Jump to content

Charlotte Arts Master Plan


cityboi

Recommended Posts

I think it makes sense to do another underground deck with a tunnel....Wachovia obviously has the cash to buy the lot if they want, though I do agree, that somewhere on that block there needs to be a tower....A hotel tower could work well along the College side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 629
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Do you have information on whether Wachovia has purchased the site from INC Consolidated? If they don't own the land, then the paper's implicated site is not correct.

The new AACC will be huge and that will be great for the both the city, as a whole, and the black community, specifically. You may be right that the size means that it wouldn't fit on the original Wachovia site, so Wachovia has purchased the site across Tryon St from INC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have information on whether Wachovia has purchased the site from INC Consolidated? If they don't own the land, then the paper's implicated site is not correct.

The new AACC will be huge and that will be great for the both the city, as a whole, and the black community, specifically. You may be right that the size means that it wouldn't fit on the original Wachovia site, so Wachovia has purchased the site across Tryon St from INC.

No. I wish I did, but I do know that they are going to build the tunnel. My assumptions are that WB is negotiating with the city and INC consolidated to come up with a final plan. I totally believe that we are moving forward on this deal by first quarter of 06'.

The total project will be HUGE and is really one that we all need to be paying CLOSE attention to. It will dramatically change our skyline and the activity on what is now a dead spot on Tryon (excluding the Green)

Wake Forest MBA program

More Condos

Arts bundle (Mint/Betchler)

Major Office Tower

Now the AACC

Plus an extension of the Green

and most improtantly RETAIL in the ground level of the development

THis is the largest thing happening Uptown IMO. Epicenter is next, and something tells me the Adams Mark complex will be the "next" big thing to really watch.

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so confused on the specific parcel being described at Stonewall and Tryon. On Polaris, that land south of St. Peters seems to be owned by a few different owners, but mostly "INC Consolidated Realty". Is that Wachovia, or did they purchase it recently.

However, the wording "It would sit on a strip of Wachovia-owned land on Stonewall Street, between the Charlotte Convention Center and a new Mint Museum" could be saying that the Mint is also going on that block, and the AACC would go on the College Street side of the lot. Am I missing something?

If you look at the map the Observer included with the article, they identify a teeny tiny strip of land holding 2 rows of parked cars facing Stonewall. According to Polaris that strip is owned by RBC Corp at 2 First Union Plaza. Seems like the paper didn't dig far enough and thus your confusion dub. They should have realized how skinny the building would have to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may have picked up some more land then. RBC Corp is Wachovia's land holding pseudo-corp and has nothing to do with RBC Centura.

I feel pretty confident that it will be on at least part of the parcel east of Tryon and North of Stonewall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, graydog, that it would be hard to believe Wachovia would build just on that small strip of land. It seems most likely that they have purchased the INC Consolidated land.

No matter what, though, the article is definitely reporting a second ward location. By the the time this project gets built, do you guys think it will end up being every surface lot anywhere near South Tryon St? The boundaries seem to be growing exponentially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/13433958.htm

The move to the Wachovia campus will significantly increase the power, prestige, and reach of the African-American Cultural Center. It could really mark a change that will put this center into the big time.

I wonder if this will help build legislative support in the general assembly for the arts plan tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

this is not for charlotte. i think its a proposal for louisville... it might even be a student project. the reason i am posting it is b/c i think its very cool and thought provoking. regardless of what you might think about the building design - the proposal is GREAT. personally, i do wish charlotte had more of a modern presence. anyways, enjoy.

http://www.museumplaza.net/video_wmv.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually not a student project, but rather an actual project being done in Lousiville by developers and will be built apparently by 2009. it is designed by rem koolhaus, partner at OMA..they are a leading arch firm in the nation for this new postmodernism. they do really cool stuff. they recently completed the seattle central public library, which if you've never seen is a magnificent building. google it. its truly auspicious. the nytimes columnist called it "one of the most, if not the most endeavouring piece of architecture built in the US within the past 100 years". i wish they would be designing our arts program/wachovia tower package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice article on Machado and Silvetti in this past week's New Yorker magazine. They did the new Getty Villa, and the architecture reporter for the magazine, Paul Goldberger, who's typically very critical, gave praise. I think the Mint will be in good hands. We won't get an eye-popping Zaha Hadid thingy, but we should get a handsome classy structure from this pair that we can be proud of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year is the "short session" of the legislature, when they are only supposed to be around for 2 months, to amend the budget. They will also consider "local bills" such as this one but only in the following situation:

"Any local bill must also be accompanied by a certificate signed by the sponsor stating that no public hearing will be necessary, the bill is non-controversial and that it has been approved by all legislators representing the area affected by the bill."

This is fine if you are in Mayberry and only have 1 representative, but obviously this really hurts the urban areas where you have several representatives from both parties--I think we have like 10 reps for our area and there is no way all 10 of them (esp the republicans) are going to agree to support this--another example of how our state government in NC is geared to the rural interests--this is also why they have 4 lane highways in rural counties that go nowhere while the cities are grid-locked

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an article that explains the Legislative problem:

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/new...e_breaking_news

To pay for the arts package, the City Council wants to raise the car rental tax from 11% to 15%, which requires legislative approval; however, in the short session the bill won't even be introduced unless all 15 Mecklenburg County legislators (10 House and 5 Senate) support it. Therefore, if even one legislator is against it, it will not be introduced in the 2006 session. Right now, 4 Republicans (surprise) are against it. Hopefully they will change their position between now and May with some education. Here are the opposing legislators and their contact info. If you are in their district and are for this, you might want to let them know your opinion:

Rep. John Rhodes District 98 [email protected] (email)

Rep Doug Vinson District 105 dougvinson.com (website)

Rep Jim Gulley District 103 jimgulley.com (website)

Sen Robert Pittenger District 39 [email protected] (email)

Also, if the car rental companies decide to support this (very doubtful) it would definitely help the chances of this getting passed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, construction costs and other aspects of the Nascar HOF contract caused a little bit more of the hotel-motel tax to be used than just the 2% that it is being raised. Basically, it looks like they reprojected the earnings from the the core tax, based on increases created by the new hotels, the arena, and the general turnaround in that industry. But then they applied that to fund the added costs of materials and labors to build the original bid.

My hope was that they'd be able to retally that original tax and come up with at least a part of the $80m they still need to fund the Arts Plan. Instead, they pretty much just added ~$20m to the Hall.

So now that the city has been awarded the Nascar Hall of Fame, and we will be getting all of those visitors, I think it now time for the Mayor to take advantage of his rolodex and get some funding for this now.

Half of the funding for the Arts Plan is already found, they just need to find the remaining $80m from a combination of new tax, land sales, or new STIF.

What is mildly ironic, but also great, is that they only part of ASC's goals that is now funded is the part that was dropped by the ASC because it was impossible: the Carolina Theatre.

$80m is not that much when considering that it can be funded using bonds paid off over a generation. The arts will help to draw high net worth demographic to downtown, help support new and existing corporate headquarters, as well as balance out our tourism attractions.

Balance is even more important, I believe, now that we have won the Nascar Hall of Fame, as we must prove that the city has more depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, construction costs and other aspects of the Nascar HOF contract caused a little bit more of the hotel-motel tax to be used than just the 2% that it is being raised. Basically, it looks like they reprojected the earnings from the the core tax, based on increases created by the new hotels, the arena, and the general turnaround in that industry. But then they applied that to fund the added costs of materials and labors to build the original bid.

My hope was that they'd be able to retally that original tax and come up with at least a part of the $80m they still need to fund the Arts Plan. Instead, they pretty much just added ~$20m to the Hall.

So now that the city has been awarded the Nascar Hall of Fame, and we will be getting all of those visitors, I think it now time for the Mayor to take advantage of his rolodex and get some funding for this now.

Half of the funding for the Arts Plan is already found, they just need to find the remaining $80m from a combination of new tax, land sales, or new STIF.

What is mildly ironic, but also great, is that they only part of ASC's goals that is now funded is the part that was dropped by the ASC because it was impossible: the Carolina Theatre.

$80m is not that much when considering that it can be funded using bonds paid off over a generation. The arts will help to draw high net worth demographic to downtown, help support new and existing corporate headquarters, as well as balance out our tourism attractions.

Balance is even more important, I believe, now that we have won the Nascar Hall of Fame, as we must prove that the city has more depth.

well put. this, IMO, is the most important item on the list. i tried to refrain from NHOF conversation, not b/c i was against it, i just did not want to get too attached. i think charlotte deserves the HOF and seem to have played the cards well. my only hope now, is that the arts package is put in full light and finalized without being stripped down.

also, i am going crazy just thinking that we are about to have an IM PEI and a MARIO BOTTA designed buildings within a few blocks from one another. this would be a HUGE deal in ANY city in the world... and hopefully it comes to pass in ol' charlotte.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.