search the site
 daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > United States > Southeast > Local Forums > Tampa Bay Area

Tampa Bay Area Includes Pasco, Hernando, and Citrus Counties
» Transportation and Infrastructure



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 17th, 2008, 10:23 PM   #41
FloridaFuture
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tampa/Gainesville
Posts: 8,600
Likes (Received): 3819

^No, the transcripts state that it is 20 floors of units on top of 4 units of parking, for a total of 24 stories.

Oh, and BTW, look what I got in my inbox, courtesy of the good people over at Mercury Advisors...

The Martin:


Looks similar to Del Villar and way better then the original bulky design. I did find out the only ground floor retail will be the artists galleries. Looks great!
FloridaFuture no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 17th, 2008, 10:45 PM   #42
TampaMike
Oh Hey!
 
TampaMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,973
Likes (Received): 921

yep, recieved the same image.
__________________
Corporations Are People Too - Mitt Romney
For the People that dress up like Corporations.
TampaMike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 12:43 AM   #43
Jasonhouse
Senior Button Pusher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tampa
Posts: 16,391
Likes (Received): 2458

haha... I was going to fire off an email in the name of SSC tonight inquiring about more info... But why bother?!

Good work folks...


Looks like 24 floors total.. probably around 245-265ft tall... Not too terrible when you think about it... I just wish that they wouldn't clone Grand Central's color palette and facade styling so much.
Jasonhouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 01:17 AM   #44
FloridaFuture
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tampa/Gainesville
Posts: 8,600
Likes (Received): 3819

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasonhouse View Post
haha... I was going to fire off an email in the name of SSC tonight inquiring about more info... But why bother?!

Good work folks...


Looks like 24 floors total.. probably around 245-265ft tall... Not too terrible when you think about it... I just wish that they wouldn't clone Grand Central's color palette and facade styling so much.
When I send emails I just send it as an individual. I wonder if it would help/hurt if I simply said it was in the name of SSC?

According to the transcripts of the council meeting, it is "246 feet, 6 inches to the top of the roof and 261 feet to the top of the core tower".

I am pleasantly surprised at the amount of glass. Grand Central and the old Martin design have big patches and in some cases entire walls of glass but then also have large walls of boring pre-cast with South Beach colors of paint just thrown on. This appears to have more glass, and since balconies are on 2 of the other sides of each tower, I would think that would mean more glass.

It also looks like they tried a bit harder covering up the parking garage as well. It looks pretty bad on Grand Central as no attempt was really made.
FloridaFuture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 01:33 AM   #45
Jasonhouse
Senior Button Pusher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tampa
Posts: 16,391
Likes (Received): 2458

Yeah, don't send anything out in the name of the site... That's really only something Admins should do, since there are automatic legal ramifications in doing so.
Jasonhouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 02:39 AM   #46
DShenise
Designer, 1404designs
 
DShenise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 1,117
Likes (Received): 40

Looks much better than the original tower. I'll bet that the towers are mirrored so it will be "flipped" from the opposite elevation. They put some effort into the parking decks too. The column features match up well with the towers and provide a nice regular pattern/flow at the street level. I would really like to see what they are doing with that out building on the right. That pattern of windows looks interesting and it might be cool if they did clad that building in Hardiplank and paint brown as its shown.
DShenise no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 05:29 AM   #47
CubanBread
Registered User
 
CubanBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ybor City, Tampa
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 380

Good chance this gets built,... or no chance?
CubanBread no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 05:38 AM   #48
Jasonhouse
Senior Button Pusher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tampa
Posts: 16,391
Likes (Received): 2458

30% it breaks ground by the end of 2009 is my wild guess. (or in other words, I have no idea )
Jasonhouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 05:53 AM   #49
TampaMike
Oh Hey!
 
TampaMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,973
Likes (Received): 921

I give them a pretty good chance. Coming out of nowhere to get this approved shows they're pretty serious. They could had easily waited for the economy to come back to have this still be residential.
__________________
Corporations Are People Too - Mitt Romney
For the People that dress up like Corporations.
TampaMike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 12:31 PM   #50
tampaguy75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 299
Likes (Received): 89

I, personally, find it surprising that they would even consider it right now. Channelside already has a lot of rentals due to the condo bust -- Seaport Channelside is 100% rental; The Place is or will be more than 50% rental; Grand Central is almost 50% rental; and there a rumors that The Slade will become rental next year when it opens. (Not to mention that Element, in the nearby downtown core, will be all rental when it opens next year.)

It makes me wonder if their optimism to move forward with the Martin has to do with the success they had with renting out the unsold units of Grand Central. From what I understand, they successfully rented out just about every unit at Grand Central that did not sell. The only ones available, now, at Grand Central are some coming open due to renters not renewing their leases.

Just like the area was instantly saturated with condos, I think the area could easily become saturated with "high end" rentals.
tampaguy75 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 03:26 PM   #51
DShenise
Designer, 1404designs
 
DShenise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 1,117
Likes (Received): 40

Its just approved though, so say they sit on it through 2009. Start construction in 2010, and I mean they don't do so much as pick weeds until then. Then they are in construction for 18-24 months, so you are looking at completion end of 2012. Ideally the economy should be on the upswing by then. Also, they won't be able to get funding until they have either "x" amount in presales, or a huge amount of cash on hand. In this market, the presales won't be happening for another year or so, so either they have a ton of cash sitting around and can build or they'll wait and wait and wait and .....
DShenise no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2009, 08:25 PM   #52
TampaMike
Oh Hey!
 
TampaMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,973
Likes (Received): 921

Just a reminder that The Martin goes up for approval this Thursday.
__________________
Corporations Are People Too - Mitt Romney
For the People that dress up like Corporations.
TampaMike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2009, 09:07 PM   #53
FloridaFuture
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tampa/Gainesville
Posts: 8,600
Likes (Received): 3819

Anyone know if it was approved? They haven't posted the city council meeting transcripts yet.
FloridaFuture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2009, 09:40 PM   #54
TampaMike
Oh Hey!
 
TampaMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,973
Likes (Received): 921

Quote:
Originally Posted by FloridaFuture View Post
Anyone know if it was approved? They haven't posted the city council meeting transcripts yet.
I haven't heard or seen anything yet saying it has been approved. If they got much of the needed information that Council was looking for, I would say it was approved considering how much they supported the project at the last meeting, besides not having the details Council was searching for.
__________________
Corporations Are People Too - Mitt Romney
For the People that dress up like Corporations.
TampaMike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2009, 10:37 PM   #55
TampaGuy
Registered User
 
TampaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 478
Likes (Received): 78

Would these be taller than the Towers at Channelside?
TampaGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2009, 10:54 PM   #56
FloridaFuture
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tampa/Gainesville
Posts: 8,600
Likes (Received): 3819

^No, The Martin would be 5 stories/ about 80 ft. shorter.
FloridaFuture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 13th, 2009, 05:28 PM   #57
TampaMike
Oh Hey!
 
TampaMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,973
Likes (Received): 921

Editing since I now had thr time to read through the transcript.

According to what I read, Council has approved The Martin. All three issues were said to be taken care of with the petitioner and Council was actually very kind, according to the transcript. The transcript says that with the solid waste issue, they resolved that and have actually made the park that is included in the new rezoning larger than what was brought to them at the last meeting. Transportation was taken care of, but found no information on what was changed from the earlier proposal. And they said that on the issue of more trees that it was revised and has been shown to the petitioner with approval, but nothing else was mentioned. Council was actually reach bitchy towards the solid waste management because they never showed up at the last meeting. They actually suggested if anything like that ever happened again, the Council would not wait for them to show up.

http://www.tampagov.net/appl_Cable_C...=frmAgenda.asp
__________________
Corporations Are People Too - Mitt Romney
For the People that dress up like Corporations.

