Jump to content


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About AnCatt2204

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, also it’s harder for investments and projects to leave if they build a larger more elaborate institution that can bring together clubs, eateries AND some other big for of entertainment. Orlando would be smart to bet on three major forms of income and employment, as much as possible because it can prevent it from falling off an economic cliff. There isn’t too much land in Downtown and if a few big projects are not located in the Central Business District, the population density requirements, commute and dense communities, with money in their pocket, hat helps all businesses downtown, IF people know about it, it’s existance. High rises usually make that hard to ignore. The OEA I can’t imagine there is NO physical way for any runways to be diverted or methods of landing altered, when the economic viability of a city is at least in part effected. As well as in the top of the courthouse which sways a bit (my mother was a detective in OPD), if these planes are cutting above the tallest buildings by less then 500’ AT LEAST, its very questionable whether the path currently is kind of risky at a bit, altitude drop of reasonable but serious consequences for any buildings 300’+ already. If they give to the pedestrian and can effectively bring people to and from. The publix next to the Sanctuary is a perfect addition and helps sustain the city a lot. This project seems a BIT different in a good way, it’s advertised by an extensive level, and the purchase of the land is within a very, very short period, unless they flip it, I think it would publicly be a huge catastrophe businesswise.
  2. Orlando (I’m native born, 6th generation Central/South Floridian), we have had a substantial change in political will, yes...we have had the good ole boy, “we want to be a small city...”, which is just as if not more irrational then these buildings. I don’t call for a NYC or Chicago, however I don’t think a goal of....Tampa, is “outrageous” and crazy. No offense to Tampa, Orlando went in 45 years from an Ocala like, omg Disney world is going to make jobs! In fact bad then Orlando was so considered backwards that Daytona Beach was the center for more then half of our local media and outsiders. Now, that is not the case. People who condemn Orlando, when I see Utbanplanet activity stating the last post in Jacksonville months behind, and perhaps three cities as active and as passionately addressed as Orlando is, I’ve talked to this older (eh, upper 50’s) man who went to Texas and Orlando and said two things here in NY, “I’ve never been so happy to leave a state (Texas), he said, “I love Orlando, I mean the sense of community and the soccer team has united that city. It’s very healthy in a big city, small town mentality with a solid purple political domination, allowing it to avoid partisan destruction. Yes, height IS critical as someone above stated, “perception is reality to anyone visiting a city...”, we don’t need and I wouldn’t say, “hey let’s crack over 700’...” because economically that is like taking a Polar plunge. However if I had a nickel for every planned development we aren’t aware of, proposed with a likelihood of building (even say 20%), establishments proposed that were likely 460’ maybe 600’ (tallest in Tampa), when a developer is told that, “listen FAA rules, restrict you guys to at most 34 floors, and this has to happen and they kind of are stuck back in time and think they can reverse time...”, that realization when any developer is scoping cities can absolutely result in any builder, investor etc. a builder and civil engineers/architect must be payed to reinvent an entire established concept, money, then they have to wait for the FAA...this causes reluctance to invest, with the added time (not structural assessment, geologic, secondary effects and economic impact, that’s standard and fully expected), when they hear, “well, you have to go through several months for FAA assessment, no building has been able to break that height...you also have to fight competing companies taking all measures possible to prevent a development. Then the city or county must approve it, they aren’t fond of large structures...” ANY reasonable developer, potential tenants, investments etc. immediately go, “this city isn’t ready for this and I’m not throwing my money on a losing bet.”, the developers, purpose and corporate sponsors will go, “with the decrease in height, sq.ft, high impact and high exposure, a chance on a city that while yes economically powerful, and socially powerful, why do this, if the headline is gone, sq.ft area is decreased by as much as a third (45, down to 30 stories), knowing it’s a city center, there is absolutely no land to spare that wouldn’t require extra for demolition....who in their right mind would invest in orlandos downtown? It’s crazy. If you take even half of these impediments out, you MUST maintain regulations and restrictions however you can’t add, politics, unnecessary restrictions, and slow development, install more doubt, install more reluctance and more problems. Then be surprised that there aren’t enough inner city residents, because there aren’t enough diverse offices, (healthcare, science, Education, technology, bank centers, hotels etc...), so where do they go...either I-drive or not orlando. The jobs if downtown, inevitably if 5,000 are employed for a specific project, commuting gets tiring and at LEAST 500 of those persons, if residential developments are available as well as public transit (LYMMO is only so effective, the fact Orlando, developed Sunrail and the only commuter rail outside Miami should be promoted extensively. Replacing LYMMO with light rail service would also be, massively culturally and economically changing. I fear most of all, we are setting Orlando’s downtown up for a numerous number of 5-15 floor offices and residents...which mathematically doesn’t allow for enough residence, and discourages residents from their admiration of downtown life, keeps away any large scale investment and...urban sprawl needs to be stopped in Downtown and IS occurring. IF Orlando like European cities, had natural benefits, Rivers, Bays and Oceans, an enormous benefit, absolutely Orlando, I mean when people say, “Orlando’s a small backward cow town...”