Lake House - Ivanhoe Village

[Urbo]

It’s no wonder why Orlando continues to lag behind in Urban Development. Even the Urbanist are nimbys here. I get it, save the tree and bring in more affordable housing. But not at the expense of urban development within a city that’s already behind in their urban development progress. And people wonder why developers like Tavistock go outside the city center to develop real estate products that the market actually wants. They do this because it’s not worth the time and resources to fight people on change even if it for the better and the change will bring more value to the community and city as a whole.

Also, Orlando is not in an affordability crisis (inflation, rising rents and increased cost of living, etc. is happening across the nation, not just in orlando). It is still very affordable to live here. Orlando is growing, and I understand it’s completely normal for people to not want to let go of the memories they cherish, but it’s all apart of life. No matter the memories people had, the old fourth ward in Atlanta is better now than it was before (even with all the great history and memories). The same for Wynwood, the same for Brooklyn, and the list goes on and on. Neighborhoods change and evolve and as long as what comes after is better and brings more value what’s so wrong with that?

2 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Let’s see - they’ve already bulldozed the Fairchild Chapel and the sign which goes back to the ‘20’s, the unique HoJo from the ‘40’s, the Brookhaven building is scheduled to go and no one is particularly optimistic about the OUC building.

Now we want to take out the ‘40’s Lake Ivanhoe Shores.  I always wonder - when you demolish everything that made a neighborhood interesting (we haven’t even talked about the funky little bars on Virginia) , what makes it any different from Anyplace, USA (aka a taller Lake Mary)?

This is just like Robert Moses trying to bulldoze Greenwich Village and the developers who wanted to bulldoze the SoBe deco district (whose funkiness upon restoration is what brought Miami back from the dead and is one of the most photographed neighborhoods in the world).

Let’s make Orlando as generic as possible, right?

There is no comparison of Robert Moses vs. Jane Jacobs here.  Nobody here is trying to run a highway through a community or build Levittowns throughout Ivanhoe. Again, Neighborhoods grow and evolve. Just want to see new and better options in the city. Washington D.C. and New York are the most historic cities in America yet they evolve and grow and still make room for new people and places to enjoy. Miami was brought back from the dead by developing a financial district in Brickell that diversified it’s economy. Miami Beach was nothing but hobos and drug addicts, and the occasional northerner on vacation there to enjoy the weather and beach.  People like Goldman and Craig robins made many efforts in preserving the Art Deco history there during its redevelopment and did a great job to make Miami Beach livable 365 days out the year. Then they took their talents to Wynwood and The Design District to continue developing the great city of Miami. Morale of the story is evolution and growth is necessary and comes at a sacrifice. 

[spenser1058]

6 minutes ago, Urbo said:

It’s no wonder why Orlando continues to lag behind in Urban Development. Even the Urbanist are nimbys here. I get it, save the tree and bring in more affordable housing. But not at the expense of urban development within a city that’s already behind in their urban development progress. And people wonder why developers like Tavistock go outside the city center to develop real estate products that the market actually wants. They do this because it’s not worth the time and resources to fight people on change even if it for the better and the change will bring more value to the community and city as a whole.

Also, Orlando is not in an affordability crisis (inflation, rising rents and increased cost of living, etc. is happening across the nation, not just in orlando). It is still very affordable to live here. Orlando is growing, and I understand it’s completely normal for people to not want to let go of the memories they cherish, but it’s all apart of life. No matter the memories people had, the old fourth ward in Atlanta is better now than it was before (even with all the great history and memories). The same for Wynwood, the same for Brooklyn, and the list goes on and on. Neighborhoods change and evolve and as long as what comes after is better and brings more value what’s so wrong with that?

There is no comparison of Robert Moses vs. Jane Jacobs here.  Nobody here is trying to run a highway through a community or build Levittowns throughout Ivanhoe. Again, Neighborhoods grow and evolve. Just want to see new and better options in the city. Washington D.C. and New York are the most historic cities in America yet they evolve and grow and still make room for new people and places to enjoy. Miami was brought back from the dead by developing a financial district in Brickell that diversified it’s economy. Miami Beach was nothing but hobos and drug addicts, and the occasional northerner on vacation there to enjoy the weather and beach.  People like Goldman and Craig robins made many efforts in preserving the Art Deco history there during its redevelopment and did a great job to make Miami Beach livable 365 days out the year. Then they took their talents to Wynwood and The Design District to continue developing the great city of Miami. Morale of the story is evolution and growth is necessary and comes at a sacrifice. 

No doubt if you were in Atlanta you’d bulldoze Little Five Points for more towers. It’s always interesting to ask visitors to major American cities what parts were most interesting. Endless blocks of International Style and towers built since rarely make the list. As to South Beach, the bulldozers were just weeks away from rolling until the Wolfson family and a cadre of residents got together to hold them off.