Last edited by TampaMike; January 13th, 2009 at 09:48 PM.
TampaMike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 13th, 2009, 09:43 PM   #58
Jasonhouse
Senior Button Pusher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tampa
Posts: 16,391
Likes (Received): 2458

Here it is... Looks like they got their revisions approved, which were holding up the tentative approval from December.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tampa City Council Meeting. January 8th, 2009 9am session
10:15:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item 56 is Z 08-67.
10:16:04 This case was before you back in December and had a
10:16:08 couple items that needed addressing.
10:16:10 If you will go to page 2 of the revised staff report,
10:16:14 I just provided you with, some of the outstanding
10:16:17 issues related to solid waste access, this is over in
10:16:21 the Channel District, it's at 1105 and 1115 Twiggs
10:16:26 Street, it's the site of the original rezoning for the
10:16:32 Martin, to increase the multifamily units as well as
10:16:38 artist studios.
10:16:39 Staff went back and worked with the petitioner related
10:16:42 to transportation mitigation issue.
10:16:45 Also related to the solid waste issue.

10:16:47 And lastly related to tree and landscape.
10:16:50 And we have come to resolution on many of those items.
10:16:52 There are a couple items that are still outstanding.
10:16:55 I have provided you with a revision sheet for those.
10:16:58 What I would like to do, though, is show you in
10:17:01 relation to the solid waste how that was reconciled.
10:17:04 I provided -- if I can have the Elmo, please.
10:17:14 This is the original wee we brought before you in
10:17:17 December with the park located to the east of the
10:17:21 property and service area.
10:17:23 The petitioner did work with TECO and with solid
10:17:27 waste, and actually reworked this area.
10:17:30 The park is now larger than it was originally.
10:17:35 Solid waste found the proposal consistent.
10:17:45 Melanie Calloway did meet with petitioner concerning
10:17:47 that.
10:17:47 Mitigation payment was negotiated, and a note has been
10:17:50 added to the site plan to address that mitigation.
10:17:53 The last item was tree and landscape.
10:17:58 I have met with petitioner on that.
10:17:59 There are a couple revisions we still need.
10:18:02 We have met on that and are in agreement.

10:18:04 Those are included on the revision sheet.
10:18:06 Staff is available for any questions.
10:18:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
10:18:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't have nip questions.
10:18:12 I'm pleased, Abbye, that you all were able to work out
10:18:15 these issues with the developer.
10:18:17 I was sick that night, really sick, and stayed home
10:18:20 that evening when you all were wrestling with this but
10:18:23 I actually watched it on TV.
10:18:27 And it actually made me even sicker.
10:18:31 Because I'll tell you what, I didn't like what I saw
10:18:34 last night and it was -- I was really, really
10:18:40 disappointed, from a staff perspective, not you guys,
10:18:43 Abbye, but as I recall, you know, it appeared to me
10:18:47 that there just hadn't been a whole lot of cooperation
10:18:50 from solid waste or transportation to work with this
10:18:54 developer in Channelside to get this project to where
10:19:01 it needed to be before it came before us and I saw
10:19:06 tremendous frustration on the part of this developer,
10:19:08 and I'll tell you what, as long as the developers have
10:19:11 come and gone through this city, this particular
10:19:13 developer is actually, you know, put his money and his

10:19:16 actions where his mouth is.
10:19:18 And he's made things happen, and he's made things
10:19:20 happen in Channelside, and he's building his projects
10:19:24 and does we says he's going to do, and those are the
10:19:27 kinds of developers that we want to encourage to stay
10:19:30 in the city, and in Channelside, and continue to work
10:19:33 with us.
10:19:33 But if we don't treat them better, they are going to
10:19:36 move on, as you say, Joseph, and I was extremely
10:19:41 frustrated.
10:19:42 I am going to send a message loud and clear,
10:19:44 especially -- no offense to solid waste who is here
10:19:48 today and I appreciate it -- but I don't think council
10:19:50 should move forward on any item if a particular staff
10:19:55 has an objection and they don't bother to show up and
10:19:57 talk about it, because it not fair to you, Abbye, and
10:20:01 to your department, to just send that objection
10:20:03 through you, and let you try to wiggle and sort it
10:20:06 out.
10:20:06 If they have a strong objection about it, a very
10:20:09 important issue like this one was, it's really a deal
10:20:12 breaker, they need to show up and they need to argue

