April 26, 20205 yr On 3/9/2020 at 11:01 AM, DevolsDance said: The IVC agenda for March has been posted https://www.columbus.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147514383 Looks like the 2nd & 6th street development is back on the agenda with an updated design. - Develop a 5 story (stepped down to 4 stories) mixed use building at the corner of 2nd Avenue and 6th street. - Proposed landscaping, per submitted site plan. - Development to include 2500 SF of retail/ restaurant space and 155 residential units. - Parking garage to include 155 spaces including 8 accessible spaces -Separate 2-level concrete parking structure (1-2 bays wide) will provide additional parking for the existing commercial tenants. Additionally, looks like we may get a peek at the 11-story tower in Jeffrey Park, it's been placed up for conceptual review. - Construction of an 11 story building that includes a mix of office and residential units, as well as a 7 story parking garage. Did we ever get an update on the tower phase of Jeffrey Park? Is that still moving?
April 26, 20205 yr 25 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Did we ever get an update on the tower phase of Jeffrey Park? Is that still moving? According to the Business First article, the tower presentation at the March IVC meeting went well. Generally positive comments from the commissioners. About the only criticism was that the tower's width was "a bit massive". A number of commissioners said they would be willing to approve a taller tower if the width was reduced. Then the April IVC meeting got cancelled because of the coronavirus - and we haven't had any information about when the next public meeting might be. Obviously, it will be on hold until another meeting can be called. But one would also think that Wagenbreener/Thrive might also wait until the economy reopens and see what the economic fallout is before proceeding.
April 26, 20205 yr 1 hour ago, Columbo said: According to the Business First article, the tower presentation at the March IVC meeting went well. Generally positive comments from the commissioners. About the only criticism was that the tower's width was "a bit massive". A number of commissioners said they would be willing to approve a taller tower if the width was reduced. Then the April IVC meeting got cancelled because of the coronavirus - and we haven't had any information about when the next public meeting might be. Obviously, it will be on hold until another meeting can be called. But one would also think that Wagenbreener/Thrive might also wait until the economy reopens and see what the economic fallout is before proceeding. Hmmm thanks for the info. Looking for my first home and I actually toured a condo over there yesterday and really liked it. It's right on the southern edge and would pretty much overlook the greenspace north of the tower that you could see in the next phase renderings. My interest is really dependent on whether that phase will actually move forward. Otherwise you really just see some crappy empty land and the highway. Waiting to see what the housing market looks like on the tail end of this.
April 26, 20205 yr They're definitely moving ground on some stuff on that end, though. There look to be some new apartments/townhomes just started and some elevator cores are up. Not sure what part that is for though.
April 30, 20205 yr Because I was touring some of the condos, I got some information from the developer and a slideshow with a couple images. I hadn't seen these renderings of the tower or this overhead rendering with the phases labeled: When I asked about timeline on the phases and the tower specifically, this is the response I got: “So we haven't broken ground yet on that it will probably be another year as we complete the phases before that breaks ground. 6&7 have broken ground and are in framing process now. some ground work has been started on phase 8&9 but mainly utility prepping.” Also, regarding phase 10 in that image: "The only thing that is inaccurate is that there is no Phase 10 planned. This was just part of the renderings to show the city the spacing and potential but we only have 9 phases total planned."
May 1, 20205 yr 13 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Because I was touring some of the condos, I got some information from the developer and a slideshow with a couple images. I hadn't seen these renderings of the tower or this overhead rendering with the phases labeled: When I asked about timeline on the phases and the tower specifically, this is the response I got: “So we haven't broken ground yet on that it will probably be another year as we complete the phases before that breaks ground. 6&7 have broken ground and are in framing process now. some ground work has been started on phase 8&9 but mainly utility prepping.” Also, regarding phase 10 in that image: "The only thing that is inaccurate is that there is no Phase 10 planned. This was just part of the renderings to show the city the spacing and potential but we only have 9 phases total planned." Thanks for posting this-it looks so different when presented this way-a much better way to visualize it. The wrapping of multi-story parking garages with residential should become a go-to practice in this city-especially in high visibility/denser areas.
