https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/florida-times-union-property-under-contract-dollar250-million-project-planned
This is the 4th Downtown project that includes plans for a new grocery store. Watch out Mandarin, we're coming for you!
"There are not many tracts this large in the area"
Uh............. has he seen 'The District', or 'The Shipyards?' Or the rest of downtown waterfront....?
Quote from: MusicMan on May 24, 2021, 09:31:50 AM
"There are not many tracts this large in the area"
Uh............. has he seen 'The District', or 'The Shipyards?' Or the rest of downtown waterfront....?
I'm assuming they meant large tract [for sale] in the area. The District isn't fully for sale (obviously they're selling portions), and the Shipyards is a total mess politically.
Fantastic news. I hope they develop something iconic that integrates the creek, river, and riverwalk.
Quote from: Josh on May 24, 2021, 10:25:56 AM
Fantastic news. I hope they develop something iconic that integrates the creek, river, and riverwalk.
The developer has a ton of experience throwing up stick build urban apartment complexes and grocery stores. I'm sure whatever they propose will be truly uninspiring ::)
I'm gonna miss the mid-century modern building.
I would imagine that for an Atlanta developer, this parcel is actually on the cheap side considering the location and size, as compared to anything similar in Atlanta.
No renderings bro?
Wow under construction this year.
Quote from: JeffreyS on May 24, 2021, 05:45:49 PM
Wow under construction this year.
Like how Berkman II is "under construction?" ;D
I hope this very valuable waterfront property is not wasted on a 5 story stick frame building. This is a great opportunity for mid-high rise project that will allow this site to fulfill its potential profit-making potential.
How about high rise or taller project? Prime location and property IMO.
DIA to start public review of $151M redevelopment of former Times-Union campus
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-to-start-public-review-of-dollar151m-redevelopment-of-former-times-union-campus
Was hoping for a LOT better for one of the best riverfront sites in the city.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on August 10, 2021, 09:06:50 AM
Was hoping for a LOT better for one of the best riverfront sites in the city.
The devil is in the details, but the proposed uses, site plan and massing is what I would expect the market can support. It would be very beneficial to get a
Greenw.. grocery market at that location.
I would hope that DIA and DDRB pushes for better treatment of how the site interacts with Riverside Avenue and the facade/finishing treatment. The Brooklyn submarket is a very profitable one for these types of developments... and as such the material and facade treatment should begin to reflect a step up over the Regency/Fuqua development across the street.
Just a little bit of height and setback variation to give the impression of rising away from the river would be nice. As rendered at this early stage, it looks like a development that could happening in Deerwood. If the market for a high-rise isn't there, fine, but it should still be expected to visually interesting and up to par for such a highly visible property that will benefit greatly from a massive city investment into McCoy's Creek.
The value of fancy renderings, especially in Jax, may be dubious at best but I look forward to seeing what Fuqua has in mind. Here's hoping the Related project on the Southbank was a good warm-up for the DDRB to do a thorough review.
Personally, I don't care about the setbacks. For 40 years the site has interacted with the river via a surface parking lot separated by a fence.
Replacing that with apartments is 1,000 times better.
Its very premature to get into the form and function at this point, but the building massing along Riverside Avenue isn't too worrisome as long as they are designed to interact well with the sidewalk.
The Greenwise grocery story in Tallahassee's Gaines Street offers a good example. It features an entrance that essentially fronts Gaines Street, even though the parking is in the back. It also features an elevated and covered seating section, as well as additional seating options among shade trees and various window massing that stretch along Gaines Street
https://www.moderncities.com/article/2018-jun-before-and-after-tallahassees-gaines-street (https://www.moderncities.com/article/2018-jun-before-and-after-tallahassees-gaines-street)
These are all very cost effective ways to make a big box a bit more contextually sensitive.
The developer was responsible for things like the Riverside Publix (when he worked for Sembler) and a joint venture with Regency Centers across the street at Brooklyn Station. They have shown the ability to work with local officials to create contextually-sensitive site designs and architectural treatments. This preliminary site plan at the former TU site is not unlike a project the same developer is doing in Atlanta:
http://www.fuquadevelopment.com/files/links/20160509-madisonyards-renderings.pdf (http://www.fuquadevelopment.com/files/links/20160509-madisonyards-renderings.pdf)
What's the line on whether the apartments will look like the rest of Brooklyn, with strategically placed rectangles of contrasting color?
Remember when Riverside Ave was widened and it was poised to become Jacksonville's version of Miami's Brickell district? It was the most expensive street widening in FL at the time. Run of the mill 5 story apartments for this section of the river and this main thoroughfare, is indicative of where the market is at.
Quote from: vicupstate on August 10, 2021, 11:23:59 AM
Remember when Riverside Ave was widened and it was poised to become Jacksonville's version of Miami's Brickell district? It was the most expensive street widening in FL at the time. Run of the mill 5 story apartments for this section of the river and this main thoroughfare, is indicative of where the market is at.
No argument that the widening of Forest St and Riverside Ave (and subsequent loss of building stock and the elimination of the historic street grid network) was not a good idea then, and still not a good idea now. And the Brickell comparisons/projections back then were eye rollers, for sure. For those curious about the history, check out: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/unity-plaza-retail-site-listed-for-sale-page-2/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/unity-plaza-retail-site-listed-for-sale-page-2/)
That said, I don't think you can look at Brooklyn and call it a failure by any stretch of the imagination. It is now home to three Fortune 500 companies, the only functioning/thriving retail presence in Downtown's expanded boundaries (aided in large part due to the interstate highway access), and has had more new housing and hotel units come online in the past 10 years than the Northbank CBD and Southbank combined.
A developer has assembled land along Park Street, and once the Park Street Road Diet (and Emerald Trail connection) is completed, you'll see that section also be marked with a mix of new infill and redevelopment of existing buildings. Brooklyn puts everywhere else Downtown to shame... and thats even with the missteps of the past.
