Jump to content

Ridgley Manor

Jaybee

By Jaybee
in Orlando

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 275
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jack Burg

jack

Posted
Posted

I have faith in Camden, at least they own the land. And there is a demand for apartments. They also have an incentive from the City.

If Orlando Palace dies, I would not be surprised. But I also thought the Ivanhoe was dead. I still have faith in 55 West. I heard that they have the go ahead from the City to start construction. They have paid their permits, which could not have been cheap.

I give the dead vote to North Orange Ave Condos. But I did call the developer who said that he was busy with another project in the Panhandle, and would try to start sometime next summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
prahaboheme City

prahaboheme

Posted
Posted

So much drama here at UP. Ridgely was sketch, this shouldn't surprise anyone and personally I would rather go without a 400ft skyscraper than have one that is some faux-historic Las Vegas resort. All an all, i'd say we've been pretty lucky with the consistency and legitimacy of developments in the past year downtown, and this is hardly a step back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dale City

Dale

Posted
Posted

I remember reading a statement from Spillis Candela Architects, about ten years ago, something to the effect of Orlando's building the finest downtown in America, 'step by step'.

We're just taking very careful steps. We're not going to rush a good thing. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
corpkid Whistle-Stop

corpkid

Posted
Posted

Im telling you guys, people die in three's and so do buildings. Orlando Palace is next. The third is anyones guess. Any bets?

Oh Sh*t... Dad passed in March, my cousin in June, I MUST BE NEXT!!! :shok::shok:

This sucks, big-time! I never thought I would see 55w go up, but now I'm fairly sure of this, with this death thing looming over my shoulder. How f'n Halloween, huh? :rofl:

I leave my sweet condo @ Eola South to all of you fellow Orlando-based U.P. members who can appreciate a realized, constructed downtown Orlando condo that doesn't suck. It's only 1600 sq ft., so fight nice after my passing :P Just kidding. I just did my will (totally a depressing experience). My mom gets this if I kick. Figured she deserved it considering what a pain in the a$$ I was growing up!

Seriously, this sucks, kinda... I NEVER really considered this a real project. Just a big 55w type thing. At least you all got your deposits back... <smirk> It was ugly IMHO. And it seemed a bit too upscale (like 55w) for our kind-of saturated upscale maket. I swear these developers think this is NYC2 or Miami2. IT'S STILL ORLANDO PEOPLE!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
firemick Hamlet

firemick

Posted
Posted

I am hoping and praying that this proposal is resurrected from the dead. I have to say, I was pretty darn disappointed when I heard it was cancelled. :sick: I like the design (neo-classical NYC 1930's) This will open up an interesting controversy about competing developments (i.e. Topland and Ridgley) with issues such as views, air rights, property and the like. I can see this happening with more developments such as Tradition Towers and 215 E. Central Blvd. and perhaps some of the Eola developments. Isn't 205 E. Central coming up for review? :thumbsup: Also who is or was behind the Ridgley Manor development?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwetteland Burg

cwetteland

Posted
Posted

Did I miss something? I thought Ridgley Manor was cancelled and refunds of deposits given back because they could not work a deal to buy the land where it was proposed.

Yes ... at the MPB on Tuesday there were folks in the audiance that complained that the Palmetto project would block the view they had from the Ridgely. Indicating that it was still in the works ... was there more? I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
facilities man Hamlet

facilities man

Posted
Posted

This raises another issue. Since most of the buildings being built now are residential is every building built after them going to have to fight for the height they want because they will be blocking someones view? This would seem to make the condos built around Lake Eola, with an unobstructed view, more valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwetteland Burg

cwetteland

Posted
Posted

This would seem to make the condos built around Lake Eola, with an unobstructed view, more valuable.

I agree, maybe the city should build another lake downtown to give more people an unobstructed view thus raising values and taxes. Maybe that's what the new park on W. Church is all about. The only thing the Palmetto obstructs from Ridgely is a view of Dynetech and/or 55W (depending on which wing you're in). Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
jmarkey Crossroads

jmarkey

Posted
Posted

i think its EB. check one of the other threads; Ridgley came up within the last two days. I think someone posted that a Ridgley rep protested views being blocked by the Palmetto tower or something like that at a city meeting...

I must make something clear. EB Developers has absolutely nothing to do with Ridgely and never did. I purchased the property at 90 E. Livingston (the main property Ridgely was planned on) after those clowns behind Ridgely defaulted or failed on the contract to buy that property and the 2 adjacent ones. With all due respect to the amateur developers of the world, I do not go to market with make believe projects on property that I do not own, let alone have under contract. The "developer" behind Ridgely continued to sell and hold deposits while EB had the property under contract and even after EB closed. There is a long string of correspondence between my attorneys and the Seller's attorneys demanding a stop to this misrepresentation. Unfortunately, the Seller had very little power over their former contract purchaser. Why anyone would go to market and take people's money for deposits on property they don't own or control I cannot explain. Myself, and 3 of my staff made the Broker selling Ridgely aware of this situation on more than one occasion. I'm sure they had contract problems with Ridgely, but I would think there was a default in there that could have gotten them out. I would respectfully request that you do not even mention EB Developer's name in the context of this kind of behavior or Ridgely.

With regards to Palmetto, I think that it is ill conceived in its lack of consideration for comprehensive planning in its immediate context area, but I did not oppose it in any public forum. To have a postage stamp size piece of property and try to simply max it out for the money in a critical redevelopment area will never be my approach. Maybe a Ridgely Rep protested Palmetto, but that was not someone from EB.

Thank you for indulging my somewhat indignant ranting.

John K. Markey

Chief Operating Officer

EB Developers, Inc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwetteland Burg

cwetteland

Posted
Posted

So I am not quite sure where this leaves us on this lot?

Well first, UPSDAN, I'd say take Ridgely off the skyscrapers; and bic, I'd say edit your 2D again. Ridgely is officially fantasy. Second, we should all thank John Markey for his input. Thanks John. Also, I'd like to hear from BlueWingzz who I thought had bought into Ridgely. It sounds like the protester at the Palmetto presentation has more to worry about than a blocked view.

I'd like to hear from Mr. Markey on how things are coming along with CityMark. I didn't consider his post to be a rant but rather a polite clarification to our amateur speculation.

Finally, IMO I agree with John Markey that a more comprehensive plan that joins the small parcels together makes much more sense than tiny projects like Palmetto. The question I have is how do you put together a comprehensive plan when the property is owned by different parties? Does EB have plans to expand their holdings in the Palmetto / Livingston area? I hope so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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.