Lake House - Ivanhoe Village

[Urbo]

11 minutes ago, Jerry95 said:

I just don’t think keeping up with the jones’s is the right move for this particular parcel. The fundamental question is whether or not the parcel is broken. It’s on a quieter side of the lake right next to a major interstate. It’s basically a dead end. Of all the parcels to develop this just feels like the wrong one to want to see razed. 
 

To your point - how can we develop a better city if we do not accommodate the people who give it life? Surely the janitor, the barista, the teacher, the lawyer, the doctor, and the waiter should all be able to live in their city, close to their work. We cannot be a playground for the rich, we must be a playground for all. And we cannot be a sandbox for developers to swoop in, swoop out and leave us with a crappy tall wooden box. We know what we’ll get - apartments there cost more than the Yard and Lake House and I just don’t know who can afford those things.

I don't believe further developing Ivanhoe Village will turn the city upside down into a playground for the rich. I'm only advocating for more urban options near the city core (specifically higher end destinations and housing). Do you agree that Orlando needs more higher end  destinations close to the city's core? If so, where would they go since they cannot be plopped in the middle of Parramore? Geography and demographic played a part in the success of the Lake House in Ivanhoe, it cannot be ignored.

[blt23]

5 hours ago, Jerry95 said:

The idea that green/shaded public spaces and affordable housing are not key to any successful city/town/truck stop is absurd. 

Orlando is a city of neighorhoods, each with its own appeal. And if you look at the successful and trendy areas of this city it’s not the areas with high rises. I love dense mixed use as much as the next person but we haven’t cracked the code on how to make it not lifeless. Until then I’ll advocate for the pink apartments to stay, for a signature redevelopment of the Sentinel site and for Mills to go on a road diet all while driving my way over to Beefy King for lunch. 

The idea that "we haven’t cracked the code on how to make it not lifeless" is absurd.

The problem of building lively urban environments was solved centuries ago, as a look at any historical European city would show. A more accurate statement is that we haven't been willing to accept the ways of making it not lifeless. How to build lively "dense mixed use" environments:

Streets are a big part of it. When the majority of a street right of way is dedicated to moving lots of cars fast, you get the liveliness of metal and glass instead of the liveliness of people. Slowing and reducing car traffic so protected bike lanes and wider sidewalks can be added makes a big difference in the amount of street activity.

Sidewalks and how buildings connect with them also matters a lot. Narrow, unshaded sidewalks adjacent to blank walls or parking with frequent curb cuts are a lot less welcoming than wide sidewalks with shade trees and seating and lots of pedestrian access points to directly adjacent buildings.

Of course green/shaded space is important, but a random tree or two on a privately held lawn is among the least valuable forms of green space because it's high maintenance, not publicly accessible, and not deluding anyone into thinking it's actually a natural environment. Any dense redevelopment of Lake Ivanhoe Shores (or the Sentinel site, since you mentioned it) should absolutely be expected to include lots of street trees and some small green/pedestrian spaces where people can walk or relax outside, along with Loch Haven Park being only a 1/2 mile away for the occasional activity that requires more space.

Density of residential units is also a critical piece because a certain number of people are required to support vibrant commercial activity, but that doesn't mean that tons of high rises are needed. It's not hard to build sufficient density using 4 to 6 story buildings provided that a bunch of them are built together rather than as single buildings. (Again, look at Europe.) Having to build 300+ square feet of parking for every unit doesn't help with density or affordability, but that is a surmountable issue and should be even more reason to invest in transit and building lively, walkable urban spaces.

2 hours ago, Jerry95 said:

I just don’t think keeping up with the jones’s is the right move for this particular parcel. The fundamental question is whether or not the parcel is broken. It’s on a quieter side of the lake right next to a major interstate. It’s basically a dead end. Of all the parcels to develop this just feels like the wrong one to want to see razed. 
 

