Brooklyn Riverside Residential Development Renderings
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2628320123_M9gbpqS-M.jpg)
DDRB Application 2012-004 is before the DDRB requesting Final Approval and Deviations for
the residential development in the Brooklyn and Riverside neighborhood. The property owner of the proposed residential properties for development is P&L Jax Riverside, L.P. Here is a look at the project's latest renderings.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-jul-brooklyn-riverside-residential-development-renderings
I like it.
Wow. Much more visually interesting than I thought it would be.
Dang. I really like it.
Very nice. Who owns the empty parcel on the front right?
Agree with everyone above. This is a good design! :)
good design here and bad desgin next door.
Quote from: fsujax on July 11, 2013, 01:25:18 PM
good design here and bad desgin next door.
Agree. The design next door definitely needs to be reworked!
I never thought this was going to look this interesting! I'm excited we are getting such a splash of color instead of a pile of dirt over here.
This is a project that has improved every time it has been reworked. I love the young, urban design and the bold colors. The parking is hidden and the area by the leasing office is really quaint. It really is disappointing that the development next door does not compliment this one at all.
Has the developer released the RFP yet?
I can't believe the positive response this is getting. This design, while attempting to integrate some of today's more popular modern design elements (the bent plate or "ribbon"), there is no sense of overall composition to the facades whatsoever. It's like they just slapped a bunch of shapes on the facade. They're really just used as a different type of ornament rather than informing the passerby about what's happening inside.
Additionally, the colors are just completely over the top. I have no objection to vivid colors normally but you have to control how they're used (sparingly) or they just end up looking childish.....just my opinion.
Quote from: JaxArchitect on July 11, 2013, 07:01:13 PM
I can't believe the positive response this is getting. This design, while attempting to integrate some of today's more popular modern design elements (the bent plate or "ribbon"), there is no sense of overall composition to the facades whatsoever. It's like they just slapped a bunch of shapes on the facade. They're really just used as a different type of ornament rather than informing the passerby about what's happening inside.
Additionally, the colors are just completely over the top. I have no objection to vivid colors normally but you have to control how they're used (sparingly) or they just end up looking childish.....just my opinion.
+1
Quote from: JaxArchitect on July 11, 2013, 07:01:13 PM
I can't believe the positive response this is getting. This design, while attempting to integrate some of today's more popular modern design elements (the bent plate or "ribbon"), there is no sense of overall composition to the facades whatsoever. It's like they just slapped a bunch of shapes on the facade. They're really just used as a different type of ornament rather than informing the passerby about what's happening inside.
Additionally, the colors are just completely over the top. I have no objection to vivid colors normally but you have to control how they're used (sparingly) or they just end up looking childish.....just my opinion.
Here we go....
The 'overall composition' would lead me towards a more vibrant, industrial feel - straight, clean lines, bold colors, muted back-grounds. Lots of steel-colors and glass....
You know what I don't see in the renderings? Beige.
And if the passerby needs to know what's going on inside, one would only need to pass through the clearly, accented front entrance, which happens to be only a couple dozen feet from the sidewalk, and ask someone in what I'm assuming would be some sort of modern amenity center/office with both workers and residents hanging about.
And the colors, while definitely bold and possibly over the top, contrast nicely, IMO. Besides, we're looking at a rendering and not the actual product. Depending on the material that has been spec'd it's not only possible, but probable that the colors, even though primaries, will end up a lot more muted.
Also, only my opinion.
Count me in the group that isn't amazed. I am happy for development of the site, but I'm not going to swoon.
1) The rendering really hasn't changed so no need to get excited.
Before:
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/assets/thumbs/image.2880.feature.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2628319793_nzCjWQ3-M.jpg)
After:
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2628320123_M9gbpqS-M.jpg)
2. The site is around 11 acres including the retail and will feature 310 units, while closing off streets. At ~1.6 people per unit (1.2 people per 185 1BRs and 2.2 people per 125 2BRs), that's 472 people at average occupancy. 220 Riverside is 294 apartments in 6.5 acres - call it 1.7 people per unit that's 475 people at average occupancy. So Brooklyn will have 947 new residents in a couple of years with not much more room for more intense development. We are so excited for these, but the isolation of Brooklyn via highways and the space that current developments will take up will prohibit the area from ever becoming a highly populated urban oasis that can truly support its own retail. In Jacksonville's multifamily areas, the SS will likely be even more densely populated - garden style apartments like this proposal squished together over a larger area.