As long as the big gray boxes end up looking like something other than big colorful boxes I'd be ok with it. The building that they are wrapping up on the other side of the river is pretty bad.
Yes! No one should be worried about anything in Jacksonville (or the rest of the Deep South, including anything in Atlanta) becoming the next Brickell.....
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-JsbJh3R/0/X2/i-JsbJh3R-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-jkcWxmg/0/X2/i-jkcWxmg-X2.jpg)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-nBBKSb7/0/X2/i-nBBKSb7-X2.jpg)
South Florida is a different animal, landscape and economy altogether. Hopefully, Jax civil leaders will be more realistic when selling various visions of what the future of local scenes can one day be.
The uses and density are fine but the site layout can be better with a few changes such as shifting the retail space and grocery store to front the entrance road and move the street level parking to the back of those buildings. Considering that any chances of Brooklyn becoming an actual urban, pedestrian friendly neighborhood again went down the drain years ago, the project is okay and beneficial to the area.
Not this developers fault but I think it's a shame how disconnected Brooklyn feels from Downtown, Riverside, and the surrounding neighborhoods if you don't have a car. Aside from the Riverwalk, there's no easy way to get to Brooklyn without feeling that your life is in danger crossing the massive roads and parking lots. Hopefully we hold future developments to stricter urban, design standards
Quote from: fieldafm on August 10, 2021, 12:17:57 PM
Quote from: vicupstate on August 10, 2021, 11:23:59 AM
Remember when Riverside Ave was widened and it was poised to become Jacksonville's version of Miami's Brickell district? It was the most expensive street widening in FL at the time. Run of the mill 5 story apartments for this section of the river and this main thoroughfare, is indicative of where the market is at.
No argument that the widening of Forest St and Riverside Ave (and subsequent loss of building stock and the elimination of the historic street grid network) was not a good idea then, and still not a good idea now. And the Brickell comparisons/projections back then were eye rollers, for sure. For those curious about the history, check out: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/unity-plaza-retail-site-listed-for-sale-page-2/ (https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/unity-plaza-retail-site-listed-for-sale-page-2/)
That said, I don't think you can look at Brooklyn and call it a failure by any stretch of the imagination. It is now home to three Fortune 500 companies, the only functioning/thriving retail presence in Downtown's expanded boundaries (aided in large part due to the interstate highway access), and has had more new housing and hotel units come online in the past 10 years than the Northbank CBD and Southbank combined.
A developer has assembled land along Park Street, and once the Park Street Road Diet (and Emerald Trail connection) is completed, you'll see that section also be marked with a mix of new infill and redevelopment of existing buildings. Brooklyn puts everywhere else Downtown to shame... and thats even with the missteps of the past.
Those F500 companies had been there before the widening and the Brooklyn 'renaissance' (such as it is) occurred. They didn't land there because of what has happened in Brooklyn the last 10 years. What has occurred in Brooklyn the last 10 years stands out because the same thing didn't happen on the Northbank or Southbank in the same timeframe. Given the widening and what has happened since, Brooklyn is really an 'urban' version of a suburban highway commercial node. That isn't a bad thing particularly but given the location we are talking about here, and the money being poured into McCoy's creek, it is hard to get excited about the same 5 story podium apartment construction that is already across the street. If the urban core really does take off, we will wish something more substantial was done here. Given the corporate presence already in the area, I wish someone (Fidelity, perhaps) would just warehouse it for that or some other substantial purpose.
Fidelity's relocation happened in 2003, and FIS' expansion is happening now. Neither had anything directly to do with the widening of Riverside Ave (a process started in the mid 1990's), but to discount Fidelity's presence when comparing Brooklyn in the year 2000 (when things like the St Joe and Harden buildings were in their due dilligence phases, and the Riverside Ave and Forrest St/I-10 interchange planning process had lots of ink on the paper) to the year 2021 is, silly.
Frankly, what's so vastly different in the type of building stock infill of Brooklyn Jacksonville in the past 15 years than that of South End Charlotte, or Westside Atlanta, or even Gulch in Nashville? The market for urban neighborhoods in mid-size cities outside of large city-outliers like Midtown Atlanta, Brickell Miami, etc is the same as whats going up in Brooklyn- some tall buildings, but mostly mid-rise, wood-frame construction mixed with compact retail developments.
None of the apartments or hotels you are referring to existed in 2000 or 2003 or 2009 for that matter. CSX and Fidelity were already there when the 'renaissance' occurred. Fidelity didn't expand because a bunch of apartments and a Fresh Market got built nearby.
QuoteFrankly, what's so vastly different in the type of building stock infill of Brooklyn Jacksonville in the past 15 years than that of South End Charlotte, or Westside Atlanta, or even Gulch in Nashville?
Nothing. Which is the point. This is a large prime riverfront spot with considerable acreage. Yet it is no different or more dense than what is 4 blocks back from the other side of Riverside Ave. You wouldn't see something like this on Tryon Street in Uptown Charlotte or on Broadway in Nashville. Just like the apartments next to the School Board building or those replacing the River City Brewing Company, the really prime riverfront spots are being developed no denser nor of higher quality than what can be found in any part of Jacksonville or any other city.
Something along the lines of a hotel, an office building, AND a mid-high rise residential building would be a better fit. This actually would be a good spot for a Convention Center and hotel, but obviously that is pie in the sky.
While it's a little early to get into exactly site plans, my thought would be to turn the garage and Grocery 90 Degrees.
- this could allow for a grocery entrance from the sidewalk, while still maintaining parking
- You could front the garage portion facing Riverside with Retail.
That aside, it isn't bad IMO. It's not the most dense thing ever, but there's a couple threads on that already.