There’s room for preservation of unique neighborhoods along with blocks of towers (that’s what should have happened along N. Orange Ave between Legion Place and Livingston and along Garland with its endless sea of asphalt). 

 

 

[JFW657]

2 hours ago, Urbo said:

It’s no wonder why Orlando continues to lag behind in Urban Development. Even the Urbanist are nimbys here. I get it, save the tree and bring in more affordable housing. But not at the expense of urban development within a city that’s already behind in their urban development progress. And people wonder why developers like Tavistock go outside the city center to develop real estate products that the market actually wants. They do this because it’s not worth the time and resources to fight people on change even if it for the better and the change will bring more value to the community and city as a whole.

Also, Orlando is not in an affordability crisis (inflation, rising rents and increased cost of living, etc. is happening across the nation, not just in orlando). It is still very affordable to live here. Orlando is growing, and I understand it’s completely normal for people to not want to let go of the memories they cherish, but it’s all apart of life. No matter the memories people had, the old fourth ward in Atlanta is better now than it was before (even with all the great history and memories). The same for Wynwood, the same for Brooklyn, and the list goes on and on. Neighborhoods change and evolve and as long as what comes after is better and brings more value what’s so wrong with that?

There is no comparison of Robert Moses vs. Jane Jacobs here.  Nobody here is trying to run a highway through a community or build Levittowns throughout Ivanhoe. Again, Neighborhoods grow and evolve. Just want to see new and better options in the city. Washington D.C. and New York are the most historic cities in America yet they evolve and grow and still make room for new people and places to enjoy. Miami was brought back from the dead by developing a financial district in Brickell that diversified it’s economy. Miami Beach was nothing but hobos and drug addicts, and the occasional northerner on vacation there to enjoy the weather and beach.  People like Goldman and Craig robins made many efforts in preserving the Art Deco history there during its redevelopment and did a great job to make Miami Beach livable 365 days out the year. Then they took their talents to Wynwood and The Design District to continue developing the great city of Miami. Morale of the story is evolution and growth is necessary and comes at a sacrifice. 

Just a matter of differing view points.

Some of us would hate to see those old apartments at Lake Ivanhoe which represent a part of Orlando history, bulldozed to make room for some cold, gray and white shoebox as much as we hated that beautiful old oak tree being hacked down to make room for a concrete tower, with zero effort whatsoever being made to save it.  

That old apartment complex has a much higher cool factor than any concrete box. Sure, you could stuff more people into a big box, but that isn't everything. There are plenty of new residential units going up in that area with plenty of room for more with out destroying even more of what little past we have left. 

[Urbo]

10 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

No doubt if you were in Atlanta you’d bulldoze Little Five Points for more towers. It’s always interesting to ask visitors to major American cities what parts were most interesting. Endless blocks of International Style and towers built since rarely make the list. As to South Beach, the bulldozers were just weeks away from rolling until the Wolfson family and a cadre of residents got together to hold them off.

There’s room for preservation of unique neighborhoods along with blocks of towers (that’s what should have happened along N. Orange Ave between Legion Place and Livingston and along Garland with its endless sea of asphalt). 

 

 

Absolutely, but I would preserve the vortex as its truly iconic for the neighborhood. You either build up or you build out, I say up!

8 hours ago, JFW657 said:

Just a matter of differing view points.

Some of us would hate to see those old apartments at Lake Ivanhoe which represent a part of Orlando history, bulldozed to make room for some cold, gray and white shoebox as much as we hated that beautiful old oak tree being hacked down to make room for a concrete tower, with zero effort whatsoever being made to save it.  

That old apartment complex has a much higher cool factor than any concrete box. Sure, you could stuff more people into a big box, but that isn't everything. There are plenty of new residential units going up in that area with plenty of room for more with out destroying even more of what little past we have left. 

The apartments are cool but not cooler than the Lake House. Nostalgia is not more important than city development in my opinion. The development of Ivanhoe Village in the right way could be a big win for the city. Something like a "Miami Design District" or "D.C. City Center" style vibe would be good to see in the City.

[JFW657]

6 hours ago, Urbo said:

The apartments are cool but not cooler than the Lake House. Nostalgia is not more important than city development in my opinion. The development of Ivanhoe Village in the right way could be a big win for the city. Something like a "Miami Design District" or "D.C. City Center" style vibe would be good to see in the City.

The liklihood of something like that happeneing around here, based on past experience, is little to none.

What we'd probably end up with would be another 420 E. Church St. style giant shoebox. 