May 1, 20205 yr 19 minutes ago, ck said: so nothing is going into the bottom left section at this point? From my understanding, no. They don't currently have anything planned for that spot. It's just conceptual spacing for what it could potentially look like in the future. I'd imagine something will go there eventually, but it will probably be driven by what the demand is for phases 6-9. I'd guess we won't see another proposal for that spot for a while considering they said they won't even be breaking ground on 8 and 9 for at least a year once 6 and 7 is done. Kinda similar to the Scioto Peninsula renderings where they have the whole area mapped out, but currently only the 6 middle buildings are actually planned.
May 1, 20205 yr 10 hours ago, Toddguy said: Thanks for posting this-it looks so different when presented this way-a much better way to visualize it. The wrapping of multi-story parking garages with residential should become a go-to practice in this city-especially in high visibility/denser areas. Agreed that no parking should ever be visible from the street, but I'm still so confused as to why anyone wants a unit staring at a freeway... That's the one place it would make sense to just have the parking garage facing 670, or re-orient the little bump-outs towards the greater development rather than towards the highway. But apparently they think they can rent them or they wouldn't be planning on it.
May 23, 20205 yr MODERATOR NOTE: The Dispatch just posted an article about the status of various development projects around Columbus and Central Ohio. The status of some of these projects have already been posted in other threads. For those projects that haven't already been updated, I'll post an update from the article in the appropriate thread. Here's an update for that huge mixed-use capstone project in Jeffrey Park from the below linked article: https://www.thisweeknews.com/business/20200523/some-major-columbus-development-projects-on-hold-while-others-move-forward Quote Wagenbrenner Development also is facing office-related questions as it moves forward on the final stages of its Jeffrey Park development in Italian Village, which was originally scheduled to include a major office building overlooking Interstate 670. “We’re confident office will still lease there, (but) it’s definitely delayed,” said Mark Wagenbrenner. “There’s users circling, and we’re entertaining those users, and we could react quickly if a user came along.”
January 6, 20214 yr Thrive Cos. cuts several stories from planned tower at Jeffrey Park The pandemic changed the plan, said Sean Cullen, vice president of development for Thrive. The final phase of Jeffrey Park will be a 5-story building with 188 apartments and 90,000-square-feet of office space in front of a garage. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/01/05/jeffrey-park-tower-gets-shorter-redesign.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 6, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, ColDayMan said: Thrive Cos. cuts several stories from planned tower at Jeffrey Park The pandemic changed the plan, said Sean Cullen, vice president of development for Thrive. The final phase of Jeffrey Park will be a 5-story building with 188 apartments and 90,000-square-feet of office space in front of a garage. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/01/05/jeffrey-park-tower-gets-shorter-redesign.html Just wait to build the thing. This looks terrible.
January 6, 20214 yr Quote The development's largest planned element – phase nine – had been a mixed-use building originally envisioned to rise 11 stories on the south end of the project. The initial design included an 800-space parking garage of seven stories topped by 100,000 square feet of office space and wrapped in 200 apartments. Now the developer and designer Meyers + Associates Architecture are proposing a shorter but much wider building with 188 apartments, a 490-space garage and 90,000 square feet of office space, all stacked side-by-side in a five-story building. Interesting. It isn't actually losing that many apartments or much office space. It looks like the biggest loss is parking. I really don't mind the height loss if all you're losing is parking. Hopefully that doesn't mean they had to scale back the next phase and now think they need less parking. Edited January 6, 20214 yr by TH3BUDDHA
January 9, 20214 yr Jeffrey Park Office, Parkside on Pearl Both Heading Back to Commission A new plan for the final phases of the Jeffrey Park development will be heard by the Italian Village Commission this month. In 2019, Thrive Companies proposed building a large parking garage topped by as much as 140,000 square feet of office space – and perhaps several floors of apartments – at the southern end of the 41-acre site. The latest plan scales down the height significantly and prioritizes building the residential portion first; a five-story, 188-unit apartment building that would sit in front of a 490-car parking garage. The submitted site plan also shows an adjacent five-story, 90,000-square feet building that is labelled as “future office.” More below: https://www.columbusunderground.com/jeffrey-park-office-parkside-on-pearl-both-heading-back-to-commission-bw1 "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 11, 20214 yr The "future office" where it is proposed currently makes no sense... The only office space buried inside a completely residential development... I bet it ends up being more residential when all is said and done. The greatest opportunity for more density and office/mixed use lies in "Phase 10" at the SW corner of the site, right along 4th at the off-ramp from 670. It makes the most sense as the highest density parcel. And as they've done all along, their plans will continue to change until there are actually shovels in the ground, so hopefully their plans for that parcel will end up being the most aggressive as it will be the last one they develop.