Quote from: fieldafm on August 10, 2021, 09:47:50 AM
Personally, I don't care about the setbacks. For 40 years the site has interacted with the river via a surface parking lot separated by a fence.
Two wrongs don't make a right as they say. I do care about setbacks as previously expressed on other threads. These buildings will be around for decades or more and set a precedent for other development along the river. We have already made more exceptions than we should have in my opinion. I believe if we had standards that we more closely adhered to you would get better and more development as a result of a higher quality environment. Development for the sake of development is not a good mantra.
I don't know about the environmental impacts of moving McCoys creek but if those are acceptable, I like that it is free of the buildings and the "channeling" there now and is surrounded by a park. Plus, by moving the Creek east, it looks like it will have greater clearance under the rising Riverside Avenue ramps to the Acosta Bridge so another win there.
Not sure that an "organic" grocer will add much as I understand Fresh Market already has much of that. Can the area support two higher end grocers so close?
One other issue that will be interesting to see addressed is the entry from Riverside Avenue being at the bottom of the bridge ramps with merging lanes right up to the entry intersection.
Quote from: vicupstate on August 10, 2021, 04:50:36 PM
None of the apartments or hotels you are referring to existed in 2000 or 2003 or 2009 for that matter. CSX and Fidelity were already there when the 'renaissance' occurred. Fidelity didn't expand because a bunch of apartments and a Fresh Market got built nearby.
QuoteFrankly, what's so vastly different in the type of building stock infill of Brooklyn Jacksonville in the past 15 years than that of South End Charlotte, or Westside Atlanta, or even Gulch in Nashville?
Nothing. Which is the point. This is a large prime riverfront spot with considerable acreage. Yet it is no different or more dense than what is 4 blocks back from the other side of Riverside Ave. You wouldn't see something like this on Tryon Street in Uptown Charlotte or on Broadway in Nashville. Just like the apartments next to the School Board building or those replacing the River City Brewing Company, the really prime riverfront spots are being developed no denser nor of higher quality than what can be found in any part of Jacksonville or any other city.
Something along the lines of a hotel, an office building, AND a mid-high rise residential building would be a better fit. This actually would be a good spot for a Convention Center and hotel, but obviously that is pie in the sky.
Good, then we agree that the widening of Riverside Ave went too far and that Fidelity's expansion had nothing to do with that.
The point was that even though the Brickell 'projections' were overblown then... Brooklyn has been, by far, the biggest success story in the artificially expanded borders of 'Downtown'... even despite the COJ missteps (Riverside Ave, tearing down historic building stock, removing the historic street grid, etc). I just see no point in dismissing that. Frankly, the Northbank could learn a lot from Brooklyn's limited success.
QuoteYou wouldn't see something like this on Tryon Street in Uptown Charlotte or on Broadway in Nashville.
Those comparables are the historic Northbank CBD in Jax. South End, Gulch, etc are the more accurate comparisons for Brooklyn Jax. In that vein I don't see much difference at all with new building stock in those urban neighborhoods, and what is going up in Brooklyn.
QuoteJust like the apartments next to the School Board building or those replacing the River City Brewing Company, the really prime riverfront spots are being developed no denser nor of higher quality than what can be found in any part of Jacksonville or any other city.
I'd like to see 8 more skyscrapers, 30,000 more housing units and 400,000 new square feet of retail pop up in 'Downtown' Jacksonville in the next three years.
But, that's not the market.
One one hand, you are saying that the riverfront is not dense enough... and then you have these irrelevant broken records:
QuoteI do care about setbacks as previously expressed on other threads.
blather about massive setbacks and arbitrary height limits along the riverfront.
Pretty confident that this middle ground I'm standing on is more the right temperature. To each their own :)
Quote from: fieldafm on August 10, 2021, 06:57:23 PM
QuoteJust like the apartments next to the School Board building or those replacing the River City Brewing Company, the really prime riverfront spots are being developed no denser nor of higher quality than what can be found in any part of Jacksonville or any other city.
I'd like to see 8 more skyscrapers, 30,000 more housing units and 400,000 new square feet of retail pop up in 'Downtown' Jacksonville in the next three years.
But, that's not the market.
One one hand, you are saying that the riverfront is not dense enough... and then you have these irrelevant broken records:
QuoteI do care about setbacks as previously expressed on other threads.
blather about massive setbacks and arbitrary height limits along the riverfront.
Pretty confident that this middle ground I'm standing on is more the right temperature. To each their own :)
I don't recall the comment you attribute to me about riverfront density so I would appreciate the cite so I can see the context it was made in if I made it. That said, density and setbacks are not mutually exclusive and can actually be complimentary as density can be achieved with higher buildings, just further setback, to allow for more greenspace along the river.
When it comes to setbacks, they should be honored regardless of the "market." That's why they are there. To take the long view, not just the market of today. Again, exceptions will be there for decades if not forever. If developers can't live with that, they can move on. However, cities all over manage setbacks and have development so maybe there is something else amiss here that would put off developers.
My "blather" is just as important to me as your "blather" is to you. Neither of us has an exclusive in that regard. ;D
Height limits are only "arbitrary" in Jacksonville because standards mean little here. DIA, or whoever, just "arbitrarily" waives them all the time. We have an alleged standard that hopefully involved some research, expert inputs and maybe some mathematical calculation in determining sight lines. Would be nice if it was consistently enforced.
Didn't realize they wanted to move the creek. I'd rather see if left where it is and have them put a building in that hole along the railroad track with the park area along the creek in the middle of the development.
Quote from: acme54321 on August 10, 2021, 07:20:41 PM
Didn't realize they wanted to move the creek. I'd rather see if left where it is and have them put a building in that hole along the railroad track with the park area along the creek in the middle of the development.
