Jump to content

Charlotte's Urban Lowe's Home Improvement

monsoon

By monsoon
in Charlotte

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 559
  • Created
  • Last Reply
dubone Megalopolis

dubone

Posted
Posted

this is such a lame excuse...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12938060.htm

"But Lowe's couldn't allay the neighborhood's biggest fear about the project: that a big-box store didn't belong in a residential neighborhood, especially one close to the city's first light-rail line."

Lowe's couldn't promise to not be a lowes... sooooooo.....

i don't understand how a respectable big box store is any worse than 20 smaller stores, as would be the case in a birkdale-like development.

Lowe's will help property values, as contractors and individuals will be able to more easily upgrade/renovate their homes.

I went to home depot yesterday, and i went by south boulevard. If this lowes gets built, i would go by south boulevard. for the city and for me, it is less driving. for dilworth/south end is almost no extra traffic from my route.

Let's hope the city council has its head on straight and sees right through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A2 Town

A2

Posted
Posted

this is such a lame excuse...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12938060.htm

"But Lowe's couldn't allay the neighborhood's biggest fear about the project: that a big-box store didn't belong in a residential neighborhood, especially one close to the city's first light-rail line."

So let me guess a bunch of used up, hideous, blighted looking body shops are ok though. Geez...

;)

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A2 Town

A2

Posted
Posted

Just sent this to the president of the association:

Thanks for helping create Sprawl for my children and yours. You really need to evaluate your community initiatives and look at the bigger picture instead of just your own interests. The proposal set forth was one that was not only unique, but inovative in urban design. This proposal has been altered countless times just to appease a handful of residents in Dilworth.

I have become highly frustrated by the few people who oppose a genuine proposal at the expense of the community at large. This has been a waste of time for not only Lowe's but for the citizens in the Charlotte area. I sincerely hope that the council will see through the non-sense of your letter in response to the current proposal, and vote this project though. My belief is that a few sensible elected officials will see through the associations focus on what they want, and look to the proposal as one that is innovative in Urban design and containing future sprawl.

The lot in consideration for the Lowe's project is a perfect opportunity for promoting smart growth in Charlotte, and by a one vote margin you have succesfully thrown your vote into the hat to promote development further outside the perimeter of Charlotte's core.

Concerned citizen and tax payer

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A2 Town

A2

Posted
Posted

I would have added... Please come to UrbanPlanet.org to let us know your response. :yahoo:

(ok that smilecon is inapproriate for this, but I have wanted to use it since Neo added it. )

You are totally right metro. Anytime we can get a great opportunity to promote UP we should. If we are all civil then a lot of great ideas can be hashed out for the better of the whole community.

:)

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ngp Whistle-Stop

ngp

Posted
Posted
The South Dilworth land rush has already begun, and this is a prime location to position affordable higher density residential development and light retail along South Blvd and the transit line. This project removes over 11 urban acres from Charlotte
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A2 Town

A2

Posted
Posted

Oh please, "affordable higher density residential development" my ass. If this Lowes gets shot down and a developer steps forward to build a multi-phase apartment project, twenty bucks says these same people will start beotching about how "the transient nature of apartment-dwellers comprimises the neighborhood's family-oriented integrity" or some such BS.

What they actually want is a tiny townhome development that will place a high-income buffer between their precious, economically segregated neighborhood and the increased density expected to build up on South.

Amen ! I agree. This letter is just a round about way of people saying, "not in my backyard !". This really sucks. I think atlrvr put it best we we spoke. If this gets shot down then don't expect companies to be jumping a lot of hoops for retail development in and around Uptown Charlotte. These guys have spent over a million dollars to appease these snobs. I would be HIGHLY pissed if I were Lowe's. The real sad part is that they approved the development and then just the other night rejected it. This is right before it has to go through council for the final say. This is political monuvering at its finest.

The worst part is that we the citizens of Charlotte can't go to speak out about these matters since the public meeting for discussions on the project was last month. Consequently when all was ok with the Dillworth Association.

A2

This is total BS !!!! :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubone Megalopolis

dubone

Posted
Posted

the funny thing about this being "not in my backyard" is that 80% of dilworth is far far away from this development. it isn't their backyard. there are a handful of houses on magnolia that are just rundown little ranches and of course Olmstead Park, which is an insular development with a brick wall around it because when it was built, that part of dilworth was still shady as heck.

And forget about other alternatives... what about the current state of the land, as it has been for decades... some photos i posted earlier in the thread:

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...pic=9499&st=15#

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubone Megalopolis

dubone

Posted
Posted

This Dilworth 12th hour reversal sounds a bit fishy to me. Its as if there is something else going on here that we don't know about.

Why would they take a stand like this knowing that it would not change the vote?

probably just like other things... they suspect it will pass, but want to be on the record as having principled opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
monsoon Gigalopolis

monsoon

Posted
  • Author
Posted

On WBTV this morning one of the Dilworth residents just came out and said it. "We all want the big bucks".

I would take that to mean that a lowes store might reduce their property values. (nevermind the community)

I'm glad I live in Huntersville as I don't care to live amongst people such as this. :shades:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atlrvr Metropolitan Area

atlrvr

Posted
Posted

I'll go ahead and say it that I want the big bucks too, but I don't see how this Lowe's will reduce the property values. It's replacing industrial buildings, with an occupied retailer, and surrounded with attractive housing. It will help property values dramatically.

I also think that DCDA reversing the vote was pretty stupid, in that now a business sees that they don't need to appease the DCDA to get city approval, though I doubt council would have approved this without at least a good number of the changes made by Lowe's from the original plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubone Megalopolis

dubone

Posted
Posted

it is fear at work. no one knows how it will affect their corner of dilworth (my supposition is it will only affect Magnolia, lyndhurst south of East, and iverson, ideal way... but the other residents are worried, too. ) I think that especially with the traffic signal, almost all the traffic will be on South Boulevard, and this will be just a drop in the bucket.

residents in dilworth's historic district will see zero negative impact from this lowes. For residents south of the historic district, it will be a mixed back, as the will get much needed sidewalks and aesthetic items like intersection circles... and nice townhomes for neighbors.

worlds better than what is there now... and who knows what ever would have or could have gone there otherwise, but it surely wouldn't have contributed as much money towards meeting community-wide needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Miesian Corners City

Miesian Corners

Posted
Posted

surprised that no has posted this yet, but the Lowe's was approved (yippie).

apparently, the only "Nay" was Patsy Kinsey, who is a dilworth resident.

Mrs Kinsey lives in Elizabeth on Greenway Avenue. I plan to write her a letter this morning voicing my displeaure over her descision. I will add that she has done absoluetly nothing as a council member (as far as I can tell) for her district. I think she and DeeDee are secretly one in the same person. Even more reason to dislike her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubone Megalopolis

dubone

Posted
Posted

Mrs Kinsey lives in Elizabeth on Greenway Avenue. I plan to write her a letter this morning voicing my displeaure over her descision. I will add that she has done absoluetly nothing as a council member (as far as I can tell) for her district. I think she and DeeDee are secretly one in the same person. Even more reason to dislike her.

yes, i meant that she represents dilworth.

her quote cracks me up:

Patsy Kinsey, the only "no" vote, said the store doesn't belong next to a neighborhood and less than a half mile from a transit station on the city's first light-rail line.

"This goes against what we've been talking about for so long, which is to place density in the transit corridor," said Kinsey, whose district includes the store.

do people not realize that density means high volume businesses, high volume transportation, and high volume residential developments? they are opposed to a big box (ie. high volume business) because it isn't dense... but they don't think it belongs next to "neighborhoods" because it is too high in volume.

puh-lease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.