Metro Jacksonville

Developer proposes 13-story Southbank apartment tower

(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Ventures-Development-Southbank/i-wfH7c3k/0/L/20170119_DDRB%20Agenda%20Packet_TITLE-L.jpg)

In October 2016, the Ventures Development Group announced plans to build a 250-unit apartment tower on the Southbank. Now armed with a larger project, the development group is prepared to go before the Downtown Development Review Board (DDRB) in order to gain conceptual design approval for 300-units. If successful, this project could become the first Southbank high-rise built since 2008.  Here's a look at their January 2017 DDRB Application Package to get a better idea of what this project could look like. Let us know what you think!

Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/developer-proposes-13-story-southbank-apartment-tower/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/developer-proposes-13-story-southbank-apartment-tower/)

Looks a lot better than the last rendering!

I agree that it's a big improvement.  My question is why didn't they also get the land where the sales office for the St John is? It seems to me like they could reconfigure the entrance and improve the parking if they use that land too.  I still think this site is crazily configured and will be tough to pull off, but I'm really hoping they can make it work.

-David

I think I read somewhere that they were leasing that sales office from Basptist or whoever owns the Aetna building and it was never part of the actual property.  Getting in and an out of this place at rush our is going to be exciting!

Quote from: acme54321 on January 18, 2017, 09:12:25 AM
Getting and an out of this place at rush our is going to be exciting!

That was my first thought as well.

Or if there is a train blocking the track. Wish that skyway track station had a walkway that went over to this area.

I love it - I already see the unit I want.  As for comments about getting in and out, people who live here that work outside downtown will be coming in at 5 - while all the employees headed back to the burbs will be going out.  Besides, have you ever seen I-295/I-95 at 5PM?  For those of us who either work downtown, or work from home, traffic is 100% irrelevant.

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 10:59:21 AM
I love it - I already see the unit I want.  As for comments about getting in and out, people who live here that work outside downtown will be coming in at 5 - while all the employees headed back to the burbs will be going out.  Besides, have you ever seen I-295/I-95 at 5PM?  For those of us who either work downtown, or work from home, traffic is 100% irrelevant.

You've clearly never tried to drive around Baptist's campus, especially that very spot where the entrance to the building will be, at rush hour.

Quote from: acme54321 on January 18, 2017, 11:03:11 AM

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 10:59:21 AM
I love it - I already see the unit I want.  As for comments about getting in and out, people who live here that work outside downtown will be coming in at 5 - while all the employees headed back to the burbs will be going out.  Besides, have you ever seen I-295/I-95 at 5PM?  For those of us who either work downtown, or work from home, traffic is 100% irrelevant.

You've clearly never tried to drive around Baptist's campus, especially that very spot where the entrance to the building will be, at rush hour.

Yes I have.  Everyone is trying to leave.  Getting in isn't bad.  South across the Acosta Bridge, right turn on Prudential, right turn into the driveway...super easy and no traffic.  Anyhow - I work from home so traffic is other people's problem.

I believe there are many other river front lots where this project would be better suited. It seems like they are trying to shoehorn to much into this tight site. In their rendering, they conveniently do not show the elevated Acosta bridge to the north, the Aetna building (if it is still named that) sitting window to window about forty feet away on the south. Also throw in the round the clock noise from ambulances and helicopters going to Baptist hospital, the noise from the trains clanking on the bridge and the highway noise. I also agree it will become a traffic nightmare in that area with site being cut off by the rail lines and sharing the only in and out with an office building and hospital. Increasing the building to 300 units with 359 parking spaces just might be pushing the envelope a little to much on the traffic count.

Clearly urban living isn't for some of you.  It is a different lifestyle that people who have only lived in a sprawling subdivision have a hard time relating to.

In urban living the more people the better, because each new person increases the demand for more services that people need on a daily basis, which businesses then move in to meet that demand, thus increasing the quality of life for everyone living there because we can walk to those businesses.  In suburbia it is the exact opposite.  Each new person decreases the quality of life for people already living there because of increased traffic - which is why some of you seem to be focusing on traffic in your opposition.

This project will bring the number of Southbank residences to 5.  It won't take long until retailers start to be attracted to the area.

Just one more thing I wish would connect to the skyway in that area.

Looks great!

Sorry to burst your bubble Kerry, but I know what urban living is all about. I have lived for many years in urban cities that make the Jacksonville downtown area look like an outskirt kind of town. The site for this project is shaped like a long handled field hockey stick for a reason; that reason being that it has very poor accessibility by bus, train, auto, bike, foot, skates, or any other mode of personal or public transport you can think of. Poor accessibility is the greatest reason why this project would be better suited for many of the other empty riverfront parcels of land scattered along the St. John's River in the urban core. Next to the new YMCA, the soon to be abandon Times Union building, the parking lot adjacent to CSX, the parking lot adjacent to the Landing, the Shipyards site, across the street from Maxwell House, the old JEA site are a just few from off the top of my head without looking at a map and I am sure there are plenty more. As vacant as our downtown is, there is no reason to start wedging the building stock on top of one another at this point in time.

Yes remc, I agree it looks great, I just don't agree with it's location at the moment.

Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 18, 2017, 01:24:49 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble Kerry, but I know what urban living is all about. I have lived for many years in urban cities that make the Jacksonville downtown area look like an outskirt kind of town. The site for this project is shaped like a long handled field hockey stick for a reason; that reason being that it has very poor accessibility by bus, train, auto, bike, foot, skates, or any other mode of personal or public transport you can think of. Poor accessibility is the greatest reason why this project would be better suited for many of the other empty riverfront parcels of land scattered along the St. John's River in the urban core. Next to the new YMCA, the soon to be abandon Times Union building, the parking lot adjacent to CSX, the parking lot adjacent to the Landing, the Shipyards site, across the street from Maxwell House, the old JEA site are a just few from off the top of my head without looking at a map and I am sure there are plenty more. As vacant as our downtown is, there is no reason to start wedging the building stock on top of one another at this point in time.

Yes remc, I agree it looks great, I just don't agree with it's location at the moment.

I would assume the project fits the space because that's the land available to them. Given that, it seems like a good use of the space, better than an underused parking lot. But yes, it's going to be a nightmare coming in and out during traffic.

Quote from: JeffreyS on January 18, 2017, 01:01:35 PM
Just one more thing I wish would connect to the skyway in that area.

I don't know the feasibility but a connection to the San Marco station would be nice.

Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 18, 2017, 11:38:38 AM
Also throw in the round the clock noise from ambulances and helicopters going to Baptist hospital, the noise from the trains clanking on the bridge and the highway noise.

If you've ever lived next to an area with these noises, you eventually become accustomed to hearing them. In fact, hearing the train rumbling by almost becomes soothing. 

Not sure what it would take to get an official at-grade pedestrian crossing but walking from this property, under the Acosta ramp, and to San Marco station couldn't be easier for an able body person.  It is 915 feet.  Hardly an insurmountable distance.

Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 18, 2017, 01:24:49 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble Kerry, but I know what urban living is all about. I have lived for many years in urban cities that make the Jacksonville downtown area look like an outskirt kind of town.

* * *

Yes remc, I agree it looks great, I just don't agree with it's location at the moment.

So, are you merely making a comment about location aesthetics or are you saying your preference is for this project to be blocked?

Well a trip to a local parking lot to see how many people will drive around doing lap after lap to save walking 50' will test the definition of what an "able-bodied" Jaxson is. All of the people claiming problems with "parking" in some of the core neighborhoods certainly add to that assumption.

It's a short walk for a true believer, but it's a pretty brutal jaunt otherwise between heat, no protection from the elements, zero separation from several lanes of automotive traffic, trains frequently blocking the crossing, etc.

As awful as parking is in the Baptist parking garages though, I myself love being able to walk there from the Skyway station during workday appointments. But I'm able-bodied and a true believer!

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 03:20:14 PM
Not sure what it would take to get an official at-grade pedestrian crossing but walking from this property, under the Acosta ramp, and to San Marco station couldn't be easier for an able body person.  It is 915 feet.  Hardly an insurmountable distance.

It would be nice to extend the Southbank riverwalk under the Acosta and FEC bridge somehow.

Personally would prefer to see something more like The Peninsula in terms of shape, taller with smaller footprint. But I imagine they will fill pretty fast if prices appropriately.

Quote from: FlaBoy on January 18, 2017, 04:31:44 PM

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 03:20:14 PM
Not sure what it would take to get an official at-grade pedestrian crossing but walking from this property, under the Acosta ramp, and to San Marco station couldn't be easier for an able body person.  It is 915 feet.  Hardly an insurmountable distance.

It would be nice to extend the Southbank riverwalk under the Acosta and FEC bridge somehow.

Can't get under the FEC bridge, too low.  Either an at grade crossing or a bridge.  Other than slow trains and the willingness of FEC to cooperate I don't see why it couldn't be done.

Isn't the entire Baptist campus about to be redone with new streets and parking garages.  I thought most of Prudential was going to become pedestrian-only anyhow.

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 10:05:40 PM
Isn't the entire Baptist campus about to be redone with new streets and parking garages.  I thought most of Prudential was going to become pedestrian-only anyhow.

Yes, I'm sure the redesign and expansion of Baptist as well as the construction of MD Anderson factored heavily in lining up financing for this project. I'd bet at least a quarter of the units will be leased by doctors.

While the campus will be redone, Prudential won't become pedestrian-only.

