ricky_davis_fan_21

Portman SouthEnd – Hawkins btw Ashton and Sycamore.

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

After the fire I had forgotten about that,  Dilworth neighborhood association fought this vigorously.  Despite everyone saying this was a future light rail line and we wanted increased density, no one wanted this increased density.  People opposed it even though the would not be able to see it from their homes.  It reminds me of the NAI Carolantic tower fight just recently at 3rd and Baldwin.  

And yes Charlotte legend is the choice of Desert Rose aka pink glass was in response to DCA opposition.  I have been in several of the units and the glass even from the inside is weird but the views are spectacular.   This tower was built way before its time in terms of high rise outside of uptown.   It is today the tallest tower outside of uptown.

Back to Portman's project, won't this be a more podium style building with parking above ground level then the tower above it due to site constraints or a tower with the parking deck next to it?  It just looks like a small site.  

I had forgot it included hundreds of townhouses, wonder what happened to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


59 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

After the fire I had forgotten about that,  Dilworth neighborhood association fought this vigorously.  Despite everyone saying this was a future light rail line and we wanted increased density, no one wanted this increased density.  People opposed it even though the would not be able to see it from their homes.  It reminds me of the NAI Carolantic tower fight just recently at 3rd and Baldwin.  

And yes Charlotte legend is the choice of Desert Rose aka pink glass was in response to DCA opposition.  I have been in several of the units and the glass even from the inside is weird but the views are spectacular.   This tower was built way before its time in terms of high rise outside of uptown.   It is today the tallest tower outside of uptown.

Back to Portman's project, won't this be a more podium style building with parking above ground level then the tower above it due to site constraints or a tower with the parking deck next to it?  It just looks like a small site. 

Correct. My understanding is that the site is 2.2 acres but only 1.6 usable. Even at a parking ratio of 2.0 / 1,000, which is a little light for South End office, you are looking at approximately 520 required parking spaces. A 12-story building on top of  4-levels of podium parking seems to be the cleanest way to skin the cat. The issue is that both your parking deck costs and building costs are going to be a higher in this config, but you can get more height / density, which is what you need to make the land number work.

 

Edited by lancer22
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Community meeting is this Wednesday at 7pm @ Powerhouse

Edited by archiham04
EDIT yeah sorry, next Wednesday.... today feels like monday
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

FYI - I hope you guys like.  Attending this cost me a parking ticket....

Sorry for the bad resolution.  His represents Portman's Total Build-Out Capacity for the lot.  Around 16/17 Stories tall, 240', several outdoor areas atop of a Step-Up Building design with one or more of the courtyards available to the public.  Tremendous retail fronting the RailTrail - I think they said around 20 or 24K.  

IMG_0857.JPG

This would most likely be SouthEnds tallest building right?..Its like the beginning of downtown SouthEnd lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

doubtful. I would think Arlington would retain that title still.

Oh crap. Forgot about Arlington. Its so close to uptown I sometimes throw it with it. lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lancer22 said:

Think it will look out of place and also looks incredibly expensive.....

At least the nearby pedestrian crossing of LYNX would be better justified for its location and also being so incredibly expensive. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

^^^I kinda of agree.  Hawkins is not a main street in any form just a 2 lane street.  I realize it is near the LYNX but lets face it most workers will come by car.    I think this site would be better suited for a podium style apartment hotel tower.  Picture this several levels of parking, then a hotel then apartments above that.  

Along South Tryon seems better for an office building of this size.  This kind of office tower would be perfect for West Blvd across from Camden Gallery apartments. 

and don't accuse of me of NIMBYism because the Krispy Kreme office is a few feet away from this site.  

 

My thought exactly. How many yuppies would want to live right next to Sycamore? Dare I say it is infinite.

Also you are a NIMBY

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the height is a little out of place, however this size development does not shock me here. Look at the size developments going up along the Atlanta Beltline Trail. I can see how the rail trail could trending that direction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I'm surprised by the skepticism about this project's location; Hawkins is an AMAZING street that deserves density, just like Tremont Ave. Any low-traffic, narrow side street that runs near a transit line is a gold mine of pedestrian/bike friendliness and should be pushed as such. Just like or the future Philemon, Raleigh/Greensboro St to the NW of the BLE in NoDa.

Thoroughfares (like S Tryon or South Blvd) are [still somewhat] hellscapes until the day true traffic calming methods are implemented.

Tremont I can agree with, Hawkins no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Psshhhh... <_<
 

It maybe COULD BE great. but it's desperately narrow. There will always be cars, so there needs to be room for decent sidewalks, parking spaces and a lane going each way. Currently theres some buildings that are soooo close to the street right accross from this proposal. 

Edited by ricky_davis_fan_21
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

It maybe COULD BE great. but it's desperately narrow. There will always be cars, so there needs to be room for decent sidewalks, parking spaces and a lane going each way. Currently theres some buildings that are soooo close to the street right accross from this proposal. 

I mean you're right. As random lots get infill on Hawkins, likely spurred by this project, I see the sidewalk/on-street parking fleshing out out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I mean you're right. As random lots get infill on Hawkins, likely spurred by this project, I see the sidewalk/on-street parking fleshing out out.

Going to need to require 25' setbacks going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

FYI - I hope you guys like.  Attending this cost me a parking ticket....

Sorry for the bad resolution.  His represents Portman's Total Build-Out Capacity for the lot.  Around 16/17 Stories tall, 240', several outdoor areas atop of a Step-Up Building design with one or more of the courtyards available to the public.  Tremendous retail fronting the RailTrail - I think they said around 20 or 24K.  

IMG_0857.JPG

Is there an online version of this presentation availiable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.