ertley

You know, with leaves on the mature trees, the screening won't be all that bad! From this side!

I was just thinking, as I was perusing the posting, "I really like the Deloitte building and I think the new one is going to be fine, but man, all that blue glass is too much...sameness."

I have to confess, when I first saw this picture and posting, I was perturbed. I'm just as much of an advocate of anyone for urban density, but I'm also in favor of historic preservation, and so the hairs on the back of my neck went up when I saw a CUL DE SAC plopped in front of a solid, big old (for Charlotte) house. Then I realized it was Sharon Lane and not Road, and I was like, "Eh, not as big of a deal," so I then went and looked up this lot subdivision on Polaris...and this could be really interesting, in a good way, or a massive failure. At least according to Polaris mapping, there's a U shaped drive that should be going in around the perimeter (of the former front yard), and this cul de sac is...secondary? primary? and providing common access to most of the new lots. IF--IMO--this cul de sac is not the primary drive but instead functions as sort of alley/garage access, and the new houses face outward to the new perimeter drive, then I say, "Well done" and "Well thought out." If, though--and I'm so used to being disappointed that I'm worried the alternative is more likely--that this cul de sac *is* the primary drive for the new houses and the other is only there for access to the old house (and two or three lots around it, then "BOO."

I watched the video and immediately noted that one of the first tag lines states that it will be "...worth the commute," making explicit today's commercial real estate zeitgeist.

I'm pretty certain the renderings show an angled division within the garage screening--on the front--with different textures of screening on either side. So, I *think* the non-framed and cladded portions will ultimately be covered by something else. (I'm not in love with the massive podium parking structure, like everyone else, but I do think they at least are making a basic effort to cover it completely.) I could be wrong, though!

My only complaint about this building (so far!) is the lack of cladding on the ground floor columns: I don't think they look right just plain, concrete-esque white. I think they should be sheathed in a silver metallic material, IMO, to continue the shimmery, reflective look of the rest of the facade. Those white columns are out of place and a little cheap looking, or even unfinished. IMHO.

I 180% love this. Looking at the picture of the building and how narrow the sidewalk is in front, I would if it would be possible for the (re)developer to recess the actual entrance to the store, creating a porch or sort of outdoor vestibule of the original facade, through which both pedestrians could pass but also allow shaded displays or even a few tables protected from the weather... Just a thought.

This is a little bit random, but The New Yorker just retrospectively reviewed the Duchess of Windsor's memoir (from, like, '56), in a comparison with Prince Harry's book, and it reminded me that my late uncle, who was born in Charlotte in the early '30s, had mentioned years ago that Wallis Windsor had had relatives in Charlotte. So, I did a little investigating, and it turns out...Uncle Bill was right! (Sometimes you never know about those older, classic Southern gents.) Wallis, Duchess of Windsor's maternal uncle died in Charlotte in 1936, literally the year of the abdication 'crisis,' but maybe before the s*% hit the fan and she became internationally known. When he died, he lived in this nice bungalow in Plaza-Midwood between The Plaza and Hawthorne Lane; but according to my research his widow and children ended up in Asheville, and his only surviving grandson lives in Raleigh.