(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Urban-Project-Renderings/i-C6VqMrd/0/L/BMC-8-L.jpg)

When is all of the supposed to go down?

DIA approves grant capped at $7.88M for Southbank apartment project

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=549169

Quote from: acme54321 on January 18, 2017, 08:22:31 PM

Quote from: FlaBoy on January 18, 2017, 04:31:44 PM

Quote from: Kerry on January 18, 2017, 03:20:14 PM
Not sure what it would take to get an official at-grade pedestrian crossing but walking from this property, under the Acosta ramp, and to San Marco station couldn't be easier for an able body person.  It is 915 feet.  Hardly an insurmountable distance.

It would be nice to extend the Southbank riverwalk under the Acosta and FEC bridge somehow.

Can't get under the FEC bridge, too low.  Either an at grade crossing or a bridge.  Other than slow trains and the willingness of FEC to cooperate I don't see why it couldn't be done.

It would have to be a pedestrian bridge of sorts over the FEC. Too bad that wasn't part of the deal for approval since it would make it much more walkable.

Quote from: acme54321 on January 19, 2017, 08:16:04 AM
When is all of the supposed to go down?

Incrementally.

http://www.moderncities.com/article/2016-aug-baptist-health-plans-massive-downtown-expansion

The cancer center on the south side of I-95 is already under construction.

(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Urban-Project-Renderings/i-8v8q56s/0/L/vcsPRAsset_516735_119577_3b5ef9a7-2fed-4f95-af73-3b5d9ed388ab_0-L.jpg)

The parking garage at Palm Avenue and Baptist Way is next up on the block. I believe construction on it will begin soon.

(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Baptist-Health-Downtown/i-S72bNtJ/0/L/20161020_DDRB%20Agenda%20Packet%20Revised_Page_067-L.jpg)

(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Baptist-Health-Downtown/i-Drsk7RN/0/L/20161020_DDRB%20Agenda%20Packet%20Revised_Page_082-L.jpg)

more: http://www.moderncities.com/article/2016-oct-baptist-health-plans-massive-southbank-parking-garage

Quote from: MusicMan on January 18, 2017, 04:39:35 PM
Personally would prefer to see something more like The Peninsula in terms of shape, taller with smaller footprint. But I imagine they will fill pretty fast if prices appropriately.

Something like this?
(http://www.jacksonville.com/images/021005/60448_400.jpg)

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y34/ussmanatee/104113_400.jpg)

^Lol, lots of crazy proposals back in the booming mid 2000s. If we're worried about traffic from 300 units, imagine if those 750ft twin condo towers would have been built on this site.

Quote from: thelakelander on January 19, 2017, 09:51:52 PM
^Lol, lots of crazy proposals back in the booming mid 2000s. If we're worried about traffic from 300 units, imagine if those 750ft twin condo towers would have been built on this site.

Even funnier, the second pic was the revised plan and only had a single tower with 300 units... Same as this plan.

It's exciting to think that we may only be a few years away from new towers building on the Northbank. This project (along with the Broadstone, 200 Riverside, Healthy town and the Publix development) seem to indicate that investors think the urban core is worth the it from a ROI perspective again.

Maybe with all this development FEC and the City will consider creating a Quiet Zone between Emerson and Prudential.

I don't see the issues with traffic so much. Traffic is annoying for maybe 30 minutes in the morning and 45 minutes in the evening. Anyone referencing their experiences with "big city" traffic shouldn't think anything of the traffic in this area. In my experience, the worst bottlenecks, aside from 95 construction (which is technically temporary but not practically), are getting through San Marco to point south and getting across the Acosta to the Southbank. Relative to those two, traffic within the hospital is much less rush-hour dependent and really not all that painful. With no signal at the entrance on Prudential, it might be tough getting out of the place from 5:15 to 6pm, but getting in (what most people will be doing) shouldn't be that hard once you get into the South Bank. Coming from 95 S across the Fuller Warren is probably the toughest option, and it's still easier to get into the hospital from there than it is to get into/through San Marco.

Besides, anyone living there working downtown or on the Southbank doesn't need to be driving, and they should expect to deal with traffic living in such a developed place. I don't see how the efficient use of space proposed in this strangely-shaped design is a negative in any way.

Quote from: RattlerGator on January 18, 2017, 03:40:02 PM

Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 18, 2017, 01:24:49 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble Kerry, but I know what urban living is all about. I have lived for many years in urban cities that make the Jacksonville downtown area look like an outskirt kind of town.

* * *

Yes remc, I agree it looks great, I just don't agree with it's location at the moment.

So, are you merely making a comment about location aesthetics or are you saying your preference is for this project to be blocked?

I think it is pretty obvious that I am only disliking the location. I like the design of the project very much.

Quote from: PeeJayEss on January 20, 2017, 11:58:39 AM
I don't see the issues with traffic so much. Traffic is annoying for maybe 30 minutes in the morning and 45 minutes in the evening. Anyone referencing their experiences with "big city" traffic shouldn't think anything of the traffic in this area. In my experience, the worst bottlenecks, aside from 95 construction (which is technically temporary but not practically), are getting through San Marco to point south and getting across the Acosta to the Southbank. Relative to those two, traffic within the hospital is much less rush-hour dependent and really not all that painful. With no signal at the entrance on Prudential, it might be tough getting out of the place from 5:15 to 6pm, but getting in (what most people will be doing) shouldn't be that hard once you get into the South Bank. Coming from 95 S across the Fuller Warren is probably the toughest option, and it's still easier to get into the hospital from there than it is to get into/through San Marco.

Besides, anyone living there working downtown or on the Southbank doesn't need to be driving, and they should expect to deal with traffic living in such a developed place. I don't see how the efficient use of space proposed in this strangely-shaped design is a negative in any way.

Real traffic doesn't exist anywhere in Jacksonville, unless there is a major accident. I have to laugh whenever someone complains about traffic, or suggests "beating the traffic," or posits that infill development will further exacerbate some imagined traffic problem. Anyone who thinks traffic is bad because it takes them a couple of red lights to get through San Marco at 5:10 pm, or because it takes 45 minutes to get to the beaches after work, needs to go drive in a real city one day.

You wanna see traffic, I lived in ATL for 8 years, that's traffic, I was in New York and drove to Niagara Falls, that's traffic,

I only bring up traffic for this particular site due to the rail line that cuts it's only one way in and out. The train always seems to pass through there around 9am, noon and 5pm. Also, if I recall properly, the Hendricks avenue exit from the Acosta bridge is being closed, leaving the prudential drive exit that dumps into that same intersection. I have sat in that intersection for 20+ minutes due to the trains.

^It' likely that a large percentage of residents will be Baptist employees. Rush hour in and out will be substantial but it'll probably make up for it by location.

Quote from: Tacachale on January 21, 2017, 02:17:00 PM
^It' likely that a large percentage of residents will be Baptist employees. Rush hour in and out will be substantial but it'll probably make up for it by location.

And the majority of the actual medical personnel in the hospital don't work 9-5 hours anyhow.  They're clocking in before 7 and after 7 on a typical day.  It's the administrative staff that works the normal hours. 

You'll rarely hear of nurses and staff docs complaining about traffic.

Yep, I've been in healthcare for over 20 years, most of us never work 9-5, right now I work 7a-7p, so I never see traffic. I am guessing many of these people will work DT which would be great to be able to walk, bike, skyway to work.

Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 21, 2017, 11:51:01 AM
Also, if I recall properly, the Hendricks avenue exit from the Acosta bridge is being closed, leaving the prudential drive exit that dumps into that same intersection. I have sat in that intersection for 20+ minutes due to the trains.

They just rebuilt that off ramp.  I don't think it is going away.

Yeah, it's not going away. You just won't be able to get to Hendricks from Main Street anymore.

Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on January 20, 2017, 04:30:40 PM
You wanna see traffic, I lived in ATL for 8 years, that's traffic, I was in New York and drove to Niagara Falls, that's traffic,

I grew up and learned to drive in Atlanta. Lived in DC for a year. Jacksonville does not have traffic, and won't until another 4-5 million people move here.

LA, New York, DC, Atlanta, Jax...doesn't matter.  Traffic is only a problem for those that choose to drive in it.  It is a self-inflicted inconvenience.  People living in this building and working near-by don't care about traffic because it doesn't apply to them.

In any event, Jacksonville most certainly has traffic. It might not be as bad as Atlanta, etc, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't a problem for some.

I still don't get why traffic is so bad when it rains in LA. 

405 is pretty crappy.

The thing I do like about Jacksonville traffic is that is moves, but at the end of the day, sitting in traffic is sitting in traffic.  Not to mention that Florida has the most terrible drivers. 

Quote from: Adam White on January 23, 2017, 11:02:45 AM
In any event, Jacksonville most certainly has traffic. It might not be as bad as Atlanta, etc, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't a problem for some.

I think recent traffic studies have had Jacksonville around the 40th worst, which would evenly match our market size. Jax traffic is bad during rush hour. Other than that, Jax traffic is not bad.

Quote from: FlaBoy on January 23, 2017, 06:11:54 PM

Quote from: Adam White on January 23, 2017, 11:02:45 AM
In any event, Jacksonville most certainly has traffic. It might not be as bad as Atlanta, etc, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't a problem for some.

I think recent traffic studies have had Jacksonville around the 40th worst, which would evenly match our market size. Jax traffic is bad during rush hour. Other than that, Jax traffic is not bad.