I suppose it is less desirable to have residential buildings any closer to the bridge and railroad than absolutely necessary. The park/creek may serve as a buffer given it has to go somewhere on the property. Also, having the creek "open air" was highly desirable. With no buildings over it, they would likely have to build some type of bridge structure over the creek to integrate the entire complex and that may have taken more bucks and real estate than they wanted to give up. Lastly, given the Emerald Trail will follow the creek, they might not have wanted that much "outside" traffic traversing through the middle of a mostly residential property for security and other reasons.
Think it is kind of a letdown they didn't incorporate the creek into the design.
^That entire section around the creek is identified as a phase 2. It seems that phase 1 could be under construction before that phase of the McCoys Creek Restoration begins. From that perspective, what's shown now could easily change once the design of McCoys Creek is far enough along.
I guess I posted in the wrong thread yesterday.
Maybe it's because of the complete lack of architectural detail in the renderings, but this feels... rather underwhelming? It gives off the Spandrel vibe of "this could really go on any property, but we had our hands on this one."
It appears to be a massing model at this point. No renderings for a specific product. Definitely not really a market for high rise construction locally though. Need to fill in a bunch of surface parking lots. It appears Jax's sweet spot is 6 to 12 floors for years to come. Keep that in mind, the next time someone proposes blowing up anything taller.
Well, that being said LAKE and others, regarding "tallness," I guess I need to change my name to LOW RISE UNKNOWN, or, MID RISE UNKNOWN; how does that sound?
Heights Unknown 2075
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on August 12, 2021, 07:15:02 AM
Heights Unknown 2075
LOLOL...will be dead and gone and it won't matter, but you're probably right and on point!
Seems like a really fair ask in terms of incentives.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dollar28-4-million-in-city-grants-proposed-for-project-at-florida-times-union-site
Pretty much all rev grants on the back end.
I like the project a lot more after hearing that they have plans for at least one riverfront restaurant in Phase 2.
Related Group - 327 units, garage and restaurant - $100,000,000. TU Site - 396 units, garage, restaurant, grocery store and 31,000 sq. ft. retail - $182,000,000? I have a tough time believing 15% more units, grocery and retail costs $82,000,000. San Marco is similar in total size and is $10,000,000 plus site work. Are their incentives based on "estimates". Just asking.
How does the daylighting and relocation of McCoys Creek and the demolition of the TU complex come into play? Neither the RCB or San Marco projects had these factors included in the redevelopment plan.
I never really paid much attention to it before, but most of this site is buried behind the Riverside Dr and Acosta ramps. The ramp starts going up right after the traffic light, the grocery store will be completely behind it.
My guess is that will work. Most that frontage will be the side or back of the grocery anyway.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 13, 2021, 09:15:24 PM
How does the daylighting and relocation of McCoys Creek and the demolition of the TU complex come into play? Neither the RCB or San Marco projects had these factors included in the redevelopment plan.
Not sure Lake. The article is not clear, but as city is buying the park land sounds as the daylighting may be done by the city. Even then is that portion $50 million? Regardless, my question is how are these REV Grants determined. Does the city rely on the developers costs?
Quote from: Zac T on August 10, 2021, 02:27:59 PM
The uses and density are fine but the site layout can be better with a few changes such as shifting the retail space and grocery store to front the entrance road and move the street level parking to the back of those buildings. Considering that any chances of Brooklyn becoming an actual urban, pedestrian friendly neighborhood again went down the drain years ago, the project is okay and beneficial to the area.
Not this developers fault but I think it's a shame how disconnected Brooklyn feels from Downtown, Riverside, and the surrounding neighborhoods if you don't have a car. Aside from the Riverwalk, there's no easy way to get to Brooklyn without feeling that your life is in danger crossing the massive roads and parking lots. Hopefully we hold future developments to stricter urban, design standards
The creek and the RR create that disconnect.
One can easily + safely walk from downtown to, let's say The Fresh Market. Any perception of a lack of safety is an error on your part.
The Brooklyn Skyway station should help with the connection. It will be a one stop hop between this Brooklyn location and Central Station well before this development is completed.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on August 16, 2021, 10:49:37 AM
Quote from: Zac T on August 10, 2021, 02:27:59 PM
The uses and density are fine but the site layout can be better with a few changes such as shifting the retail space and grocery store to front the entrance road and move the street level parking to the back of those buildings. Considering that any chances of Brooklyn becoming an actual urban, pedestrian friendly neighborhood again went down the drain years ago, the project is okay and beneficial to the area.
Not this developers fault but I think it's a shame how disconnected Brooklyn feels from Downtown, Riverside, and the surrounding neighborhoods if you don't have a car. Aside from the Riverwalk, there's no easy way to get to Brooklyn without feeling that your life is in danger crossing the massive roads and parking lots. Hopefully we hold future developments to stricter urban, design standards
The creek and the RR create that disconnect.
One can easily + safely walk from downtown to, let's say The Fresh Market. Any perception of a lack of safety is an error on your part.
It's a lot of fun watching people cross Riverside Ave and try to dodge 6 lanes of traffic or cross the Riverside Ave, Acosta Bridge, Water St intersection or the countless times I have to help people who get lost trying to walk from Brooklyn to the Omni or vice-versa. Yeah sure it's a walk that a capable person could do but let's not kid ourselves into believing that it's easy or safe. Riverside Ave and Forest St were built to get cars through Brooklyn as quickly as possible and that's exactly how people drive through there. And developments with massive parking lots like the Fresh Market worsen the situation for pedestrians.
With the opening of McCoys Creek and its associated park, would that improve the pedestrian connection between the existing Brooklyn commercial areas - and Skyway Station - and the new development and riverwalk?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on August 16, 2021, 11:18:49 AM
With the opening of McCoys Creek and its associated park, would that improve the pedestrian connection between the existing Brooklyn commercial areas - and Skyway Station - and the new development and riverwalk?
