First Ward Urban Village / North Tryon Vision Plan

[dcharlotte]

56 minutes ago, Piedmont767 said:

One of the renderings has shipping containers in it, so we are going to get our container market after all! 

That's a mouse trap for Levine. He gets in to see what all the hype is about and we ship him off. 

[dubone]

8 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

The study's website (which isn't helpful for the most part) does have a nice map that includes a delineation of Levine's holdings. http://www.northtryon.org/study-area/

Right, the focus area is trying to remake the Library and Discovery Place, swapping out the good part of College Street nightlife with a lame highrise, and inexplicably swapping 7th Street Station for a similar but different parking structure.  

So mainly take everything that is already active, used, visited and loved and redo it.   Because even the planners know that the real problem with the area is the 20+ acres of Levine's Wasteland, and despite being virtually required to do something based on his deal with the city, it still seems somehow unlikely other than one little hotel and a mediocre superblock apartment building. 

I welcome the plan, but really, redoing Discovery Place and the Library are fun projects, but they will be controversial changes requiring public votes.    The area of focus should NOT be the area that is already drumming up a decent amount of activity and development interest. 

[CLTProductions]

1 minute ago, dubone said:

Right, the focus area is trying to remake the Library and Discovery Place, swapping out the good part of College Street nightlife with a lame highrise, and inexplicably swapping 7th Street Station for a similar but different parking structure.  

So mainly take everything that is already active, used, visited and loved and redo it.   Because even the planners know that the real problem with the area is the 20+ acres of Levine's Wasteland, and despite being virtually required to do something based on his deal with the city, it still seems somehow unlikely other than one little hotel and a mediocre superblock apartment building. 

I welcome the plan, but really, redoing Discovery Place and the Library are fun projects, but they will be controversial changes requiring public votes.    The area of focus should NOT be the area that is already drumming up a decent amount of activity and development interest. 

What about any of those College & 6th street bars is good? Lol and nothing is changing about 7th Street Station, however I agree the focus area should be past all this, with these as nice to have's

[dubone]

They have stayed in business.  They bring humans there who willingly spend money.  They are buildings and not parking lots.     

 

 

My point is not whether you or I shake my large booty till my glitter dress rides up at a College Street bar, nor whether you or I enjoy that scene.  It is that I would far rather be there in what it is today that standing 3 blocks north watching vagrants sit in the grass and throw stryrofoam everywhere. 

[CLTProductions]

2 minutes ago, dubone said:

They have stayed in business.  They bring humans there who willingly spend money.  They are buildings and not parking lots.     

 

 

My point is not whether you or I shake my large booty till my glitter dress rides up at a College Street bar, nor whether you or I enjoy that scene.  It is that I would far rather be there in what it is today that standing 3 blocks north watching vagrants sit in the grass and throw stryrofoam everywhere. 

Touche, fair enough.

[Xss]

1 hour ago, Jayvee said:

A good chunk of it does fall on LevineLand, however he has hired so many people lately to essentially do his work for him, I think they might actually move forward with a few things this time around.

However the vast majority of the work is the Hal Marshal Center, Bank of Americas lot, Library lot and the Veterans building thing. 

Ok, thanks for the answer. Well, crossing fingers then, I guess. Ultimately, whether Levine owns the land or not, it's whatever will get built that is important: hopefully they'll get this right.

[dubone]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article46076200.html

I didn't even want to read this article.  But there are a few pieces of real news.  The Canopy is confirmed to be going kitty-korner to Imaginon across from the Treloar house, which is not news that he will 'renovate' when a tenant comes in.  (you know, because all tenants pay for modernization of a building up front).  The other is that the land behind the old CFD headquarters is being marketed for sale.   I don't understand that because I think he never sold any land, but that is amazing precedent if it happens. 

[CLTProductions]

32 minutes ago, dubone said:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article46076200.html

I didn't even want to read this article.  But there are a few pieces of real news.  The Canopy is confirmed to be going kitty-korner to Imaginon across from the Treloar house, which is not news that he will 'renovate' when a tenant comes in.  (you know, because all tenants pay for modernization of a building up front).  The other is that the land behind the old CFD headquarters is being marketed for sale.   I don't understand that because I think he never sold any land, but that is amazing precedent if it happens. 

I still think he's full of crap. We will see. I think we knew the hotel was going there but just confirmed now. As far as the land sale goes, HHF is the real deal and I think Levine just wants to start cashing in. 