January 11, 20214 yr 23 minutes ago, jebleprls22 said: The "future office" where it is proposed currently makes no sense... The only office space buried inside a completely residential development... I bet it ends up being more residential when all is said and done. The greatest opportunity for more density and office/mixed use lies in "Phase 10" at the SW corner of the site, right along 4th at the off-ramp from 670. It makes the most sense as the highest density parcel. And as they've done all along, their plans will continue to change until there are actually shovels in the ground, so hopefully their plans for that parcel will end up being the most aggressive as it will be the last one they develop. Yeah, also that area seems best for an office on the lower levels over a parking garage, then apartments above. Living that close to an off ramp wouldn’t be ideal. So being higher up would work nice.
March 11, 20214 yr Two Large Developments in Italian Village Moving Forward Two significant projects got key approvals this week from the Italian Village Commission – one in the Jeffrey Park development and the other in a new development called The Lusso. In Jeffrey Park, a plan to build a five-story, 178-unit apartment building and parking garage near the I-670 off-ramp will be moving forward after the board approved the overall footprint of the proposal (it will need to return for a final sign-off on design details and landscaping). A five-story, 90,000-square-foot office building is also part of those plans, although the developer – Thrive Companies – has said that that portion of the development will be built after the apartments and the 490-space parking garage. More below: https://www.columbusunderground.com/two-large-developments-in-italian-village-moving-forward-bw1 "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
March 11, 20214 yr In general, I stopped following Jeffrey Park developments. I was curious if this is what was originally supposed to be that tower portion? Did they scale it back?
March 11, 20214 yr Particularly happy they requested the developers doing something creative with the parking garage. Just no more metal wavy curtains please and thank you.
March 11, 20214 yr 3 hours ago, Zyrokai said: In general, I stopped following Jeffrey Park developments. I was curious if this is what was originally supposed to be that tower portion? Did they scale it back? Is there ever any other outcome? They cut it in half.
March 11, 20214 yr 16 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: Is there ever any other outcome? They cut it in half. Did it actually lose much other than the parking garage that made it taller? I don't think it's actually losing a lot of apartments or office space. According to one of the articles: Quote The development's largest planned element – phase nine – had been a mixed-use building originally envisioned to rise 11 stories on the south end of the project. The initial design included an 800-space parking garage of seven stories topped by 100,000 square feet of office space and wrapped in 200 apartments. Now the developer and designer Meyers + Associates Architecture are proposing a shorter but much wider building with 188 apartments, a 490-space garage and 90,000 square feet of office space, all stacked side-by-side in a five-story building. Unless I'm missing something, it seems like it's not losing much in terms of density.
March 11, 20214 yr 9 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Did it actually lose much other than the parking garage that made it taller? I don't think it's actually losing a lot of apartments or office space. According to one of the articles: Unless I'm missing something, it seems like it's not losing much in terms of density. Yeah from what someone mentioned awhile back, this is probably a better option overall. In the end density is more important, which is why I like the current north market development. Hopefully the phase along 4th right by the ramp will bring some more height.