I know this is slightly off topic... but, living in DC, I've of course been surrounded by pot smoking in public for years now, and while I'm generally inured to it, I have had similar situations where people wholly abuse this right by smoking in crowded public spaces, in front of children, especially... What aggravates me just as much as the discourtesy, solipsism and entitlement of those flouting what should be simple, decent behavior is the predictable, continual cluelessness of policy-makers who don't have enough foresight to realize such issues are inevitably going to occur and make realistic, workable policy for equitable enforcement. My big argument for legalizing pot is to explicitly pair it with alcohol consumption, which already has simple, universally understood rules for its controlled consumption. I realize that actually adding pot to alcohol statutes is impracticable, but you can instead write the statues for pot to more or less mirror alcohol as much as possible, for the end purpose of making it clear and simple that the same laws will apply to both. The point would be to have clear, unmistakable, easy to convey messaging to the public that existing laws for alcohol effectively cover pot: If you can't drink alcohol somewhere, such as on a public transit platform, then you can't smoke pot there either--and especially motorized vehicles. (I cannot count the number of times I pass not merely parked but driven cars with marijuana fumes wafting from them.) Caveat: These new social districts for open consumption of alcohol complicate this, which is why I'm actually ambivalent about them, because it undoes this fantasy synergism! (And believe, me, alcohol is my drug of choice.) Regardless, IMO this would solve innumerable problems with compliance and enforcement. But policy-makers just continually seem to be unable to take into account people's limited abilities to assimilate new information, especially if it's not helpful or interesting to them. It's a longstanding frustration for me how policy-makers don't consider equally both sides of policy-making: They just (lazily IMO) work through legal and procedural considerations and don't follow through to actual implementation and enforcement of regulations. My off topic six cents' worth ramble...

This [my response, not the original posting] technically belongs in the Culture thread, but since it was prompted herein... I personally think some folks with deep pockets (e.g. developers) should approach the NC Music Hall of Fame and work out a deal to relocate it in Charlotte, whether part of a Brevard entertainment district or not; anywhere uptown would be fine, IMO. Everybody likes music, of one variety or another, and it would be a tremendous draw, and for all ages and demographics, to have it downtown. I've stated before that I don't think Charlotte should go chasing waterfalls, when developing its cultural identity, and a museum about music and musicians from North Carolina would definitely not be something you could find anywhere else. I'm sure the institution in Kannapolis is done well, but if real money, especially as part of a major development, was put into its relocation to downtown Charlotte, it really could be taken "to the next level," in way that it's not currently. The Hall of Fame was originally founded in Thomasville and moved to Kannapolis only in '08 (from my internet research), so it wouldn't be like Charlotte was poaching a sui generis Kannapolis institution; it's moved before. I think it could be objectively stated that it would get far more patronage by being in Charlotte than in Kannapolis. I opined a while ago that I think the old First Baptist should not be simply an auditorium space for the new library complex but really offer a variety of productions, including music (not copying per se, but inspired by Ryman in Nashville), and having the Music Hall of Fame within a few blocks' walk would really create some 'synergy' , IMHO, and hopefully inspire or catalyze a live music culture downtown, which is what makes Nashville and Austin the cultural centers of the New South that they are. This was mentioned in the History thread, at some point, but Charlotte was a major locus of country music in its early days, and Nashville became dominant--and drew artists and talent away from everywhere else--largely because of the sponsorship and influence of an insurance company-sponsored radio program. To me, having the NC Music Hall of Fame in Charlotte would be more than appropriate, it would situate it where some of the actual earliest national musicians from the Carolinas started. Besides everything else, there are so many relatively unknown, important folk, etc. artists that have come from North Carolina that should be known by all North Carolinians--Elizabeth Cotten springs immediately to mind--that I think (IMHO) it's actually incumbent upon a museum of a scope, such as one statewide, to be in a place where the most people possible can attend and learn.

I hope they will. It's such an ugly building that its loss won't be a problem, and replacing it with anything along South Boulevard will be an aesthetic improvement. I just hope their plans do something with a little more individuality and style than Sharon... I've long thought what they should do is allow South Boulevard to be developed to full UDO density and height allowance, and re-orient the church, specifically the sanctuary building, to the current "back side." (Side note, I will be annoyingly insistent that the city should rename that disconnected vestige of South Caldwell "Cleveland" when it's eventually connected to Cleveland Street.) I would orient the new sanctuary directly opposite the NW end of Templeton (a nice coincidence of name), creating a dramatic architectural statement and focus for that residential street and its neighborhood. Ideally they'd hire a really superior architect with the money they'd realize from whatever deal they make and not put up some ho hum, run of the mill structure, but whether modern or traditional, something noticeable, remarkable (in a good way). Perhaps more importantly, it would both figuratively and materially better integrate it within the neighborhood, making it a more walkable and accessible destination, while at the same time improving the South Boulevard corridor. Win-Win (IMO).