[dubone]

Yes, it was the location for the hotel on his master plan.  I think we speculated if it would go on his new holdings at 6th and Brevard which is a block closer to the action.  

 

Overall he is full of crap, and it is a far more boring story than the potential of the neighborhood that we have just seen.    That is incredible if he does start selling.    Maybe that is the ultimate outcome of just pure land banking and selling to competent developers.  That may be the loop hole in his contract to develop that it would only cover land he owns, so he could sell and not be in violation even if nothing is done by the new owners.

 

 

[cltbwimob]

On November 23, 2015 at 7:19:52 PM, dubone said:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article46076200.html

I didn't even want to read this article.  But there are a few pieces of real news.  The Canopy is confirmed to be going kitty-korner to Imaginon across from the Treloar house, which is not news that he will 'renovate' when a tenant comes in.  (you know, because all tenants pay for modernization of a building up front).  The other is that the land behind the old CFD headquarters is being marketed for sale.   I don't understand that because I think he never sold any land, but that is amazing precedent if it happens. 

While we all (myself included) are pretty quick to knock Levine for his "do nothing" attitude, one thing I will say is at least he is saving and upfitting the historic properties on his land rather than destroying them.  I would much rather see the Treloar house sit vacant for another decade-or century as the case may be-if it means it will eventually be renovated.  Some of our other illustrious developers around town would have already torn the building down and put up a beige apartment building in its place.  So maybe one of the positive consequences of Levine's land banking is that a few of the city's endangered historic properties will not get leveled.

Edited November 25, 2015 by cltbwimob

[49er]

He has promised to renovate that building for 10 or 15 years while allowing it to fall into further disrepair. And, he leveled a really cool warehouse last decade that could have been an incredible loft conversion with retail downstairs. There's really no silver lining to his land banking:

http://www.cmhpf.org/S&Rs%20Alphabetical%20Order/surveys&rgriffith.htm

 

[ah59396]

42 minutes ago, 49er said:

He has promised to renovate that building for 10 or 15 years while allowing it to fall into further disrepair. And, he leveled a really cool warehouse last decade that could have been an incredible loft conversion with retail downstairs. There's really no silver lining to his land banking:

http://www.cmhpf.org/S&Rs%20Alphabetical%20Order/surveys&rgriffith.htm

 

 

Agreed.  I don't buy it for one second that the guy is just going to magically renovate the Treloar one day.  In my opinion it's already as good as gone.

[dubone]

9 hours ago, cltbwimob said:

While we all (myself included) are pretty quick to knock Levine for his "do nothing" attitude, one thing I will say is at least he is saving and upfitting the historic properties on his land rather than destroying them.  I would much rather see the Treloar house sit vacant for another decade-or century as the case may be-if it means it will eventually be renovated.  Some of our other illustrious developers around town would have already torn the building down and put up a beige apartment building in its place.  So maybe one of the positive consequences of Levine's land banking is that a few of the city's endangered historic properties will not get leveled.

You have not been paying much attention to what he has done traditionally.   He is 'saving' the old Dixies because it was already saved and put to productive use before he owned it.  

The Treloar house is legitimately historically registered but he has done the opposite of preserving it, by allowing the elements into the structure for many years.  If you think that this whole note in the paper of 'waiting for a tenant to up fit' you will not have realized that I have heard those very words out of his mouth more than ten years ago.  He used to imply even more progress with an imminent 'fresh deli' going in.    

There were a number of old warehouses and houses on his land, especially along the tracks, and most have been torn out quietly.    At the time they could have been nice little coffee shops or boutiques, but instead he has done none of the proper investment required to stabilize and up fit the structures for a tenant to be able to come in.     Similar buildings in Noda, Southend and all over town have gotten that treatment from their owners and became interesting urban places.   Levine's have all been torn down except for Treloar and Dixies.   

I used to believe Treloar's destruction was saved by the fact that he did own 3/4 of that block, but he has now purchased the City Chevy land across from Courtside and the closure of @7th make it seem like that block is heading down the path to surface parking...   It will be a nice surprise if he does what he has explicitly stated for more than a decade and renovate the Treloar back into commercial use.   But the economics to make that work are already clearly there to rent it out.  

 

[cltbwimob]

^^^Admittedly, I did not pay start paying attention to historic preservation issues until about 2 years ago.  My evolution from complete apathy to complete preservationist has occurred rather quickly, so I did not pay too much attention to the things that developers did with their historic building stock until recently.  

