Jump to content

Lake Eola Neighbourhood.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, popsiclebrandon said:

Build that. Its just rich people who refuse to buy the land wanting the city to keep it empty for them.

 

20 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

As long as they save the trees, I’m all in. It’s odd to me. given the retirement towers were built as affordable housing for seniors and were here first. Now, the johnny-come-latelys at Star Tower think they get to moan and groan.

It’s like moving next door to a 50-year old airport and complaining about the noise.

Who are you to say that "it's just rich people who refuse to buy the land"? There is a story behind this fight, and written commitments made by the city to keep this parcel open space. You guys are going off a whim here, and not understanding the issue which is fine, but please don't make stuff up. The pro development media of course spins it the story.

The people in Sanctuary, Star Tower, Vue, helped all this development to happen by taking risks and investing their money into a city nobody had any interest in living in during the financial crisis. I am not sure why you are so harsh to somebody who you think is "rich" and because of that, deserves a wall in front of them.

You guys let me down with your comments. Think whatever you want though, for anyone else, I would hope you support long term residents who believe in downtown. Let me be very clear on this issue. Nobody is fighting against seniors living here, this is about an improper use of the land, shoehorning a development that does not fit or is friendly to its neighbors.

Sign the petition.

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-against-mariposa-groves

At just 20 feet away, this building is trying to be crammed in.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 696
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The very 1st pic in this thread is of The Paramount, so I thought I’d post that they recently finished adding letters down the side of the bldg. I think it looks great, as if its always been this way

Dr. Beattie was an orthodontist and the tradition has continued with his kids. Growing up, Orlando was still small enough that it was a rite of passage for most middle class kids to go to one of a han

This may sound weird. . . But I would purchase the Cambria Hotel lot across the street and the AT&T building, then build a green overpass over Rosalind to more directly connect DT to the park with

Posted Images

Ummm, when was this “written commitment” made and by whom? That’s extremely odd for the city to have made such a commitment on that particular lot.

Further, if it existed, why is it just coming to light now? Something doesn’t make sense. Plus, as much as I’m no fan of Thomas Chatmon, since he works for the city, it seems strange he’d be banging this drum if there’s some sort of contract.  

Not that I mind. If nothing gets built, we keep the trees. But as I’m not getting any younger, more senior apartments might be a good thing in a few years, given I’ve lived in the ‘hood off and on since 1986 and have no desire to leave.

In the case of the Sanctuary, it came along in 2006, well before the financial crisis. The developer got a little greedy and went on with the Star Tower which opened in 2008 before the economy went south in late 2008. Same with the Vue. May I remind you they were not making great sacrifices with the prices they were going for, either. From the beginning, they overpriced the market.

They also weren’t the first. Park Lake Towers, Reeves House and 530 E Central did the same thing years before with the same results. If they went into it blind with that history, that is on them. Meanwhile, the folks who invested organically in redevelopment in Thornton Park generally did quite well. Which we’ve been preaching all along.

Edited by spenser1058
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. These buildings were all started before the financial crisis, no one was just putting up 500k+ condos out of the goodness of their hearts. They wanted to make money and they did. That is good capitalism. Every tower is a risk of course but pretending these developers were saints is a weird move.

2. I'd love to see where the city wrote in some provision to never allow a building on a parcel already zoned for high intensity use. If they did then this wouldn't be moving forward and anyone in the city who made a promise like that should be fired.

3. Empty/underused lots are going to continue to be developed into higher density best uses as land downtown becomes more scarce. That is an excellent thing (and yes we do need to find more green space for the city to offer as well).

4. I don't understand how it doesn't fit. Its smaller than Star Tower so its not like they are putting up some 28 story tower to tower over it. It seems like an excellent fit visually to me. The step down in the image there is very nice. There is like 5 feet between Post and Paramount and yet somehow it works just fine for everyone.