March 12, 20214 yr 21 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said: Did it actually lose much other than the parking garage that made it taller? I don't think it's actually losing a lot of apartments or office space. According to one of the articles: Unless I'm missing something, it seems like it's not losing much in terms of density. Building parking into a project is very expensive. I have no issue removing that element and they probably saved money overall removing it. However, that said, there was nothing stopping them from adding a few more floors of residential units. It's not like the demand isn't there and they wouldn't have recouped the cost. Columbus is in a severe housing crisis and yet it's being built as if there's a significant surplus. But yeah, I get that my views on this kind of thing remain very unpopular here, so that's all I'll say about it.
March 12, 20214 yr 10 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: Columbus is in a severe housing crisis and yet it's being built as if there's a significant surplus. The housing shortage in Columbus is not in the expensive downtown-area apartment and condo market. It's in the middle class single family home market in the suburbs. 15 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: However, that said, there was nothing stopping them from adding a few more floors of residential units. Obviously there was something stopping them. I know we all want more height most of the time, but we are playing Sim City while the developers are living in the real world and dealing with real money. The price of raw materials has skyrocketed over the past year. The price of lumber is through the roof. While adding just a few more floors sounds like no big deal to you, it could very well be a big deal to a developer who's running on thin margins and needs to worry about cash flow issues. Even the demand for the units will be there once the building is built, they might not have the cash on hand (and they might not want to take on the debt) to take on the cost of just a few more floors solely for the sake of having a taller building. 20 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: But yeah, I get that my views on this kind of thing remain very unpopular here, so that's all I'll say about it. It's your constant irrational negativity any time a building isn't as tall as you want it to be that's unpopular here.
March 12, 20214 yr 46 minutes ago, cbussoccer said: It's your constant irrational negativity any time a building isn't as tall as you want it to be that's unpopular here. It's arguably more irrational to demand everyone praise everything even as the city and residents face rapidly increasing housing costs and a continued car-dominated environment because there isn't enough density being built to support alternatives. The "good enough" viewpoint would be fine if there weren't any tangible negative consequences to so many projects being underbuilt. And the housing shortage is across the board, not just in specific types or locations. I'm not sure how it makes sense to high five over a bad situation where so little is being done to change it. If it was just this one project or just this one developer, that would be one thing, but it isn't. All that said, instead of bringing this stuff up in every development thread, perhaps there should be one to specifically discuss these types of issues and what can realistically be done about them. Edited March 12, 20214 yr by jonoh81
March 12, 20214 yr 8 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: It's arguably more irrational to demand everyone praise everything Nobody here is demanding that.
March 12, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, cbussoccer said: Nobody here is demanding that. Then no one would have a problem with what I'm arguing. Are the escalating housing costs acceptable? Are the lack of transit options? Lack of walkable amenities in many neighborhoods? If they're not, what do you propose be done to fix them if the answer isn't arguing for greater density and better urban planning than what we've been getting? In all seriousness, no snark or sarcasm, if there are better options that I'm just not getting, I'd love to hear them. Edited March 12, 20214 yr by jonoh81
March 12, 20214 yr 15 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: Then no one would have a problem with what I'm arguing. Are the escalating housing costs acceptable? Are the lack of transit options? Lack of walkable amenities in many neighborhoods? If they're not, what do you propose be done to fix them if the answer isn't arguing for greater density and better urban planning than what we've been getting? In all seriousness, no snark or sarcasm, if there are better options that I'm just not getting, I'd love to hear them. So now that the developer reduced some of the parking and slightly changed the footprint while still maintaining the same overall density, we need to all be upset and come up with a plan on how to fix the problem of escalating house costs, lack of transit options, and availability of amenities in certain neighborhoods? You really just need to relax.
