU stated that 150 people had reservations for units. Granted not all those would buy but that seems like a fairly high amount of interest. Isn't that nearly half the units?
Nearly as important as the number of reservations is the momentum of reservations. A lot of those reservations might have come right after they opened for them. If they've petered out to one or two per month, I can imagine a developer or bank being spooked that they'll be stuck with a bunch of empty units.
How will these changes effect the public pier and the original design?
The private development at the Shipyards can happen at whatever pace the developer wants. But the public improvements are governed by an agreement with the city, so they're supposed to proceed as before. I read something a few days ago that said the Shipyards public improvements were ahead of schedule.
According to my understanding of the article they will get a year extension to resubmit a plan, and this will include all?
Whenever the Design Review Committee approves something, the approval lasts for a year. For most condo projects, and especially in this market, that's not enough time to get started. So, when that approval expires, the developers have to return to the DRC to get an extension. (I keep writing DRC, but I think it's called something else now) As I read the article, LandMar wants an extension for the design of Tower One, the luxury condo tower that's indefinitely delayed.
I'm really becoming more and more cynical about all the aborted projects downtown. It seems that in the last 4 or 5 years almost EVERY project has met a similar fate.
Right as most major condo projects downtown were being announced, the real estate market tanked. One of the faults of the media (i.e. me) during that time was doing a poor job of distinguishing likely projects from less likely ones. Some projects, like the 70-story tower that was to be built near the football stadium, were backed by investors with little developer experience. Most of the time, these investors run their projects through the design review process (and the media) to drum up support. Then, they're able to take the projects to somebody who actually builds stuff and say "See? My land is worth $X million. As shown by this approval, the city is amenable to building something big here, and public support (from all these newspaper articles I got) is strong. Want to buy it?" Some examples of the investor announcements include the St. James (70-story tower), the San Marco Riverwalk Village (5 towers next to the Main St. Bridge), and St. Johns Point (a few towers out by the stadium). After their DRC approvals, the San Marco Riverwalk Village and St. Johns Point actually got to teh point of having real developers behind them. The Village's developer pulled out before signing a deal, and St. Johns Point's developer owns the land but is sitting on it.
What I understand from the TU article is that LandMar is going to skip the tower for now, and move on to the low-rise aspects of the project that they highlighted when first announcing it. These included smaller towers with condos and lots of retail space on the ground floor. If I remember correctly, this segment of phase one was set closer to Berkman Plaza. Tower One was intended to be quite a ways away from Berkman.
Anyway, what do I know.
How's NYC, jlight?
Quote from: vicupstate on October 17, 2007, 03:02:10 PM
Another thing hurting DT is that the 'public money' spent on the BJP projects is either already spent or on hold (courthouse). The boom times from 5 year ago were 'gassed up' by those projects and the incentivised projects such 11e, Carling, etc. The city has stopped incentives and stopped spending on its' own construction projects. Private money follows public money.
In this environment the city needs to channel efforts into AFFORDABLE housing DT and getting the courthouse underway.
I completely agree - that's why when the real estate market softened, it would have been a perfect time to RFP's on the city-owned land. They could have sold them for a little less than market rate (meaning that they would get more than the 0 that they got now for them), and been a catalyst in getting a project going.
Damn hate to see the shipyards go ......But maybe we could get a big project with more buisness with advertisement i think we should get a Move To Jax dvd on the desk of every ceo onthis sid eof the globe.[/size]