I would agree with this. And I think one of the worst spots right now (9B/295/Baymeadows) will be somewhat relieved once the road is widened. The main point of congestion there is having two lanes ending within a mile of each other.

All this talk about traffic is the exact reason many people are now deciding to live in or adjacent to employment centers; so we don't have to drive.  I worked in Philadelphia for 2 months.  Some people would say Philly traffic was bad.  I wouldn't know, I walked to work.

Quote from: pierre on January 24, 2017, 08:12:10 AM

Quote from: FlaBoy on January 23, 2017, 06:11:54 PM

Quote from: Adam White on January 23, 2017, 11:02:45 AM
In any event, Jacksonville most certainly has traffic. It might not be as bad as Atlanta, etc, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't a problem for some.

I think recent traffic studies have had Jacksonville around the 40th worst, which would evenly match our market size. Jax traffic is bad during rush hour. Other than that, Jax traffic is not bad.

I would agree with this. And I think one of the worst spots right now (9B/295/Baymeadows) will be somewhat relieved once the road is widened. The main point of congestion there is having two lanes ending within a mile of each other.

They aren't widening it - they are adding toll lanes.  Also, multiple studies have shown that increased capacity doesn't reduce congestion and in many cases makes it worst because of induced demand.  A Caltrans study found that increased capacity on California freeways was completely used up in less than 4 years, returning roads to their original congestion.  The question quickly becomes, how many lanes of congestion do you want?

Lol, the question isn't whether Jax has bad traffic in general (it doesn't), but whether traffic at this location is bad (it is). On the other hand, as a likely large percentage of the residents will be Baptist employees and downtown workers, the backups will probably be better for them than what they currently deal with.

My cousin is a nurse at Baptist downtown. She says a number of the doctors have primary or second residences in the area to be convenient for work. Some specialties even require the person to be accessible within 20 or 30 minutes if they're called in. All that meshes with what we've seen recently in north San Marco as more doctors and Baptist employees have settled in the area. I imagine this tower would be seen as perfect for a lot of people.

aaaauuuugggggghhhh!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/southbank-tower-developer-fighting-neighbors-appeal

Honestly, this was to be expected.  But it seems to have a lot of support by the various boards involved so I'm not sure we'll have any more delays after Jan 15.

Hmmm. If Baptist wanted to add a 300 bed medical tower to its complex, would the same opposition be there?

I don't know why this is worth paying the attorneys to complain about? With 300 units I would guess at most an additional 300 cars would be on the roads during rush hour (assuming some don't commute, some commute during off-peak hours and some families have multiple cars). It's not like a venue; not all 300 cars are going to hit the road at the same time. The parking situation seems like more of a problem for the company trying to lease the apartments than the surrounding area. At some point hopefully people will be able to live here without a car (or one car per family rather than one per person), but we aren't there yet.

I don't understand the parking complaint. First, there are still more cars than units, and a lot of these are going to be single people living there. There are also plenty more spaces on the Baptist campus nearby that would be available for a fee. Second, if really doesn't have enough parking, it'll be the building that suffers, not the neighborhood, as people just won't move there if it doesn't have enough spaces. The traffic issue also seems pretty silly considering how much Baptist has exploded in recent years. 337 cars - most of which will probably be owned by people who work at Baptist - is just a blip compared to the impact of the rest of the campus.

Quote from: Tacachale on November 01, 2017, 04:11:21 PM
I don't understand the parking complaint. First, there are still more cars than units, and a lot of these are going to be single people living there. There are also plenty more spaces on the Baptist campus nearby that would be available for a fee. Second, if really doesn't have enough parking, it'll be the building that suffers, not the neighborhood, as people just won't move there if it doesn't have enough spaces. The traffic issue also seems pretty silly considering how much Baptist has exploded in recent years. 337 cars - most of which will probably be owned by people who work at Baptist - is just a blip compared to the impact of the rest of the campus.

...and now we understand...downtown revitalization is not just smart growth or economic development...it's a culture war:)

^I agree that it is; but why is it?

Baptist needs to be open to this. I'm sure a lot of their employees are not from Jax and would prefer to live within a close distance of work.  Having this option would be more beneficial in my opinion than having the land vacant.

Plus, more riverfront residential options are needed in this city.

Thinking about this, I don't remember any opposition when the +800 foot twin tower project was proposed for this site in the mid-2000s. I wonder what changed since this project is significantly smaller?

Quote from: thelakelander on November 02, 2017, 01:05:21 PM
Thinking about this, I don't remember any opposition when the +800 foot twin tower project was proposed for this site in the mid-2000s. I wonder what changed since this project is significantly smaller?

Did those projects reach the same stage of planning as this one has?  I think those never received much backlash due to the relative unlikeliness of the projects coming to fruition.

"I'm sure a lot of their employees are not from Jax and would prefer to live within a close distance of work."

Unless they want a private yard and some peace and quiet.  This will be a noisy location to say the least (Hello CSX train).

Why do we have parking requirements at all?  And the other urban design requirements?

According to my conversations with the DIA staff, no request for a parking variance has ever been turned down.

The various boards have shown that they will approve LITERALLY anything (see the Gate Station in Brooklyn, where the developer's attorney argued successfully that the driveway apron should be counted as a pedestrian plaza).

Given that, why go through the motions, and give neighbors the chance to delay projects with these kinds of appeals?  You don't even have to win the appeal to derail a project if the market turns, or tenants get sick of waiting.

Why not say: "If you want to build downtown, come down and do it.  If you want City money, meet our criteria (urban design, historic preservation, etc.)   If not, knock yourself out."

Quote from: Jim on November 02, 2017, 01:22:33 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on November 02, 2017, 01:05:21 PM
Thinking about this, I don't remember any opposition when the +800 foot twin tower project was proposed for this site in the mid-2000s. I wonder what changed since this project is significantly smaller?

Did those projects reach the same stage of planning as this one has?  I think those never received much backlash due to the relative unlikeliness of the projects coming to fruition.

The +600 foot Hines project that came after them, made it further. They made it to sales before the market blew up. If I recall, it was much larger ad well.

Quote from: thelakelander on November 02, 2017, 01:05:21 PM
Thinking about this, I don't remember any opposition when the +800 foot twin tower project was proposed for this site in the mid-2000s. I wonder what changed since this project is significantly smaller?

Good point Lake; I'll bet there's something sinister behind the scenes that we don't know about than meets the eye.

Here's one theory regarding the "something sinister behind the scenes"...

Many of Baptist's high-level executives have office suites in the Aetna Building which face the east. These offices are located on the 9th floor if I'm not mistaken. It's relatively new office space which Baptist put a decent chunk of change into. If built, this new 13-story apartment tower will obstruct their admittedly awesome views of the city. There may be more to this dispute than meets the eye (no pun intended).

Maybe the developer can add two more levels of parking garage, giving the building 15 stories instead of 13. The building needs to be taller anyway.

I agree; it does need to be taller; how about 20 stories? Add a few more stories of parking garage to solve the parking situation. The design is ok; but It needs to be more standard and not like it is now, with a more contemporary design. It looks European or south American or something. And make it slightly more slender to maybe have even parking spaces around the building in addition to the parking garage (5 to 7 stories). I know; just a pipe dream, and most in this forum love the way the building was designed.

Hell, the previous projects Lake and I were discussing were both over 50 stories.  The original project even included 2 towers.

(https://photos.smugmug.com/History/Unbuilt-Skyscrapers/i-JVCpJwX/0/6a272fbc/L/St%20John-2-L.jpg)

Quote from: Jim on November 05, 2017, 08:03:16 AM
Hell, the previous projects Lake and I were discussing were both over 50 stories.  The original project even included 2 towers.

(https://photos.smugmug.com/History/Unbuilt-Skyscrapers/i-JVCpJwX/0/6a272fbc/L/St%20John-2-L.jpg)

I'd like to focus less on how Jax looks from an interstate bridge or a plane or a drone, and more on how things look as a pedestrian walking along the sidewalk.  I also wish the project renderings had more images from ground level.  What will drive a sense of energy and vitality in the urban core, is the soundness and quality of the pedestrian experience.  I've seen amazing neighborhoods in cities all over the world with nothing but brownstones.  It's very unclear to me how this project integrates with the surrounding pedestrian experience.  Ultimately, I support any attempt to replace a parking lot with residents, but projects that are pedestrian-scale are key to a downtown of street-level vigor.

The plug was pulled on the St. John (tower in right photo above) exactly 10 years ago last week.

QuoteWeak market stalls second tower for The St. John

Development of a second luxury condominium tower downtown has been put on hold until the real estate market recovers.

Private developer Hines announced late Tuesday The St. John would not be built next to the Aetna Building on the Southbank "until real estate conditions in Northeast Florida are more favorable."

Local developer the LandMar Group earlier this month said it would delay building its first condominium tower at the Shipyards and focus on the mixed-use components of its urban community.

Houston-based Hines issued a statement of its intention to "monitor the market and move forward" with its plans for the 640,000-square-foot high-rise "at a later date."

Walt O'Shea, a vice president in Hines' Jacksonville office, said the company still views the project as viable.

"It's a long-term plan to develop the project we've concepted," O'Shea said in response to the real estate market's uncertain time frame for recovery.

"For us it's a long-term commitment to the project and the site, whether that's 18 or 24 months. ... We'll relaunch marketing when the time is right."