[jliv]

The Ivanhoe Shores apartments are probably safe, given the Main Streets programme borders for the area clearly stop short of that complex.

https://www.orlando.gov/files/sharedassets/public/departments/edv/main-streets/2021ivanhoevillagemainstreetprogrammap.png

However, the fact that the same owner controls the land between I-4 and Orange means its fate is tied to whatever happens on the Orange-facing side of their holdings.

Edited November 13, 2021 by jliv
didn't want to add yet another rant...

[Urbo]

1 hour ago, JFW657 said:

The liklihood of something like that happeneing around here, based on past experience, is little to none.

What we'd probably end up with would be another 420 E. Church St. style giant shoebox. 

People thought the same of Wynwood, and Design District at some point. The Lake House could be a turning point for this neighborhood. I think Ivanhoe village is perfect for higher end shopping, dining and cultural destinations, there is a need and demand for these types of environments and experiences in the city. Orlando needs to build a brand outside of Disney, and focus on true city building, and creating more interesting and attractive places. I believe our focus should be more on the placemaking, design and quality of development, so I agree with the concern of the last point you made.

 

 

 

 

[JFW657]

36 minutes ago, Urbo said:

People thought the same of Wynwood, and Design District at some point. The Lake House could be a turning point for this neighborhood. I think Ivanhoe village is perfect for higher end shopping, dining and cultural destinations, there is a need and demand for these types of environments and experiences in the city. Orlando needs to build a brand outside of Disney, and focus on true city building, and creating more interesting and attractive places. I believe our focus should be more on the placemaking, design and quality of development, so I agree with the concern of the last point you made.

Old school, retro funkiness is big with today's hipster crowd.

And that apartent complex just oozes cool, retro funkiness by the bucket full.

Don't underestimte the appeal of that old fashioned funky "vibe" as you younger folks like to say nowadays.

They could easily go too far and fancy-shmancy that neighborhood up too much.

Turn it into someplace cold and soulless that puts people off.  

I think Orlando's brand would be better served by keeping as much as possible of wat made it a charming small-ish southern city to begin with.

A nice mix of urban center and quaint little city would be perfect. 

That is IMHO, as always. 

[dcluley98]

This is interesting. 

 

I said previously that the LakeHouse was one of my favorite projects, given the quality, design and speed of construction. 

 

I thougth it would be a great way to add density to the neigborhood with immediate impact and still carried the local flavor. 

 

I do not feel the same way about The Yard, necesarilly. . . 

 

I am in favor of making this place still "Ivanhoe Village" instead of building large towers of nonsense. 

 

Would like to see a smaller story development of that corner of Orange and New Haven with GF retail but would wonder if it would actually work or still be vacant similar to other "placemaking" developments. 

 

We have seen often that this type of thing, while optimistic and visionary in nature, can lead to vacant, lifeless facades in real life, due to the unfortunate circumstances of making a business work with the critical mass of patrons needed. . . 

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by dcluley98

[jliv]

1 hour ago, dcluley98 said:

I do not feel the same way about The Yard, necesarilly. . . 

The common theme here is the shared villain of these forums: Baker Barrios.   Their lack of imagination is clear (that "Pantaloon in the Sky" they're calling "The Edge". )  Perhaps the NIMBY movement should focus on keeping Baker Barrios out of their neighborhoods!

Edited November 13, 2021 by jliv

[prahaboheme]

41 minutes ago, jliv said:

The common theme here is the shared villain of these forums: Baker Barrios.   Their lack of imagination is clear (that "Pantaloon in the Sky" they're calling "The Edge". )  Perhaps the NIMBY movement should focus on keeping Baker Barrios out of their neighborhoods!

Couldn’t agree more about the Edge - what a buffoon! 

[dcluley98]

The common theme would be bashing crap, lazy, and cheap architecture and urban design. 

 

Nothing against Baker Barrios, but if the shoe fits, then, well. . . .

[JFW657]

9 hours ago, dcluley98 said:

The common theme would be bashing crap, lazy, and cheap architecture and urban design. 

 

Nothing against Baker Barrios, but if the shoe fits, then, well. . . .

Which begs the queston.... why does it seem like no high end, top tier architectural firms ever get hired to design buildings in Orlando?

Not sure, but I think the last internationally renowned architectural firm who designed a proposal for DTO was Arquitectonica, who designed a proposed complex which never even got built, for the parcel where Society is currently under construction.  

[Urbo]

9 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Which begs the queston.... why does it seem like no high end, top tier architectural firms ever get hired to design buildings in Orlando?

Not sure, but I think the last internationally renowned architectural firm who designed a proposal for DTO was Arquitectonica, who designed a proposed complex which never even got built, for the parcel where Society is currently under construction.  