Yes, the McCoys Creek portion of the emerald trail is supposed to connect to the riverwalk.
Why would the DIA approve this with such an ambiguous design? This is an approval to be reviewed? Even looking at this, there are some easy adjustments that could be made to make it more pedestrian friendly.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on August 16, 2021, 08:14:48 PM
Why would the DIA approve this with such an ambiguous design? This is an approval to be reviewed? Even looking at this, there are some easy adjustments that could be made to make it more pedestrian friendly.
They're currently only looking at the numbers on a spreadsheet. They will still need to go through a conceptual, then final design review.
I've gotten myself confused several times about this also. The DIA is mainly looking at the financials and determining if they meet city requirements and how much should be approved. The DDRB (DT Development Review Board) will look at the actual design of the site and architectural details. See article about Jags performance center. All those comments came from DDRB. This is my interpretation, so I could be wrong.
Quote from: jaxjags on August 14, 2021, 10:13:51 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on August 13, 2021, 09:15:24 PM
How does the daylighting and relocation of McCoys Creek and the demolition of the TU complex come into play? Neither the RCB or San Marco projects had these factors included in the redevelopment plan.
Not sure Lake. The article is not clear, but as city is buying the park land sounds as the daylighting may be done by the city. Even then is that portion $50 million? Regardless, my question is how are these REV Grants determined. Does the city rely on the developers costs?
JBJ article today states the city is responsible for the McCoy's Creek/Park part of this project. So again I just don't get the $180 million especially as it appears the plan is for low rise wood buildings. Maybe as the details are released it will become obvious.
Thanks all!
People can snub their noses at these projects but the end of the day they will probably bring valuable amenities that greatly benefits any DT resident. If that means chains like Starbucks or Firehouse so be it.
Canton in Baltimore is very similar to Brooklyn and has this vibe. There's a retail area called Canton Crossing which has a Chick fil A, Harris Teeter, Target and a lot of other amenity type places in amongst new waterfront apartments and its been very successful.
"Speedbump" due to concern over the timing of a restaurant along the Riverwalk.
From the Jacksonville Business Journal - https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2021/08/19/fuqua-redevelopment-of-times-union-hits-dia-speed.html?utm_source=st&utm_medium=en&utm_campaign=me&utm_content=ja&ana=e_ja_me&j=24789029&senddate=2021-08-19
Quote
The city is being asked to incentivize the project, but the DIA is loath to do so without it including a component that will activate the waterfront.
Fuqua's plans calls for a riverfront eatery in phase two of the development, which could be a minimum of five years away.
That's too long, some DIA board members said.
"We don't have opportunity to do retail anywhere else along this stretch (of the river near Brooklyn,)" said DIA member Oliver Barakat. "We have to have this."
...
The DIA voted 5-3 to table a resolution to approve incentives for the project so that those points can be hammered out at a special meeting to consider the resolution and other topics. That meeting is expected to be held Sept. 2.
...
Work on phase two would have to wait on a separate project that would be done by the city, which would see it uncover and relocate McCoy's Creek a bit further to the east from its current spot. Fuqua's phase two, which would include more apartment units and restaurant space on the river, couldn't begin until the creek project was finished.
Ultimately, that's an uncertain time period that all parties involved seemed uncomfortable with, especially since the time seems ripe right now to activate the riverfront with a new restaurant.
Good for the DIA.
The DIA unanimously approved incentives for the Fuqua development which will now include a riverfront restaurant in the first phase. Apparently there was decent public comment at the meeting and most people expressed a desire for an engaging project with better design.
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2021/09/03/t-u-redevelopment-gets-dia-green-light.html
QuoteThere will be a riverfront restaurant in the Brooklyn area of Jacksonville, now that developers and the city have come to an agreement — one that will see the city help pay for the eatery.
The Downtown Investment Authority voted 7-0 Thursday to approve nearly $30 million in incentives for Fuqua Development's plan to redevelop the former Florida Times-Union property. That includes splitting the cost of building a restaurant, which the city agency has argued is needed for riverfront activation.
QuoteA couple of public comments before the meeting began Thursday asked the DIA to ensure that if public money is incentivizing this development, to make sure the project will have excellent design and engages the public.
DIA board chair Braxton Gillam pointed out that Fuqua's project will turn the site from unused and blighted into a property that not only includes mixed-uses, but even a new public park.
Another public comment called the proposed buildings ugly.
DIA board members pointed out that there aren't renderings for the buildings yet and the plan is still conceptual, and that design is the purview of the DDRB.
This part scares me:
QuoteBarakat, board member Carol Worsham and Chair Braxton Gillam agreed that architectural quality is important for a Downtown riverfront development but said it is too early to judge Fuqua's plans.
The developer has not released renderings for One Riverside Avenue.
Worsham and Boyer noted the design quality will be reviewed when the project moves to the Downtown Development Review Board.
"We see a site plan that is probably not final, it's very conceptual, and those of us as designers or architects or engineers or landscape architects look at that and think, 'I want more.' I think the devil is in the details," Worsham said.
Barakat said he agrees that what Fuqua presented "feels like a high-density suburban site plan" but said the site comes with constraints like necessary riverview corridors and McCoys Creek.
Gillam said he was frustrated by the public's criticism of a "design that's yet to occur."
I believe the site plan is the most important element to get right at the conceptual stage. If you screw up here, from a pedestrian scale perspective, the architectural design of the building facades won't be able to overcome poor land planning. So when I read the DIA comments above and see the "conceptual" plan below, I see a Phase 1 site plan that is way past the conceptual stage. The apartment structures actually have individual units fairly designed already. This plan is in the engineering phase. Phase II, around the proposed park is conceptual.