March 12, 20214 yr 33 minutes ago, cbussoccer said: So now that the developer reduced some of the parking and slightly changed the footprint while still maintaining the same overall density, we need to all be upset and come up with a plan on how to fix the problem of escalating house costs, lack of transit options, and availability of amenities in certain neighborhoods? You really just need to relax. I am relaxed. I assure you that 99.99% of the time I have these discussions, I'm neither angry nor really particularly upset. I just want better development than what the city keeps getting and have strong views about it. If you think I'm wrong about what should be happening, great, but so what are the alternatives? I'm legitimately asking what you think should happen. If you'd rather take this to private or start a new thread, I'm game. Edited March 12, 20214 yr by jonoh81
March 12, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, jonoh81 said: Then no one would have a problem with what I'm arguing. Are the escalating housing costs acceptable? Are the lack of transit options? Lack of walkable amenities in many neighborhoods? If they're not, what do you propose be done to fix them if the answer isn't arguing for greater density and better urban planning than what we've been getting? In all seriousness, no snark or sarcasm, if there are better options that I'm just not getting, I'd love to hear them. I'm not sure how these apply here as this project lost very little density with the height reduction, which was the point of my comment. Edited March 12, 20214 yr by TH3BUDDHA
March 12, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said: I'm not sure how these apply here as this project lost very little density with the height reduction, which was the point of my comment. But it did lose density. 22 units. It's never about just one project or one reduction. Across the entire city and metro area, counting all the reduced projects, the NIMBY cancellations, the swap of multi-family to single-family, etc. all add up to hundreds if not thousands of housing units every year that are not getting built. The city and region need to double or triple total annual housing construction just to break even. So while any single project is not the end of the world and wouldn't solve anything on its own, collectively they are part of the greater problem facing the area. So yes, I am passionate about addressing this right down to the individual project, apparently rubbing some people the wrong way in the process. But if that's not the answer, I continue to ask what is. The new zoning rules will eventually come out, but based on what's happened in the past on this issue, I have my doubts that they'll go nearly far enough. Edited March 12, 20214 yr by jonoh81
March 24, 20214 yr On 3/12/2021 at 6:33 PM, jonoh81 said: But it did lose density. 22 units. It's never about just one project or one reduction. Across the entire city and metro area, counting all the reduced projects, the NIMBY cancellations, the swap of multi-family to single-family, etc. all add up to hundreds if not thousands of housing units every year that are not getting built. The city and region need to double or triple total annual housing construction just to break even. So while any single project is not the end of the world and wouldn't solve anything on its own, collectively they are part of the greater problem facing the area. So yes, I am passionate about addressing this right down to the individual project, apparently rubbing some people the wrong way in the process. But if that's not the answer, I continue to ask what is. The new zoning rules will eventually come out, but based on what's happened in the past on this issue, I have my doubts that they'll go nearly far enough. I just happened to be looking through the Harmony Tower thread and you were very supportive of that project because of the height. Based on what you're saying here, I'm not sure why you would support that building. While 30 stories, only the top 15 will be condos with the bottom 15 being hotel. The developer mentioned that the number of condos will depend on buyers and that it's possible that entire floors will be one condo with a maximum potential of 3 per floor. So, we could potentially only see 15 housing units from that building with a max of 45. That project would do very little to increase housing units, will add very little density, and it certainly won't do anything for affordable housing. So, why would you support it other than its height? You could pack a lot more people on this same parcel into a smaller building with smaller apartments, but, if that happened, you would complain that the density isn't enough because it isn't taller, even though it would provide more density than Harmony Tower. I think this is the primary reason people get annoyed with these comments about height sometimes. It seems like people get fixated solely on height without even taking density into consideration. While you're saying all of those other things, it seems that you really just want a tall building because it's cool. Edited March 24, 20214 yr by TH3BUDDHA
March 24, 20214 yr 32 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: I just happened to be looking through the Harmony Tower thread and you were very supportive of that project because of the height. Based on what you're saying here, I'm not sure why you would support that building. While 30 stories, only the top 15 will be condos with the bottom 15 being hotel. The developer mentioned that the number of condos will depend on buyers and that it's possible that entire floors will be one condo with a maximum potential of 3 per floor. So, we could potentially only see 15 housing units from that building with a max of 45. That project would do very little to increase housing units, will add very little density, and it certainly won't do anything for affordable housing. So, why would you support it other than its height? You could pack a lot more people on this same parcel into a smaller building with smaller apartments, but, if that happened, you would complain that the density isn't enough because it isn't taller, even though it would provide more density than Harmony Tower. I think this is the primary reason people get annoyed with these comments about height sometimes. It seems like people get fixated solely on height without even taking density into consideration. While you're saying all of those other things, it seems that you really just want a tall building because it's cool.