Somebody, somewhere needs to donate that poor little church a steeple.

Ahhhh...expertise...!

To me, the most disappointing--I wouldn't even say rises to the level of upsetting--thing is the lack of imagination or vision. I still don't understand why so many people think in terms of All or Nothing, or either/or. Quite frankly, I think the sanctuary structure is mediocre architecturally (I think it came later) and is a bland, "tasteful" midcentury gesture toward "class," so I'm sanguine about it going; the (educational?) building connecting the two wings is less remarkable--although probably was of quality--but I wouldn't protest vociferously against its demolition. But...but the (I would imagine) old sanctuary to the left--it must've been the 1917 element--had real character and more individuality: It was the element that should've been salvaged, IMHO. It sits right along the side street, so it could've easily incorporated into the larger development, and tearing down the other structures would've allowed as much continuous development space as they needed. That's a failure of vision, imagination, and--dare I say it--taste and discretion. But, maybe, all the structures were in bad shape and couldn't reasonably be salvaged. I'll try and be charitable.

When I was a kid, I had an inflatable 747 that hung by a string from the light fixture in my bedroom. I'm pretty certain it was a souvenir from a TWA flight, because I'm fairly sure the plane livery was red, not blue. My grandmother gave it to me after she returned from a trip, so 747s occupy a big, big place in my emotional memory. I'm so glad I actually got to fly on a few. I only wish I'd kept it, even if got a hole in it at some point (I'm guessing).

I have always thought, in cities that have one and/or could justify one, the ideal conversion for old shopping malls is to art museums. You've got a building built to accommodate thousands of people, looking en mass, often leisurely, at objects...Each individual store would be simply used, with little expenditure, to specific galleries, and the anchor stores would provide larger space for the same, but also event or large space venues. The atria or actual mall portion could display larger (taller) pieces or mobiles....

Today's continuing theme of Charlotte alleyways reminded me of an idea I had a while ago: What if the city of Charlotte realized its rights of way, in the form of its many dis- or unused residential alleys--in all the older neighborhoods near the center city, and converted some--or all--to dedicated bike lanes? It is my understanding that city sanitation doesn't use any for waste removal, correct? And most are unpaved and not usable by private residential garages, right? (But even so, there could be accommodation made for utilizing those in conjunction with bike lanes.) Anyway, I believe there's an untapped, extraordinarily low cost resource of miles and miles of potential protected bike lanes in Dilworth, Wilmore, upper Wesley Heights, Lockwood, Cherry, Elizabeth, just lying fallow as abandoned alleyways. (There's even one block by Dowd Park between Arty and Greenland.) The city owns this land, so right of way acquisition is null, with the only cost clearing and paving them. If you had an incredibly robust, even if "too many," bike lanes in nearly all of the neighborhoods encircling the center city, just think of what that would do for, in the short term, actual realization of bike commuting into uptown or within those areas, and in the long term, building the case for greater connectivity to the neighborhoods of farther reach? I think it could be a "game changer," IMHO. This first occurred to me when I was looking at the map and trying to figure out how one could get a continuous or at least contiguous bike lane from the heart of 'the wedge' up into downtown. My first thought, which I still think is a good idea, but is way more controversial, costly and involving road reconstruction, is getting rid of that g----d dinky median in Providence, instead making its center lanes contiguous with a simple painted double yellow line, and then utilizing the lateral space gained from the median on the shoulders of the street, even if it means removing the current curbing as well. I've walked Providence many, many, many times and it could be done with a little bit of ingenuity. There are actually not that many single family houses facing lower Providence--it's mainly neighborhoods or 'communities'--and finding a smidge of added lateral space at intersections (for turning lanes) would be the only real issue. The dinky median ends--amazingly coincidentally--right at Briar Creek, so if the extant greenway could be extended just a little farther down to Providence, that would provide direct connection and then get bikers up to Randolph: but what then? Then, pouring over the map, I recognized the old alleyways a few blocks up in Elizabeth, and...voila! I would extend the greenway/bike path up along Briar Creek (just some office parks and the like bordering it), and then connect it to the unused alley that goes nearly uninterrupted between 7th and 8th, from Ranier (and the block between it and Bascom/Cameron is currently empty and could be designed to accommodate) all the way up to the Independence exit; there is only one house--admittedly a nice, older house that I would not want demolished--on Louise that would be an impediment, but something could be done to work around it, if a bunch of smart people all worked on it. So, you would have all of your neighborhoods surrounding downtown interlaced with protected bike lanes, and lower Charlotte would have the Sugar Creek Greenway on the near SW and Providence Road directly S, and then (hopefully) with the eventual Silver Line, one to the SE. To me, if you get 'the wedge' with general bike accessibility, you can set the standard/template for making it happen in the rest of the city.