(https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/sites/default/files/352906_standard.jpeg)
With the passage of this incentives package, we've basically locked ourselves into a Phase I site plan with surface parking at the entrance of the grocery store (I believe that could have been flipped from the entrance). We've also lost an opportunity to integrate the retail/dining into a "central street/view corridor" (sort of like Tapestry Park or the Downtown Dadeland photo below) that could have connected Riverside Avenue with the Riverwalk. Instead, we'll probably end up with a random riverwalk restaurant location at the helipad, which will not be seen from Riverside Avenue and an isolated/disconnected strip mall shops pushed in the top corner of the site. The lack of visibility and connectivity with the rest of the retail and Riverside Avenue will possibly create an additional challenge to the viability of the restaurant space from a feasibility perspective.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Miami/Miami---September-2021/i-Pf2j4Zq/0/2b545c1e/XL/20210902_170516-XL.jpg)
I get what you're saying Lake, but isn't that the fight on all of the developments? The fact they're so far ahead of conceptual is because they're taking the cookie-cutter plans and plopping them down on the site.
Hell, there's probably have 3 or 4 elevations / renderings already done and ready to go, they'll just need to figure out the foundation plans.
But you're right - this should have been shot down already based solely on the layout.
One other thing. Now that the proposal is to relocate the creek, it would have been interesting to see what could be done with the site if the office building stayed and was converted into a boutique hotel and/or residential use with lower level retail.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on September 03, 2021, 11:34:06 AM
I get what you're saying Lake, but isn't that the fight on all of the developments? The fact they're so far ahead of conceptual is because they're taking the cookie-cutter plans and plopping them down on the site.
Hell, there's probably have 3 or 4 elevations / renderings already done and ready to go, they'll just need to figure out the foundation plans.
But you're right - this should have been shot down already based solely on the layout.
Cookie cutter plans can be laid out differently. The grocery store is a box. No reason it needs to have surface parking between the building and the development entrance. I think the DIA would have more leg to stand on, in regards to getting the site plan right, if they attacked that during the incentives approval process, like they did with this particular desire for a full service restaurant.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 03, 2021, 11:52:26 AM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on September 03, 2021, 11:34:06 AM
I get what you're saying Lake, but isn't that the fight on all of the developments? The fact they're so far ahead of conceptual is because they're taking the cookie-cutter plans and plopping them down on the site.
Hell, there's probably have 3 or 4 elevations / renderings already done and ready to go, they'll just need to figure out the foundation plans.
But you're right - this should have been shot down already based solely on the layout.
Cookie cutter plans can be laid out differently. The grocery store is a box. No reason it needs to have surface parking between the building and the development entrance. I think the DIA would have more leg to stand on, in regards to getting the site plan right, if they attacked that during the incentives approval process, like they did with this particular desire for a full service restaurant.
I get that with the buildings, but I'm sure the civil part is pretty cookie cutter as well, is it not? (civil is kinda out of my wheelhouse, so I don't know)
No, civil isn't necessarily cookie cutter. Especially, considering the unique aspects of this site (railroad, creek, relocated creek, two bridges, a river, etc. as the frontage).
Quote from: thelakelander on September 03, 2021, 12:07:10 PM
No, civil isn't necessarily cookie cutter. Especially, considering the unique aspects of this site (railroad, creek, relocated creek, two bridges, a river, etc. as the frontage).
I say that in the sense that by leaving parking / ingress / egress along the main roadways and over ROW of undergrounds, it typically allows them access for utility tie-in while the rest of the site can go vertical - speeding up the construction times by months.
In my experience, that's never been the driver of putting surface parking up front on private property. In this plan specifically, there does not appear to be a utility easement between the development's entrance driveway and the left wall of the grocery store box.
If the site plan is this far along, I agree where are the basic elevations? Not the final design but the artist/conceptual version.
Something tells me The Jaxon followers will need to express our opinions loud and clear to the DDRB when the time comes. And yes please move grocery to the street. It's funny that way up here on the Northside there are two strip centers with buildings at the street and parking hidden in the rear. Why not DT.
A restaurant on the helipad site is an interesting concept but seems very cut off from the rest of the development.
Destined for failure. There's not enough visibility from the street and not enough foot traffic on the riverwalk to support it. They need to find a way to better connect it with the retail component of the project.
My layman's question here is why they would try and put a restaurant on the helipad instead of using the opportunity to straighten the Riverwalk so that there aren't two 90-degree turns there anymore?
Quote from: marcuscnelson on September 04, 2021, 01:54:40 PM
My layman's question here is why they would try and put a restaurant on the helipad instead of using the opportunity to straighten the Riverwalk so that there aren't two 90-degree turns there anymore?
The entire property, including the helipad, is owned by the Morris family and under contract to the developer. The Morris family, Haskell, Fidelity, the old St Joe building, etc all have a series of easements to allow the Riverwalk to have been extended from the Northbank to the Fuller Warren. COJ can't just rearrange the Riverwalk whenever they want to as the property owner has rights to the land including a small extension over the water.
The desire to put a restaurant on that small helipad site is one of the most bizarre things I have seen the DIA ever do in their existence.
^ I'm not saying just do it whenever they'd like, I'm saying now that the site is being redeveloped anyway, why have the city or developer not sought to straighten the Riverwalk instead of trying to stick the restaurant there?
But I guess you might not have an answer for that.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 04, 2021, 10:40:20 AM
Destined for failure. There's not enough visibility from the street and not enough foot traffic on the riverwalk to support it. They need to find a way to better connect it with the retail component of the project.
Yeah I didn't want to say it, trying to be optimistic, but no way any sort of restaurant makes it in that spot.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on September 04, 2021, 03:42:16 PM
^ I'm not saying just do it whenever they'd like, I'm saying now that the site is being redeveloped anyway, why have the city or developer not sought to straighten the Riverwalk instead of trying to stick the restaurant there?