QuoteO'Shea declined to disclose the number of buyers or deposit amounts on The St. John, citing company policy.

Buyers will receive refunds on deposits, according to the news release.

Hines announced its plans for The St. John in 2005, with an unveiling last year of an all-glass design for the 300-unit tower. The company has a standing policy not to disclose the cost of its developments. The St. John was designed by Miami-based Arquitectonica International Corp. The project was scheduled to break ground in 2006, with construction finishing in 2008.

Its unique all-glass look and upscale style is something Barton is optimistic Jacksonville's skyline will still gain.

"Obviously, we're disappointed and would love to see that project go forward, and we think it will," Barton said.

"We won't get it immediately, but I'm optimistic we will."

http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/103107/bus_213612256.shtml#.Wf8ZeFtSzIU

^It was pie in the sky even before the real estate bubble burst. The current project is much more feasible.

I think around this period there were three planned Arquitectonica designed residential high rises planned for both sides of the St. Johns.
The other two were at the Shipyards.

DDRB sided with the apartment developer. The owner of the Aetna Building (or whatever it's called now) plans to file a suit to keep the apartment project from happening. They don't want the building to be taller than 60' even though a 45 story building had the green light to be built in the same location before the real estate bust killed it.

How long do they have to file? Or how soon can construction begin?

Quote from: MusicMan on December 13, 2017, 09:57:41 AM
How long do they have to file? Or how soon can construction begin?

If its an injunction they are looking for, they need to file ASAP but have a two year period. It is an almost certainly fruitless lawsuit.

Quote from: FlaBoy on December 13, 2017, 01:00:25 PM

Quote from: MusicMan on December 13, 2017, 09:57:41 AM
How long do they have to file? Or how soon can construction begin?

If its an injunction they are looking for, they need to file ASAP but have a two year period. It is an almost certainly fruitless lawsuit.

Agree it seems worthless to attempt.  Let's see they bought it in 2013 and one would think during their due diligence they were very aware of the previously approved project on the same tract of land.  So they felt they got such a good deal it was worth the risk.  Also did they make any attempt to purchase this land to protect their investment?  If not I would throw the suit out.

Anyone know what was mentioned about this project at the DIA meeting?

^Just that the owners and neighbors have come to an agreement that cut the 300-unit $65 million project down to 180-units at $45 million. DIA is on board with the requested $8 million, 20-year REV grant.

Cool, I was curious if they had released any renderings.

There was about a year ago, but I don't know if it will be 13 fls anymore.

Yeah, I've seen those.  I'd say it wasn't exactly an awe inspiring building.  I'm hoping that this new building will be a little more interesting architecturally rather than just downsizing what had been proposed.  We can dream ::)

Where exactly is this proposed for? 

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 03, 2018, 04:42:44 PM
Where exactly is this proposed for?

The surface lot between the Aetna building and Acosta bridge.

Quote from: acme54321 on September 24, 2018, 08:03:16 AM
Yeah, I've seen those.  I'd say it wasn't exactly an awe inspiring building.  I'm hoping that this new building will be a little more interesting architecturally rather than just downsizing what had been proposed.  We can dream ::)

I hope it's not another 5-story frame building on our downtown waterfront. Embarrassing!!

^Counterpoints.

1) Metro Houston has 6.5 million people living in an area smaller than Jacksonville. Makes sense that they'd have more, bigger skyscrapers than a metro of 1.5 million spread over a larger land area. You build up when a shortage of land makes building out more expensive.

2) Demand for residential units and office space in downtown Jacksonville is finite. If there's demand for 1,000 apartments, you've got to chose between height and density. Personally, I'd rather have ten 5-story apartment buildings going up and providing some infill than one 50-story highrise.

3) If you compare our skyline to that of comparable MSAs, it's actually quite nice.

Quote from: heights unknown on October 03, 2018, 10:54:24 PM
10 years ago they were going to build a skyscraper, twin ones at that, close to 700 feet in height. The economic bust in 2008 killed that. I agree, a beautiful river and waterfront and the best we can muster for the image and identity of downtown Jax is 5 story apartment complexes and developments, and I understand there's not many on the waterfront "per se," but Jax is a city of close to 1 million people. Look at Houston that also consolidated with it taking over most of Harris County; booming skyline, sleek and gleaming scrapers gracing the sky, and no, skyscrapers don't make a city, people do, but they sure help to boost the image and personality of that city to lure more people in; and of course the businesses have to be lured in as well to the urban core and downtown, in order to produce such gleaming and tall monoliths for major cities like Jax (or are we?). Business, economics, and a burgeoning skyline needs to catch up with that population. My Jax is doing much much better but still behind the 8 ball of other major American and Florida cities.

Well stated. Thanks for that good , common sense analysis. / howfam

The market can support what the market can support.  If there was a demand for big skyscrapers you'd see developers proposing to build them. 

Quote from: heights unknown on October 04, 2018, 04:02:05 PM
Quit thinking small and in a box and get businesses and the right people in our government in here that can get our city fired up. Jax has been thinking "little engine that cant" for far too long. Not that I am lobbying for huge gleaming skyscrapers cause as I said, they don't make a city, but it sure helps with erasing the small minded, in a box suppressive mentality that has kept Jax down for far too long. Ken brought up a super good point, and I already knew that; yes, the demand is not there; well dammit, city and county leaders, "DO WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THE DAMN DEMAND HERE!"

Isn't that's why they are elected, and or appointed, and make the big bucks?

One thing I learned working for the government in the Navy: "NEVER SAY NO AND NEVER SAY YOU CAN'T!" There is always a way; and if it isn't, then query other places and people to find out a way!

Huh?

I give up!

Heights, "I give up" sounds like a combination of "No" and "I can't", so.....

Quote from: downtownbrown on October 08, 2018, 02:27:17 PM
Heights, "I give up" sounds like a combination of "No" and "I can't", so.....

"DOWNTOWNBROWN;" In all due respect, please don't get smart in which you aren't; so stand down. That was directed at you or whoever was pretending you didn't know what I was saying in that previous post, so I deleted the post. You have no game, so don't try and play any. You called me out, so I'm responding out in public the way you tried to play your weak game to me jabbing me in the open; real men don't play games. If you want to talk in private, talk to me behind closed doors on my facebook page (GARRY B. COSTON). We can go toe to toe THAT way. Don't try and game play me in public; that's the sign of a coward. Thanks.

Quote from: downtownbrown on October 08, 2018, 02:27:17 PM
Heights, "I give up" sounds like a combination of "No" and "I can't", so.....

A super or good Man, Manager or Leader praises in public, reprimands in private. Remember that please because not only does it apply to good and sound management or supervisory principles, but also in good and sound "life principles." THAT's what I was saying to you in my post about playing games and cowardice; didn't mean to offend or disrespect, but you never call people out in public unless they called you out first, or offended you or your family in some way and you reciprocate, but if you are a real man, you won't even reciprocate but instead you'll just ask them to "go behind the shed" so to speak to talk or duke it out. So lets forget about this and get back on topic; OK? Thanks.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 03, 2018, 08:33:08 PM

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 03, 2018, 04:42:44 PM
Where exactly is this proposed for?

The surface lot between the Aetna building and Acosta bridge.

Thank you.  I'm just not sure which one is the Aetna Building.    Is hat the building with the Prudential logo on it?


https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3117237,-81.6602792,717a,35y,39.26t/data=!3m1!1e3

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 12, 2018, 11:49:50 AM

Quote from: acme54321 on October 03, 2018, 08:33:08 PM

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 03, 2018, 04:42:44 PM
Where exactly is this proposed for?

The surface lot between the Aetna building and Acosta bridge.

Thank you.  I'm just not sure which one is the Aetna Building.    Is hat the building with the Prudential logo on it?


https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3117237,-81.6602792,717a,35y,39.26t/data=!3m1!1e3

No, it's the building across Prudential Avenue from Baptist Hospital.  Technically, it's not the Aetna building anymore since Aetna punked out and moved to the southside  :(
It now has Baptist & OneCall's name on the top of it.

I just saw the latest rendering. It's been chopped in half. It's seven stories or so tops.

How well does it interact with streets?

It doesn't, at all.

Quote from: jaxnyc79 on October 12, 2018, 08:18:32 PM
How well does it interact with streets?

It doesn't. It faces the river in the back of a parking lot. The nearest street is the Acosta Bridge.

Here is the updated rendering courtesy of JDR...Looks meh. https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/ventures-has-smaller-plan-for-downtown-southbank-apartments (https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/ventures-has-smaller-plan-for-downtown-southbank-apartments)

Ugly. I hate this movement of plopping suburban looking apartment buildings into the urban core.

It looks like the base of a much taller building that just got chopped of the top.... which is essentially what happened.

Quotesuburban looking apartment buildings

Doesn't look any different than waterfront multifamily developments in places like Baltimore, Washington DC or Greenville, SC.  This developer has been put through the ringer by their neighbor. With market conditions as they are, hope their numbers can work on this new site plan.. and hope it gets built. Part of this development will include a much-needed extension of the Southbank Riverwalk.

