The grassroots opposition group, Rethink the Princeton (Facebook), has ceased its legal fight against Pollack Shores, the developer behind the proposed Princeton at College Park project.
According to the group, the City and Pollack shores threatened to sue them if they did not drop their legal appeal to change the project’s scale. Click HERE to see a letter they sent the Orlando Weekly detailing their decision to give up.
We’ve written about the Princeton development multiple times, most recently HERE.
Pollack Shores released the following statement concerning the appeal:
“Pollack Shores Real Estate Group is excited to announce the upscale multifamily development, the Princeton at College Park, will come to fruition in Orlando, Fla.
The National Association of Home Builders Multifamily Development Firm of the Year, Pollack Shores, worked collaboratively with hundreds of residents of the College Park neighborhood throughout the development process by hosting four public meetings and more than 50 private meetings with residents, business owners, the City Architect and staff, the municipal planning board and the City Commission which resulted in a reduction of project density by 25 percent.
We are very excited to create the Princeton at College Park which will allow future residents the opportunity to be a part of the desirable College Park neighborhood. We are dedicated to the city of Orlando and its responsible growth by adhering to the Edgewater Vision plan and we will continue to be good neighbors in the College Park area and the greater City of Orlando, “ says Anthony Everett, Director of Central Florida for Pollack Shores.
The grassroots organization opposed to the development of the Princeton at College Park, Rethink the Princeton, dismissed its lawsuit against Pollack Shores Real Estate Group. The development also underwent formal court proceeding earlier this year, which resulted in a court ruling stating that the Princeton at College Park fully adhered to the growth plan outlined in the Edgewater Vision Plan, which was created by the City of Orlando through collaboration with development experts and local residents.
The Princeton at College Park development, bound by Smith Street, Princeton Street and Edgewater Drive, will be home to 206 luxury units and a parking garage. The project will contribute more than $1.2 million in transportation improvements, public parking, undergrounding of overhead power lines, sewer upgrades, a public pocket park and a potential future transit stop. The project will add 300 new construction jobs, 10 full-time management positions and contribute about $38 million to the Orlando economy.”
We reached out to the Mayor’s office in regards to the claims being made that the City had “threatened to sue” Rethink the Princeton members and received the following response:
“Our responsibility is to protect tax payer resources and because of that, the City informed Rethink the Princeton of plans to file a motion for repayment of attorney fees and costs in the event that we [the City of Orlando] prevailed. If they prevailed [won the case] these costs would not be their burden. The Rethink the Princeton group chose to dismiss their claim.Legal fees are not out of the ordinary in court cases. The ReThink Princeton group should have continued their litigation if they believed they would be successful.For background, on September 10, 2015, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Judicial Circuit rejected the challengers’ claims outright in Popkins v. City of Orlando. The panel found that the City respected petitioners’ due process rights during the rezoning process, complied with the Edgewater Drive Special Plan and the Land Development Code, and was fully supported by the evidence in approving the Princeton project.The court in a related action, Rethink the Princeton, Inc. v. City of Orlando, has also recently rejected a number of the plaintiffs’ claims. The only claims that remained related to The Princeton’s consistency with the City’s Growth Management Plan. The City remained committed to defending the City Council’s zoning decision and the public process established for developing and implementing smart growth management strategies. “
To read the report from the Edgewater Drive Vision Taskforce mentioned above for yourself, click HERE.
Displacing reality for fantasy will backfire.
Where’s your reality McLain. What do you stand to gain.
No mixed use is a joke. They should have been on the hook for something to help with the traffic, at the least. It’s already terrible enough. It’s backed up nearly constantly for 3 hours every weekday.
And hey Jeffery, plenty of the houses on the strip where this apartment is supposed to be built are perfectly nice. Don’t be a jerk.
Jeffery McClain, rude!
None of these developments are gated, so…
Build a giant box, slap a gate around it and you’ve got a ‘community’. Nice. Can’t wait.
Guess it’s all about the money
Sam Gallaher – Yeah! Wait until the first high rise project is a go on either Princeton or Edgewater…can’t wait for the howls of protest then. 🙂 Probably have a decade before that anyways…
Sam Gallaher – There was some, but NOTHING like these “NO Density” yard sign nimrods now. Let me take them to downtown Miami or Brooklyn and show them what happens to their “home values” when high density is built. I can’t afford a single-family home in either town! Bunch of dolts.
Tina Heslin Cason -Yes, pretty much since birth. Thanks for playing! 😉
Was there this much outrage when the Wellesley was built?