.... I’ve noticed on urban planet when it comes to MANY cities and large towns forums, there is little to no activity, yet Orlando has activity every single 30 minutes a couple hours at most....others haven’t since last year, many. So, I think sadly some jealousy and some, “my city is better and more vibrant, more open, better why are YOU getting so much attention...” DOES play a role in the negativity and condemnation of Orlando. A city that goes from nothing to the most visited city in the US 65 million to NYC which has 63 million, regardless of the reason, or where and what the do, if I say, “I’m originally from orlando...” with regard to foreigners, everyone in the US and almost all first world countries, everyone knows where I’m talking about. They have incredible misconceptions and stereotypes but what are you going to do? On national tv programs Orlando’s skyline is always behind countless professional news, blah blah blah analyst and that’s NOT something found in anyway commonly in ANY, “small cow town city...” I’ve seen NY, Chicago, Washington DC, LA, Atlanta and Miami a lot, and Orlando is probably right behind those in public exposure. I have no doubt having lived there and not for a long time. Sometimes I see Dallas, Seattle, San Fran, Charlotte and New Orleans...I have not seen many of ANY of the cities people have mentioned as more “diverse, cosmopolitan and well known...” so in 45 years to go from that, to the second largest University in the nation, Disney, Universal, I Drive, Seaworld, Downtown, The new health and computer graphics companies adjacent to the Kennedy Space Center, and a population from literally 100,000 (Seminole, orange, Osceola), to 2.2 million plus, roughly 1 million more 3.2 on vacation at any given time, add in Lake and Brevard even and you top 2.8 million and with growth, I mean nearly 4 million in about two years....that is NOT small. By ANY stretch of anyone...so, no Orlando is holding itself back by trying to grasp the last straws of being a, “quiet, southern belle and WASP dominated pit stop between Miami and Atlanta.”, no way is any building exempting symbolic structures should exceed 600 feet, even symbols shouldn’t 700, however, if you bring the jobs, the people will come. If I-4 is a hassle and sundial expensive, Enough of a populace will move downtown to kick a lot of diversity, cosmopolitan atmosphere. I pray Orlando does NOT, while it absolutely should hold on to tourism it can’t let it go yet, if Health, and tech are invited to compete...an excellent public transit system and dominating skyline that is basically a hopefully elegant and novel, but is a sign that expresses, “the action is here...” Right now, I-drive and downtown are competing for this and in 40 years (I’ll be 67), I opulent be surprised if Orlando’s skyline stretched from the convention center to Ivanhoe. If people have any desire to retain natural resources and some level of rural charm, then vertical, dense development with an effective public transit system and three dominating industries must be maintained. Orlando is so internationally known, Im surprised it doesn’t start pursuing International organizations to set up shop there. Climate change, can devestate South Florida sadly, the subtropical climate is too much of an asset though and Orlando is the only city that a category 5 Hurricane will likely never pass over, (really any 140-150 mph+ storm is very unlikely to show up, a 120-130 mph storm is possible however incredibly still rare.), Orlando’s proximity to Tampa, the Miami and Jacksonville areas, as well as Atlanta and Charleston, the connection to the Caribbean and South America will be split with Miami and...if Orlando doesn’t hold itself back it really has a chance at a San Fran, Boston, Miami parallel city. Holding itself back though, could kill it if one industry tourism collapses, and the invitation to banking institutions, International organizational headquarters, furthering health and nanotechnology, as well as Space exploration connections with the Cape, Education, a diversified economy if capable of paralleling tourism 55-45, it can avert a detroit like collapse, International connections and less struggle for those willing to bet on Orlando, can only be stopped by, height limits, overkill of economic assessment, and corporate run well established institutional attempts to kill it. I hope Orlando’s ready to start addressing this, when opportunity presents. I have a feeling that the assessment of the requirements for development have cost orlando sadly. We may not know how much has been proposed and the developers killed it realizing there isn’t a problem with residential population capability...only willingness to self challenge, if they allow that if 5,000 jobs arrive downtown, appropriate infrastructure, excitement, transit and other people to socially improve upon downtown would fill the View up quick. It will be awhile for any residential developments or very large ones to be proposed, however future markets and centralized employment may be the next set of high and mistakes IF allowed to challenge the status quo.
