Proposed redevelopment for CenterState Bank property in Riverside scrapped

[thelakelander]

Plans for the redevelopment of the CenterState Bank property at 1232 King St. appear to be delayed.

The Riverside Avondale Preservation newsletter reports the proposed redevelopment plans from the potential purchaser are scrapped.

J.B. Ritz Inc. presented proposed development plans to RAP for a multifamily mixed-use project on the site that included the construction of a smaller bank building.

The economics of the development would require the development of 118 dwelling units, which in turn required relaxation from the overlay district height restrictions, according to the RAP newsletter.

The newsletter said the developer likely would not receive the relief needed to make the project work, which would be determined by the city with a recommendation by RAP.

Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/group-says-proposed-redevelopment-plan-for-centerstate-bank-property-in-riverside-scrapped

[Charles Hunter]

How much higher than the overlay limit would be required?  A foot or two, or ten, or more?  I suspect the more significant concern is the proposed 118 units.

[jaxnyc79]

Plans for the redevelopment of the CenterState Bank property at 1232 King St. appear to be delayed.

The Riverside Avondale Preservation newsletter reports the proposed redevelopment plans from the potential purchaser are scrapped.

J.B. Ritz Inc. presented proposed development plans to RAP for a multifamily mixed-use project on the site that included the construction of a smaller bank building.

The economics of the development would require the development of 118 dwelling units, which in turn required relaxation from the overlay district height restrictions, according to the RAP newsletter.

The newsletter said the developer likely would not receive the relief needed to make the project work, which would be determined by the city with a recommendation by RAP.

Full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/group-says-proposed-redevelopment-plan-for-centerstate-bank-property-in-riverside-scrapped

Haven't seen the plans obviously, but this city confuses me, and seems super uptight as it relates to density.  I imagine the developer would have taken care to create an aesthetically pleasing adjacency and the project would have added more fuel to the district"s mixed-use vitality, yet I was on Cassatt Avenue this morning and miles of the avenue look like a complete and abandoned dump with seemingly no standards for design.  The signs looked especially horrible.

So Riverside does or doesn't want urbanization?  Just when I was thinking riverside might be the city's cool and funky dense zone to make up for a laggard downtown, I see this article and sounds like riverside wants to be Leave it to beaver-ville.

[thelakelander]

^Riverside doesn't want urbanization. The community is fine being the equivalent of a first ring Detroit or Chicago style suburb. It will never have the density of a Lakeview or Wicker Park. That fight has been going on a while now. IMO, it's fueled the redevelopment and popularity of Brooklyn and Murray Hill. Both are close enough to benefit from the demographics and popularity, yet they come without fights business owners and developers would face within the historic district.

[jaxnyc79]

^Riverside doesn't want urbanization. The community is fine being the equivalent of a first ring Detroit or Chicago style suburb. It will never have the density of a Lakeview or Wicker Park. That fight has been going on a while now. IMO, it's fueled the redevelopment and popularity of Brooklyn and Murray Hill. Both are close enough to benefit from the demographics and popularity, yet they come without fights business owners and developers would face within the historic district.

Maybe parts of Charlotte are like this, but From what I've seen, dense infill residential is nearly ubiquitous in charlotte, and consequently, you're hard-pressed to find abandoned or vacant strip centers anywhere.  By the way, adjacent commercial/retail almost always have monument signage fairly low to the ground.

[Tacachale]

Silly thing for RAP to push back on. Residential would be a much better use of the site.

[jaxnyc79]

Riverside-Avondale is closed to growth.  Got it.  And what exactly does 'community fit' mean - showering RAP management with perks?

[thelakelander]

Maybe parts of Charlotte are like this, but From what I've seen, dense infill residential is nearly ubiquitous in charlotte, and consequently, you're hard-pressed to find abandoned or vacant strip centers anywhere.  By the way, adjacent commercial/retail almost always have monument signage fairly low to the ground.

Charlotte is way more progressive than Jax when it comes to embracing density! That city reminds me more of a new up and comer like Orlando or Austin. Dilworth is probably Charlotte's version of Riverside. It's also a historic district. You won't find as much high density urban development in the heart of that neighborhood. Instead, you'll find it on the edges, like South Boulevard (South End) and Moorehead Street. Jax is definitely in need of a zoning overhaul. The areas where we have moonscape are the spots we should definitely be pushing for dense infill development.

[Tacachale]

Riverside-Avondale is closed to growth.  Got it.  And what exactly does 'community fit' mean - showering RAP management with perks?

More or less, though I wouldn't say the neighborhood as a whole opposes density. There are people who are excited about it when it comes up. However, zoning discourages it, and currently RAP tends to oppose such changes.

[jaxnyc79]

Maybe parts of Charlotte are like this, but From what I've seen, dense infill residential is nearly ubiquitous in charlotte, and consequently, you're hard-pressed to find abandoned or vacant strip centers anywhere.  By the way, adjacent commercial/retail almost always have monument signage fairly low to the ground.

Charlotte is way more progressive than Jax when it comes to embracing density! That city reminds me more of a new up and comer like Orlando or Austin. Dilworth is probably Charlotte's version of Riverside. It's also a historic district. You won't find as much high density urban development in the heart of that neighborhood. Instead, you'll find it on the edges, like South Boulevard (South End) and Moorehead Street. Jax is definitely in need of a zoning overhaul. The areas where we have moonscape are the spots we should definitely be pushing for dense infill development.

I seriously considered a place in dilworth (or claiming to be dilworth) when searching.  Yes, mostly big historic homes on large lots, and yes, all around the perimeter and in certain selective spots, dense residential and mixed use (ground floor retail) under construction or newly finished. I opted for south end because of light rail.  Charlotte zoning and design standards for various uses adjacent to one another, should be considered by Jax.  This is my first trip back to Jax since moving from NYC to Charlotte, and the city just feels like a laggard in so many ways, from downtown vitality to even the appearance of relatively new south side shopping centers.  Landscaping standards in suburbia appear weak - the trees look sickly lol.  Chin up Jax - jeez.

[JeffreyS]

I was at a holiday party during luminaria in my neighborhood Avondale.  We were talking about this project likely not going forward. Five different home owners from the area all thought RAP was wrong to oppose this.  I wonder if RAP may be getting a bit out of touch.  Wonderful group but sometimes I think other than chain stores they have suburb envy. I am not sure how high the proposed building were.

[Bill Hoff]

The zoning overlay in that area was updated relatively recently, was it not? And with A LOT of community involvement. It'd be one thing if the zoning overlay wasn't updated, but the community & city just approved an updated version a few years ago...

[lowlyplanner]

Has anyone seen the actual proposal?

I saw an earlier version that was all residential - the developer acknowledged that King Street might be a good location for retail but said they just didn't do retail.  This early version also had a one story bank branch with a drive through that was on one side of the property.  Overall the thing represented small time thinking.

This property is literally one of the 3 largest redevelopment opportunities in Riverside.  Why settle for something mediocre?

When the Overlay was being developed, First Guaranty Bank insisted on, and got, a 45' height allowance on this property, which is higher than most of the neighborhood outside of 5 Points.

[MusicMan]

Interesting.

Was this property ever offered for sale on the open market?  I certainly do not remember it. Sounds like the "developer" had an inside track to purchase this parcel, which is indeed "Prime real estate" in a hot neighborhood. In fact this parcel is in 32205 Avondale according to the MLS.

I have investors who would have paid top dollar for the opportunity to develop this parcel, and 118 units IS WAY TOO FEW for this site.
Catalyst Development Partners is doing 145 units on a smaller parcel in San Marco. 

It is massively underutilized for sure.

[thelakelander]

If all you can go up is 45 feet, you're basically limited to three floors.