I've always thought upper South End looks like a scalpel, due to the curve of South Tryon on the west side; but I don't think "the Scalpel" is catchy enough for a neighborhood moniker. With all of the eventual development west of Tryon south of Tremont, it'll soon be spread out though.

I would argue that if you don't maintain an arbitrary centering of Charlotte's downtown on Trade & Tryon and instead center it more to the south--to include South End in uptown--Charlotte's center city isn't all *that* much less dense than Nashville's.

This. THIS...is the single greatest post on CLT Urban Planet ever, I think. I almost don't have to come home for Christmas now.

In organizing/de-cluttering circles, OHIO is used to mean "Only Handle It Once." (Yes, I saw the four planned building shapes!)

I may not agree with this absolutely, but I do think that rigid differentiation, segmentation or specialization in organizations is a prevalent issue that causes many, or even most, organizational problems. If I were in charge--of an organization, or the world--I would mandate that all supervisors and managers must spend a day week--every week--doing the job of one of their subordinates. It wouldn't be the same job every week, it would be rotational, and rather than random hopefully strategic, and not some "Undercover Boss" sort of stunt, but a fundamental part of organizational and operational culture. I am convinced it would help eliminate the gap of understanding and appreciation between management and workers, with a fringe benefit that workers themselves would be induced to perform better, with the possibility that any given day a manager might show up to take over for them, or work beside them. I first formulated this theory during the one year--the worst year of my life--that I taught high school. I felt a HUGE problem in the school where I taught was that none of the administrators had been in a classroom for quite some time and had diminished appreciations for what teachers dealt with. (In this instance, I think every administrator should teach one class per semester or school year, rather than teaching for one day a week--and no cherry picking the best classes for them, but actually what happens to work best schedule-wise!) We all know that there's plenty of wasted time in offices, and the time could be made for this, easily.

Is this just a bike path or a representation of a rail trail adjacent or nearby a Silver Line???? (I am totally opposed to Julie Eiselt's demand/pique that the Silver Line is aligned with the Blue Line through downtown, and am hoping CATS is just humoring her until they can prove it's not smart as well as not feasible. IMHO)

Rather than trying to recreate, because resuscitate isn't even accurate for, Brooklyn Village, I would (IM*H*O) love to see such efforts directed at an area with existing Black businesses, such as Five Points. I agree with @AirNostrumMADthat trying to engineer human activity according to planners' wishes or desires fail just as often as they succeed. The city achieves more when it looks at where people are or headed and encourages or accentuates it rather than trying to re-direct it. Municipal officials aren't generally good at influencing people's ideas of what's cool or worthwhile--as a matter of fact, I think avatars of activity and cognescenti of cool are more often than not are operating in opposition to what city fathers have in mind for them. Build equitable infrastructure and let the people do the rest. IMO.

I completely agree: Better to work with amenable developers--i.e. compromise--than be too demanding or even obstreperous in negotiations and have them just tear entire older structures down. The older I get the more I appreciate the wisdom of "Do not let the pursuit of perfection prevent doing good."