Site plan:
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2628319699_gGgRcTq-M.jpg)
Generally I have a hard time calling this "urban" since it could easily go up in various degrees in the burbs as well. Take note of the "Uptown at St. Johns" (from another Atlanta developer) - less flamboyant colors, but it also features a typically inexpensive Sunbelt infill exterior facade so commonly seen nowadays. However, the SJTC development has a garage wrapped by 210 units also more inexpensive "modern" design isn't too dissimilar, and overall density is not too dissimilar - the parcel there is 5.5 acres whereas it's around 6-7 acres for the multifamily component in Brooklyn, 6.5 acres for 220 Riverside.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2544334247_Jh8Bg2h-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2544334175_bwvhCBp-M.jpg)
Rents here are asking $1.23-$1.43/sf for 1 BRs ranging from 709 SF to 848 SF, and $1.06-$1.30/sf for 2 BRs ranging from 1,143-1,501 SF. Looks like units here are likely larger than in the Brooklyn dev, and potentially very slightly cheaper - maybe.
Considering the Uptown residents have nearly 2 million SF of commercial uses to walk to from their apartment whereas residents of Brooklyn will likely never have much to walk to since ~1,000 residents is not enough by itself to support significant commercial development (bars, restaurants, retail) - can we say the Uptown with its structured parking and destination walkability is ironically more urban?
And just for anyone who's interested in numbers, Miles Development paid ~$30/sf for the land in 2001 (~$1.3M/acre). Pope & Land bought for $14/sf in 2011 ($615K/acre). Tribridge bought the land for the Uptown last year for $600K/acre, or basically the same price as this prime "downtown" real estate. All of these land prices are insanely cheap compared to equivalent land in Raleigh, Nashville, Austin, Orlando, Charlotte, etc.
Miles had also originally proposed 1,200-1,300 units over retail on the same land, to be phased over 5-7 years. We are getting 310 units now instead.
I'm not purposely trying to be a negative nancy but this is all reality and perspective. Looking forward to the day that this type of project is "beneath" Jacksonville and bigger and better things are happening!
I spent the day in the Southside and downtown of Birmingham. What's crazy is they have these Brooklyn Riverside/ 220 Riverside infill mixed use projects already all over the place. We really missed the boat the last decade.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 11, 2013, 09:16:27 PM
I spent the day in the Southside and downtown of Birmingham. What's crazy is they have these Brooklyn Riverside/ 220 Riverside infill mixed use projects already all over the place. We really missed the boat the last decade.
maybe so, but we're nowhere near as bad off economically as Birmingham is....most of the wealthy folks live outside the city....one of the pros of consolidation is that isn't the case here (yet)
Yes. The 10% sales tax is also pretty insane but I was referring to recent urban infill residential development. With our "booming" economy, one would think it should include our core as well.
Quote from: stephendare on July 11, 2013, 09:42:42 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on July 11, 2013, 09:16:27 PM
I spent the day in the Southside and downtown of Birmingham. What's crazy is they have these Brooklyn Riverside/ 220 Riverside infill mixed use projects already all over the place. We really missed the boat the last decade.
Jacksonville was far too busy building massive parking garages and demolishing its historic neighborhoods to make way for 'new development' while making it impossible for 'new developers' to actually build anything downtown.
One thing that does stand out is the amount of available older building stock in Bham. A lot of it is empty but still standing. The scale kind of gives you an idea of what DT Jax and LaVilla was once like. Anyway, now that these guys are approved, any idea on when they plan to break ground?
agreed....they still have a rich building stock
Quote from: thelakelander on July 11, 2013, 10:09:54 PM
Yes. The 10% sales tax is also pretty insane but I was referring to recent urban infill residential development. With our "booming" economy, one would think it should include our core as well.
10% Sales tax...did you try ordering some liquor? Hold onto your pants!
Quote from: thelakelander on July 11, 2013, 09:16:27 PM
I spent the day in the Southside and downtown of Birmingham. What's crazy is they have these Brooklyn Riverside/ 220 Riverside infill mixed use projects already all over the place. We really missed the boat the last decade.
True,
But it is hard to say with UAB right in town. I do think such a large university really helps the situation.
When you think about it, we can make an excuse for every city. However, at some point, we've got to move on and resolve our problems. We don't need a UAB to create a market for urban infill. Perhaps the market is already there and we're doing something that stops it from blossoming? For example, for every Birmingham, I can offer up a Chattanooga, Greenville, SC, Tampa, Orlando, St. Petersburg, or Norfolk, VA that doesn't have a UAB. Nevertheless, we still have 50,000 people working in/around downtown and a beautiful river that can't be replicated anywhere else. That's more than many of the places I just mentioned, bring to the table. When I look at it, even Shands should be a larger draw on housing and support businesses in the immediate vicinity than it appears to be.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 12, 2013, 10:20:08 AM
I can offer up a Chattanooga
When I first started working for my firm, I was brought on to work on our project in Chattanooga among others and ended up spending much time there. The whole metro has an office market only 5 million SF deep to give one an idea of how small office employment is there (and we were 300,000 SF of their market). What a great city! And I still don't understand what their economic "driver" is, Lol! Really no population growth or job growth, but the city has harnessed tourism and has a very strong downtown org backed by one of the two billion-dollar family trusts in the area (they fought/competed with us on everything)...and they have managed to capture seriously strong tourism for such a small, interior city.