To your point - how can we develop a better city if we do not accommodate the people who give it life? Surely the janitor, the barista, the teacher, the lawyer, the doctor, and the waiter should all be able to live in their city, close to their work. We cannot be a playground for the rich, we must be a playground for all. And we cannot be a sandbox for developers to swoop in, swoop out and leave us with a crappy tall wooden box. We know what we’ll get - apartments there cost more than the Yard and Lake House and I just don’t know who can afford those things.

What parcels do you see as the right ones to be razed?

Because where you see "the quieter side of a lake next to a major interstate," I see 9+ contiguous acres of older low density buildings and surface parking only 2 miles from the CBD and directly adjacent to a main arterial road leading there, along with being next to a rail line where if the transit service was frequent and all day an infill stop could easily be justified there by having 2k+ residential units within 1/4 mile after redevelopment. If you have any interest in building midrise modern urbanism, this is as good a place as any.

Not building anything won't preserve affordability on a large scale. We all know that people are moving to Orlando and refusing to allow the construction of more housing will just drive up the prices of existing housing according to the laws of supply and demand.

Edited November 16, 2021 by blt23

[JFW657]

3 hours ago, Urbo said:

Its interesting how there is little to no debate on what could be built here, how it could be designed, or what could be added to make the neighborhood better, as if this property is timeless, iconic and functioning at its best use. Instead, there is more debate about how new development is unwanted for the property which is nimbyism and holds back urban development. Many people want growth but only if they like it, that's just not the reality of cities. We should encourage growth, critique  t, try and influence for the better, but not stop it.

No one is stating affordable housing and green/shaded public spaces are not key to a  successful city. I'm speaking about ONE neighborhood out of Orlando, Ivanhoe Village. I'm not saying every neighborhood needs to be a high-end, modern mixed use dense place. I'm simply saying if there were ONE neighborhood in the city of Orlando, close to the city center that could appeal to more modern higher-end urban experiences and environments it could be Ivanhoe Village. In fact, the city 's core needs it or else Lake Nona will continue to lure many jobs and developments that should take place closer to the core. 

There is no code to be cracked. Good urban design and architecture is not some mystery. Development can occur simultaneously, there is no reason to wait if there is demand, land and capital. Sentinel site can be developed just as other parts of the city are developed at the same time. That's what will make the city even more exciting. You'll are holding on to nostalgia, and are feeling the growth pains of a great local neighborhood going through an growth and evolution process. The focus should be on designing and developing a better city and there are many sides to that than just affordable housing.

And what happens after that charming old apartment complex gets razed and some cold, ugly, uninspired shoebox goes up in its place?

Will you just say "Oh well, too bad and tough luck"?  

Seems like a lot of what you're proposing as being the best course for that parcel involves speculation and unfounded faith that what will repace it will be an improvement.

I have seen very little of what's been built in downtown Orlando in recent years that gives me such faith. 

I imagine someday those apartments will have to come down, but I don't see where it has to happen any time soon. 

[prahaboheme]

1 hour ago, JFW657 said:

And what happens after that charming old apartment complex gets razed and some cold, ugly, uninspired shoebox goes up in its place?

Will you just say "Oh well, too bad and tough luck"?  

Seems like a lot of what you're proposing as being the best course for that parcel involves speculation and unfounded faith that what will repace it will be an improvement.

I have seen very little of what's been built in downtown Orlando in recent years that gives me such faith. 

I imagine someday those apartments will have to come down, but I don't see where it has to happen any time soon. 

Let’s use the Jaymont block as an example of such. 

[Urbo]

47 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

And what happens after that charming old apartment complex gets razed and some cold, ugly, uninspired shoebox goes up in its place?

Will you just say "Oh well, too bad and tough luck"?  

Seems like a lot of what you're proposing as being the best course for that parcel involves speculation and unfounded faith that what will repace it will be an improvement.

I have seen very little of what's been built in downtown Orlando in recent years that gives me such faith. 

I imagine someday those apartments will have to come down, but I don't see where it has to happen any time soon. 

the apartments are cool and charming, but they would not stand a chance in any other great city in America, so why should they stay in Orlando which is striving to be a great city. A better Lake House with a more ground retail/commercial to activate the streets would be much better than the apartments. The Interlock in Atlanta is an ideal type project in my opinion (residences instead of hotel). Entertainment destinations like Puttshack would be great additions to the neighborhood.

I understand the development history is not favorable in Orlando, but you will be surprised how quickly development and design standards can change in a city. It just takes the right vision, a strong community committed to design and neighborhood development, growth  and a few years to get the ball rolling in the right direction. I believe things can change here, I believe that Orlando has the potential to be a world class city. It should capitalize on having one of the world's most visited places in Disney right down the street and grow its urban neighborhoods. People rarely crossed the bridge to Miami from Miami Beach, and always viewed Miami as the beach and retirement town, but over time Miami focused on developing its neighborhoods and now Wynwood, Design District, Midtown, Edgewater, Brickell, Mimo District, Coconut Grove and even downtown  have made Miami a livable and attractive city all year around, elevating Miami as one of the top cities in America.

Orlando can take a similar path by rebranding itself as not just the home of Mickey, but also a city of vibrant urban neighborhoods with arts, entertainment, and cultural destinations, unique dining and retail experiences, economic hubs/clusters, and beautiful places to live. But it starts with believing that we can have better outcomes and embracing the change necessary for good growth.

[JFW657]

34 minutes ago, prahaboheme said:

Let’s use the Jaymont block as an example of such. 

Okay, let's.

AFAIC, it's apples and oranges.

Why?

Because the parcel that Lake Ivanhoe Shores occupies is not on par with the Jaymont block in the heart of DTO.

The parcel in question is way up by Lake Ivanhoe and as such, any replacement development is nowhere near as crucial to DTO as The Plaza was. 

The Jaymont Block was crying out.... screaming for, a signature development like The Plaza that made a statement about DTO. 

Had the Woolworth and McCrory buildings been on the opposite side of that block, IOW had they been facing Magnolia instead of Orange, I would have been 100% in favor of saving the facades and incorporaing them into the ground floor of the parking garage as retail.

And they would have been a perfect fit with the rest of Magnolia, too. 

But their appearance did no fit into what the block at Orange and Church IMO, desperately needed, which was a striking, modern, urban looking, "city center" style development. 

It's a shame they had to go, but (and this is of course JMO) when weighing the value of those two storefronts against what replaced them, I'm sorry but I'd rather have what replaced them.

And again, all of these argumens are just one person's opinion against another persons.

@Urbo feels he same way about LIS as I do about the Jaymont block. 

You feel he same way about the Jaymont block as I do about LIS.

I disagree with him, you disagree with me, and we all have our individual reasons for doing so based on our own individual perspectives from which we view the issue.

I'll never change your mind and you'll never change mine.

[JFW657]

23 minutes ago, Urbo said:

the apartments are cool and charming, but they would not stand a chance in any other great city in America, so why should they stay in Orlando which is striving to be a great city. A better Lake House with a more ground retail/commercial to activate the streets would be much better than the apartments. The Interlock in Atlanta is an ideal type project in my opinion (residences instead of hotel). Entertainment destinations like Puttshack would be great additions to the neighborhood.

I understand the development history is not favorable in Orlando, but you will be surprised how quickly development and design standards can change in a city. It just takes the right vision, a strong community committed to design and neighborhood development, growth  and a few years to get the ball rolling in the right direction. I believe things can change here, I believe that Orlando has the potential to be a world class city. It should capitalize on having one of the world's most visited places in Disney right down the street and grow its urban neighborhoods. People rarely crossed the bridge to Miami from Miami Beach, and always viewed Miami as the beach and retirement town, but over time Miami focused on developing its neighborhoods and now Wynwood, Design District, Midtown, Edgewater, Brickell, Mimo District, Coconut Grove and even downtown  have made Miami a livable and attractive city all year around, elevating Miami as one of the top cities in America.

Orlando can take a similar path by rebranding itself as not just the home of Mickey, but also a city of vibrant urban neighborhoods with arts, entertainment, and cultural destinations, unique dining and retail experiences, economic hubs/clusters, and beautiful places to live. But it starts with believing that we can have better outcomes and embracing the change necessary for good growth.

I guess my question to you then is, with all the other potential sites for multistory development right in that same vicinity, why should we be in such a hurry for that complex demo'd and replaced?

As you can see below, there are other potential places.....

 

[Jerry95]

14 hours ago, Urbo said:

Do you agree that Orlando needs more higher end  destinations close to the city's core? If so, where would they go since they cannot be plopped in the middle of Parramore? Geography and demographic played a part in the success of the Lake House in Ivanhoe, it cannot be ignored.

I'd agree that we need more destinations downtown beyond food and drink and that our retail and cultural attractions needs to both attract people downtown and enhance the quality of life for the downtown residents. I'd also agree that Ivanhoe is at the right intersection between the CBD, College Park, and Winter Park to be a successful choice.

12 hours ago, blt23 said:

The idea that "we haven’t cracked the code on how to make it not lifeless" is absurd.

The problem of building lively urban environments was solved centuries ago, as a look at any historical European city would show. A more accurate statement is that we haven't been willing to accept the ways of making it not lifeless. How to build lively "dense mixed use" environments

All good points. To clarify, I don't think Orlando has the forward drive and formula to facilitate dense mixed use developments that highlight the principles of urbanism you describe. My fear is that we raze Ivanhoe Village in the name of density and actually end up with a less inviting area that people don't want to visit anymore. We're great at letting neighborhoods form organically, not so much when it comes to planned developments. I'm also not saying save LIS forever, I just don't think it should be first on the chopping block. 

 

[jliv]

11 hours ago, Urbo said:

the apartments are cool and charming, but they would not stand a chance in any other great city in America, so why should they stay in Orlando which is striving to be a great city. A better Lake House with a more ground retail/commercial to activate the streets would be much better than the apartments. The Interlock in Atlanta is an ideal type project in my opinion (residences instead of hotel). Entertainment destinations like Puttshack would be great additions to the neighborhood.

I understand the development history is not favorable in Orlando, but you will be surprised how quickly development and design standards can change in a city. It just takes the right vision, a strong community committed to design and neighborhood development, growth  and a few years to get the ball rolling in the right direction. I believe things can change here, I believe that Orlando has the potential to be a world class city. It should capitalize on having one of the world's most visited places in Disney right down the street and grow its urban neighborhoods. People rarely crossed the bridge to Miami from Miami Beach, and always viewed Miami as the beach and retirement town, but over time Miami focused on developing its neighborhoods and now Wynwood, Design District, Midtown, Edgewater, Brickell, Mimo District, Coconut Grove and even downtown  have made Miami a livable and attractive city all year around, elevating Miami as one of the top cities in America.

Orlando can take a similar path by rebranding itself as not just the home of Mickey, but also a city of vibrant urban neighborhoods with arts, entertainment, and cultural destinations, unique dining and retail experiences, economic hubs/clusters, and beautiful places to live. But it starts with believing that we can have better outcomes and embracing the change necessary for good growth.

Interesting that you point out a development in Atlanta as a case study.  Atlanta provides plenty of anti-patterns for how you develop a city, which I can speak to as someone who lived there for 10 years.  Anytime I hear someone complain about traffic in Orlando brings me back to my unhappy place of sitting in traffic for 2 hours on N. Druid Hills Rd trying to get out of Buckhead!.  One of the things Atlanta greatly benefits from is the School of Regional and City Design at Georgia Tech.  The impetus for the Beltline and Atlantic Station (not a total triumph, mind you) come from masters theses by students there, and I know a few graduates who went on to do some great things in Atlanta.  Not really sure how mature the UCF and Rollins programs are, comparatively, but a rethink of Ivanhoe Village/Mills 50 would be a perfect project for some aspiring students who feel the same way you do IMHO (before AdventHealth and its affiliated doctors completely steal the opportunity).