Just strike through my previous post.

[Spartan]

 

On 11/20/2015, 8:57:59, ah59396 said:

I'm going to be a grumpy cynic for a minute here.  But I mean seriously....what is this.  This "vision" looks phenomenal, and hey, if it ever happens, I'll be absolutely delighted and eat my crow with glee. Because I see a real city in those renderings with midrise development and retail and high quality structures and well planed urban streets-capes and on and on.  I just don't' see it happening.  Not in Charlotte.  Not with the building climate in this city.  Which is plop crap for as cheap as possible and the city will just allow it with complete disregard for the human scale.

 

I'm all for planning ahead and looking into the future.  but if this ever comes to fruition in the way it's shown in these renderings, i'll be flat out stunned.  we don't have the leaders necessary to champion this kind of ground breaking development.

While I generally agree with this statement, it will probably take 15-20 years to realize some semblance of this vision. That time frame is important because IF the City adopts a form-based code that applies to uptown, then I think a more high quality building product will be mandatory and we will see tremendous progress towards that end.

On 11/20/2015, 9:03:54, tozmervo said:

The building itself is far larger than CM Library needs, there's a shocking amount of vacant space in there. If you go on the upper floors, there's a grand reading room space under the dome, but it goes totally unnoticed and unappreciated because of really poor site design. It was the libraries logo for years, and I don't think most people realized what building the logo showed because no one can see the dome from the street.

My understanding is that the library was designed the way it was because it was originally supposed to front a different kind of development that failed and ultimately became the Hearst Tower. In the original plans, the current scheme made much more sense. C'est la vie. 

The library hosted a 'listening session' about 7-8ish years ago where they were throwing around big ideas for something more grand and modern (think Seattle's library). They also want to reorganize their book distribution network, which currently requires all books going from one branch to another to be routed via the uptown location. Part of the renovation would be to remove the centralized hub from uptown (assuming it doesn't happen sooner).

 

On 11/25/2015, 11:54:30, cltbwimob said:

^^^Admittedly, I did not pay start paying attention to historic preservation issues until about 2 years ago.  My evolution from complete apathy to complete preservationist has occurred rather quickly, so I did not pay too much attention to the things that developers did with their historic building stock until recently.  

Just strike through my previous post.

Completely OT here... but was there a specific issue that made you change your mind? I'm always curious why some people are so ambivalent towards this issue.

 

[Nick2]

From a development standpoint, there is a small opportunity to be gained in the historical nature of the building and possibly from a design/trendy standpoint. But is there really a reason to preserve something like an old warehouse aside from simply looking at it's age? Strictly looking at development, it would make more sense to level a large warehouse and build efficient, well-designed, neighborhood oriented buildings rather than renovate. The only major gain could possibly be a pull of potential clients/customers who like the renovation of older buildings considering that's what is very trendy right now.

This is of course assuming that there isn't a major historical value to the building. As in, whether or not it's had some sort of major impact in the past or if it's simply just an old warehouse (as an example).

I'm definitely not against preservation but I'm not exactly for it either. I just don't see the benefit of preserving older buildings just for preservation's sake if that makes sense.

[Spartan]

9 hours ago, Nick2 said:

From a development standpoint, there is a small opportunity to be gained in the historical nature of the building and possibly from a design/trendy standpoint. But is there really a reason to preserve something like an old warehouse aside from simply looking at it's age? Strictly looking at development, it would make more sense to level a large warehouse and build efficient, well-designed, neighborhood oriented buildings rather than renovate. The only major gain could possibly be a pull of potential clients/customers who like the renovation of older buildings considering that's what is very trendy right now.

This is of course assuming that there isn't a major historical value to the building. As in, whether or not it's had some sort of major impact in the past or if it's simply just an old warehouse (as an example).

I'm definitely not against preservation but I'm not exactly for it either. I just don't see the benefit of preserving older buildings just for preservation's sake if that makes sense.

Here's an idea for an old crappy warehouse in the middle of Charlotte: Uptown Brewing Co., Queen City Brewing Co., Crown Town Brewing, etc.

In this city, all old buildings should be preserved because we have so few left. Most likely that block will be a goner, but count me in the camp that says "save it." What if that alley in the back was re-imagined and given a more authentic-looking "streetscape" (ie: brick pavers and ped-scale lighting) and in stead of "Phoenix" or whatever lame underage drinking establishment is there, you get a new place for 7th St Market that feels less sterile and has more room to expand?