5. This is just pure NIMBY-ism and just own it. I sort of get it but I don't have any sympathy for people who buy near growing areas and complain about new things going in. Like when people who bought homes near UCF were shocked the university kept growing or people who bought in Solaire couldn't believe towers might go in the many blocks between them and Eola.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, dcluley98 said:

Are these pine scrub trees and indigeounous shrubs?

 

Ni.gif

There are 2 very pretty oaks, but they are roadside. The few trees inside the lot are "less" stately.

Also I'd like to clarify that Chatmon did not come out in favor of this. He treated it like the political football it is. The ARB however liked the look of the plan. Remember, the ARB does not make determination if the project will be allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question I’d really like to know: how many of the condo units downtown are owner-occupied?

Strictly based on my own anecdotal experience, it seems like there are an awful lot of younger roommate college types but maybe the numbers are in reality different.

I’m going to post a longer piece a little later why I don’t think upper end condos downtown have been or will be a success any time soon (hint: the close-in neighborhoods are one of two major factors I see), but I know those of you who hate my (controversial?) encyclicals would like a rest so I’ll give y’all some breathing space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jvest55 said:

I am not going to debate with you, just understand you don't have the whole picture and to argue it without understanding just makes you seem extremely naive. 

I won't be commenting about this anymore. 

Thanks

I moved from a unit in 420 that was near 520's construction. I now live in a unit that would be near this construction. 

I hope they build it. If they started tomorrow I would be happy. This city needs density. 

There's actually a really amazing view walking down Osceola from the lake towards South St. where there's a "wall" of buildings. I want more of that. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

A question I’d really like to know: how many of the condo units downtown are owner-occupied?

Strictly based on my own anecdotal experience, it seems like there are an awful lot of younger roommate college types but maybe the numbers are in reality different.

I’m going to post a longer piece a little later why I don’t think upper end condos downtown have been or will be a success any time soon (hint: the close-in neighborhoods are one of two major factors I see), but I know those of you who hate my (controversial?) encyclicals would like a rest so I’ll give y’all some breathing space.

I look forward to your perspective, but I logged on tonight to say I wish they would build another $500k+ property in that area. I don't disagree with your premise that they don't do well, but from my perspective we need more long term, moneyed residents downtown ( and Eola) to bring the food establishments and everything else up to minimally acceptable. 

I think low income/ very low income senior housing is the last thing this area needs. You might as well put a server farm/ telco station there for what it brings to the community.

Btw, this comes from someone who has been involved in numerous low income senior housing investments.

To your question though... Idk, 25% tops. I think it varies by building, but the overwhelming vast majority of residents in the downtown high-rise condos do not own their properties. Just my guess.

3 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Orlando Meats will do an all-vegan (why does this sound like an oxymoron?) pop-up next weekend at Eola General:

https://www.orlandoweekly.com/Blogs/archives/2020/06/19/orlando-meats-chefs-to-stage-an-all-vegan-pop-up-at-eola-general-next-weekend
 

From Orlando Weekly 

Eliot Hillis is the bomb... rumor is he wants to open a vegan restaurant while also owning (partially) the most meat centric place in town. Rumor also is that location is in the Lake Eola area.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AmIReal said:

I look forward to your perspective, but I logged on tonight to say I wish they would build another $500k+ property in that area. I don't disagree with your premise that they don't do well, but from my perspective we need more long term, moneyed residents downtown ( and Eola) to bring the food establishments and everything else up to minimally acceptable. 

I think low income/ very low income senior housing is the last thing this area needs. You might as well put a server farm/ telco station there for what it brings to the community.

Btw, this comes from someone who has been involved in numerous low income senior housing investments.

To your question though... Idk, 25% tops. I think it varies by building, but the overwhelming vast majority of residents in the downtown high-rise condos do not own their properties. Just my guess.

Thanks. I’m not opposed to high-end residential towers. What seems to be the case, however, is that each of them has failed on the initial round. There has to be a reason for that and I’m preparing my thoughts on it. Suffice it to say, keep any older-growth trees, don’t encroach on the park (Rosalind to Summerlin) and go for it.