But I guess you might not have an answer for that.
The Riverwalk is already not straight, and is well-used. What does eliminating one right angle going to accomplish at the end of the day?
If I were the developer, I'd have no interest in revising my easement, which I still have control over and could potentially revoke.
If I were COJ, I'd offer to improve the helipad site at no cost to the developer and offer the developer cash to maintain the space... and construct something that is beneficial to the Riverwalk... like some kind of drinking fountain/rest station/bike repair station for the runners/walkers/bikers that use the Riverwalk. That doesn't change the existing easement, the property owner keeps their over-water rights... and you are replacing a blighted and no-longer-useful helipad with something that is complimentary to the Riverwalk and not shoehorning some ridiculous retail structure on this small sliver of land.
Retail has been tremendously successful in Brooklyn because the retail is easily visible to the vehicular traffic and offers easy and free parking. There are already two cafe spaces fronting the Riverwalk (one in Haskell and one in the Raymond James Building... and a smoothie shop inside the YMCA at the Tillie Fowler Memorial). At least those cafe spaces serve the existing office users inside those buildings. This helipad restaurant idea literally ignores every aspect of what has made retail actually function in Brooklyn.
If I were the developer, I would look at putting the restaurant along the river (sunset views should be great! - especially if they add a rooftop eating/bar section) with some nice greenspace surrounding it for outdoor eating. I would connect it with well-defined pedestrian corridors to Riverside Avenue (there should be lots of potential foot traffic from the existing residential, office and hotels already in Brooklyn) and the bases of hotel, office and/or residential midrises built along Riverside Ave that have ground floor retail/activity centers and/or residential (maybe with a little retail, as suggested, to service the bikers, walkers and kayakers on the Emerald Trail/creek) facing the creek . This should generate some built in traffic and buzz to support the restaurant. I would put the parking structure (little or no surface lots) in the center of the property recognizing that the riverfront, creekfront and street frontage at the property edges are the most valuable square footages.
Given the potential to attract Riverwalk, Brooklyn pedestrian and creek/Emerald Trail traffic on a "spontaneous" basis, the restaurant should be a casual (i.e. jeans, shorts, nice outdoor wear, etc.) and mid-priced affair .
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on September 04, 2021, 10:57:22 PM
If I were the developer, I would look at putting the restaurant along the river (sunset views should be great! - especially if they add a rooftop eating/bar section) with some nice greenspace surrounding it for outdoor eating. I would connect it with well-defined pedestrian corridors to Riverside Avenue (there should be lots of potential foot traffic from the existing residential, office and hotels already in Brooklyn) and the bases of hotel, office and/or residential midrises built along Riverside Ave that have ground floor retail/activity centers and/or residential (maybe with a little retail, as suggested, to service the bikers, walkers and kayakers on the Emerald Trail/creek) facing the creek . This should generate some built in traffic and buzz to support the restaurant. I would put the parking structure (little or no surface lots) in the center of the property recognizing that the riverfront, creekfront and street frontage at the property edges are the most valuable square footages.
Given the potential to attract Riverwalk, Brooklyn pedestrian and creek/Emerald Trail traffic on a "spontaneous" basis, the restaurant should be a casual (i.e. jeans, shorts, nice outdoor wear, etc.) and mid-priced affair .
"Over great" recommendation. Most sensible proposal (outside of maybe 2 others) that I've seen yet.
Quote from: jaxjags on September 03, 2021, 02:08:15 PM
Something tells me The Jaxon followers will need to express our opinions loud and clear to the DDRB when the time comes.
Here here.
And if you're interested in this issue, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's only one organization (with paid staff) that is consistently advocating for great design in key spaces right now, and that's Scenic Jacksonville. Going to meetings, lobbying, using expertise to build consensus and pressure.
Built design is part of their mission - if having a better built and natural environment is your jam, get engaged with them.
QuoteAnd if you're interested in this issue, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's only one organization (with paid staff) that is consistently advocating for great design in key spaces right now, and that's Scenic Jacksonville
Excuse me while I throw up.
Quote from: fieldafm on September 07, 2021, 06:37:06 PM
QuoteAnd if you're interested in this issue, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's only one organization (with paid staff) that is consistently advocating for great design in key spaces right now, and that's Scenic Jacksonville
Excuse me while I throw up.
Lol. Well, is there another? If so, they didn't show up or give input: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-approves-dollar182-2-million-times-union-site-plan-with-first-phase-restaurant
Wish the local AIA and planning chapters could be more engaged in advocacy, but I don't think they feel it's their role, necessarily.
The local planning chapter has been involved with public policy and working with historically excluded neighborhoods that need planning the most. In downtown, the local APA chapter reviewed Boyer's draft zoning overlay rewrite and had her adjust the boundaries to make sure LaVilla was actually within the LaVilla district. Something that most won't care too much about at the high level, but will be instrumental in helping that area of downtown eventually redevelop with its own character and sense of place very different from the rest of the central business district. I believe AIA has been heavily involved with the riverfront and some of its members were very vocal about the Landing getting torn down and went as far as even to provide free concepts of what a renovated and modified space could be. From my experience, the lion's share of effective advocacy work is done before showing up to public meetings.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2021, 11:48:27 PM
From my experience, the lion's share of effective advocacy work is done before showing up to public meetings.
Definitely.
There's also something to going on the record.
Quote from: fsu813 on September 07, 2021, 10:37:43 PM
Lol. Well, is there another?