March 24, 20214 yr It is disappointing that there is a reduction here, but it is not a huge loss. It would be worse in a different location. And given the pandemic and all, if they follow through with this it will be "ok"(but not great)IMO. Now they should look at Astor Park to see how to do the dang garage right. We really need the density(and especially height)downtown-again, JMO. What we really could use would be more projects like this 40 acre development scattered throughout the city, older parts and newer parts, replacing dead retail or less dense apartment complexes, etc, especially those on major arterials where they just might help get some needed upgrades in public transit in this city.
March 24, 20214 yr 6 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said: I just happened to be looking through the Harmony Tower thread and you were very supportive of that project because of the height. Based on what you're saying here, I'm not sure why you would support that building. While 30 stories, only the top 15 will be condos with the bottom 15 being hotel. The developer mentioned that the number of condos will depend on buyers and that it's possible that entire floors will be one condo with a maximum potential of 3 per floor. So, we could potentially only see 15 housing units from that building with a max of 45. That project would do very little to increase housing units, will add very little density, and it certainly won't do anything for affordable housing. So, why would you support it other than its height? You could pack a lot more people on this same parcel into a smaller building with smaller apartments, but, if that happened, you would complain that the density isn't enough because it isn't taller, even though it would provide more density than Harmony Tower. I think this is the primary reason people get annoyed with these comments about height sometimes. It seems like people get fixated solely on height without even taking density into consideration. While you're saying all of those other things, it seems that you really just want a tall building because it's cool. So as far as I can tell, I made exactly one comment in the Harmony thread saying it was great news and said it was better than another, much smaller project I incorrectly was thinking had been proposed for the site. The project I was thinking was going there was a 12-story hotel, so a 30-story project with a mix of residential and hotel would be a significant improvement in my view. There is no contradiction in arguments I've made about this. There seems to be a lot of confusion about what my stances are. Perhaps that is my fault for not explaining them well enough, so here they are. 1. I support height, and I support height specifically because it tends to increase density, not just for the sake of height itself. I'm well aware of the fact that shorter projects can be dense. I've lived outside of the US in places where there is incredible density in relatively low-rise development. The neighborhood I lived in, for example, had density 3x-4x that of Campus (so about 60K-90KPPSM), but very few buildings over 8 stories. So yeah, I know it can be achieved. But Columbus' version of low-rise development tends to lack that kind of density and is instead heavily correlated to project size/height. If Columbus projects were being built with old European, Asian or Latin American density, you wouldn't see me complaining about height. 2. The projects that have reductions- which is what I mostly argue against- also almost universally lose density. You rarely see a size reduction with a corresponding increase in density. That's a problem for me, and that's become even more true at a time when there's an extreme housing crisis in Columbus and prices are rising for everyone- renters and home buyers alike. This inevitably leads to many people being priced out of the market, which hurts the middle and lower income levels the most and may ultimately affect Columbus' ability to keep growing. For a project like Harmony, the number of prospective units is almost certainly going to be too low for the size (notice I never commented one way or another about that in my previous, singular comment), but I do think that if we're talking about activating the street and even potentially transit, hotels can also help with that and can make up for some of the lack of more residential units. 