389 North (AKA Zoi House) | 41-Story Mixed-Use [Proposed]

[leondecollao]

 

[FLClarkKent]

What an amazing transformation for that part of downtown if both Zoi House and Golden Sparrow are built. Insta-dense.

[JFW657]

I hope the city doesn't force them to tacky-up the nice, clean-looking design by forcing them to put a tacky-looking spire on top of it. 

Bleh. 

[Dale]

I don’t think it’s a slam dunk, the notion that Baker Barrios knows better than the city how to design a good building.

[spenser1058]

It became a requirement during the Frederick administration that any high rise had to have some sort of feature on top to keep the skyline from looking like an endless sea of monotonous glass boxes.

I think they envisioned buildings like Philip Johnson’s AT&T Tower in Manhattan but Baker Barrios and co. went cheap and simply stuck cheap visors or spires on top instead (I think at one point you could also do a water feature at the base in keeping with Mayor Bill’s love for KC and all its fountains but iirc that got dialed back during the Pat Robertson wildfires in the late ‘90’s).

Anyway, unless something got repealed, I think such things are still required.

Edited January 27, 2019 by spenser1058

[JFW657]

I'm not against a "feature", I just hope that feature is not a spire.

Like that thing on the Amway Center.

Or, God help us, multiple spires like the "Batman Building" in Nashville.

[spenser1058]

8 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

I'm not against a "feature", I just hope that feature is not a spire.

Like that thing on the Amway Center.

Or, God help us, multiple spires like the "Batman Building" in Nashville.

You’d prefer a feature not a bug...

Edited January 27, 2019 by spenser1058

[prahaboheme]

52 minutes ago, FLClarkKent said:

What an amazing transformation for that part of downtown if both Zoi House and Golden Sparrow are built. Insta-dense.

It’s really about how the intersection of Orange / Livingston improves, IMHO. This intersection already has two of Orlando’s largest buildings yet due to absolutely abismal street activation, this area is pretty hostile to pedestrians. 

I do like that these developments would further contribute to the “skyscraper canyon” effect along Orange (the only one that exists in Orlando metro).

[JFW657]

34 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

You’d prefer a feature not a bug...

I don't want to see something that looks out of place and "tacked on" just to satisfy a bunch of local bureaucrats.

Some buildings look good with a spire, some don't. 

This building was obviously not designed with a spire in mind. 

[spenser1058]

It comes down to how much backbone the bureaucrats have. When the 7-Eleven at 50 and Magnolia was planned, the city had in mind something like the sevvie at Ferncreek and 50, coming right up to the street.

At that point, 7-Eleven was still very much old school and wanted the store built the way they always built them.

The city, rather than standing firm, came up with the weird compromise resulting in the strangest looking convenience store in America.

Thankfully, they grew a backbone and 7-Eleven, under international ownership, got less rigid and we ended up with the newer model which is definitely preferable, although still not perfect.

 

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by spenser1058

[JFW657]

1 hour ago, spenser1058 said:

It comes down to how much backbone the bureaucrats have

To me it comes down to how much good taste and design sense they have, which all too often, unfortunately, seems to be little to none. 

They need to realize that sometimes it's better to just back off and not try to apply and enforce a rule in every instance, just because it's on the books.

[dcluley98]

I think the main concerns in the ARB report are valid and well articulated. As for "spire or not" - that can be a matter of opinion. If executed well, it could look good. We have not seen the revised design yet, so we have no way of judging. The ARB is absolutely correct on the pedestal, and their suggestion to the designer to try and make the crown of the new tallest building more iconic is not out of place or a radical suggestion, IMO. 

This is not "design by committee" which usually always fails. This is application of basic standards making suggestions to the design team to try to improve it. It is still up to the design team to make a cohesive final product. (and I actually rather like most of this building for a BB building, unlike my vocal opinions on some of their other designs). 

Edited January 27, 2019 by dcluley98

[Uncommon]

The video showed a chasm between the area with Zoi House, the courthouse, and X Orlando and the area with SunTrust, 55 West, and the new building (forget what it’s called atm). But there’s a pretty big gap in between those two sections. I wish a couple of high rises could be built between the two areas so that the downtown skyline could be continuous without major gaps. Driving westbound on the 408 approaching downtown with all those gaps is a little depressing. The best view is westbound on I-4 heading into downtown around the E Colonial exit. The skyline looks great from that angle. Unfortunately, I rarely take I-4 in that direction

[dcluley98]

There is a bit of a gap in there. I am interested to see a skyline Pano from the top of the new CV student housing building. That would be a unique new perspective on downtown showing a different angle we have not seen before. 

