Plaza-Midwood Projects (Central, Commonwealth, The Plaza)

[tozmervo]

The more generic term is "Pedestrian Scramble"* where all traffic stops and you can criss-cross the intersection as a pedestrian. 

*I had never thought about it before, but that's a terrible way to refer to any crosswalk. 

Edited July 8, 2016 by tozmervo

[DEnd]

10 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

The more generic term is "Pedestrian Scramble"* where all traffic stops and you can criss-cross the intersection as a pedestrian. 

*I had never thought about it before, but that's a terrible way to refer to any crosswalk. 

That's why I prefer Barnes Dance.  The issue with it is that it stops vehicular traffic in all directions which causes a cumulative effect on traffic congestion.  Due to this it tends to mainly be used only in areas with high pedestrian traffic (which PM does not qualify as).  However appropriately implemented it does reduce pedestrian causalities.

 

31 minutes ago, Midwoodian said:

Is the delay I am talking about called a "Barnes Dance" in transportation jargon?  Also, I was thinking about the same thing on the no right turn lights.  The could come on during the delay and then turn off.  Glad to hear others on this board think this is also needed.

  I think the Plaza Midwood core (Plaza to Pecan) is a great place to prioritize pedestrians over vehicles to some extent, but it needs to be neighborhood driven.  So get your neighbors and neighborhood businesses together and get them on board with it.  And yes you will be vilified for creating a war on cars (no parking minimums?  increasing congestion? are you nuts?)  But I think asking for a minimal impact form cars so that Kids can get to the Library a bit safer, and families can walk to the grocery store a bit safer, isn't asking for much.   

[Spartan]

The technical term is "Exclusive Pedestrian Phase," which indicates how the signal phasing would operate. The inclusion of the diagonal component is known as a "Pedestrian Scramble Zone' and the term 'Barnes Dance' isn't really that common, and is mainly used in the northeast in my experience.

The existing signals could do a number of things to make it better for pedestrians. First would be to include a "Leading Pedestrian Interval" (LPI) which turns the pedestrian walk signs on for a few seconds before the lights turn green to give pedestrians a chance to get out into the intersection first. I think all signals in the neighborhoods with higher pedestrian activity should include these (PM, Noda, Five Points, Lincoln Heights, Dilworth, Wilmore, South End, Elizabeth/Midtown, the uptown Wards, etc.). I think these would solve a lot of pedestrian crossing issues at signals.

While more complicated due to impacts on vehicular traffic, an exclusive pedestrian phase would only make sense at intersections with high pedestrian volume. This would stop traffic and turn on the walk signs on all legs of the intersection. This might make sense at Pecan due to the intersection geometry, and maybe The Plaza due to pedestrian volume (though I think that this intersection is debatable).

The scramble zone concept needs incredibly high numbers of pedestrians to make it work well. There aren't many intersections in the city that would truly make sense for this. Trade&Tryon is the obvious one. Trade/College, 5th/College too. I'm sure there are a few others.

If I were in PM I would advocate for lead pedestrian intervals (LPI) and exclusive ped phases. Those are realistic asks and can be tested almost immediately. The City would just need to reprogram the signals, which takes time but doesn't involve any construction (which takes forever).

 

[videtur quam contuor]

This "scramble" is an old idea. I recall in my childhood a family visit to a big city (which I cannot recall:  St Louis? Chicago?) and looking out and down from the hotel window in a downtown area and watching the pedestrian traffic as a bell rang and the "scramble" ensued. It fascinated me, somewhat because of my aerial perspective. This was before one way streets, traffic flow control and other autocentric measures took firm hold and made pedestrians targets rather than partners.

[SgtCampsalot]

This old house got torn town yesterday. Remember how many businesses tried to make it work in there? Never did very well.

[tozmervo]

Let's enjoy what might be the most famous (if not certainly the most heavily traveled) pedestrian scramble- 

 

[DMann]

Yikes!

[SgtCampsalot]

So, random thing: This old modest church was demolished this week. I got a few pics of the result. It's always a bummer when an old building gets gone, whether it was in good shape or not.

Original Structure:

Yesterday:

 

Edited July 15, 2016 by SgtCampsalot

[Third Strike]

53 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

So, random thing: This old modest church was demolished this week. I got a few pics of the result. It's always a bummer when an old building gets gone, whether it was in good shape or not.