This “mammoth complex” isn’t even as tall as the Wellesley Building directly beside it…
Do you live in College Park?
I’m all for “thoughtful urban planning” and “community”…but density…hell, HIGH density is this state’s ONLY long term hope. Around 85 Million by 2100 or so. Let that sink in there…then factor in all the millions of South Floridians that will be force to evacuate due to rising waters. Orlando better get prepared to EXPLODE.
Well said Laurie McLeod Combs!
*your.
Urbanity doesn’t have to mean character-less, big box conformity. Neighborhoods can become urban while retaining their own distinctive charm and yes, community. Austin is an excellent example of this. Density is not Florida’s only hope– Florida’s best chance comes in refusing to kowtow to money grubbing developers who put quick profit and rapid builds ahead of thoughtful urban planning and long term neighborhood management.
Rethink was all about trying to maintain the character of a College Park perpetually stuck in the 1950’s. Hate to break it to those people but the Princeton will only be 8000 feet from Lake Eola! College Park’s Edgewater Ave and Princeton St. were inevitably going to be incorporated into the urban core of Downtown Orlando. Density is this state’s only hope. Besides, the Princeton will be an improvement over the awful residences there now.
There’s always these types in Orlando standing in the way of progress. If YOUR College Park “vibe” is now over…maybe you should all consider moving to some quaint exburban town like Mt. Dora. I here it’s really nice…and small.
Probably. But when the Princeton grows stale in 20-25 years…it will be that much easier to raise for something much better and BIGGER. The Princeton is an improvement over the eyesores that occupy the area now.
It’s all perfectly legal. In America, capitalist developers laugh at your sensibilities and emotions.
You’re “community vibe” was yesterday. College Park is inevitably being incorporated into Orlando’s urban core. The College Park perpetually stuck in the 1950’s is over. Density is this state’s only hope.
Sam Gallaher – Yep. Rethink was all about trying to maintain the character of a College Park perpetually stuck in the 1950’s. Hate to break it to these people but the Princeton will only be 8000 feet from Lake Eola. College Park’s Edgewater Ave and Princeton St. were inevitably going to be incorporated into the urban core. Density is this state’s only hope.
Exactly Sam. Most of the resistance to the Princeton was really based on fear of income and racial diversity in the neighborhood. So over those people.
If Rethink the Princeton had focused on the incorporation of retail to make this a mixed-use development, I would have supported it. However, the primary focus against the Princeton was density/traffic. We’re living in a time when environmental sensitivity and limited sprawling growth patterns is massively important while being located in a state that is experiencing and will continue to experience huge population growth. Every neighborhood near any urban core in the US is going to be experiencing increased density. Rethink chose the wrong focus.
There goes the neighborhood!!
The worst location possible for this mammoth complex! Not in keeping with the community vibe.
Most everyone knows I support smart urban growth but this developer builds cheap product and is a flipper. They are not long term commuted to CP ☹️
Court battle won? It never went to trial! Pollack Shores started threatening with SLAPP suits. The Princeton offers no community benefit. The pocket park your referring to already exists. The “under grounding of power and sewer upgrades” it normal for this scale of project. This will not be a mix use project as required by the ” Community Activity Center” zoning requirements that Pollack Shore has skirted, so now residence are stuck with that run-down CVS shopping center. Public parking? You mean like the Wesley Parking Garage? This is not an example of NIMBYism , this is an example of an out-of-town developer (from Atlanta) not listening local residence to agree on the size of this apartment complex. They could have at least actually given us a new park, or a better shopping center.
They were already within the growth management plan to begin with. It’s just another fine example of NIMBYism. We should be pushing for more multi-modal streets, better connectivity, and a mix of uses and housing types to increase density in an effort to combat suburban sprawl, create more economically productive neighborhoods, and become more environmentally sustainable.
The number of units were reduced.
“will be home to 206 luxury units and a parking garage. The project will contribute more than $1.2 million in transportation improvements, public parking, undergrounding of overhead power lines, sewer upgrades, a public pocket park and a potential future transit stop”
And the court battle was won. I don’t know what you mean by skirting requirements.
I’m all for progress, but throwing up 366 over priced rental apartments (in an already saturated market) while skirting requirements and not creating new commercial space is not responsible growth. Rethink put up a good fight.
About time. We have to stop being so opposed to density. If there’s any complaint to be made in these instances, it should be toward the lack of transportation choices. Don’t fight the development, fight for better connectivity.