Looking through the roster of Scenic Jax, it looks like a bunch of retirees who are keeping busy and getting involved. While I support that, I think it's a lot of their ideologies that got Jacksonville in the situation it's in. We need younger people to step up, but they're kind of busy right now. It used to be one wage earner could provide for a family of 4 with a nice house, two cars, a country club membership and a dog in the yard. Work for 30 years and then retire and collect social security... Wages have decreased compared to inflation, social security is gone, houses and cars cost 10 times what they used to, and what's not flooded in the world is currently on fire. So maybe the people who have run the world into the ground should take a break from telling the rest of us what's best for us and just sit this one out.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on September 08, 2021, 09:49:58 AM
Quote from: fsu813 on September 07, 2021, 10:37:43 PM
Lol. Well, is there another?
Looking through the roster of Scenic Jax, it looks like a bunch of retirees who are keeping busy and getting involved. While I support that, I think it's a lot of their ideologies that got Jacksonville in the situation it's in. We need younger people to step up, but they're kind of busy right now. It used to be one wage earner could provide for a family of 4 with a nice house, two cars, a country club membership and a dog in the yard. Work for 30 years and then retire and collect social security... Wages have decreased compared to inflation, social security is gone, houses and cars cost 10 times what they used to, and what's not flooded in the world is currently on fire. So maybe the people who have run the world into the ground should take a break from telling the rest of us what's best for us and just sit this one out.
Here here; and I agree. But if "some" of the young people do step up or want to step up (because yes most are busy like we were), they need to really pay attention, do the research and analysis, and stop shooting off of the hip as most do and really pay attention to what's needed. I did mine, and you did yours too captain zissou I would guess (you may still be working but I am retired), but I still stay on top of my field of expertise and what they're doing in the work sector(s) (not just mine but others as well), and out in the field, and sometimes the young ones (younguns) upset me and make me mad as they come up with only THEIR ideas on the way things should work and not consider all areas and sectors of our demographic; there.......I said it, carry on.
Quote from: fsu813 on September 08, 2021, 08:56:17 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2021, 11:48:27 PM
From my experience, the lion's share of effective advocacy work is done before showing up to public meetings.
Definitely.
There's also something to going on the record.
Yes, going on the record also takes place before the meetings as well. When you can combine to two, the public support in the end does make things easier for politicians to push through.
Quote from: fsu813 on September 07, 2021, 10:37:43 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on September 07, 2021, 06:37:06 PM
QuoteAnd if you're interested in this issue, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's only one organization (with paid staff) that is consistently advocating for great design in key spaces right now, and that's Scenic Jacksonville
Excuse me while I throw up.
Lol. Well, is there another? If so, they didn't show up or give input: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-approves-dollar182-2-million-times-union-site-plan-with-first-phase-restaurant
Wish the local AIA and planning chapters could be more engaged in advocacy, but I don't think they feel it's their role, necessarily.
Perhaps the qualm isn't with Scenic Jax being the only organization with paid staff - maybe its associating them with advocating for "great design"
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 08, 2021, 12:27:06 PM
Quote from: fsu813 on September 07, 2021, 10:37:43 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on September 07, 2021, 06:37:06 PM
QuoteAnd if you're interested in this issue, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's only one organization (with paid staff) that is consistently advocating for great design in key spaces right now, and that's Scenic Jacksonville
Excuse me while I throw up.
Lol. Well, is there another? If so, they didn't show up or give input: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-approves-dollar182-2-million-times-union-site-plan-with-first-phase-restaurant
Wish the local AIA and planning chapters could be more engaged in advocacy, but I don't think they feel it's their role, necessarily.
Perhaps the qualm isn't with Scenic Jax being the only organization with paid staff - maybe its associating them with advocating for "great design"
Care to elaborate? A penny for your thoughts.
For example, regarding the Morris property, I believe they are simply advocating for something better than typical, suburban mid-level architecture and site plan. Which is what the comments on this website also reflect, unless I'm mistaken. Bringing that issue into the public discourse (higher expectations/standards for prime locations, including riverfront development) seems like a positive. I believe they also gave input that aligned with this website's thoughts on the development near MOSH (apartments & restaurant). I know they're heavily involved in pushing for a master plan for riverfront development, something this website has also advocated for (a Downtown masterplan), and which resulted in the Jessie Ball DuPont riverfront study now being analyzed. And smaller items too, like ensuring the new Regions Bank signage in Downtown wasn't too billboard-ish. Etc.
I obviously think very highly of this website and it's contributors, especially the expertise it brings, and I haven't noticed any obvious conflicts of view between it and SJ opinions on place making, design, development, etc.
To Captains remark, I'm associated with Scenic Jacksonville. I think they realize passing the torch is a priority, hence, my & and a couple others under 50 humble presence (we'll see that increase soon, I believe). Bill Brinton, legendary local activist, more or less founded the organization and the type of work it focuses on. Built design is one of four focus areas, all are related to the visual quality-of-life of Jacksonville - "scenic".
Anyway, my original message was: be engaged. Advocate whatever way you're comfortable with, though it's always good to get out of our comfort zones now & again, as well. Support those that are planting flags for expecting something more in Jacksonville, whether it be this website, SJ, etc.
Am I the only one who is drooling over the thought of owning a handsome coffee-table photo book chronicling the decades inside the old Times-Union building...there is certainly enough local talent afoot to make it happen! It would be a shame for those photos - if they exist - to be lost forever. Surely there are still some photogs and reporters with stories to tell. Please? Ennis, the Author Laureate??
QuoteWith the almost 19-acre site still being cleared, TriBridge Residential LLC broke ground Sept. 22 for the first phase of its riverfront apartment community at One Riverside.
One Riverside, designed for apartments, restaurants, retail stores and amenities, is expected to be a $250 million project.
In addition to the TriBridge apartments, a Whole Foods Market, retail space, a city park and a restored McCoys Creek are planned at the Northbank property next to the Acosta Bridge.
TriBridge Partner Katherine Mosley said she anticipates completion of the first 270 units and a restaurant by year-end 2024.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/photo-gallery/one-riverside-apartments-break-ground
Nice. I like. Carry on.