Original Structure:

Yesterday:

 

Is there something planned for that space? 

[teeg]

1 hour ago, SgtCampsalot said:

So, random thing: This old modest church was demolished this week. I got a few pics of the result. It's always a bummer when an old building gets gone, whether it was in good shape or not.

No disagreement here, but still I have to admire the ambition of anyone who would try to build anything at that specific location.  

[PMrez]

8 hours ago, teeg said:

No disagreement here, but still I have to admire the ambition of anyone who would try to build anything at that specific location.  

Why is that considered ambitious?

[archiham04]

On 7/15/2016 at 8:36 PM, PMrez said:

Why is that considered ambitious?

I would answer that by saying it is usually difficult to find a tenant for new construction across the street from a retail establishment that goes to this much effort for security:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2295576,-80.8121557,3a,70.3y,53.16h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_EVdW3lwQXWolZk3WBQLxw!2e0!5s20140501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

 

[Niner National]

19 minutes ago, archiham04 said:

I would answer that by saying it is usually difficult to find a tenant for new construction across the street from a retail establishment that goes to this much effort for security:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2295576,-80.8121557,3a,70.3y,53.16h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_EVdW3lwQXWolZk3WBQLxw!2e0!5s20140501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

 

A security guard in a wheelchair doesn't seem like much effort to me.

[SgtCampsalot]

12 minutes ago, archiham04 said:

I would answer that by saying it is usually difficult to find a tenant for new construction across the street from a retail establishment that goes to this much effort for security:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2295576,-80.8121557,3a,70.3y,53.16h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_EVdW3lwQXWolZk3WBQLxw!2e0!5s20140501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

 

I'd agree that it is a seemingly random, or at least very interesting, location with a whole host of other visible lots also out there to choose from, however to your specific point, it's not like it hasn't been done before across the street from a similar looking corner store.

[GeauxCLT]

This .33 acre site was purchased earlier this year for $145k, they bulldozed the existing structure, and now it's listed for $500k. Best of luck, I just don't see it happening anytime soon. Pretty sure this is a long term play for someone and the current listing is just a crazy hope. Just my guess. 

[KJHburg]

VanLandingham estate is listed for sale for $5.1 million all 4.5 acres. This should be very interesting and if rezoning is proposed it could be very contentious. 

[Crown]

31 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

VanLandingham estate is listed for sale for $5.1 million all 4.5 acres. This should be very interesting and if rezoning is proposed it could be very contentious. 

Where is this listed? Costar drawing a blank. 

[KJHburg]

Listed by KW Commercial just listed today I think. 

[boochops]

Oh wow... last I heard from Billy and Brooks, the plan was to try to make the pool happen again after the waiting period. I think the PM Facebook page might actually implode over this. 

[Midwoodian]

1 hour ago, KJHburg said:

VanLandingham estate is listed for sale for $5.1 million all 4.5 acres. This should be very interesting and if rezoning is proposed it could be very contentious. 

Wow, huge news.  Thanks for the heads up!

In other news, Novas has finally finished siding their storehouse after putting up nice iron stairs.  Also, site prep work/ potentially construction on the mixed use project going in in the old Tommy's pub site has begun.

[atlrvr]

On 10/20/2015 at 4:09 PM, atlrvr said:

Maybe he just sells the entire property to Ryan Homes to jam as many townhomes with front-loaded garages they can get there once they go up for a different zoning request with no protest petition, and the 1-year demolition permit stay is exhausted for Historic district.

Maybe they will name the new development The Towns @ Van Kinsey Heights???

[KJHburg]

Here is a story on the VanLandingham estate sale

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2016/07/20/historic-vanlandingham-estate-in-plaza-midwood.html?ana=RSS%26s%3Darticle_search&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[southslider]

The new estate owners will be within their rights to tear down the historic mansion and build out the site under existing residential zoning.

[GeauxCLT]

^not true. The estate is under a MUDD conditional zoning. Any change, including demolition, requires a rezoning. 

[southslider]

^Actually, a B-2 conditional zoning per Virtual Charlotte. Still, it should be pretty easy to rezone to straight-up R-5 without conditions, like most of the surrounding neighborhood.