That is a good question…Architectonica has work in lake Nona and arguably the best architect in the world David Adjaye is down the street in winter park. I would like to see some world class architecture in DTO. 

10 hours ago, dcluley98 said:

The common theme would be bashing crap, lazy, and cheap architecture and urban design. 

 

Nothing against Baker Barrios, but if the shoe fits, then, well. . . .

I agree the common enemy is poor architecture and urban design. I wouldn’t mind seeing a sacrifice in the height of new development in Ivanhoe if there was a form base code that could ensure new development were designed to a higher standard. 

[jliv]

Which begs the queston.... why does it seem like no high end, top tier architectural firms ever get hired to design buildings in Orlando?
Not sure, but I think the last internationally renowned architectural firm who designed a proposal for DTO was Arquitectonica, who designed a proposed complex which never even got built, for the parcel where Society is currently under construction.  

(Sorry for stirring the pot to lead this thread off-topic but...) Not commenting as an expert on the Orlando architecture and design firms competing for business, but Baker Barrios probably has enough hotel, multi-family, and health care projects in their portfolio to position themselves well during the RFP phases. Some developers probably don't even bother with an RFP as they some goodwill loyalty built in. Their work will never gain plaudits by Dezeen, but I don't think the developers look for that kind of prestige. It's why the new Architectonica design is in Lake Nona, and downtown has the Big Sombrero.

Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk

[jliv]

Old school, retro funkiness is big with today's hipster crowd.
And that apartent complex just oozes cool, retro funkiness by the bucket full.
Don't underestimte the appeal of that old fashioned funky "vibe" as you younger folks like to say nowadays.
They could easily go too far and fancy-shmancy that neighborhood up too much.
Turn it into someplace cold and soulless that puts people off.  
I think Orlando's brand would be better served by keeping as much as possible of wat made it a charming small-ish southern city to begin with.
A nice mix of urban center and quaint little city would be perfect. 
That is IMHO, as always. 

"fancy-shmancy". Those hipster kids up to their shenanigans and malarky. Excuse me while I figure out what time "Matlock" starts in the TV Guide.

Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk

[prahaboheme]

In terms of notable architects, RAMSA designed the UCF downtown building.

[dcluley98]

The Winter Park Library also received much publicity for the architect from the UK.

[spenser1058]

I guess it goes in waves. In the early to mid ‘80’s, Reynolds, Smith & Hills, an engineering firm with an architectural division, seemed to get everything (i.e., OC’s Brick Bunker, the Copper Whopper, VCC buildings) locally. 

Then, in Orlando at least, you stopped hearing about them as much.
 

Edited November 14, 2021 by spenser1058

[JFW657]

5 hours ago, jliv said:

"fancy-shmancy". Those hipster kids up to their shenanigans and malarky. Excuse me while I figure out what time "Matlock" starts in the TV Guide.

You actually watch Matlock????  

Really????? 

Golly gee willikers, you must be one heck of an old fogey.   

(FYI it's on MeTV from 10am - 11am Mon - Fri.)  

[spenser1058]

A shout-out to RS&H, btw, for a masterful job of figuring out a way to update the landmarked Bridge of Lions, one of Florida’s masterful treasures (ironically enough, originally designed by the head of bridge design for Flagler’s FEC RR, the forerunner of… Brightline!).

Residents were mortified any replacement for the bridge would destroy everything that made it special, but RS&H managed to preserve its uniqueness, not unlike a great barber who will do a haircut so well  you can’t see the difference.

Best of all, the marble lions which give the bridge its name were  cleaned and returned to their original perches.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_of_Lions#/media/File%3ABridge_of_Lions.JPG
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_of_Lions

Edited November 15, 2021 by spenser1058

[smileguy]

On 11/13/2021 at 10:21 AM, jliv said:

The Ivanhoe Shores apartments are probably safe, given the Main Streets programme borders for the area clearly stop short of that complex.

https://www.orlando.gov/files/sharedassets/public/departments/edv/main-streets/2021ivanhoevillagemainstreetprogrammap.png

However, the fact that the same owner controls the land between I-4 and Orange means its fate is tied to whatever happens on the Orange-facing side of their holdings.

The Main Street designation doesn't mean anything on this matter.   The programs are only in commercially zoned areas, and the apartments are R-3B, making them ineligible. 

[Jerry95]

On 11/12/2021 at 3:48 PM, Urbo said:

Even the Urbanist are nimbys here. I get it, save the tree and bring in more affordable housing. But not at the expense of urban development within a city that’s already behind in their urban development progress.

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. 

[Urbo]

1 hour 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. 

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.

 

[Jerry95]

24 minutes ago, Urbo said:

The focus should be on designing and developing a better city and there are many sides to that than just affordable housing.

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.