(https://www.unionwharfapts.com/media/cache/galleries/Union_Wharf_Aerial_retina.jpg)
Baltimore

(http://www.perkinseastman.com/dynamic/image/day/asset/fit/940x626/92/ffffff/center/3441963.jpg)
DC

(https://odis.homeaway.com/odis/destination/b9c22302-d524-466d-8b42-cba7bc1fd7ef.hw1.jpg)
Greenville

The cluster of structures in that area makes no sense to me.  I see this new building wedged in, I see Aetna, a parking garage about as vast as both Aetna and the new residential building put together.  The pedestrian experience there looks atrocious.  Having said that, I very much prefer low-rise and village-style construction on the immediate waterfront.  I hate building walls on the beach, and I'm not a fan of them along our waterfront downtown. 

Quote from: jaxnyc79 on October 17, 2018, 09:29:19 AM
The cluster of structures in that area makes no sense to me.  I see this new building wedged in, I see Aetna, a parking garage about as vast as both Aetna and the new residential building put together.  The pedestrian experience there looks atrocious.

The challenge is really the OneCall Building (built as the Prudential building), which was built in the 50s on a dirt site with zero consideration for pedestrians, really. There was a retail project proposed next to the garage which would have helped. Otherwise I think that little quadrant is going to be a challenge.

Quote from: Steve on October 17, 2018, 09:32:56 AM

Quote from: jaxnyc79 on October 17, 2018, 09:29:19 AM
The cluster of structures in that area makes no sense to me.  I see this new building wedged in, I see Aetna, a parking garage about as vast as both Aetna and the new residential building put together.  The pedestrian experience there looks atrocious.

The challenge is really the OneCall Building (built as the Prudential building), which was built in the 50s on a dirt site with zero consideration for pedestrians, really. There was a retail project proposed next to the garage which would have helped. Otherwise I think that little quadrant is going to be a challenge.

Hit the nail on the head.  There has never been anything pedestrian about this site, it's a hospital and a huge office building, I don't have too much of an issue with it.  Half of it didn't even exist until massive land reclaimation when the Once Call and Baptist complexes were built in the 50s.

http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00071741/00010/39x?coord=30.316673219017776,-81.6628362226287,,

Wow, that area is going to be even more of a cluster f*** during shift change at the hospital; morning and afternoon/evening rushes out of the 841 building oh and then add a train crossing....  I do not miss working at the former Aetna building.

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 09:28:19 AM

Quotesuburban looking apartment buildings

Doesn't look any different than waterfront multifamily developments in places like Baltimore, Washington DC or Greenville, SC.  This developer has been put through the ringer by their neighbor. With market conditions as they are, hope their numbers can work on this new site plan.. and hope it gets built. Part of this development will include a much-needed extension of the Southbank Riverwalk.

That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 09:28:19 AM

Quotesuburban looking apartment buildings

Doesn't look any different than waterfront multifamily developments in places like Baltimore, Washington DC or Greenville, SC.  This developer has been put through the ringer by their neighbor. With market conditions as they are, hope their numbers can work on this new site plan.. and hope it gets built. Part of this development will include a much-needed extension of the Southbank Riverwalk.

(https://www.unionwharfapts.com/media/cache/galleries/Union_Wharf_Aerial_retina.jpg)
Baltimore

(http://www.perkinseastman.com/dynamic/image/day/asset/fit/940x626/92/ffffff/center/3441963.jpg)
DC

(https://odis.homeaway.com/odis/destination/b9c22302-d524-466d-8b42-cba7bc1fd7ef.hw1.jpg)
Greenville

Does it really qualify as an extension of the riverwalk if the connecting route runs about a half mile off the river, under the overpass, over the train tracks and then another quarter mile down this building's driveway? All for about 100 yards of riverfront sidewalk?

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Quote from: JBTripper on October 17, 2018, 11:03:49 AM
Does it really qualify as an extension of the riverwalk if the connecting route runs about a half mile off the river, under the overpass, over the train tracks and then another quarter mile down this building's driveway? All for about 100 yards of riverfront sidewalk?

Does it really qualify as an extension of the riverwalk? Yes, I would say it does.  I think it's easy to get caught up in what isn't there... and wanting everything to happen overnight. The truth is, these types of things are implemented incrementally over time. The Tampa Riverwalk, Waterfront Toronto (Toronto Harbour, Quay, etc) and the Atlanta Beltline didn't happen overnight... and in many cases, sections were built based on the development timeline of the surrounding area- and not based on whether everything lined up neatly together. 

Eventually, the shared use path across the Fuller Warren will be built. Those 'connecting routes about a half mile off the river' you mention will provide some kind of linkage with the Southbank Riverwalk and the Fuller Warren multi-use path.  In the future, there will be other sections of the Riverwalk built that will probably include over-water sections adjacent to Baptist and Nemours.... which will then link to the '100 yards of riverfront sidewalk' you are now bemoaning. Who knows, when that time comes to build those sections... there may even be a Southbank Riverwalk pedestrian bridge over the FEC train tracks constructed concurrently (much like the pedestrian bridge built on the Northbank Riverwalk... decades after the original Northbank Riverwalk was constructed). The key is, to get sections of the Riverwalk built as the adjoining land uses are developed. The gaps will be filled in incrementally, over time. Just because all of this doesn't happen overnight... isn't a reason not to sieze upon the opportunity that exists right here, right now.

We're pretty late in the real estate cycle... so, to me... not getting this site developed would be ashame... as it will likely sit vacant another 10+ years. I'm getting older, and I'd sure like to see progress in my lifetime.  :)

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Of course it's all subjective. I wouldn't consider that to be modern architecture though.

My read of his comments re 'suburban looking apartment buildings' was that he was referring to the architecture, not how they were situated on the land. But only he knows...

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 11:45:13 AM

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Of course it's all subjective. I wouldn't consider that to be modern architecture though.

My read of his comments re 'suburban looking apartment buildings' was that he was referring to the architecture, not how they were situated on the land. But only he knows...

It's a useful distinction. The layout has a lot more to do with how it interacts with the rest of the space than the aesthetics. There are lots of great modern buildings that are designed for a suburban lifestyle, and shitty buildings that are designed for an urban lifestyle.

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: JBTripper on October 17, 2018, 11:03:49 AM
Does it really qualify as an extension of the riverwalk if the connecting route runs about a half mile off the river, under the overpass, over the train tracks and then another quarter mile down this building's driveway? All for about 100 yards of riverfront sidewalk?

Does it really qualify as an extension of the riverwalk? Yes, I would say it does.  I think it's easy to get caught up in what isn't there... and wanting everything to happen overnight. The truth is, these types of things are implemented incrementally over time. The Tampa Riverwalk, Waterfront Toronto (Toronto Harbour, Quay, etc) and the Atlanta Beltline didn't happen overnight... and in many cases, sections were built based on the development timeline of the surrounding area- and not based on whether everything lined up neatly together. 

Eventually, the shared use path across the Fuller Warren will be built. Those 'connecting routes about a half mile off the river' you mention will provide some kind of linkage with the Southbank Riverwalk and the Fuller Warren multi-use path.  In the future, there will be other sections of the Riverwalk built that will probably include over-water sections adjacent to Baptist and Nemours.... which will then link to the '100 yards of riverfront sidewalk' you are now bemoaning. Who knows, when that time comes to build those sections... there may even be a Southbank Riverwalk pedestrian bridge over the FEC train tracks constructed concurrently (much like the pedestrian bridge built on the Northbank Riverwalk... decades after the original Northbank Riverwalk was constructed). The key is, to get sections of the Riverwalk built as the adjoining land uses are developed. The gaps will be filled in incrementally, over time. Just because all of this doesn't happen overnight... isn't a reason not to sieze upon the opportunity that exists right here, right now.

We're pretty late in the real estate cycle... so, to me... not getting this site developed would be ashame... as it will likely sit vacant another 10+ years. I'm getting older, and I'd sure like to see progress in my lifetime.  :)

The extension appears to fit in with the master plan for the Riverwalk to connect it over to the Fuller Warren. The main difference seems to be that the new development is funding it, which is a plus.

Am I missing something, or are they getting more grant money for building a smaller building????:

"In January 2017, the DIA approved a 15-year Recapture Enhanced Value grant worth up to $7.66 million to help subsidize the estimated $62.3 million construction cost.

Ventures returned to the DIA in September to modify its agreement based on new estimated construction costs of $44.8 million.

Under the new approved terms, Ventures will receive a REV grant worth up to $7.88 million over 20 years pending council approval."

Probably because they are making less money per unit on the development now.  There are a lot of fixed costs that aren't going to go down by shrinking the building (land cost, contractor mobilization, etc)

Quote from: Tacachale on October 17, 2018, 01:23:58 PM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 11:45:13 AM

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Of course it's all subjective. I wouldn't consider that to be modern architecture though.

My read of his comments re 'suburban looking apartment buildings' was that he was referring to the architecture, not how they were situated on the land. But only he knows...

It's a useful distinction. The layout has a lot more to do with how it interacts with the rest of the space than the aesthetics. There are lots of great modern buildings that are designed for a suburban lifestyle, and shitty buildings that are designed for an urban lifestyle.

My view is that the building is ugly, uninspiring and generic. It might interact with the rest of the space perfectly - but a better-looking building that isn't going to look extremely dated in 20 years could do the job just as well. This building looks disposable (and likely is).

The group that gave them hell should pay the difference out of their pockets instead of the taxpayers.....

Quote from: thelakelander on October 17, 2018, 06:07:26 PM
The group that gave them hell should pay the difference out of their pockets instead of the taxpayers.....

Seriously. 

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 11:45:13 AM

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Of course it's all subjective. I wouldn't consider that to be modern architecture though.