3. "Density" is important IMO because, beyond housing prices and availability, it directly correlates to street-level activity. It helps create more of a market for walkable amenities and can help promote a better transit system, something Columbus also lacks. The best type of density for this is certainly residential because it is permanent and 24 hours a day, but hotel customers, office workers, etc. can also provide it to a lesser degree even if it's not full-time. Perhaps that's why I didn't immediately come down hard on the Harmony Tower proposal. So yeah, short version is that I don't just care about height. I care about quality, about density and how projects ultimately assist in solving ongoing situations that I consider to be problems. Not everyone has to agree with any of this, or that density is even necessary, but I do at least think I've been consistent in the messaging. Also, can I just say that there's some irony in the fact that I was positive about the Harmony project when most people complain I am never positive about anything... and I still get criticized. Edited March 24, 20214 yr by jonoh81
April 28, 20214 yr Jeffrey Park Phase 8 - 310 Unit Apartment Building (4-25-21) Jeffrey Park Phase 6 and 7 - Townhomes and Condominium Flats The Mason Jeffrey Park Future Site of Jeffrey Park Phase 9
July 6, 20213 yr Jeffrey Park Phase 8 (7-3-21) Jeffrey Park Phase 6 and 7 - Townhomes and Condominium Flats Future Site of Jeffrey Park Phase 9
July 6, 20213 yr 1 hour ago, NorthShore647 said: Jeffrey Park Phase 8 (7-3-21) Jeffrey Park Phase 6 and 7 - Townhomes and Condominium Flats Future Site of Jeffrey Park Phase 9 Pretty amazing to think this whole huge parcel sat empty and abandoned for so long and is now a massive residential community that adds so much to the vibrancy of the area. Great photos of the continuing progress!
July 6, 20213 yr Does anyone know the total number of residential units built or under construction in Jeffrey Park?
July 7, 20213 yr 22 hours ago, cbussoccer said: Does anyone know the total number of residential units built or under construction in Jeffrey Park? From Thrives website, it looks like the plan is 600 apartments and 185 homes. I'm not sure what amount has been completed and how many are yet to be built.
July 7, 20213 yr 11 minutes ago, Alexzanto said: From Thrives website, it looks like the plan is 600 apartments and 185 homes. I'm not sure what amount has been completed and how many are yet to be built. That seems like a really low number for how much they have over there. I would have guessed 1500, but clearly I was way off ha.
July 7, 20213 yr 9 minutes ago, VintageLife said: That seems like a really low number for how much they have over there. I would have guessed 1500, but clearly I was way off ha. I thought so too, they mention that the area is zoned for 1500 units but the development may only be for 600 (plus the homes) currently. I think the fact that most of the current buildings are only 3 stories and units seem to be larger in size than many other projects being built. Here is where I am getting my information: https://thrivecos.com/developments/jeffrey-park/
July 7, 20213 yr 2 minutes ago, Alexzanto said: I thought so too, they mention that the area is zoned for 1500 units but the development may only be for 600 (plus the homes) currently. I think the fact that most of the current buildings are only 3 stories and units seem to be larger in size than many other projects being built. Here is where I am getting my information: https://thrivecos.com/developments/jeffrey-park/ Kind of makes it seem like they mean currently 600+, with the way housing is so hard to come by, both owning and renting, and how many u it’s it was zoned for, I can’t see them not hitting the 1500.
July 8, 20213 yr On 7/7/2021 at 12:16 PM, Alexzanto said: I thought so too, they mention that the area is zoned for 1500 units but the development may only be for 600 (plus the homes) currently. I think the fact that most of the current buildings are only 3 stories and units seem to be larger in size than many other projects being built. Here is where I am getting my information: https://thrivecos.com/developments/jeffrey-park/ Sounds like at least two of the sections don't even offer studios and from the gallery photos they look quite spacious. The floor plan section doesn't seem to work unfortunately which would provide the best information.
September 27, 20213 yr Renderings for the apartments and office, at the south of the development have been released. *sorry for the low quality, if anyone finds them in better quality, feel free to delete my post. Edited September 27, 20213 yr by VintageLife Spelling error
September 27, 20213 yr 15 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Renderings did the apartments and office, at the south of the development have been released. *sorry for the low quality, if anyone finds them in better quality, feel free to delete my post. Where does this stand in the commission process? I forget.
Create an account or sign in to comment