Jump to content

Legacy Union (former Charlotte Observer redevelopment)


Missmylab4

Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, Jayvee said:

It's gotten better looking. 656' is the final height.

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 9.52.11 AM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 9.54.12 AM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 9.54.16 AM.png

Are those people on a balcony in the "Church Street Elevation Enlarged?" Is there a retail tenant on a higher floor? Restaurant? Or just office tenant amenity? 

33 Floors seems like too few for a height of 656' doesn't it? Hearst tower is 47 floors. Maybe the anchor tenant has some really tall employees. 

New renderings are a huge improvement. This is gonna be a great addition to the skyline. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Jayvee said:

So I think this new?? 2 retail spaces accessible from the office lobby. The one is HUGE, how is that going to work with lobby only access?

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 10.48.11 AM.png

They actually listened to my critisms in my article and fixed a lot of stuff.

There is a lot of information in the RTAPs that is interesting. 

The most interesting is the “Podium” that faces Hill street previously had an architectural feature on top that capped it off. Now they have removed the “cap” and placed a “future development area” that would be connecting to the small parking deck there. They have also included the text “future multi use building” so they’ve made it clear that “podium” will be built on top of. 

58e26929b4bd7_ScreenShot2017-04-03at11_23_47AM.png.4d058972b745d323e671375770574e5a.png

Also interesting, they have eliminated all the entrances to the tower except Church and Tryon, meaning the uses along Stonewall will have nothing to do with this building, aka more space for street front retail. 

Here is before and after

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 11.16.18 AM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-03 at 11.16.00 AM.png

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, I'm in the minority (I still hate it, now only slightly less as the additional height definitely helps).  If they removed/replaced the beige concrete panels, it would be much better.  I also hate the way that the pyramid sits on the top.  It feels poorly sized and integrated with the rest of the building.  It doesn't look glassier to me but I must be missing something.  F+.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JBS said:

Apparently, I'm in the minority (I still hate it, now only slightly less as the additional height definitely helps).  If they removed/replaced the beige concrete panels, it would be much better.  I also hate the way that the pyramid sits on the top.  It feels poorly sized and integrated with the rest of the building.  It doesn't look glassier to me but I must be missing something.  F+.

I think they need to add in a step between parapet and pyramid, like this. But probably glass instead of Stucco

58e2677356dcf_ScreenShot2017-04-03at11_16_00AM.thumb.png.e108a308e071906e61539c12f73068be.jpg

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

Just a quibble...but looking at the new elevations in Accela, I'm seeing 632'.

Both numbers are stated in the document, but I agree with the 632' based on the elevations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the 656', includes the underground levels, while the 632' is the Tryon St frontage elevation above grade.  Also looks like there is a retail stall along Church St between the lobby and Hill St that will mask the service area...not sure if that was in the original, but seems pretty sweet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

I suspect the 656', includes the underground levels, while the 632' is the Tryon St frontage elevation above grade.  Also looks like there is a retail stall along Church St between the lobby and Hill St that will mask the service area...not sure if that was in the original, but seems pretty sweet.

Yep, that was there before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, asthasr said:

With its size, it'd be great to get some photoshop renderings of how it will look from various angles... anyone have the chops? :P

Here you go. Took a little to get the perspective right. Had to split the building into pieces. 

 

Untitled-2.jpg

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excited for this project, but feel it will accentuate the bookend nature of our skyline. DEC/620 on the south and BAC/Hearst to the north. 

Not necessarily a bad thing. I may be ready to see BAC finally lose its crown and watch CLT's new tallest rise somewhere in the middle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NCpride said:

Excited for this project, but feel it will accentuate the bookend nature of our skyline. DEC/620 on the south and BAC/Hearst to the north. 

Not necessarily a bad thing. I may be ready to see BAC finally lose its crown and watch CLT's new tallest rise somewhere in the middle. 

Hope I didn't start anything. I have no insider knowledge, though obviously there are rumors attached to said parking lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still hate it. The eight pane windows below each cornice reek of bad postmodern towers of the 1980s (see WaMu in Seattle, Comerica Tower in Dallas, or Humana in Louisville). When will Charlotte EVER get a a really good modern tower? My guess is never. 

My hope now is that the future development surrounding Johnny's Erection will hide it from view.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • 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.