My read of his comments re 'suburban looking apartment buildings' was that he was referring to the architecture, not how they were situated on the land. But only he knows...

You are correct. The architecture is very uninspiring.

And as Adam mentioned, very disposable.

It's like the Ikea version of an apartment building.

Is'nt Catalyst Development Partners building on Home Street (145 units) at $15 million way cheaper than this? Price per unit?

Quote from: copperfiend on October 18, 2018, 08:14:14 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 11:45:13 AM

Quote from: fieldafm on October 17, 2018, 11:39:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 17, 2018, 10:42:07 AM
That doesn't mean it's not hideous. And the fact that they are happening elsewhere gives credence to copperfiend's complaint about such designs being part of a 'movement'.

'Hideous' is quite subjective. It looks like a pretty typical interpretation of modern architecture to me.

And to me the phrase 'suburban looking apartment buildings' would refer to a site layout which features large setbacks, surface parking with continuous parking drives, separate buildings with limited massing and limited connections to adjacent property. Based on the site design of this property, I wouldn't consider this to be a 'suburban looking apartment building'.

Of course it's all subjective. I wouldn't consider that to be modern architecture though.

My read of his comments re 'suburban looking apartment buildings' was that he was referring to the architecture, not how they were situated on the land. But only he knows...

You are correct. The architecture is very uninspiring.

And as Adam mentioned, very disposable.

It's like the Ikea version of an apartment building.

I think Ikea would honestly do a better job!

These sorts of buildings are everywhere! I almost took a photo of one on my way home from work last night. And it was a suburban one, to boot :)

I don't think it's too much to want inspiring or interesting architecture in the 'urban core' (or on the river, for that matter).

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's an inspiring design for a riverfront building by any means. That being said I think it would look much better if it were painted in shades of blue and white to match the rest of the buildings downtown. We kind of have a theme with the colors of our downtown buildings and it'd be nice to keep it going.

While I think the building could look better, I can't get THAT bent out of shape about it:

- It's an odd site with a very small amount of street frontage. The developers didn't create the site.
- I'm not sure how (short of tearing the Old Prudential building down or significantly restructuring it) you can make it pedestrian friendly. Since I haven't seen too many people jumping up and down to demolish a building that's nearly full of tenants, I'd assume it's going to be there a good while.
- If we get a Riverwalk extension out of it, that will be nice, though it's an awkward connection to the Friendship Fountain area and to the Fuller Warren area (shared use path).

Let them build this and call it a day.

Quote from: Dolph1975 on October 12, 2018, 12:21:06 PM

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 12, 2018, 11:49:50 AM

Quote from: acme54321 on October 03, 2018, 08:33:08 PM

Quote from: bl8jaxnative on October 03, 2018, 04:42:44 PM
Where exactly is this proposed for?

The surface lot between the Aetna building and Acosta bridge.

Thank you.  I'm just not sure which one is the Aetna Building.    Is hat the building with the Prudential logo on it?


https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3117237,-81.6602792,717a,35y,39.26t/data=!3m1!1e3

No, it's the building across Prudential Avenue from Baptist Hospital.  Technically, it's not the Aetna building anymore since Aetna punked out and moved to the southside  :(
It now has Baptist & OneCall's name on the top of it.

ah ha!  Thank you.  That makes perfect sense.  I thought that tall building wasn't ( always ) part of a hospital complex with the parking lot.   I just couldn't wrap my mind about where it was.  That's an interesting place to squeeze in a couple hundred units.  I don't think the residents there will appreciate the less than ideal rush hour traffic they'll deal with having only one way in and out on a street that normally backs up.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 17, 2018, 03:02:58 PM
Probably because they are making less money per unit on the development now.  There are a lot of fixed costs that aren't going to go down by shrinking the building (land cost, contractor mobilization, etc)

Maybe, maybe not.  Most of the costs are not fixed.  And a bunch of that cost goes up exponentially, not linearly, every story they go up beyond the first handful or so.

What is good news is this project will spur an extension of the southbank riverwalk.  Does anyone know if the city has any plans for this? 

Any chance it'll include a stairway connecting it with the Acosta Bridge sidewalks?

Just a random thought:
Since Ventures Development Group compromised with GV-IP Jacksonville Owner LLC and lowered their building height and units down, I wish GV-IP Jacksonville Owner LLC would build out with private money the Riverwalk in front of their property just like how Ventures Development Group is building out in front of their property.

There's already a riverwalk there.  It could be greatly improved, but it's already there.  I wish some private money would go toward crossing the railroad tracks and under the acosta bridge.  I'd rather connect what we have as soon as we can

Quote from: thelakelander on October 12, 2018, 05:36:43 PM
I just saw the latest rendering. It's been chopped in half. It's seven stories or so tops.

Please tell me ... thelakelander- that the new design is not of wood-frame Hillbilly construction. My word, we're headed backward instead of forward.

I don't know what everyone hates on wood for these midrise buildings.  Do you want them to build it out of concrete just because?  Wood is a great choice in many applications.  Inexpensive, strong, environmentally friendly, easily worked, etc.

Just prefer James Hardi products when possible.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2018, 02:04:04 PM
I don't know what everyone hates on wood for these midrise buildings.  Do you want them to build it out of concrete just because?  Wood is a great choice in many applications.  Inexpensive, strong, environmentally friendly, easily worked, etc.

I think a lot of the concern/dislike for wood is that it isn't built for permanence.  From what I have been able to read about 40 years is the max.  A concrete building will last forever.  Then there is the noise level difference and energy efficiency as well.

Quote from: MusicMan on October 25, 2018, 05:40:43 PM
Just prefer James Hardi products when possible.

Huh?  Hardie products arent structural.

Quote from: Kerry on October 25, 2018, 08:57:41 PM

Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2018, 02:04:04 PM
I don't know what everyone hates on wood for these midrise buildings.  Do you want them to build it out of concrete just because?  Wood is a great choice in many applications.  Inexpensive, strong, environmentally friendly, easily worked, etc.

I think a lot of the concern/dislike for wood is that it isn't built for permanence.  From what I have been able to read about 40 years is the max.  A concrete building will last forever.  Then there is the noise level difference and energy efficiency as well.

40 years huh?  Better tell that to everyone in Avondale, Riverside, Springfield, should we keep going?

Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2018, 10:14:45 PM

Quote from: Kerry on October 25, 2018, 08:57:41 PM

Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2018, 02:04:04 PM
I don't know what everyone hates on wood for these midrise buildings.  Do you want them to build it out of concrete just because?  Wood is a great choice in many applications.  Inexpensive, strong, environmentally friendly, easily worked, etc.

I think a lot of the concern/dislike for wood is that it isn't built for permanence.  From what I have been able to read about 40 years is the max.  A concrete building will last forever.  Then there is the noise level difference and energy efficiency as well.

40 years huh?  Better tell that to everyone in Avondale, Riverside, Springfield, should we keep going?

There are 40+ year old multistory apartments in Riverside/Avondale/Springfield?

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 28, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

Quote from: Steve on October 29, 2018, 09:18:36 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 28, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

Quote from: Adam White on October 29, 2018, 09:41:29 AM

Quote from: Steve on October 29, 2018, 09:18:36 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 28, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

Probably not considering the era when it was built. 

Long story short is that a properly designed, built, and maintained wood (or any other material) structure can last a very very long time. 

Quote from: acme54321 on October 29, 2018, 11:11:36 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 29, 2018, 09:41:29 AM

Quote from: Steve on October 29, 2018, 09:18:36 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 28, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

Probably not considering the era when it was built. 

Long story short is that a properly designed, built, and maintained wood (or any other material) structure can last a very very long time.

Perhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

Quote from: Adam White on October 29, 2018, 11:16:34 AMPerhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.  The wooden interior buildout was probably heavy hardwood timber too.  Apples and oranges.

If you're in a 1905 house in Jax it is almost certainly yellow pine, as are most other historic wood builings of that age.  It might be old growth though which is better than the plantation grown lumber in use today.

Time will only tell how these newer, heavily engineered structures hold up.  I think they'll do fine, and I imagine the guys shelling out $40M to build it agree.  We walked past the Broadstone Riverhouse almost daily as it was being built and that is next level compared to any traditional residential framing I've ever seen, but it has to be at 4 stories.

I mean, the type of material and the quality of construction aren't the same thing.

I likely wouldn't buy a unit in this building for many reasons (construction aside). But, since they're apartments it's a non-issue. Besides, maybe in 50 years someone will want to redevelop the entire area over there, including the OneCall building.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 29, 2018, 11:59:43 AM
I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.

While yes the exterior walls were masonry and provided some structural support, the wood was absolutely load bearing which is why it nearly collapsed in the late 1940s. Today it's structurally steel.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 29, 2018, 11:59:43 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 29, 2018, 11:16:34 AMPerhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.  The wooden interior buildout was probably heavy hardwood timber too.  Apples and oranges.

If you're in a 1905 house in Jax it is almost certainly yellow pine, as are most other historic wood builings of that age.  It might be old growth though which is better than the plantation grown lumber in use today.

Time will only tell how these newer, heavily engineered structures hold up.  I think they'll do fine, and I imagine the guys shelling out $40M to build it agree.  We walked past the Broadstone Riverhouse almost daily as it was being built and that is next level compared to any traditional residential framing I've ever seen, but it has to be at 4 stories.

