Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

347 Excellent

About ertley

  • Rank
    Unincorporated Area

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There is MORE than enough street frontage on Central and Pecan for them to build the buildings of their dreams (i.e. maximal return on investment), while allowing those historic buildings to stand. Because the Silver Line is planned to not only travel along the property's southern edge--as well as having a stop there--I would HOPE the city would take more than a cursory interest in this site. By preserving the historic buildings , they can replicate in Plaza Midwood some of the vibe of the Rail Trail in South End, and I would think any decent developer would realize the huge potential for increased traffic (i.e. retail, services, entertainment) that could inspire. We'll see. If anyone has contacts with city council or planning board members, now's the time to bend their ears.
  2. I don't know if they actually will, but this is exactly the sort of thing the Duke Endowment was set up for--over a century ago--which Buck Duke couldn't have predicted, but that I hope the current board and trustees understand: A major American city should not be without its own daily newspaper. It is *definitely* for the good of the Carolinas that there is a Charlotte Observer. I'm so generally dismayed by the state of American media, not primarily quantity but instead quality, which all stem from the revenue problem, which isn't going to get any better. I've long thought that the only real solution for this societal problem is for important media houses to adopt a non-profit model/status, like the Guardian in the U.K. If the Duke Endowment could realize the importance of this situation, they could be at the forefront of creating a new media model in the U.S., but with more important changes to public discourse and society in general. Now I will put my soapbox back under my desk.
  3. My sentiments 118% ! When there's been *nothing* else to peruse here, I've looked maybe once or twice at the thread, but otherwise I generally ignore it, for the reasons you expressed.
  4. ...and if the potential midrise building ever appears across 4th on the NE parcel of the ballpark block, you'll mainly see the sides of the tower, and not the facade that's primary now.
  5. (Can't read the article, so I may be restating what they're proposing...) But I wish the Old Dowd House and that block would be conceived as a World War I museum in total, with a primary focus of course on its impacts on Charlotte, but with programming that also talks about the larger effects of the war globally. I wish there was a new museum structure built somewhere adjacent--fronting Wilkinson would be ideal--that allowed for permanent collections as well as rotating exhibitions, including a theatre. Just think of the number of not just documentaries but popular movies--just "1917" this year--and t.v. shows--heck, you could even have a screening of the second (or third?) season of "Downton Abbey"--that could be shown, to lure the people in. I envision it as a de rigeur part of the Charlotte experience, especially for all of its schoolchildren, like Discovery Place. I'm big, big, big on history, and I'm one of those who truly believes those who don't know it are doomed to repeat it. Problem is, there's so much to teach, schools literally can't (meaningfully) cover it all, so I think it's incumbent upon cities and other institutions to do their parts and make manifest those parts of history that they can.
  6. That would be very cool. I hope it happens. My *dream* (but which I am fully aware will never happen) is that the city would re-move the original Mint building--they did it once already!--to the Gold District, maybe even on Mint Street...and re-convert it to a museum about its actual, original purpose, in conjunction with any/all other planned historical mine projects in the district. I think it would be an amazing capstone to an entire 'experience', and be a means of really articulating Charlotte's importance in the national economy, even back in the early 19th century. Eastoverians could decide if they still wanted a museum presence in their neighborhood--that modern portion of the building would remain, to be adapted if needed--but if they decided "no," what would it really matter?
  7. I know everything costs money, but since it's going to be a while until the anticipated building to the NW of the UNCC building ever appears, I wish they would get a bold, dynamic mural painted on that blank expanse of wall... It could be pretty well justified as being a strong marketing tool.
  8. What excites me most about this is the mere fact that it extends, or at least starts to, the skyline and, more importantly, development density south and east from uptown. I'm all for current South End development. I cannot wait to see all of its surface parking lots and mediocre buildings from the '70s and '80s gone. As I've expressed before, my driving motivation is for Charlotte to avoid the mistakes of Atlanta (i.e. ultimately be superior and triumphant!!!), and growth in one general direction, along one major street or road (more or less), does not a true "world class" city make. I remember, decades ago, an article in the Observer about Charlotte development that quoted a planner or designer who was advocating for building off Tryon--this was probably in the '90s--and I remember specifically his saying that development centered on one street was "death" to a city, and that's always stuck with me. I know Charlotte has already managed to avoid that fate, but it's still good to see significant development in all directions from uptown, and not just SW.
  9. My contention is that when they re-connect 10th and extend it across the Blue Line and College and reconnect it at Tryon, that they keep Pfifer Avenue as it is, and make the resulting mini-block between Phifer, Tryon, 10th and College a park. I think it would be nice sized, self contained park for upper Tryon.
  10. I don't know if they had to do it (because of engineering necessity), if they were made to do it (by the city, due to current setback requirements), or if they chose to do it--obviously the preferable option--but I really, really appreciate how the set the building back a few feet from the front of the adjoining historic building, so it isn't eclipsed and shows off, which is good for the entire block--which makes it good for the Beer Garden. A+