  3. Well,I led the petition to approve the Skyplex proposal which was...sought to be 700 feet but I was hoping it maintained its look as a "building" or architectural monument and not just a really tall rollercoaster. It was approved 1700 signatures v. 150 signatures, who thought the taller the better. The FAA has cleared 700 feet for I-drive, (Though the county has a problem with it), I'm mixed, Joshua Wallack had to talk it down to 500 feet, but if it's just the tallest rollercoaster in Orlando...it can become unsavory, and attract crime, and congestion and look very tacky. Now a 600+ foot rollercoaster that has an impressive architectural element, won't appear tacky, and the other elements of the park are good. Now my fear is...that now that near 700 foot buildings COULD be built on I-drive, 30 years from now...which Downtown will be most prominent? Or will the region become accepting of say 450 foot maximum from Lake Ivanhoe, to John Young or I-drive, and near 700 on I-drive? I don't want I drive to become basically...the dominant downtown and Downtown become, a secondary downtown to visitors and locals. I-drive will start developing Condos, and a nightlife so. I support a limit in height, idk if 450 foot is good, as it could adversely economically harm Orlando. (Say a regional bank headquarters wants to move somewhere, if Orlando says 441' is your maximum, and Tampa says go for 600 if you need...guess who's likely to get several thousand more jobs and hundreds of residence. I don't think height and European-esque density are mutually exclusive. Downtown should mantain a strict architectural code, that demands, warm, Mediterranean, or post-modern developments...it would be good. 600 feet would be perfect, allowing regional headquarters, and not having I-drive challenging Downtown as far as being the "city center" and allow corporate headquarters, perhaps a 350 foot limit south of the East-west down to I-drive north. It's a hard issue, but I'm also concerned about sprawl and the environmental effects it could have. So much of I-drive has been sprawled out, it's gobbling up the last tract of what is technically considered the northern headwaters of the Everglades, so vertical density, I hope becomes a much more promoted development policy in Downtown and SoDo and I-drive. The Skyplex project if completed will have a major impact on Orlandos skyline. It seems it will be 600 feet from what I understand (idk if that includes to pillar) so, that will be...challenging but may break Orlandos fear of height. European cities are great however their also limited in capability of population increases due to the lack of height. In London taller buildings are being proposed as a result, so the smartest move is to promote high rises under 600 feet with strict architectural appeal, uniqueness and improves ground level impact, but don't cut yourself to only being in favor or mid or tiny high rises as downtown quickly many decades from now may not be the first thing that catches the eyes of many if I-drive out glitters it. So...it's a fine line, Orlando has to mantain. Not 1,000 foot super tall cold buildings...but not defeatist fear of height, resulting in possible economic losses and dominance of other areas of Orlando over downtown eventually. major
  4. Even if God forbid there is some economic drop off, well for one we just left a major correction period so I'd say...even though the percentage chance of an economic drop is roughly the same (though slightly less) a year after a correction time, I'd say we got till mid 2018. Enough time time to build and THEN have no one move into the buildings. However the architecture is decent, it really will give that concrete n'' steel v. Grass and lake contrast a major boost because of its location, and could be a good starting point for many downtown activities.
  5. Well, Orlandos made it to NYNewsday http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/skyplex-an-orlando-roller-coaster-has-a-topsy-turvy-future-1.11074453 hopefully someone reading this can make it to the meeting to show support, 2,000 miles is a bit of a trek for me. Lol.
  6. Ok, long time no talk on this page, (actually a couple weeks ago somewhere on the forums) I have been forming a petition and promoting it a lot shameless plug here: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/let-skyplex-become-a-symbol-of-orlando-let now, most here are citizens or familiar with Orlando, I myself am very much in favor of this project as an see it as a starting point for urban development (and Orlandoa first true skyscraper), but mainly as a source of or centerpiece that will eventually, in the long term connect I drive with...the city proper and urbanism (mid-high rise-skyscraper) development with a pedestrian friendly,economically expanding region. However when I see cities like Minniapolis St. Paul...I also wonder whether Orlando is heading toward that type of urbanism Downtown v. I drive...(I fear Downtown may be hurt) of course with the new PAC, Amway, Citrus Bowl; city hall, Library, Lake Eola and the countless new condos in development...a lot of residence could be built in that area, and sunrail will have a continuous line connecting both. So...my question besides the plug, do you think Orlando is best served as a local city v. Tourist city (I drive) or a full blown trail of urban development with some interruptions. Also how is the Orange County government essentially...pre planning a city? Or it could be a meaningless reference group for political shield from NIMBYS. I've heard a lot of buzz from people all over where I live talking about this project, and taking in Wallacks determination...this is too big to really disappear, imp....what would best serve Orlando and will Orange County (and Orlando) be able to "make" a city with a city already in place?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.