My house is in London (though it was located in Essex when it was built). It's a mid-terrace workers' cottage - the walls are brick and are load-bearing.

Funny story - it's a very small house. The prior owner tore down the wall between the two downstairs rooms. Apparently, she didn't have a steel joist installed and made it look like there was one (so it didn't get picked up on the survey). Anyway, we figured it out and had to get one installed. The entire upstairs of the house was being held up by a 5x4 timber dating back to Victorian/Edwardian times. It would've snapped eventualy, but still...

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

Quote from: Kerry on October 29, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 05:46:04 AM

Quote from: Kerry on October 29, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

Quote from: Kerry on October 30, 2018, 08:50:10 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 05:46:04 AM

Quote from: Kerry on October 29, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

What does the size of the structure have anything to do with how long it's going to last?  It's pretty clear you have something against this type of construction "just because".

Quote from: Kerry on October 30, 2018, 08:50:10 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 05:46:04 AM

Quote from: Kerry on October 29, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

Look through all my posts and tell me if you still think I am arguing in favour of a multi-story apartment building made out of sticks of pine and sheetrock.

Quote from: Kerry on October 30, 2018, 08:50:10 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 05:46:04 AM

Quote from: Kerry on October 29, 2018, 01:18:59 PM
A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

Correct - it's a three story building plus a basement that's (originally) made of wood and handles an incredible about of people every day. It's an example that I thought most could relate to.

Plus we've already talked about the 3 and 4 story apartment buildings in Riverside and Springfield that are made of wood and are at or near 100 years old and that didn't seem good enough....

If people think this type of construction won't hold up, the majority of cities across the country are screwed then.

https://denverinfill.com/blog/2017/09/modera-river-north-arts-update-3.html

From OKC, San Diego and Denver, to Nashville, Atlanta and Jax, this is how these projects are being built across the US right now.

The issue I have is that I don't believe they weather well. It's not just multi-story buildings. Look at all the subdivisions that spring up overnight. Within 20 years they look completely beat down and worn out. This sort of construction has a limited lifespan and is essentially treated as being disposable. I have a serious problem with that, regardless of whether it is the industry standard or not.

On the bright side, I guess we're all fucked anyway and our wasteful lifestyles mean that humankind is going to disappear from this planet soon - possibly within the lifespan of those buildings.

And at least the construction is expected to hold up for a few decades. Can't really say the same for the style.

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
On the bright side, I guess we're all fucked anyway and our wasteful lifestyles mean that humankind is going to disappear from this planet soon - possibly within the lifespan of those buildings.

Love that you're a glass half full kind of guy, Adam :D :D :D

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 09:36:34 AMCan't really say the same for the style.

I'll agree to that one.  I'm a lot more concerned about the timelessness (specifiaclly lack thereof) with this style.  These cookie cutter buildings are starting to spring up all over the place.

Quote from: acme54321 on October 30, 2018, 10:03:21 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 09:36:34 AMCan't really say the same for the style.

I'll agree to that one.  I'm a lot more concerned about the timelessness (specifiaclly lack thereof) with this style.  These cookie cutter buildings are starting to spring up all over the place.

I fear they will look extremely dated in a matter of years. And that will be an excuse to raze them and build something new. Which (wastefulness aside) isn't entirely a bad thing - but given Jacksonville's track record, might end up resulting in some prime waterfront parking spaces.

Quote from: KenFSU on October 30, 2018, 09:55:00 AM

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
On the bright side, I guess we're all fucked anyway and our wasteful lifestyles mean that humankind is going to disappear from this planet soon - possibly within the lifespan of those buildings.

Love that you're a glass half full kind of guy, Adam :D :D :D

8)

The cookie cutter, weatherization stuff is more about the cheap, non load bearing exterior materials moreso than the structural components. The four frame apartment complexes in these images (Dallas, Tampa and Orlando) are either older or near 15-20 years in age. They seem to have aged fine with continued maintenance.

(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-rQvsB5r/0/c6cee657/L/Wood%20Frame-4-L.jpg)

(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-4cMcCq6/0/0d7cc9a9/L/Wood%20Frame-2-L.jpg)

(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-Mc8B2Df/0/1a99964c/L/Wood%20Frame-1-L.jpg)

(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-xq2fDhB/0/bc9b1341/L/Wood%20Frame-3-L.jpg)
I remember this one burning down while under construction in Ybor City in 2000.

(http://images.pennnet.com/articles/fe/thm/th_img5.jpg)
Full article: https://www.fireengineering.com/articles/print/volume-153/issue-10/features/ybor-city-fire-tampa-florida.html

Update, via the Daily Record:

QuoteSouthbank apartment development

Ventures Development Group LLC has come to an agreement with DIA staff on project deadline extensions for its plans to build a 185-unit apartment development along Prudential Drive, between the Eight Forty One Building and the Acosta Bridge.

The DIA board will vote on a resolution next week that would give Ventures until Dec. 31 to obtain title to the 2.9-acre property.

It also sets deadlines of March 1 for the company to obtain permits for vertical construction and Sept. 1, 2020, to begin vertical construction.

Ventures' design was approved by the DDRB in October after a lawsuit with an adjacent property owner forced the company to limit the scope of the project.

Ventures will extend the Southbank Riverwalk as a result of the lawsuit settlement and provide 55,000 square feet of open public space along the St. Johns River.

The DIA has extended Ventures a 20-year, $7.88 million Recapture Enhanced Value Grant for the project.

link: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/downtown-investment-authority-will-take-action-to-validate-ceo-selection

We will be in a developing killing recession by then.

Just saw article in JBJ that they have received the permits to begin foundation work and the permits for vertical construction are currently in review by the city.

Quote from: edjax on January 28, 2020, 04:05:04 PM
Just saw article in JBJ that they have received the permits to begin foundation work and the permits for vertical construction are currently in review by the city.

Edjax.:

Is the building still 7 stories, reduced from the original 13 stories?

Yes

Too bad,

Maybe the new owners for the Aetna building would've let them go back to 13.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/sources-southbank-tower-to-be-sold-within-weeks (https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/sources-southbank-tower-to-be-sold-within-weeks)

Quote from: Adam White on October 30, 2018, 09:36:34 AM
Look at all the subdivisions that spring up overnight. Within 20 years they look completely beat down and worn out. This sort of construction has a limited lifespan and is essentially treated as being disposable.

Using something for a 100 years is hardly "disposable".

Sale complete!

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2020/03/18/apartment-builders-close-on-southbank-riverfront.html?iana=hpmvp_jac_news_headline

Hopefully since they are this far along, they'll get going soon.

That rendering or conception does not look like a 13 story building. How many stories? I see 7 or 8 in the rendering.

It is no longer 13 stories. People complained about the density, so it was chopped in half.

Assholes; oops, excuse me, I'm sorry for my foul Sailor ass mouth.

Quote from: heights unknown on March 18, 2020, 05:02:58 PM
Assholes; oops, excuse me, I'm sorry for my foul Sailor ass mouth.
[/quote

Yes Heights Unknown, I felt the same way about the height reduction when I first heard a while back on this thread. Seems like there's been several projects in the Jacksonville area that have been cut down in height recently. When first proposed, these projects showed renderings of high rise buildings , then somehow soon thereafter they mysteriously got reduced in height. Recall these projects:  the apts at Bishopgate in Riverside, proposed for 16 stories, ended up 5 stories; high rise apts at Jax Beach "The Waterfall" proposed for 11 stories, now sign at the site shows shorter 6-7 story structure; the hotel planned for "The District" project, planned as a high rise in all early renderings is now planned to be only  5-6 stories; and very recently the Ford on Bay (old courthouse site), anticipated to be high rise will be approved as a meager 5- story development.   This is a disturbing trend that casts suspicion on the motivation for these changes. Somebody in power seems to not want this city to have high rise buildings thereby depriving it of that "big city" look.  Shameful!!!

Seen them on site a few days ago taking down the lights and prepping. 

It's not the glimmering glass and steel-St. John, but oh well.  The St John would've been iconic.  Poof, gone!

Quote from: Seraphs on March 24, 2020, 04:00:46 PM
It's not the glimmering glass and steel-St. John, but oh well.  The St John would've been iconic.  Poof, gone!

I remember the St. John proposal, 51 or 52 stories.  Would've been a great visual addition to the south bank skyline.

In 12 years Jacksonville went from having a promising future with several new sky scrapers, to falling down a sky scrapers worth of stairs behind downtown Orlando, knocking down several iconic buildings with no replacement plan. Whoda thunk it?

A realist could see it coming a mile away. It's just disappointing to see the worst case scenario around projects like the various demolitions and the major pipe dreams appear to be in the process of happening. Potentially a decade blown.

Quote from: thelakelander on March 18, 2020, 04:58:16 PM
It is no longer 13 stories. People complained about the density, so it was chopped in half.

More likely, it's really expensive to build up.  For a project like this we could easily be talking 50% - 60% or more per sq foot.   Jacksonville isn't exactly a market full of people making 6 figures.  IIRC it has one of the smallest percentages of the 50 major metros in the US.   

On top of that, there's been a lot of high end rentals coming online downtown.  How many more can this small market support in the near future?   I'm not saying it can't.  Just that this is a question investors and others creating a project like this are going to be asking.

Under construction now; taken this afternoon.  Workers and excavators on site.

