SouthEnd Midrise Projects

[ontap]

Why can't we get something like the new Hargett Place "brownstones" in Raleigh?

[kermit]

^ oh jezzus, its Harrisburg town-center quality. (Kee Court)

Edited October 18, 2016 by kermit

[asthasr]

Why do they randomly change the level of brick on every single townhome? Have they never seen the beautiful row houses of Washington, Philadelphia, or New York?

[NYCLT]

Would prefer something like these from Germantown in Nashville:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1769118,-86.7885665,3a,75y,151.79h,103.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl_aZZHRhx0e-sta9BXH5Fg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1768341,-86.787483,3a,75y,239.92h,102.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx3b9KIPJWYnhbnUyumWOVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Ryan20]

More townhomes planned for W Tremont. There was a townhome project here about a year ago that was cancelled. These would have an amazing uptown view as they are higher in elevation than the Helix townhomes. I don't know why they have the 17' wide homes with the uptown views instead of the 20' wide units. 

 

http://ww.charmeck.org/Planning/Rezoning/2016/140-150/2016-146 site plan.pdf

[nonillogical]

57 minutes ago, Ryan20 said:

More townhomes planned for W Tremont. There was a townhome project here about a year ago that was cancelled. These would have an amazing uptown view as they are higher in elevation than the Helix townhomes. I don't know why they have the 17' wide homes with the uptown views instead of the 20' wide units. 

 

http://ww.charmeck.org/Planning/Rezoning/2016/140-150/2016-146 site plan.pdf

I like the trend of these small townhome developments. Helix is really looking great (makes me wonder why we are getting something so much cheaper looking in a more prime location at Kee Ct). 

If Common Market is indeed going in that section of W. Tremont I really hope they bought the building this time! Already completely surrounded by planned developments. 

[navigator319]

725 appts 20% of which for low income.  What got me though was 300k of office too.  Sounds very large to me.

Phase 1 is ~150 of the appts and 180 room hotel.  Late 2017 getting underway.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article109060247.html

Edited October 19, 2016 by navigator319

[rjp212]

8 minutes ago, navigator319 said:

725 appts 20% of which for low income.  What got me though was 300k of office too.  Sounds very large to me.

Phase 1 is ~150 of the appts and 180 room hotel.  Late 2017 getting underway.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article109060247.html

Love it!  Great mix of uses and architecture. 

[cjd5050]

11 hours ago, navigator319 said:

725 appts 20% of which for low income.  What got me though was 300k of office too.  Sounds very large to me.

Phase 1 is ~150 of the appts and 180 room hotel.  Late 2017 getting underway.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article109060247.html

I think this is the path forward to correct public housing designs from the past.  What a great land use in terms of density and the density should help with security.  Nice!

[Prodev]

Assuming those townhouses are going to be along Euclid, they do not fit in at all with Dilworth. Wish they could swap places with the Kee Ct THs posted above because they really do look great and will be a refreshing change from everything going up now. EDIT - saw the site plan, they are on Euclid. Not sure why they're showing it as a 4 lane road though.

Is it just me, or does anyone else get skeptical when an out of town group with no ties to Charlotte and no experience here gets picked? Even the CEOs quotes seem very generic and canned to me, but maybe I'm just cynical. 

It also seems odd about their programming for Phase 1...

Edited October 19, 2016 by Prodev

[CLTProductions]

1 hour ago, Prodev said:

Assuming those townhouses are going to be along Euclid, they do not fit in at all with Dilworth. Wish they could swap places with the Kee Ct THs posted above because they really do look great and will be a refreshing change from everything going up now. EDIT - saw the site plan, they are on Euclid. Not sure why they're showing it as a 4 lane road though.

Is it just me, or does anyone else get skeptical when an out of town group with no ties to Charlotte and no experience here gets picked? Even the CEOs quotes seem very generic and canned to me, but maybe I'm just cynical. 

It also seems odd about their programming for Phase 1...

I agree with your cynicism. It's VERY canned and a lot seems like a pie in the sky. However the company does great work and the Fan Pier in Boston became fully realized incredibly close to their original plan. Architecture and all. That's impressive. 

But yeah 175 or something apartments and the hotel in the first phase is very odd. Here are the images in higher rez 

 

Edited October 19, 2016 by Jayvee

[Ryan20]

Are there any better views of the Kee Ct or W Tremont townhome projects beside what is in the zoning plans? Is anyone else concerned that South Blvd is going to be a permanent gridlock in a few years? 

[atlrvr]

^^^  Regarding South Blvd, this site rendering shows 2 connections.  The first I'm a fan of, which is the extension of Caldwell St to Cleveland St, which should help add some North/South Capacity, especially from the Morehead corrdior, which doesn't intersect with South.

The other, I'm not a fan of (probably because I'm a neighborhood resident), which is that THIS rendering shows Mt Vernon directly extending to South Blvd, and connecting on to Bland St, which of course goes all the way down past Mint St.....this is NOT what the approved site-plan for the site rezoning in 2010 shows.

http://charlottenc.gov/planning/Rezoning/RezoningPetitions/2010_Petitions/Pages/2010-022.aspx

 

Mt Vernon extends slightly onto the site, and then has a 3-way stop where it dead-ends into the park space, so a driver would need to make a left turn or right turn to then get to South (or the extended Caldwell).  Though subtle, the approved site-plan (i believe) would do a better job distributing traffic through the more residential portion of the neighborhood.

I hope the rendered version released yesterday is updated to be more compatible with what was approved.

Also agree that the while the townhomes are attractive relatively to most going up in Charlotte, that "edge" directly across Euclid from the Historic District is awkard, and would be better served with something slightly more traditional....they would look great in South End though!

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

^^^  Regarding South Blvd, this site rendering shows 2 connections.  The first I'm a fan of, which is the extension of Caldwell St to Cleveland St, which should help add some North/South Capacity, especially from the Morehead corrdior, which doesn't intersect with South.

The other, I'm not a fan of (probably because I'm a neighborhood resident), which is that THIS rendering shows Mt Vernon directly extending to South Blvd, and connecting on to Bland St, which of course goes all the way down past Mint St.....this is NOT what the approved site-plan for the site rezoning in 2010 shows.

http://charlottenc.gov/planning/Rezoning/RezoningPetitions/2010_Petitions/Pages/2010-022.aspx

 

Mt Vernon extends slightly onto the site, and then has a 3-way stop where it dead-ends into the park space, so a driver would need to make a left turn or right turn to then get to South (or the extended Caldwell).  Though subtle, the approved site-plan (i believe) would do a better job distributing traffic through the more residential portion of the neighborhood.

I hope the rendered version released yesterday is updated to be more compatible with what was approved.

Also agree that the while the townhomes are attractive relatively to most going up in Charlotte, that "edge" directly across Euclid from the Historic District is awkard, and would be better served with something slightly more traditional....they would look great in South End though!

http://hdproperties.org/2016/10/19/hdp-announces-developer-for-16-acre-site-in-dilworth/

Are you sure its changed? It doesn't look that different to me, just think the site plan doesn't do a great job illustrating the plan.

I was able to pull a slightly higher resolution file from the backend of their website.

[atlrvr]

Yes....it's a bit subtle, but building designated "E" on your rendering was 2 buildings on the Rezoning approved plans.  Mt Vernon (which is the road in the upper left portion of this rendering) bisected the townhomes a little further north, and went between the two "Building E's", then dead-ending into the park.

The approved site plan is available through this link....the orientation on Page 2 of the site plan is different from here, but Mt Vernon is middle-bottom of the plan, with the extension stub that dead ends into the park (Area C) named "Private Street"....i really like the rezoning plan better, as it eliminates the straights shot of a single-family street, but still provides good (maybe better?) connectivity.

 

http://charlottenc.gov/planning/Rezoning/RezoningPetitions/2010_Petitions/Pages/2010-022.aspx

[alb1no panther]

23 hours ago, atlrvr said:

^^^  Regarding South Blvd, this site rendering shows 2 connections.  The first I'm a fan of, which is the extension of Caldwell St to Cleveland St, which should help add some North/South Capacity, especially from the Morehead corrdior, which doesn't intersect with South.

The other, I'm not a fan of (probably because I'm a neighborhood resident), which is that THIS rendering shows Mt Vernon directly extending to South Blvd, and connecting on to Bland St, which of course goes all the way down past Mint St.....this is NOT what the approved site-plan for the site rezoning in 2010 shows.

http://charlottenc.gov/planning/Rezoning/RezoningPetitions/2010_Petitions/Pages/2010-022.aspx

 

Mt Vernon extends slightly onto the site, and then has a 3-way stop where it dead-ends into the park space, so a driver would need to make a left turn or right turn to then get to South (or the extended Caldwell).  Though subtle, the approved site-plan (i believe) would do a better job distributing traffic through the more residential portion of the neighborhood.

I hope the rendered version released yesterday is updated to be more compatible with what was approved.

Also agree that the while the townhomes are attractive relatively to most going up in Charlotte, that "edge" directly across Euclid from the Historic District is awkard, and would be better served with something slightly more traditional....they would look great in South End though!

ah.  i think i see what you're saying.

the renderings show a straight shot.  the approved plans show a Y split (3-way stop), essentially.  i think you're splitting hairs, though.  instead of forcing drivers to choose left or right, make the lane straight for those that want to pass through he community while still making a right turn available.

besides, what's the value of a 3-way stop? i assume plenty of extra construction costs to build two distinct structures as opposed to one.

Edited October 20, 2016 by alb1no panther

[atlrvr]

The reason that I'm splitting hair is that it would be preferable (as a resident, not as a someone who wants to "pass through the community") to force a turn. 

Psychologically, it would probably have the effect of that person wanting to cut from South End to Morehead to turn a block earlier on Caldwell.....i suspect if it's a straight shot, people will just stay straight on Mt Vernon all the way to Dilworth Rd.

The neighborhood has done a really good job on having excellent connectivity by distirbuting vehicles by NOT having straight shots (see the slight misalignment with Berkeley/Rensselear, Park/Romany both requiring 2 turns to cut through the neighborhood. 

The actual travel times aren't impacted by more than 10 seconds if someone is driving the speed limit.  It probably is inconvenient where people try to use the straight shots as high-speed cut-through (Euclid and Dilworth Rd).

[alb1no panther]

Hmmm . . . perhaps a traffic circle then? maybe some other traffic-reducing measures? 

[Papaner88]

Why doesn't south end adopt more traffic circles?  I was trying to turn from Dunavant onto Remount towards Souththe other day and it was near impossible.   However, throw a circle in there and traffic flows.   I am from a town in Indiana (Carmel) where virtually every intersection has been converted to a circle and it was amazing. 

[ah59396]

25 minutes ago, Papaner88 said:

Why doesn't south end adopt more traffic circles?  I was trying to turn from Dunavant onto Remount towards Souththe other day and it was near impossible.   However, throw a circle in there and traffic flows.   I am from a town in Indiana (Carmel) where virtually every intersection has been converted to a circle and it was amazing. 

They better think of something because traffic is about to be a nightmare along that corridor.  Driving along last night and seeing the tear down of the radio buildings for LIDL and the Teeter going up, both with very autocentric designs, caused me to have a cold sweat.

consider the amount of gridlock the freaking Chick-fil-a creates on south Blvd, they are about to have a mess on their hands.

[southslider]

Dilworth was also worried when Lexington was to be connected with Carson at a signal on South Blvd. That signaled connection was built quite awhile ago, but cut-through traffic east of Euclid never became a problem. Similarly, it IS splitting hairs to think connecting Mt Vernon to South Blvd would add much traffic east of Euclid.

[ChessieCat]

This sign has been posted.  Does anyone have renderings or info about 300 West Summit?

Edited October 24, 2016 by ChessieCat

[SouthEndCLT811]

Address in the article is right next to 300 W Summit and also states Stiles is the developer.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/real_estate/2016/03/plans-forsouth-end-office-building-could-be.html

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, SouthEndCLT811 said:

Address in the article is right next to 300 W Summit and also states Stiles is the developer.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/real_estate/2016/03/plans-forsouth-end-office-building-could-be.html

There are much nicer renderings than the Risden McElory pencil drawing. I've asked a contact for updated renderings.

 

[atlrvr]

Stiles just closed on this land this month.

My last bit on the Mt Vernon connection:

I lived in a house I owned on Lexington Ave (between Myrtle and Oriole) and was on DCDA in 2005-2006 when the original high-density version of 1200 South Blvd was proposed, and was a vocal proponent of extending Lexington across to Bland.  The primary difference between the two is that Lexington connection really only benefits the neighborhood residents south of Myrtle given that it doesn't intersect with any major cut-throughs.  Yes, traffic has increased dramatically between Myrtle and South, but that is a high density portion of the neighborhood.  Also, Lexington is 45' cross-section, so has natural traffic calming due to the narrow street width.

None of those factors apply for Mt. Vernon, as it would provide cut-through incentive (connecting to Dilworth Rd) and is the widest cross-section street in the neighborhood.

Really apples-oranges.