I can go on and on, but I think someone out there could surely come up with a cool way to re-use that space and make it desirable.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Nick2 said:

From a development standpoint, there is a small opportunity to be gained in the historical nature of the building and possibly from a design/trendy standpoint. But is there really a reason to preserve something like an old warehouse aside from simply looking at it's age? Strictly looking at development, it would make more sense to level a large warehouse and build efficient, well-designed, neighborhood oriented buildings rather than renovate. The only major gain could possibly be a pull of potential clients/customers who like the renovation of older buildings considering that's what is very trendy right now.

This is of course assuming that there isn't a major historical value to the building. As in, whether or not it's had some sort of major impact in the past or if it's simply just an old warehouse (as an example).

I'm definitely not against preservation but I'm not exactly for it either. I just don't see the benefit of preserving older buildings just for preservation's sake if that makes sense.

but its not a warehouse. Its was a private home that was built in 1887. Its got an incredible amount of historic value, and should absolutely be saved. Its the last of two examples of the row houses that once dotted uptown charlotte.

[SgtCampsalot]

Because old buildings literally remind us who we are. Anyone who grew up with nothing but strip malls, no matter how nice and "upscale" the strip mall is, knows what it does to your mindset of who you are and where you come from to not have physical reminders of your culture more than a few decades old.

Edited December 2, 2015 by SgtCampsalot

[dubone]

If developers built up of high quality, there might be less anxiety about tearing down character buildings (pun unintended) throughout the city.  But we have so few of these vintage structures, let alone those of some historic status that the last few seem  much more significant.    If you have lived in Charlotte for more than a few years, and pay attention, you will have seen a number of antique buildings torn down and replaced with either parking lots or unremarkable buildings.    J&W tore down a late 1800s warehouse on Trade street and replaced it with a parking lot for college students, one of the lowest value uses you could imagine facing a main street just blocks from the heart of a city. 

There are plenty of good uses for old warehouse and old structures that have some visual interest, and cities that have kept their stock of old structures have reaped a lot of cultural benefits that just don't come to cities that put parking lots in place of their old commercial structures.  

 

[Nick2]

Some interesting points. I sometimes forget how Charlotte's old neighborhoods and historical buildings were mostly leveled a half century ago so the need and reason for preservation in Charlotte is driven by the fact that there's already so little left.

I definitely don't condone the razing of a historic building for a parking lot. That's just wrong on so many levels.

I was asking more along the lines of other beneficial reasons besides just the preservation itself. In the long run I guess it could attract people into neighborhoods that are really trendy. Like on southpark's sodosopa lol

But seriously, in the short run, it's in the best interest to preserve if possible and convert to a microbrewery, lofts, or retail. This will help setup a more neighborhood feel for future expansion in a way. 

Preservation for  revitalization is great but we shouldn't let it stand in the way of progress.

On another note, I really like that vision for North Tryon that was posted to the charlotte observer. That would be a huge boost to uptown. In their vision, I think preserved warehouses could serve a good purpose.

[kermit]

the opening ceremony for First Ward Park is tomorrow (Monday) at 10:30

(because why mark any significant civic occasion at a time when the public could actually participate?)

Edited December 6, 2015 by kermit

[The Force Sleeps]

Greetings all! Longtime reader/lurker here and figured it was time to join the fray.

Article on CA today about First Ward future development:

https://www.charlotteagenda.com/29420/first-ward-park-is-open-heres-whats-next-for-the-neighborhood/

From the glowing praise you guys give Levine around here, what is a realistic timeframe for some of these projects to come to fruition? I know that's not an easy question to answer, but Levine seems to think its his time to start building.

[CLTProductions]

Q3 2016 is supposed ground breaking for the hotel with an 18 month construction schedule. I've heard Levine is under the gun by Hilton on that one, so it might actually happen. As for the rest, who knows....

[Guest]

Honestly guys, I'm disappointed with his plan. $700 million is not the size project that should happen on 24 acres. Should be more like $2.5 billion, in my opinion. Pretty sure Crescent is spending more than $700million on just two plots of land on stonewall. This is 7.5 city blocks and I'm a little mad we are only getting 300 hotel rooms out of it. Not to mention... Here are the promised specs from 2008. How are we letting him get away with only 1/4 of this.

“Over a 10– to 15-year period, Levine plans to build 2 million square feet of office space, 2,150 apartments and condominiums and 282,000 square feet shops and restaurants.”

Edited December 8, 2015 by Guest