Edited by spenser1058
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the lot on Google Maps Street View, it really does look like they want to shove that building into a spot that really isn't suited for something that big.

I'm not against cramming high rises together, but I think it is more appropriate over around Orange Ave.

I'd prefer to see that neighborhood retain as much as possible of the smaller scale quaintness that made it so inviting in the past.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit I've never paid much attention to the distance between buildings built on either side of a road, but 13 feet seems way too close for comfort. Years ago, The Vue sued Highwood to squash a proposed mixed-use condo tower on Fifth Third's parking lot and there was more than enough distance between those two buildings. I really don't blame Star Tower residents for protesting. IMO, the first red flag should have been when 420 E Church St was built next door lol. I remember quite a few units in Star Tower selling for 200 & 300k after the last Recession, so I wouldn't necessarily classify them as a bunch of rich NIMBYs.

As I said before, S Eola is not turning out how I expected it to be:

 

On 5/5/2020 at 10:42 AM, nite owℓ said:

I wonder how the unit owners at Star Tower feel about an affordable housing development getting built next door to their building. I've always imagined there would eventually be a dense cluster of luxury apartments/condos in South Eola surrounding Star Tower and The Sanctuary, but it seems like they are increasingly being surrounded by buildings that are not up to snuff. I guess the only upside is that Mariposa Groves is more geared towards senior housing (quiet neighbors).

Not being a snob by any means, but with luxury condos in WP near Park Ave priced around $1M, it just would've been nice to see some more upscale residential projects built downtown is all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, nite owℓ said:

I have to admit I've never paid much attention to the distance between buildings built on either side of a road, but 13 feet seems way too close for comfort. Years ago, The Vue sued Highwood to squash a proposed mixed-use condo tower on Fifth Third's parking lot and there was more than enough distance between those two buildings. I really don't blame Star Tower residents for protesting. IMO, the first red flag should have been when 420 E Church St was built next door lol. I remember quite a few units in Star Tower selling for 200 & 300k after the last Recession, so I wouldn't necessarily classify them as a bunch of rich NIMBYs.

As I said before, S Eola is not turning out how I expected it to be:

It will be sad if and when the day comes that the neighborhood becomes block after block of sterile looking concrete towers with scrawny little code required "trees" replacing the shady oaks. 

Especially to those who were around to remember the way it was before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2020 at 12:43 PM, Jvest55 said:

I am not going to debate with you, just understand you don't have the whole picture and to argue it without understanding just makes you seem extremely naive. 

I won't be commenting about this anymore. 

Thanks

This is the first I'm hearing of anything, either Star or this new development's side, so I'd love to hear the more information and the whole picture.

19 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Thanks. I’m not opposed to high-end residential towers. What seems to be the case, however, is that each of them has failed on the initial round. There has to be a reason for that and I’m preparing my thoughts on it. Suffice it to say, keep any older-growth trees, don’t encroach on the park (Rosalind to Summerlin) and go for it.

For me personally, I'd prefer to be in a high rise condo.  But the HOAs on most of them are close to my mortgage living in Wadeview.  Unless somehow I double my salary, I have a hard time justifying that extra payment.  Also, last I looked into it, most condo loans are still requiring a full 20% down payment, which, when we're talking 500k+... is just money most younger people don't have.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

I confess to a bit of schadenfreude. My humble little abode has a lovely view of Eola Park and the downtown skyline.

Well, given that schadenfreude means taking pleasure in the misfortune of other people, I am curious as to whose misfortune you are taking pleasure in and why?

Assuming it is the residents of Star Tower for possibly losing their view, why?

Do you dislike the Star Towerians?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Well, given that schadenfreude means taking pleasure in the misfortune of other people, I am curious as to whose misfortune you are taking pleasure in and why?

Assuming it is the residents of Star Tower for possibly losing their view, why?

