Quote(https://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Fleet-Landing-DDRB-March-2026/i-6b8X5Cm/0/NX5bRBvMrNLwvBCSDzzfJzWbNNmNzP8DFBLxH28L8/L/DDRB%20March%2012,%202026%20Agenda%20Packet_Page_62-L.jpg)
After a failed attempt to acquire the DCPS Southbank headquarters, Fleet Landing now has plans for a 32-story tower in Brooklyn at 111 Riverside Avenue. The project will seek conceptual approval from the Downtown Development Review Board on March 12, 2026. Here is a look at the project's conceptual plans. Let us know what you think!
Read More: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/fleet-landing-riverside-seeks-ddrb-conceptual-approval/
Due to relevancy, reposting here from the Haskell Building thread:Quote from: MakeDTjaxGre@tAgain on March 06, 2026, 10:20:59 PMGreat share! The Fleet Landing proposal looks really nice, and well put together - just stands out a bit from my opinion. I'm curious if they plan to acquire the empty lot next door for a potential Phase 2 as well.
Looking at the Fleet site plan, they appear to be only taking 1/2 of the Haskell Building's footprint creating an empty lot where there is none now. I gather you are talking about the next lot over, to be clear.
Curious about the planned auditorium and its use. Being on the riverfront, will it be open to public events or only for residents? What will be its seating capacity? I thought they were going to also include a restaurant open to the public?
I note that part of the tower violates the height setbacks from the river. Once again, it appears the City is rolling over for this. I get there is a volume/massing allowance swap here but I still feel that this creates a massive (pun intended 8)) loophole that frustrates the purpose of the guideline, especially, when repeatedly violated.
I note the following guideline cited by DDRB that it is pushing aside:
QuoteWaterfront Design and River Views: setbacks, height and access corridors.
It is the intent of this subsection to encourage and protect enticing views of the river
from as many places in downtown as possible by providing View and Access Corridors
at the street level, to maximize overall value by providing both enhanced public spaces
at the riverfront and by facilitating river and creek views from as many buildings as
possible, as well as managing building forms and massing to be respectful of the
context of the surrounding buildings and of the pedestrian environment by stepping
buildings up from the river and defining height zones as delineated hereunder to allow
views around, over and through the architecture, and, to respect the scale of the context
in which development occurs.
And, here is the guideline vs. the request:
ZONE C100' TO 175' SETBACK FROM MHWL
MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED: 75'
Request: 375 feet!QuoteFINDING: The conceptual site plan identifies a view corridor aligned with
Stonewall Street extending from Riverside Avenue to the St. Johns River. The
proposed development maintains this corridor and provides a public plaza and
pedestrian access connection linking Riverside Avenue to the Riverwalk. The
submitted volume diagram indicates building height distributed within Zones B
and C in accordance with the waterfront height provisions of ยง656.361.6.2.H.
What's the point of having a rule that is easily circumvented?!
If the ordinance that restricts the height of buildings in favor of view corridors stops this building from being built the way it is shown, then the ordinance should be repealed. It's just another excuse to stop building up our Downtown. Truth is, any building you build, a one story bld. would block the view to a pedestrian. Truth is, the best, most "enticing" views of our river and downtown can be seen from the various bridges we have, especially from the Fuller Warren (Best Panorama) and Acosta (Best Close-Up) Bridges. Lets hope this and other proposed high rises are approved so we can look forward to many years of seeing these buildings as much-needed additions to our skyline.
Quote from: howfam on March 09, 2026, 08:32:28 PMIf the ordinance that restricts the height of buildings in favor of view corridors stops this building from being built the way it is shown, then the ordinance should be repealed. It's just another excuse to stop building up our Downtown. Truth is, any building you build, a one story bld. would block the view to a pedestrian. Truth is, the best, most "enticing" views of our river and downtown can be seen from the various bridges we have, especially from the Fuller Warren (Best Panorama) and Acosta (Best Close-Up) Bridges. Lets hope this and other proposed high rises are approved so we can look forward to many years of seeing these buildings as much-needed additions to our skyline.
This is not about preventing high rises downtown. It's about preserving views of the river that make such high rises attractive. Looking out the window of one building to look at another isn't very exciting. And, for those not in buildings, having a view along the banks of the river, not just the water itself, is part of completing and framing the natural environment that is the centerpiece of the City.
Manhattan and other major cities do just fine building up their skylines back from their waterfront or in landlocked parcels. In fact, if you live/work back from the waterfront, you will be looking to have enjoyable access to it, not having to fight a wall of high rises. So, if you really want to build up Downtown, leave some green spaces along the river as an amenity.
The lack of high rises Downtown has more to do with poor planning and management than focusing on the river.
By the way, the Fuller Warren only has sidewalks on its west facing side. The east facing side toward Downtown is cars only so taking in that view at 60+ mph isn't going to last long.