Jump to content

Creative Village


sunshine

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WAJAS98 said:

By the way, this report confirms that Amelia will not be realigned like originally proposed. I don't know about you guys, but I think this is a small win for the development.  It increases the area of the park at the very least.   Apparently, the stub out on Terry was built under the original plan, but it will be addressed with the construction of Amelia Court and Central Park, which btw needs a different name (It may be confused with the one in Park Ave when discussing things with a regional context).

Good!!!

I like the curve!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


7 hours ago, orlandouprise said:

So Ustler unveiled his great park for CV this morning on Growth spotter. Meh...its ok. in contrast from his initial renderings...it has turned into something very underwhelming. Disappointed in Ustler. He has turned into a typical cheap ass developer.

 

You cant show people modern, edgy, "creative" renderings and then deliver this.  If this was your plan from the beginning...own it. The park is ok, but that's it. Nothing is really "creative" about it. I wish one day a developer would have the money and the balls to push through something that pushes the envelope, something that makes a statement and becomes iconic for Orlando. I had hopes for CV that this would be it. Initial renderings looked modern, even slightly futuristic. This looks like anywhere USA from the mid 90's. 

 

...and in regards to the "LOVE"sculpture (I know its a placeholder image)...dear god ...NO. if I want to take a picture of that I go to Philly. At least make it a creative sculpture of the letters ORL or something Orlando. Something people will actually that they were in Orlando visiting when they look back at the picture.

 

End of rant...Lol 

I like the Love Sculpture, every city should have one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cwetteland said:

SIAP:  According to the OBJ,  Miami developer The Allen Morris Company who teamed with Ustler on parcel M (aka Prism) says he wants to put two more complexes in the CV.  Couldn't read time frame (paywall).

You didn't hear it from me, but if you disable javascript in your browser you can get past the paywall! The article states, " There likely will be another "one or or two" projects in the next several years after the first project is completed in mid-2020 and after the Mill Creek Residential Trust LLC project is finished approximately a year later. "   So it seems they're waiting to see how the first complex pans out before starting on more.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, orlandouprise said:

So Ustler unveiled his great park for CV this morning on Growth spotter. Meh...its ok. in contrast from his initial renderings...it has turned into something very underwhelming. Disappointed in Ustler. He has turned into a typical cheap ass developer.

 

You cant show people modern, edgy, "creative" renderings and then deliver this.  If this was your plan from the beginning...own it. The park is ok, but that's it. Nothing is really "creative" about it. I wish one day a developer would have the money and the balls to push through something that pushes the envelope, something that makes a statement and becomes iconic for Orlando. I had hopes for CV that this would be it. Initial renderings looked modern, even slightly futuristic. This looks like anywhere USA from the mid 90's. 

 

...and in regards to the "LOVE"sculpture (I know its a placeholder image)...dear god ...NO. if I want to take a picture of that I go to Philly. At least make it a creative sculpture of the letters ORL or something Orlando. Something people will actually that they were in Orlando visiting when they look back at the picture.

 

End of rant...Lol 

Totally apart from any bait and switch re the renderings, I think bland buildings are kind of a norm for Craig. Whether it's TPC, the condos on E. Washington or GAI, he's always been somewhat conservative on the looks and scale of the buildings.

A lot of the edge that attached to Craig came from his collaboration with Phil Rampy. Together they were the impetus  to revitalize in-town neighborhoods like Thornton Park and served as the inspiration for the city to create other Main St. neighborhoods. After they split, however, Craig more or less returned to his staid FFO upbringing. We probably shouldn't be too surprised.

Edited by spenser1058
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst thing about the Creative Village lawn is the palm tree lined promenade. 

Who is going to enjoy this on a August summer day?

I don’t even care that the park design is largely uninspired (and, it is), but there are very basic things that need to be taken into account when designing park space. 

Are there any successful parks in the south that do not have adequate tree cover?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, prahaboheme said:

The worst thing about the Creative Village lawn is the palm tree lined promenade. 

Who is going to enjoy this on a August summer day?

I don’t even care that the park design is largely uninspired (and, it is), but there are very basic things that need to be taken into account when designing park space. 

Are there any successful parks in the south that do not have adequate tree cover?

Sometimes, in the desire to be Miami (which, btw, has sea breezes we'll never have), more than a few folks ignore the fact that good old-fashioned oak trees are much more practical and look a lot more appropriate for inland Florida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, orlandouprise said:

Why did Craig and Phil split?