Do you dislike the Star Towerians?  

It was more the post that assumed because they poured “all that money” into it that the decades of sweat equity and rent payments and internal improvements some of us not so wealthy folks made didn’t matter compared to them.

There have been lots of ways to participate in the rebirth of downtown.

It’s like the campaign Barnett Bank started in the early ‘70’s: “over a lifetime, you may do $500,000 worth of business with us so at Barnett we’ll treat you like a half-millionaire”.

It’s a way of thinking that has been lost and the idea only rich people matter has all but destroyed the country over the last 40 years.

Edited by spenser1058
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

It was more the post that assumed because they poured “all that money” into it that the decades of sweat equity and rent payments and internal improvements some of us not so wealthy folks made didn’t matter compared to them.

There have been lots of ways to participate in the rebirth of downtown.

It’s like the campaign Barnett Bank started in the early ‘70’s: “over a lifetime, you may do $500,000 worth of business with us so at Barnett we’ll treat you like a half-millionaire”.

It’s a way of thinking that has been lost and the idea only rich people matter has all but destroyed the country over the last 40 years.

I'll confess to having little sympathy for high rise dwellers losing their view because of another building going up next to theirs, but I also agree with Jvest55 in that a building that size doesn't really fit in that location and that kind of density doesn't really fit in that neighborhood.

Let them pack highrises together cheek by jowl over on Orange Avenue and the like, but I'd like to see at least some of South Eola's small scale charm preserved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

I'll confess to having little sympathy for high rise dwellers losing their view because of another building going up next to theirs, but I also agree with Jvest55 in that a building that size doesn't really fit in that location and that kind of density doesn't really fit in that neighborhood.

Let them pack highrises together cheek by jowl over on Orange Avenue and the like, but I'd like to see at least some of South Eola's small scale charm preserved. 

I fear South Eola’s charm is already mostly gone. The Mariposa “forest”, for example, was truly unique in an urban setting and some of the frame houses we lost to the concrete canyons were  just a tragedy.

TBH, it was a blind spot when Mayor Bill was doing the rezoning in the late ‘80’s. We already had several retirement towers and notoriously homophobic Bill hated that South Eola was an infamous cruising zone late at night. OTOH, I don’t think any of us imagined us it would go as far the other way as it did (and with precious little retail despite filling up hundreds of new units).

One irony, of course, is that, thanks to Grindr, the cruising district there is as defunct as the high school version over by Steak ‘n Shake.

Edited by spenser1058
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spenser1058 said:

I fear South Eola’s charm is already mostly gone. The Mariposa “forest”, for example, was truly unique in an urban setting and some of the frame houses we lost to the concrete canyons were  just a tragedy.

TBH, it was a blind spot when Mayor Bill was doing the rezoning in the late ‘80’s. We already had several retirement towers and notoriously homophobic Bill hated that South Eola was an infamous cruising zone late at night. OTOH, I don’t think any of us imagined us it would go as far the other way as it did (and with precious little retail despite filling up hundreds of new units).

One irony, of course, is that, thanks to Grindr, the cruising district there is as defunct as the high school version over by Steak ‘n Shake.

Odd.

I lived right across Summerlin from S. Eola from '85 through '99 and walked those streets all hours of the day and night countless times, but never saw any activity of any kind.

I wasn't looking for any kind of activity either, but honestly, I rarely even saw another human.  

Ghost town.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Odd.

I lived right across Summerlin from S. Eola from '85 through '99 and walked those streets all hours of the day and night countless times, but never saw any activity of any kind.

I wasn't looking for any kind of activity either, but honestly, I rarely even saw another human.  

Ghost town.

Oh, it definitely was going on. There weren’t any street walkers there, it was done in your car. Some good friends of mine that lived in a huge two-story house where the Paramount now is used to sit along with me out on the front porch and watch the goings on. Since you’re straight, you would have had no reason to pay attention. There were no females involved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • 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.