Edited November 16, 2021 by jliv

[Urbo]

33 minutes ago, jliv said:

Interesting that you point out a development in Atlanta as a case study.  Atlanta provides plenty of anti-patterns for how you develop a city, which I can speak to as someone who lived there for 10 years.  Anytime I hear someone complain about traffic in Orlando brings me back to my unhappy place of sitting in traffic for 2 hours on N. Druid Hills Rd trying to get out of Buckhead!.  One of the things Atlanta greatly benefits from is the School of Regional and City Design at Georgia Tech.  The impetus for the Beltline and Atlantic Station (not a total triumph, mind you) come from masters theses by students there, and I know a few graduates who went on to do some great things in Atlanta.  Not really sure how mature the UCF and Rollins programs are, comparatively, but a rethink of Ivanhoe Village/Mills 50 would be a perfect project for some aspiring students who feel the same way you do IMHO (before AdventHealth and its affiliated doctors completely steal the opportunity).

Yes, i just wanted to point out a good example such as The Interlock of what could replace the apartments. I don't think any city is perfect, and every neighborhood has its challenges or sore points. Overall, I think Atlanta has done okay with its development patterns (could be better but net positive overall). The redevelopment of the old fourth ward, inman park, west midtown, auburn avenue, and now summerhill, the gulch,/south downtown, the westside, etc. They are growing their neighborhoods and striving to make them better and more urban in my opinion.

Good point in regards to Architecture/Planning programs influencing development ideas and urban design. Although, community groups and organization can very effective to spur growth and development (ie: Friends of the High Line), I'm sure those institutions play a big role. Mills50  and Ivanhoe are prime areas to rethink development and try new and innovative ideas.

11 hours ago, JFW657 said:

I guess my question to you then is, with all the other potential sites for multistory development right in that same vicinity, why should we be in such a hurry for that complex demo'd and replaced?

As you can see below, there are other potential places.....

 

I don't think its about being in a hurry, it has i-4 frontage, lake frontage and skyline views. Its one of the most prime piece of underdeveloped/undeveloped property in the neighborhood. Lake Ivanhoe Shore presents the best development opportunity to make an large impact in progressing the area into a more vibrant and dense neighborhoods. Essentially, the right development here can set the tone for the other developments and infill property in the area to be better than the Yard and Lake House.

[JFW657]

20 minutes ago, Urbo said:

I don't think its about being in a hurry, it has i-4 frontage, lake frontage and skyline views. Its one of the most prime piece of underdeveloped/undeveloped property in the neighborhood. Lake Ivanhoe Shore presents the best development opportunity to make an large impact in progressing the area into a more vibrant and dense neighborhoods. Essentially, the right development here can set the tone for the other developments and infill property in the area to be better than the Yard and Lake House.

I like to think of it as remaining a green, quiet, peaceful haven from the noise, traffic and hubbub that will inevitably be products of the surrounding development. 

A little trip back in time to the calmer, simpler days of yesteryear, if you will. 

I think we could have both... a vibrant, dense neighborhood with Lake Ivanhoe Shores being part of it.

I think keeping it would actually make the neighborhood more ecclectic and architecturally interesting.  

[sethM]

This discussion should be in the Lake Ivanhoe thread and not here but I think we’re jumping the gun to go raze Lake Ivanhoe Shores when The Yard still hasn’t broken ground on their phase two project on the other side of Virginia and there’s plenty of other vacant or underutilized lots in the neighborhood as is. 

 

For the area to be sustainable there also needs to be major changes to Orange and Virginia to make them more friendly to the level of vehicle traffic, parking, and pedestrians. I worry that without infrastructure changes we’re simply at the peak of Ivanhoe Village.  

[leondecollao]

I kinda can’t believe how nice the food hall at the Yard is.....WHOAAAAA! 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CWZQmcVMMoK/?utm_medium=copy_link

Grand opening tomorrow it seems. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by leondecollao

[IAmFloridaBorn]

Lake House is an awesome addition!