10:20:15 their own case and then we need to make our decision.
10:20:18 So I'm sending that message all the way up to Steve
10:20:22 Daignault, who is as high as you can go in that group,
10:20:25 to say that if folks have objections on these
10:20:28 projects, they need to show up down here and talk
10:20:30 about them, and not deal with it through that.
10:20:35 That's my soap box today.
10:20:37 I'm glad these issues are worked out.
10:20:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, if this happens
10:20:40 again, and solid waste is supposed to be here, I think
10:20:44 we should override them and make our own decision.
10:20:47 We need probably to change the ordinance.
10:20:49 If they fail to show, it's too late.
10:20:53 And I give this gentleman a lot of courage.
10:20:56 I mean, he's got to be spending a lot of money down
10:20:59 there.
10:20:59 It costs money every time to go back to the drawing
10:21:01 table.
10:21:02 And if staff fails to show up, it's too bad.
10:21:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I agree with the comments of both
10:21:10 Mr. Dingfelder and Mr. Caetano.
10:21:12 And the other issue that I'm sure you noted, Mr.

10:21:17 Dingfelder, was that the petitioner wasn't contacted
10:21:23 with the comments that staff until the day before the
10:21:26 zoning.
10:21:26 And I think that maybe we just need a clerical person
10:21:30 to make sure that -- she's saying that's not true?
10:21:34 Well, it was online but they weren't contacted.
10:21:37 I feel it's so much better for everyone when things
10:21:40 can be discussed in advance and sorted out, and it
10:21:43 comes to council.
10:21:45 Sometimes it's not possible to come to -- yes, but
10:21:50 sometimes it is.
10:21:50 Certainly we like to get our information in advance,
10:21:52 and I know that petitioners would -- and perhaps
10:21:57 there's a clerical or process way where staff person,
10:22:02 a clerical person, can, after the staff finishes
10:22:05 reviewing something, contact the petitioner so that
10:22:07 they have an opportunity to address the issues raised
10:22:10 by the staff prior to coming before council.
10:22:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I also want to note I did send the
10:22:18 chief of staff a letter regarding this and got a
10:22:22 response back that corrected the problem, and they
10:22:24 won't have it in the future.

10:22:25 So I did follow up as chairman of the board, and the
10:22:29 same thing, a memo to the chief of staff to address
10:22:32 the problem.
10:22:36 Anyone from the public want to address council on this
10:22:38 item 56, or the petitioner?
10:22:42 Okay.
10:22:43 Motion to close.
10:22:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just for the record, is petitioner
10:22:47 amenable to the revision sheet dated January 8, 2009?
10:22:52 I think we probably should have that agreement on the
10:22:56 record.
10:22:59 >>> Ken Stoltenberg, Mercury advisors.
10:23:02 Yes, we are amenable.
10:23:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:23:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
10:23:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
10:23:07 (Motion carried).
http://www.tampagov.net/appl_Cable_C...=frmAgenda.asp
Jasonhouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 4th, 2009, 10:23 PM   #59
FloridaFuture
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tampa/Gainesville
Posts: 8,600
Likes (Received): 3819

From Mercury Advisors:

Quote:
The Martin and DelVillar are both still alive, however due to lack of funding from the banking industry these projects are currently on hold.

The Martin renderings on our website are the most up to date ones. I have enclosed blown up versions of them – color scheme will very likely change somewhat to make sure it will be as vibrant and pleasing from a color standpoint as Grand Central.

Many greetings.

Frank Bombeeck






FloridaFuture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 5th, 2009, 12:54 AM   #60
DShenise
Designer, 1404designs
 
DShenise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 1,117
Likes (Received): 40

The street scaping looks nice. Don't know how I feel about the high cantilever/overhang on the north elevation. Its not really a cantilever because its supported by columns, but visually it looks like its hanging off. The orangish color might not be helping the rendering or the view angle, but it looks like its missing something. The other elevations look interesting too.

Looks like the folks on the northside of Grand Central will now have a pool view too, just across the street.
__________________
"... holding your breath till you turn blue is not consistent with the judicial temperament" David Frum.
DShenise no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
tampa-projects

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu