Is the FTU site locked into a suburban site plan?

[acme54321]

Daily Record reporting that demo permits have been issue.  Site expected to be cleared by July.

[jaxlongtimer]

Could it be because our City doesn't have a clue what a good development standard is or has any principles or vision to enforce? ....

....the real issue with this site plan is that the Code doesn't do what its supposed to do.... 

Looks to me like we actually agree.  Who is responsible for the Code?  The City! 

I am not anti-development, I am pro quality development.  I think it is clear from the Jaxson, quality development in Jax is hard to find.

And, yes, I am not for giving developer's blank checks drawn on the taxpayer's accounts.  With today's real estate prices and market conditions, much of what is being incentivized is not necessary.  It's clear that developers can easily flip their developments at tremendous gains based on reported sales.  Like the parking garage fiasco, the City takes much or all of the risks and none of the gains.  It has a long track record of being a terrible deal maker.

To counter your comment about my position, it seems you have never seen a development, no matter how badly conceived, that you don't support moving forward.  I guess we are opposite sides of the coin.

[fieldafm]

To counter your comment about my position, it seems you have never seen a development, no matter how badly conceived, that you don't support moving forward.  I guess we are opposite sides of the coin.

I was one of the few people on the planet working behind the scenes to improve this project.

Your uninformed assertion is ignorant, baseless and stupid.

[Tacachale]

^Okay, simmer down, folks.

[jaxlongtimer]

To counter your comment about my position, it seems you have never seen a development, no matter how badly conceived, that you don't support moving forward.  I guess we are opposite sides of the coin.

I was one of the few people on the planet working behind the scenes to improve this project.

Your uninformed assertion is ignorant, baseless and stupid.

Now, if you were working behind the scenes, how would I be expected to know that?  While your efforts are appreciated, the over-the-top commentary is disrespectful and uncalled for.  Apparently I hit a nerve - not intended.

[Ken_FSU]

Walked by today.

For such a high profile property, the residential buildings almost look like Vestcor workforce housing units.

Excited for the Whole Foods, but genuinely surprised to see how cheap the housing looks for such a prime piece of property.

 

[Zac T]

Looking at Fuqua Development and TriBridge Residential's website, it seems all of their projects are pretty average at best

[Florida Power And Light]

Glad The Mouth Of McCoys Creek is no longer under a parking lot.
Free to The Sky!
Unlike so many new residents moving in there…..

[jaxlongtimer]

To counter your comment about my position, it seems you have never seen a development, no matter how badly conceived, that you don't support moving forward.  I guess we are opposite sides of the coin.

I was one of the few people on the planet working behind the scenes to improve this project.

Your uninformed assertion is ignorant, baseless and stupid.

Based on incoming reviews, I don't think my comments questioning the quality of this project are turning out to be "ignorant, baseless and stupid."  Prescient might be more apt.

[Jax_Developer]

5 over 2 really isn't intended for any architectural features. It was invented as a cheaper alternative (in LA) to other frame materials & for cheaper housing. There's no disputing that. We will have to wait for the related tower to get anything "cool" building wise on the river... those projects have the "budget" to incorporate design elements that 5 over 2's simply can't afford. It's the equivalent of seeing a 08 Camry with 250k miles w/ brand new chrome rims. The conversation here isn't about code at all but incentives. How could we have incentivized them to not build the cheapest form of mid-density housing on the river? The code here is about as liberal as anything in the country near a downtown river... (Ex. No affordable requirements, very little public space mandates, almost zero control on the proposed use)

Vista Brooklyn really is the only example of mid-density project downtown & is the only (market rate) block apartment building built in all of DT Jax in the last X years... also a pretty sharp building for what it is in my opinion. Hard to understand why they are the only building to do that, but nonetheless that's where we are. Maybe that Southbank storage building will be all block who knows.

I've said before that the 5 over 2 stuff needs to be controlled downtown & the incentive packages for Brooklyn & the Southbank really needs to be reconsidered. There isn't some large magical gap in rents in those areas to what would be required to make economic sense for these 5 over 2's & there is genuinely zero incentives to even look at block here. I would personally feel much better about the incentives if they went to pushing developers over the edge to choosing block/steel... The buildings last much longer, hold more density & most look way better.

We've already done it on the Northbank.

[Steve]

Agree with that. I think the only incentives in Brooklyn and on the Southbank should be for true high-rise stuff, with exceptions perhaps on things like Vista Brooklyn which actually checks a lot of boxes, to the point above.

I'd also think that in the Northbank core, we've got to better encourage density. I know a full concrete building will be much more expensive per unit. Ok great - the incentives can be aligned accordingly.