(https://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/9D9CB425-0255-4BF8-AEBB-74330F86F220_zpswbnszx3i.jpeg)

(https://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/B5686B1A-67F6-4E3D-BECE-ADAB1ED7DEFC_zps2ze1ufq3.jpeg)

Don't know whether I should leap for joy, or burn in the deepest part of a pit.

It's something.

It should be taken as a positive.  It's one less surface parking lot to deal with.

Simms is back! Amazing. Thanks for the photo.

Just broke ground on the townhomes on college and willow branch in riverside

What are the plans for changes to streets and intersections there?  Any?   They're pretty messy right now.  I've found out of town visitors quickly notice the whole Prudential / Acosta / San Marco thing takes F O R E V E R.  And during rush hour it backs up.   I'm curious how all that extra traffic from another 200 units.   

They aren't doing anything that I'm aware of

They will probably use the existing driveway connection immediately adjacent to the railroad crossing - making it nearly impossible for apartment dwellers to turn left.
Not that I think they are going to do it, the best traffic solution would be to tie in at the existing Palm Avenue intersection - which could be signalized.
Or ... they could do a round-about at Palm, instead of a signal. 

They only own the narrow driveway so nothing is going to happen at Palm Ave.  A round about there isn't physically possible.

Tower crane going up now:

(https://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/Mobile%20Uploads/07E57866-2375-4C27-A35D-1D69CDD79D1D_zpsscwfqjgv.jpeg) (https://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/Mobile%20Uploads/07E57866-2375-4C27-A35D-1D69CDD79D1D_zpsscwfqjgv.jpeg.html)

I get the desire for 50 story buildings, but what if that turned into a second Berkman II? How would that look with a 50 story skeleton sitting on the river, unfinished for a decade or 2......?

Quote from: MusicMan on June 16, 2020, 09:54:23 AM
I get the desire for 50 story buildings, but what if that turned into a second Berkman II? How would that look with a 50 story skeleton sitting on the river, unfinished for a decade or 2......?

I don't think anyone who supports taller buildings downtown does so with the expectation that they wouldn't be finished. No one wants a Berkman II 2.

I'd rather have a 50 story unfinished tower than what the General Development Corporation did to the state of Florida during the 1950s and 60s.

Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2020, 05:03:39 PM
I'd rather have a 50 story unfinished tower than what the General Development Corporation did to the state of Florida during the 1950s and 60s.

Not just in the 50's and 60's but into the 90's and beyond under their new name of Atlantic Gulf Communities following their fraud and scandal riddled bankruptcy.  So, you can also thank them for developing the 4,000+ acre Julington Creek Plantation in St. Johns County which they also bankrupted.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1995-10-22-9510200779-story.html (https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1995-10-22-9510200779-story.html)
[Emphasis added]

Quote
October 22, 1995

By JAY WEAVER Business Writer
SUN-SENTINEL

Once a big-shot residential developer, General Development Corp. fell on its face in the early 1990s in one of the country's biggest consumer-fraud cases.

Thousands of people from the Northeast had bought lots and homes in new Florida communities built by General Development - only to discover they were overcharged for them.

In 1992, the Miami-based land developer and home builder pleaded guilty to fraud charges under bankruptcy protection and set up a $160 million restitution fund. The company's four senior executives were convicted and sentenced to prison.

But three years later, after a bankruptcy reorganization, General Development has a different name and mission. Its successor, Atlantic Gulf Communities Corp., is betting its future on 4,270 acres of valuable land it owns in the hot-selling home market of southwest Broward County.

But unlike its predecessor, Atlantic Gulf plans to develop the land and sell it off to home builders.

While the company is forging a new direction for itself, analysts say Atlantic Gulf still must reduce a mountain of debt as it moves ahead with residential projects in Miramar, Pembroke Pines and other growing communities around Orlando and Jacksonville.

"In its three short years, Atlantic Gulf has had more than a few problems of its own," writes Anthony Marchese, author of The Inside Market, a newsletter based in Summit, N.J.

"It has lost $51 million since its founding, and debt exceeds equity by a ratio of three to one."

But Marchese stresses positive developments: a corporate restructuring, stock buying by Atlantic Gulf executives and the selling of landholdings in secondary Florida markets.

"The stock's a buy for speculative, risk-tolerant investors only, with a target of $15 over the next 12 months," Marchese writes. The stock, traded under the symbol AGLF on the Nasdaq exchange, closed at $7 on Friday.

Atlantic Gulf President Larry Rutherford - who joined General Development as an executive vice president a few months after it filed for bankruptcy in April 1990 - agreed with the analyst's outlook.

"It's a speculative stock with a lot of debt overhang," Rutherford, 49, said in Atlantic Gulf's Coconut Grove office overlooking Biscayne Bay. "But I'm optimistic we're going to grow with Florida and Broward County."

He stressed that Atlantic Gulf is a skeleton of its former self - nimble and ready to stage a corporate turnaround.

Atlantic Gulf has only 145 employees, the result of a massive restructuring from 1990 when General Development had 3,000 employees, $1 billion in assets and $5.8 billion in filed claims by creditors from General Development's bankruptcy. That figure was reduced to $1 billion in allowed claims, which was paid in part with Atlantic Gulf stock.

Today, Atlantic Gulf has $352 million in assets and liabilities of $287 million.

To move ahead, Rutherford said, Atlantic Gulf must sell more of its 55,000 acres in secondary Florida markets, pay off or refinance $200 million in debt due by 1998 and begin developing its residential projects in southwest Broward.

"It's a balancing act that will tip us toward profitability next year," said Rutherford, who previously was chief executive officer at Gulfstream Land and Development Corp., which developed Jacaranda in Plantation.

Atlantic Gulf lost $4.95 million, or 51 cents per share, during the second quarter ending June 30, compared with losses of $10.03 million, or $1.04 per share, in the same period last year.

Rutherford hopes to reverse that losing streak, in part with the gold mine he sees in southwest Broward.

Last month, Atlantic Gulf bought 1,750 acres west of Interstate 75 for $39.5 million. It was the prominent site of former Blockbuster Entertainment Chairman H. Wayne Huizenga's dream for a sports and theme park complex. His Blockbuster Park plan was killed by entertainment conglomerate Viacom Inc. after it bought the giant video-rental chain last year.

To buy and develop the site along the Miramar Parkway, Atlantic Gulf formed a partnership with wealthy brothers from Virginia, Art and Steven Sandler. Their plan for the new development, Country Lakes, calls for about 4,200 single-family homes, townhouses and rental apartments, along with retail and office development. The homes would be priced between $125,000 and $175,000 - in sync with sales in southwest Broward.

The Country Lakes site also is within a few miles of Atlantic Gulf's other residential projects: Windsor Palms and Sunset Lakes in Miramar and Summerchase in Pembroke Pines. Those three projects would amount to 3,000 additional single-family homes - but only ground has been broken on Windsor Palms.

When Atlantic Gulf's four developments are built, the real estate would be worth an estimated $1 billion, Rutherford said.

For the Country Lakes project, the Sandler brothers' majority investment was critical to Atlantic Gulf, which lacked the capital and borrowing capacity to do it alone.

The Sandlers, who made a fortune this summer when Sara Lee Corp. acquired the brothers' majority interest in Consolidated Foodservice Cos., have real estate investments in southeastern Virginia and Washington, D.C., suburbs. Steven Sandler said they've been eyeing an opportunity to enter the Florida market and seized it with Atlantic Gulf.

"They know what they're doing, and that's the only thing that matters to me," Steven Sandler said.

The Country Lakes partnership's timing might be right, as long as demand remains strong and the homes are affordable.

No doubt the southwest Broward real estate market has slowed down and become more competitive since its explosive growth after Hurricane Andrew and the resulting migration of Dade County homeowners northward. But real estate experts say it's expected to remain one of the most robust in the country through the next decade because of South Florida's steady growth.

"The reality is, Broward will continue to experience good growth and Dade will throw more and more buyers into that market," said Lewis Goodkin, a Miami real estate analyst. "Everyone talks about Hurricane Andrew [in 1992). What happened is the hurricane accelerated that growth, but the momentum is still strong."

Goodkin said Atlantic Gulf's landholdings in Miramar will appeal to home builders because of the diminishing number of parcels available in Southwest Broward.

David Adler, president of the Builders Association of South Florida, said his Miami-based home-building company would like to buy one.

"We're very interested in Atlantic Gulf's new sites," said Adler, who is building a few residential projects in Southwest Broward, including Atlantic Gulf's Windsor Palms in Miramar.

Asked about the developer's prospects for recovery, he said: "We not only think they're going to rise out of the ashes [of the bankruptcy reorganization), they're going to be a major shaper of southwest Broward."

Since the early 1990s, the most successful developer in that market has been SilverLakes. It has sold 2,500 homes in Pembroke Pines, and is developing another 2,500 in Miramar.

Don Neuerman, director of sales and marketing at SilverLakes, seems unfazed by Atlantic Gulf's bold challenge in those two fast-growing cities.

"They may be the new player in town," he said, "but we're going to be shoulder to shoulder with them."

Well... I've learned something today.

GDC provided great places for many of Florida's young people to  do all sorts of fun activities outdoors without and worry about supervision or the law

Lol, now that they certainly did!

Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2020, 05:03:39 PM
I'd rather have a 50 story unfinished tower than what the General Development Corporation did to the state of Florida during the 1950s and 60s.

Luckily it's not an either or.

Berkman II is disgusting.  It's sad that pile of crud hasn't been removed.