Belmont @ Freemason Progress

[okinawatyphoon]

BUMMER.

[vdogg]

If they hadn't saved Granby, then none of these "towers" would've happened. Now I understand why it was so important to them to do so. What they hell happened? It's almost like we never had an actual boom to begin with.

[Glassoul]

If they hadn't saved Granby, then none of these "towers" would've happened. Now I understand why it was so important to them to do so. What they hell happened? It's almost like we never had an actual boom to begin with.

[wrldcoupe4]

Fake chimneys?

[vdogg]

^^^Haha. I'm wouldn't be mad about this Glassoul if they had stuck to this concept from the very beginning. I'm getting tired of the developer bait and switch going on in this town though. Lure people in with these lofty concepts and then replace it with crap at the last minute. I will never take a developer at face value again (except for tomj, at least he seems to be straight forward about things. ).

[gosscj]

Is this for real? They really spent years modifying their somewhat interesting original design just to dumb it down and reintroduce it in an awful color scheme? That's crap. I can't imagine this project looking remotely appealing at that location - and not because of the reduced height, which doesn't really bother me, but because of THAT AWFUL DESIGN! What a waste of time, money and, most importantly, space.

A side note: I didn't know we couldn't curse on here. Let it suffice to say "crap" was not my original word choice above.

[vdogg]

We have an automatic censor on some words but we should still try to keep it relatively clean.

[vdogg]

Well, we still have some time to go before they actually build the thing. I'm going to follow the design review process closely. It was my understanding that the parking garage had to be built first, which really won't work with the 2 seven-story concept. Maybe the lady was mistaken, or perhaps she thought I was talking about the other rendering released last year (doubtful, I was pretty clear about my request). I'm going to try to reserve crying until the next pilot article when a rendering of those pops up. This is such a waste of real estate.

[vdogg]

I have received some information, though I will not name the exact source, I believe it is pertinent to the discussion here.

First let me acknowledge what your email implies...that being that the project's design continues to evolve.

Perhaps it first would be helpful to describe the scope of the project as it design has evolved. The project as it currently is envisioned contemplates a total of approximately 234 apartments. These 234 units are broken up into a total of four buildings, as follows:

1. One four story building located on the north side of Bute Street facing south (~24 units).

2. One seven story building located on the south side of York Street facing north (~42 units).

Note: These two buildings would be located on either side of a parking structure, which is largely comprised of the present YMCA surface parking lot, in essence “screening” the garage from those two adjacent streets.

3. Two seven story buildings located on the City owned parking lot located between York (to the south), Brambleton (to the north), Duke (to the east) and Yarmouth (to the west) (each of these buildings would contain ~84 units).

As far as the most recent design regime which I am aware of, it is that which is on the City’s website, and reflects a design fairly similar to that originally identified in 2003. Looking at the attachments to your email, it is the pdf. entitled “brambletontowermaybe.” Even as I share this with you, I can also advise you that we have met with the developer and their architect along with the City’s urban design consultant (Ray Gindroz) and made some suggestions regarding the architectural vernacular and understand that the developer’s architect is in the process of addressing these suggestions…though we have not yet seen the results of that effort.

In closing I would say that the design of the project continues to evolve and will evolve further as it goes through the City’s design review process…

[vdogg]

Wow, it must be pretty chilly in hell cause I got responses back from everyone. What I gathered from this is that the design review committee may have some concerns about the design of the most recent iteration, and that they have expressed it to the developer who is working to resolve the design issue with the architect. That being said, I expect the 2 seven story concept to be part of the final product. Why the developer decided to revert back to the original, I don't know, but I personally feel it probably has to do with construction costs.

[erdogs]

This reminds me of the big car shows where they show their concept cars, then when they finally come out look nothing like the concept car.

[Sky06]

Wow, it must be pretty chilly in hell cause I got responses back from everyone. What I gathered from this is that the design review committee may have some concerns about the design of the most recent iteration, and that they have expressed it to the developer who is working to resolve the design issue with the architect. That being said, I expect the 2 seven story concept to be part of the final product. Why the developer decided to revert back to the original, I don't know, but I personally feel it probably has to do with construction costs.

[rusthebuss]

Where is the LRT station supposed to be in relation to these buildings? It seems to me if they needed the space, they'd want a smaller footprint. The city needs to take the lead, not let the developer do want they want just to cut costs. Of course, the city wants the building built too.

[vdogg]

Looks like this goes before design review on Feb 21st. I'm still working on confirming the name change but once I do i'll change the name of the thread and update the projects listing.

Brambleton & York, Belmont @ Freemason, aka Kotarides

[urbanlife]

how about they build nothing and let someone with better architects and a more willingness to build a better Norfolk.

How is these buildings Vernacular? That doesn't even make sense.....they are just throwing around that word in hopes that people will overlook the fake crap pasted to the building. Williamsburg, those houses are vernacular to that area. This is just crap. Seriously.

[lammius]

Here you go. This is what came out in 2003

Which ironically is better than the crap posted in that package but pretty much same exact concept with different colors.

[New England Transplant]

I like this too. It does fit in with the rest of Freemason.

[lil-bear]

I wonder if the recent watering down of once exciting renderings has something to do with the state of the local market, or if the city had something to do with them becoming crap!!!

[vdogg]

I wonder if the recent watering down of once exciting renderings has something to do with the state of the local market, or if the city had something to do with them becoming crap!!!

[urbanlife]

even with the need for cheaper materials, that has little effect on good or bad design. In the end, this is just a bad design.

[vdogg]

Also on the March 22nd planning commission agenda:

CITY OF NORFOLK, for the following applications: a. For a change of zoning from HC-WF2 (West Freemason Historic and Cultural Conservation) District to conditional D-3 (Freemason/Granby Conservation and Mixed Use) District on property bounded by Brambleton Avenue to the north, Duke Street to the east, Bute Street to the south and Dunmore Street to the west. The General Plan of Norfolk 1992 depicts the site as mixed use. The purpose of the rezoning is to permit the site to be developed with residential units and a parking garage.

[Chesapeake Pirate]

Also on the March 22nd planning commission agenda:

[gosscj]

Is there any way you can post those renderings, CP? Also, do you think the Freemason residents have good reasons behind their complaining here? Aside from parking, which can be addressed in ways other than on-street spaces, I see no reason to "preserve" the southern side of Brambleton the way it is. Shouldn't they see light-rail as a benefit to their community, and new developments on empty lots (or an ugly old YMCA) as the improvements they will inevitably be? These people have to recognize that Freemason is a downtown neighborhood.

[mikeas]

Is there any way you can post those renderings, CP? Also, do you think the Freemason residents have good reasons behind their complaining here? Aside from parking, which can be addressed in ways other than on-street spaces, I see no reason to "preserve" the southern side of Brambleton the way it is. Shouldn't they see light-rail as a benefit to their community, and new developments on empty lots (or an ugly old YMCA) as the improvements they will inevitably be? These people have to recognize that Freemason is a downtown neighborhood.

[Chesapeake Pirate]

Is there any way you can post those renderings, CP? Also, do you think the Freemason residents have good reasons behind their complaining here? Aside from parking, which can be addressed in ways other than on-street spaces, I see no reason to "preserve" the southern side of Brambleton the way it is. Shouldn't they see light-rail as a benefit to their community, and new developments on empty lots (or an ugly old YMCA) as the improvements they will inevitably be? These people have to recognize that Freemason is a downtown neighborhood.