[prahaboheme]

38 minutes ago, Uncommon said:

The video showed a chasm between the area with Zoi House, the courthouse, and X Orlando and the area with SunTrust, 55 West, and the new building (forget what it’s called atm). But there’s a pretty big gap in between those two sections. I wish a couple of high rises could be built between the two areas so that the downtown skyline could be continuous without major gaps. Driving westbound on the 408 approaching downtown with all those gaps is a little depressing. The best view is westbound on I-4 heading into downtown around the E Colonial exit. The skyline looks great from that angle. Unfortunately, I rarely take I-4 in that direction

While it looks like a big gap, it’s really only a few blocks. A few of these proposals seem to move toward a more cohesive looking downtown (and im not referring to height but rather a continuous street wall and density to support pedestrian activity).

Edited January 27, 2019 by prahaboheme

[dcluley98]

Yup. Orange is looking like it will be a real urban corridor, with Church, Pine, Central, and Livingston connecting to the spine east and west. Exciting developments!

How much effect does everybody think the establishment of Lynx Central had on the magnetism of more dense development around Livingston? I think it (along with CV) was key. People didn't see it at the time, thinking it was just in the middle of no-where, but then 5 years later, look what is happening now. It's chess, not checkers! 

Edited January 27, 2019 by dcluley98

[JFW657]

1 hour ago, dcluley98 said:

I think the main concerns in the ARB report are valid and well articulated. As for "spire or not" - that can be a matter of opinion. If executed well, it could look good. We have not seen the revised design yet, so we have no way of judging. The ARB is absolutely correct on the pedestal, and their suggestion to the designer to try and make the crown of the new tallest building more iconic is not out of place or a radical suggestion, IMO. 

This is not "design by committee" which usually always fails. This is application of basic standards making suggestions to the design team to try to improve it. It is still up to the design team to make a cohesive final product. (and I actually rather like most of this building for a BB building, unlike my vocal opinions on some of their other designs). 

I don't hate spires in and of themselves. If a spire looks like a natural part of the building fine. If it's put there because someone, either the architect or a bureaucrat thought there should be one, that's just a recipe for failure. 

Classical buildings with natural stone clad exteriors, like the old skyscrapers of lower Manhattan for instance, look great with their spires. Sleek, modern buildings with glass exteriors tend to look ridiculous with them. 

Some other type of roof element could look really good, if as you said, it's well executed. But otoh, you always run the risk of getting something gimmicky looking. That's why it's often better to just leave well enough alone. Telling them to go back and come up with something to put on the roof, increases the chance that whatever they do come up with, will look odd and just detract from the original design rather than enhance it.

Whatever they add to this design should be minimal and understated, rather than obvious and obtrusive.

Edited January 27, 2019 by JFW657

[AndyPok1]

On 1/25/2019 at 8:31 PM, Uncommon said:

Disagree. I’d love at least one 600-footer. It would really make the skyline pop if there was some variance in the height of buildings. It always angers me that a city like Oklahoma City has an 800 foot skyscraper and a much bigger city like Orlando is scrapping over another 400-footer. Makes me sick I tell ya.

Having lived in Oklahoma while the Devon Tower was being built, and then visiting OKC after it was finished.  You don't want that here.  It sticks out like a sore thumb and does nothing for urbanism or street level activity.  Even driving past on the highway it doesn't look great.  It's like... ummm why is that one building more than double the height of the rest?

On 1/27/2019 at 5:39 PM, prahaboheme said:

While it looks like a big gap, it’s really only a few blocks. A few of these proposals seem to move toward a more cohesive looking downtown (and im not referring to height but rather a continuous street wall and density to support pedestrian activity).

This.  And largely there's a decent streetwall connecting them.  It's complete all the way to Jefferson.  The block between Jefferson and Robinson can't really do anything with because of the cathedral on one side and First Green Bank on the other (unless they turn their parking lot into a garage, but I don't see much chance of that happening).  That's why I was so adamantly against the Diocese's proposal because that lot between Robinson and BoA is the last infill on Orange until you get to Livingston.

[dcluley98]

RE: "the gap" 

Cambria Suites would help, if built. It would put another active site on an empty lot facing Lake Eola, fill in a bit of skyline between 110 and CBD with mid height view from perspective of the lake, and help to be more of an entrance into DT from the park down Washington. Haven't seen any updates on it though. I really wish something got built on that lot. If not Cambria, at least something better to connect the park to Magnolia and Orange. 