That is the stuff of soap operas that we won't go into here. Suffice it to say, like Martin and Lewis, Roy and Walt or, more tragically, Eisner and Wells, what was a great partnership (at least for the neighborhoods) that combined creativity with hard-nosed practicality, it was a shame that it came to an end.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, prahaboheme said:

The worst thing about the Creative Village lawn is the palm tree lined promenade. 

Who is going to enjoy this on a August summer day?

I don’t even care that the park design is largely uninspired (and, it is), but there are very basic things that need to be taken into account when designing park space. 

Are there any successful parks in the south that do not have adequate tree cover?

Totally agree. They need to take a trip to Savannah and design this like one of their many squares lined with beautiful old oak trees and maybe with a fountain, a statue, or two to draw some attention at the ends and some open space/field in the middle. . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JFW657 said:

I opined the very same thing earlier in this thread and was "gently reminded" that those early renderings were just preliminary designs not meant to be taken seriously.

Fine. But that doesn't make the somewhat more bland, pedestrian, run-of-the-mill looking end product we're getting any more exciting.

CV's design isn't ugly or cheesy looking by any stretch of the imagination, but it also doesn't seem to reflect a great deal of imagination either.

Perhaps. I also recall that some rebutted that Stern’s design for the academic commons isn’t bland and sterile, rather classic.

Alternatively, those  “pie in the sky” Baker Barrios renderings of Creative Village seem really dated to me looking back on them a decade later. Maybe that’s because Solaire and Dynetech (whatever it’s called now) are essentially that style. We already have it and no one considers them Orlando’s finest.

I don’t excuse Ustler for his lazy park plan, however, I also place the blame here on the city if they allow this to proceed.

 

Edited by prahaboheme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, WAJAS98 said:

By the way, this report confirms that Amelia will not be realigned like originally proposed. I don't know about you guys, but I think this is a small win for the development.  It increases the area of the park at the very least.   Apparently, the stub out on Terry was built under the original plan, but it will be addressed with the construction of Amelia Court and Central Park, which btw needs a different name (It may be confused with the one in Park Ave when discussing things with a regional context).

 

http://www.cityoforlando.net/economic/wp-content/uploads/sites/25/2018/07/Creative-Village-IMP-Final-to-CVDRC-6-12-18.pdf

Not a fan. That street should be aligned but oh well I suppose.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, prahaboheme said:

Perhaps. I also recall that some rebutted that Stern’s design for the academic commons isn’t bland and sterile, rather classic.

Alternatively, those  “pie in the sky” Baker Barrios renderings of Creative Village seem really dated to me looking back on them a decade later. Maybe that’s because Solaire and Dynetech (whatever it’s called now) are essentially that style. We already have it and no one considers them Orlando’s finest.

I don’t excuse Ustler for his lazy park plan, however, I also place the blame here on the city if they allow this to proceed.

I dunno... I kinda like Dynatech (or whatever it’s called now). Or at least the elliptical tower portion anyway. Don't much care fir that chunky looking box wrapped around the bottom half. And Solaire would be OK if the top didn't look so chopped off. Or rather "truncated" (which I spelt correckly this time). What I'm saying is that afaic, the architectural style isn't bad, the execution of it just has a couple of issues. But I wouldn't hate seeing similar designs in CV. I don't hate what's going up there either, I just don't think it reflects much in the way of creativity. The park does look underwhelming though. If they really do end up putting palm trees in there, that will really be cheesy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dcluley98 said:

Totally agree. They need to take a trip to Savannah and design this like one of their many squares lined with beautiful old oak trees and maybe with a fountain, a statue, or two to draw some attention at the ends and some open space/field in the middle. . 

Fountains get my vote, I love fountains!

 

Anyone have links to the old park plans and the new ones? Didn't see it mentioned recently

Edited by aent
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, prahaboheme said:

I guess what I don’t understand is why Ustler is developing the public common. Shouldn’t the city be doing this? Is the public common actually a private development?

 

Its not uncommon, and I generally consider it a win-win. There is benefit on both sides. The developer can get the park where they want it, and has more flexibility to finish it the way they want it to be, to try to enhance property values. The municipalities often offer impact fee credits for what it would cost to build a more standard city park, so he gets a tax break on a good portion of what he spends on it. Municipalities often like it, as they don't have to go through the normal procedures for governmental approval to build a park, and they generally don't need to worry about being scrutinized for the cost of the park if they were trying to build something nice that a political opponent would call too extravagant and a waste of tax dollars. Also, the developer generally has more incentive to keep the budget extremely efficient, so there is generally much less overhead and waste so more money goes towards the actual park. Thats why you also occasionally see developers building public schools. It varies by area, but its also done with thru-roadways, fire/EMS, etc...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aent said:

Its not uncommon, and I generally consider it a win-win. There is benefit on both sides. The developer can get the park where they want it, and has more flexibility to finish it the way they want it to be, to try to enhance property values. The municipalities often offer impact fee credits for what it would cost to build a more standard city park, so he gets a tax break on a good portion of what he spends on it. Municipalities often like it, as they don't have to go through the normal procedures for governmental approval to build a park, and they generally don't need to worry about being scrutinized for the cost of the park if they were trying to build something nice that a political opponent would call too extravagant and a waste of tax dollars. Also, the developer generally has more incentive to keep the budget extremely efficient, so there is generally much less overhead and waste so more money goes towards the actual park. Thats why you also occasionally see developers building public schools. It varies by area, but its also done with thru-roadways, fire/EMS, etc...

What all this efficiency isn't translating into is an inspired design for the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, prahaboheme said:

What all this efficiency isn't translating into is an inspired design for the park.

Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be a good or inspred park design?

To me, if it has lots of shady trees, benches, winding paths/walkways, some sort of central feature like a statue or fountain with places around it to gather and sit etc, then I'm happy with it. Anything more than that is getting a bit on the fancy-shmancy side for my tastes. When they try to get all artsy-fartsy and designery, I think it often just looks like they're trying too hard.

On the other hand, if it ends up just being a patch of grass with a palm tree lined central walkway down the middle, that would be a huge disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be a good or inspred park design?

To me, if it has lots of shady trees, benches, winding paths/walkways, some sort of central feature like a statue or fountain with places around it to gather and sit etc, then I'm happy with it. Anything more than that is getting a bit on the fancy-shmancy side for my tastes. When they try to get all artsy-fartsy and designery, I think it often just looks like they're trying too hard.

On the other hand, if it ends up just being a patch of grass with a palm tree lined central walkway down the middle, that would be a huge disappointment.

My favorite park design in the South in the last 25 years is Waterfront Park in Charleston SC. It incorporates pretty much everything you’ve described above. 

Heres some info about it: https://www.charleston-sc.com/charleston-waterfront-park.html

Something like this would have played off the more traditional design for the UCF academic commons and could also have used the water features of Lake Dot as a focal point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, prahaboheme said:

My favorite park design in the South in the last 25 years is Waterfront Park in Charleston SC. It incorporates pretty much everything you’ve described above. 

Heres some info about it: https://www.charleston-sc.com/charleston-waterfront-park.html

Something like this would have played off the more traditional design for the UCF academic commons and could also have used the water features of Lake Dot as a focal point.

Very nice!!! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a college campus, I think things that are the classic "quad" type gathering space are appropriate. I am thinking of Harvard Yard, UVA Lawn, UNC Chapel Hill Arboretum and Quads, SMU Boulevard, UIL Champaing-Urbana, Notre Dame, etc. Should be multi-functional gathering space, with real trees for shade, some points of interest such as sculpture or fountain around the perimeter, wide open space in the middle for activities, whether planned or impromptu, things like integrated seating or ampitheater type passive design features, intelligent design pathways for pedestrians as well as other activities such as cyclists, rollerbladers, and pets to coexist, ingress and egress transition areas to draw people into the park and transition them to the adjacent buildings across the street and the plaza at the academic commons to the south, good site lines from inside park to surrounding areas, CPTED considerations, other amenities such as water fountains, pet considerations (fountain, waste, designated areas, etc.) pavilions and some sheltered space for storms or public transit, and most of all, well-thought out landscaping with functional trees and easy to maintain Florida-friendly flora so it doesn't look like an unkempt mess over time or cost a ton to keep decent. 

UNC Chapel Hill below. Obviously we can't get anything to that scale or grandeur, but looking at something like that for inspiration of what should be there in just a small portion is a good idea: 

C9JiNVDVoAEqnv7.thumb.jpg.9c6b7094bf06bf709f0fee80d189d30d.jpgUNC Chapel Hill.jpg

Edited by dcluley98
  • Like 1
Link to comment
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.