Aside from downtown, the coolest place is arguably North Shore across the river. It's amazing what they've done in Chattanooga for so little.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 12, 2013, 10:20:08 AM
When I look at it, even Shands should be a larger draw on housing and support businesses in the immediate vicinity than it appears to be.
I agree. Where are all the UF interns residing? Where do the nurses live? The doctors? How many UF grad students are there at Shands? Like I keep saying - JOBS are what will make for a bright future for Springfield. There are some, between Shands and DT Jax (not nearly enough), but has it resulted in any restorations by employees of Shands?
Shands interns don't know where Springfield is and they are unofficially discouraged from living within close proximity to the hospital by coworkers.
^^You mean UF Health, Lunican! haha and you are correct about them being discouraged from living anywhere near the hospital.
^This is what I mean. Seems like it may be more of us sabotaging ourselves than anything being market rated. On the surface, the blocks between Boulevard and Pearl should be lined with a mix of dense housing types and 8th Street should have businesses and medical offices catering to the population Shands draws. In many cities across the country with similar sized medical campuses, this is the case. Only so much can be blamed on the market.
well, look at the hospital has done, completely gated walled itself from the community all in the name of security.
Quote from: fsujax on July 12, 2013, 10:58:55 AM
^^You mean UF Health, Lunican! haha and you are correct about them being discouraged from living anywhere near the hospital.
Considering what they see at that hospital, can you blame them?
I kid! kinda...
Johns Hopkins used to do the same thing....but now they are focused on improving the areas around the hospital
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 13, 2013, 08:05:34 PM
Johns Hopkins used to do the same thing....but now they are focused on improving the areas around the hospital
I was flying delta yesterday and in sky mag there is an article about US medical tourism. The focus was on the Texas medical center in Houston, mayo clinic in Scottsdale and Rochester, and Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, but at the end they included a chart with a few others like Mass Gen in Boston and a mention of Mayo also being in Jax.
No point here, just a coincidence.
^Yeah. One of the things I liked best about Rick Mullaney's failed run for mayor was the idea of making and building the area around Shands into a medical district. I hoped Brown would have taken that idea and ran with it.
Pollack Shores pays $7M for Brooklyn site
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=540988 (http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=540988)
Wednesday, November 6, 6:40 PM EST
by Karen Brune Mathis, Managing Editor
Pollack Shores Real Estate Group paid $7 million for about 7 acres in Riverside and landed a $28.4 million mortgage to develop "The Brooklyn Riverside," a 310-unit apartment project.
Through NW/PSREG Brooklyn Owner LLC, Pollack Shores bought the property from P&L Riverside LP, the Pope and Land group that initially planned to develop the site.
The deed was signed and the mortgage from PNC Bank issued on Nov. 1.
The city is reviewing building permits for The Brooklyn Riverside at 100 Magnolia St.
As reported, construction is expected to start this month and the first phase could be completed late summer or early fall 2014. Pollack Shores Real Estate Group of Atlanta, shown as the owner on a list of team members, has applied for building permits for the $24.8 million project.
The project encompasses seven buildings that total 310 residential units on the 7.96-acre site. Plans show four four-story buildings and three three-story buildings. Average rental rates will be between $950 and $1,500.
The Brooklyn Riverside will be built near 220 Riverside apartment and retail project and the Shoppes on Riverside, a retail development that will be anchored by The Fresh Market.
where is the new hotel's going in brooklyn? the only area left is along forest blvd that i can see ????? there are about 9 acres of land if you were to group all those lots where the broken down dwellings remain > they are all mostly empty lots but some have people living in them but they are not up to code and most are literally falling down ?????? why dont they just go ahead and demolish the ones that are vacant?? since the land is selling for 2 million dollars an acre in brooklyn it makes no sence to leave those old structures standing > i was talking to the owners of those old houses and they were offered about $5000.00 to sell their homes and most of them took the money and left .......... So there are not many remaining , maybe about 16 houses ????? one guy is advertising his at $8000.00 cash to sell his home but it is falling down about to be a hazard
I think the hotel is supposed to be north of Unity Plaza...but still no official announcement.