[spenser1058]

5 minutes ago, dcluley98 said:

RE: "the gap" 

Cambria Suites would help, if built. It would put another active site on an empty lot facing Lake Eola, fill in a bit of skyline between 110 and CBD with mid height view from perspective of the lake, and help to be more of an entrance into DT from the park down Washington. Haven't seen any updates on it though. I really wish something got built on that lot. If not Cambria, at least something better to connect the park to Magnolia and Orange. 

Given downtown’s hotel occupancy rates, I will be shocked if that gets built. Hopefully, we’ll get something there soon, though.

A point Andy makes reminds me of something that our nattering nabobs of negativism (btw, for those who accuse me of liberal bias, that’s a Republican quote) often miss: by building a variety of smaller structures instead of one or two really tall ones (which St. Pete did at one point and it just looked silly), from a distance Orlando’s downtown looks pretty impressive.

Whether viewed from OIA, one of the taller hotels out by OCCC or even just eastbound on I4 around Conroy Rd., I’ve had friends in town for conventions and such observe that downtown Orlando looked bigger than they imagined.

From that perspective, you can’t tell how tall the buildings are, just that there are a lot of them.

[otowntiger]

26 minutes ago, dcluley98 said:

RE: "the gap" 

Cambria Suites would help, if built. It would put another active site on an empty lot facing Lake Eola, fill in a bit of skyline between 110 and CBD with mid height view from perspective of the lake, and help to be more of an entrance into DT from the park down Washington. Haven't seen any updates on it though. I really wish something got built on that lot. If not Cambria, at least something better to connect the park to Magnolia and Orange. 

Ok I'm not familiar with 'Cambria Suites'.  Can you  point me to that thread?  I'd like to take a look at it. thanks!

[JFW657]

Nothing wrong with a skyline gap afaic. Look at Manhattan. Atlanta has two skylines as well, I believe.

The important thing is that we get rid of the empty vacant lots and fill them in with really great mid-rise architecture that is utilized for purposes that draw people to them.

Still, a couple more around 450' - 500' and a couple more around 350' - 400' would be nice.

Just now, otowntiger said:

Ok I'm not familiar with 'Cambria Suites'.  Can you  point me to that thread?  I'd like to take a look at it. thanks!

It was a proposed hotel supposed to go up on Rosalind across from The Metropolitan aka the old Harley Hotel.

 

[spenser1058]

4 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Nothing wrong with a skyline gap afaic. Look at Manhattan. Atlanta has two skylines as well, I believe.

The important thing is that we get rid of the empty vacant lots and fill them in with really great mid-rise architecture that is utilized for purposes that draw people to them.

Still, a couple more around 450' - 500' and a couple more around 350' - 400' would be nice.

It was a proposed hotel supposed to go up on Rosalind across from The Metropolitan aka the old Harley Hotel.

Atlanta has three: downtown, midtown and Buckhead. More talls are also popping up along the Perimeter as well.

[otowntiger]

11 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Nothing wrong with a skyline gap afaic. Look at Manhattan. Atlanta has two skylines as well, I believe.

The important thing is that we get rid of the empty vacant lots and fill them in with really great mid-rise architecture that is utilized for purposes that draw people to them.

Still, a couple more around 450' - 500' and a couple more around 350' - 400' would be nice.

It was a proposed hotel supposed to go up on Rosalind across from The Metropolitan aka the old Harley Hotel.

 

thanks!  I agree, by the way.  While I think it'd be exciting to have a" higher profile" skyline one with at least one or two iconic structures in the 500-600' foot range to give it more 'ummph'  I do believe that it is  more  important to have good street level design for maximum success from a planning and urbanist perspective and  to provide that true vibrant urban fabric we all want to see.  In my opinion Orlando is on its way in that regard;  super tall iconic buildings notwithstanding.

Edited January 31, 2019 by otowntiger

[dcluley98]

Yeah, that's what I meant with Cambria. It is key infill on a highly visible vacant lot that will add much to activation and connectivity of the park to inner DT. The additional visitors to the area who will likely be walking around DT and the lake will add more critical mass to patronize businesses and increase demand for more growth in restaurant/retail adjacent to the lake, while providing a much better "entrance".   The height is immaterial to me, although 8 stories would look decent there IMO. The main thing is the visitors, the two story ground floor retail/lobby, and the amenities overlooking the lake area. I really hope something goes through there in this cycle. Can't have that lot sitting vacant for another decade! 

Edited January 31, 2019 by dcluley98