  11. That is an excellent idea. Like so many of the best ones, it's deceptively simple. The county and city still own several blocks or portions thereof in the city center--ID one of those for the new Discovery Place, and then when it's complete you turn over the CORNER LOT ON TRYON STREET (and an entire adjacent block behind) that you've already sold to private developer(s), for redevelopment. If nothing else, an easy option is to reformulate the library redevelopment, and put the new Discovery Place as a ground floor(s) anchor on the other block. The Hal Marshall annex is an obvious choice, though, since the county already owns the land. It would put Discovery Place directly across the street from the McColl Center, which could hopefully lead to some interesting cross-programming between the two, and actually increase the McColl Center's prominence. When the Silver Line is completed, that would put the new Discovery Place one block from the transfer station of the Blue and Silver lines--a great location in terms of accessibility. Another option is, if you've got a cluster of art museums on the south end of Tryon, then why not try the same thing with children's/family-friendly venues on North Tryon? It would mean a land swap or deal with a private developer, but if it's the one of thinking of--He Who Shall Not Be Named--maybe the county/city could exert some leverage. That block bounded by 6th/7th/Brevard Caldwell directly across the street from ImaginOn and the Children's Theatre is still a parking lot, with the notable exception of that (vacant) historic house at the corner of Brevard and 7th, which would make a terrific element--say, an entrance/welcome center?--to be incorporated in the new Discovery Place. The advantage to putting it on that block is that it would then be directly across the street from First Ward Park. Anyway, regardless of where a new location would be, I think the city/county needs to recognize the redevelopment potential--and money in their coffers, to potentially pay for a good portion of the new project--for the existing site.
  12. The Twitter message posted that advocated making driving personal cars "inconvenient"--on the level with taking an airplane, it would seem to me--which is tantamount to a ban, effectively, I would say. I think those sentiments are more than counter-productive; even if you agree with them, you shouldn't put them in print. I'm totally and completely supportive of mass transit--I take it every day and only drive a car once or twice a week, and that's because mass transit isn't as frequent or reliable on the weekends--and want mass transit to be at least equivalent to road construction, both in funding levels and priority, in the very near future. But even *I* start to see a little pink (maybe not fully red) when I read something like that, expressed as it is. If nothing else, it's incredibly classist and elitist, because the vast majority of people live in the suburbs, far and near, do so because they can't afford to buy in the city center, where things are walkable or accessible to DECENT mass transit. You make houses in Myers Park or Eastover or Foxcroft the same price as those in farthest reaches or Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, and see how many people would opt to move into the city. So many people live where they live because of economic exigency and nothing else, and they're forced to drive to work because it's the best option--economically, time-wise, logistically. Instead, folks like Jean Walsh need to reframe their public statements (at least) so say driving needs to become a less attractive option. And that's, IMO, not just a political stance, it's the moral, ethical and just stance as well. Don't penalize the people who can neigh afford any more economic stress than they already experience to more expediently--at least in the near term--achieve your ends. Instead, do it the right way: Make those that can pay--and I'm not talking about merely individuals here--pay for transit that can make driving redundant. Yes, a lot of people do like to drive at will, and will continue to do so, but with further improvements and innovations in car fuels, especially electric, cars on the road won't be the critical issue it is now, in terms of emissions, only congestion.No one likes driving in rush hour, or in congestion, and a well functioning transit system that provides equitable access and service will find itself at capacity and beyond if it's only built (and run well). I don't think I should have to mention--it should be plainly obvious to any thinking person in 2020--that some people, maybe the majority of people, just instinctively react--negatively--to any perception of choices both being made for them, and denied them. You end up creating far more resistance and unnecessary conflict with the kind of ill-chose language she (and thousands like her) used in that post. IMHO. Less stick, more carrot.
  13. The thing that gets me the *most* upset about so much of the ill-informed debates about immigration--I'm not commenting on anyone's specific post here, just reflecting--is that this is something that's going to escalate dramatically in importance in the coming decades, because of global climate change. What we're experiencing now, in terms of levels of "legal" and "illegal" immigration, is just a dress rehearsal for what's to come. I get really, really, really frustrated, almost more than with any other major issue, with how little effort some (probably most) people are putting into actually trying to resolve this and come up with actual, workable policy, instead turning it into an internecine conflict that's going end up like a Nero fiddling while the [world] burns situation...
  14. Maybe it’s already been pointed out, but on the web site I noticed they’ve changed the renderings of the top of the tower...
  15. The second I read that approximately 40 percent of the property is in a flood plain and can't be 'built out,' I gave up all hope of anything historic being salvaged.
  • 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.