Jump to content

Portman SouthEnd – Hawkins btw Ashton and Sycamore.


Guest

Recommended Posts


I feel like this post should be pinned for reference on every UP thread.  Great explanation and commentary. All of the complaints about too much parking are unrealistic at best.  Agreed on the screen standards.  I hate the screening on The Line.

17 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

I like it.  I also like parking.

 

Edited by J-Rob
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, J-Rob said:

I feel like this post should be pinned for reference on every UP thread.  Great explanation and commentary. All of the complaints about too much parking are unrealistic at best.  Agreed on the screen standards.  I hate the screening on The Line.

 

Perhaps. But parking like this is much easier to defend than parking as proposed by Stiles and Shorenstein at East/West Station. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

I like it.  I also like parking.

I live less than 2 miles from this site, and it would take me > 20 mins to take transit  there assuming best case on the transfer at CTC.  I would walk on a really nice day.   On a cold or rainy day,  I would drive.

I'd like to think I'm the type of valuable employee my company wants to retain, and choosing a building that is inconvenient to anyone not living within a 5 minute walk of the LRT (so > 95% of the Charlotte metro area) wouldn't be a popular decision with anyone I can think of that I work with.

I'm transit supportive.  I will voted for the original transit tax.  I voted again the repeal.  I will vote for another 1% hike to support more build out.....but right now, the projections are 18 years for another line to be added, to add what, another 5-10% of the metro population to have a transit be competitive with driving. 

The city isn't dense enough, not have established transit to make building without parking for a majority of employees a marketable solution.

Small boutique buildings can do it when they are catering to small firms of like-minded people (think creative firms).  Large firms have broader populations to consider.

I view office buildings (and apartment buildings) next to transit stations with parking to accommodate employees, but also having good transit, biking, pedestrian access the best of all worlds, not a problem.    

TL,DR: building parking is expensive.  developers wouldn't do it if they didn't think it was economically worth it.   tenants wouldn't pay the premiums, unless they thought it was a valuable amenity for their employees.

*** I do think parking garage screening in urban districts should require greater design standards., just like other components of a building's design standards.  no argument there ***

Your points are well taken, and I agree that there are a multitude of reasons why large quantities of parking are necessary to make projects feasible in 2021. My point is that this and other buildings will likely be around for a long time (because it is a huge waste of resources to tear down and rebuild buildings every 25-30 years). It may be around for 50+ years. I think it's reasonable to imagine a scenario in that time horizon where the demand for parking will be less than it is now. The design of the parking structures in these podium buildings makes it very difficult to retrofit the parking levels into any other income-producing use. Today's amenity may well become tomorrow's liability. The solution to this (mainly, raising floor-to-floor heights of parking levels by 2-3 feet) costs more up front but could contribute significantly to the building's viability over its full life span. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to take this thread off-topic, but supporting more parking + transit is completely contradictory. They are competitors. At a system-wide level, universally building significant amounts of parking destroys any competitive edge transit has or will ever have. As long as we have abundant free parking, transit use will never meaningfully increase. I'm not saying we shouldn't be building any parking, but we're building more parking per capita than *literally* any other urban place on earth. Considering the climate crisis we face, this is beyond unacceptable.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 9:33 PM, KJHburg said:

Parking in high rise apartment towers could easily be converted to storage units for residents who are probably lacking in storage.   Or huge floors of dog friendly areas.  

I actually think this is a smart way to think about this. Storage units for those who live in compact urban apartments are worth their weights in gold, trust me. My apartment--thank God--has its own washer and dryer and furnace unit as well, but they had to convert original closet space--I live in an old building that was renovated, so there wasn't a ton of storage space to start--into two discrete closets to house them. I wouldn't go so far as saying I would kill someone to get a non-off site storage space, but I might not be adverse to non-lethal chicanery...

I actually think, if we're trying to conceive of a non-car-centric future, one thing that these parking garages could be converted to--at least the lower levels--is parking for BICYCLES. In our best case scenario, when people own no cars, and take mass transit or bike for routine travel, the bike population per capita would be very high, right? Where are all these bikes going to be parked? Charlotte's sidewalks aren't wide and expansive enough, and as I said, urban apartments don't have a surfeit of space, and if we're thinking about couples with a bike each, having what once was a space allocated for a car instead converted to two bike parking spaces would be amazing. Then, think about guest parking as well as customer parking in buildings with commercial space. Charlotte isn't built for thousands of bikes being parked Uptown or its surrounding neighborhoods--unless you consider taking them inside...to parking structures already there built primarily for another modality.  

(Obviously, once you get higher than the second, maybe third, level you're probably going to have to be more creative with your adaptive reuse, but I think basic storage units will also be well received, and you'll still need a level or two for cars, even if in this ideal world they're only ride share or rental vehicles.)

This isn't even taking into account what the future might hold in terms of new inventions or innovations in individual transportation that we can't fathom yet.  I definitely understand the rationale behind advocating for smaller or less prominent parking structures, but I think it's premised primarily on current conditions and anticipated nearer term ones, but none of us know what the future holds. Regardless, I have no doubt that the desire for monetization of every space of our society will find a way in the future to adapt and rehabilitate today's parking structures.

I pretty much agree with @atlrvr's post. I would make the point that I've made on hear before, which I again think needs repeating: You are penalizing and hindering the advancement of the less affluent by limiting parking and vehicular access in certain parts of town, which--uncomfortably--are the parts traditionally seen as exclusionary and I (would hope) we are all at pains to be be reversing. Poor people can't chose their mobility options as easily as those of us (I presume) on this board; they're often farther away from *reliable* and *efficient* mass transit--and for decades more, at least, if the Silver Line is 18 years away. If you start restricting parking too much now, you limit who can reasonably participate in certain elements of the city's life--for employment, most critically.

I truly, truly believe you don't start with reverse social engineering to get us to a less car-centric society. You first have to provide the good, reliable, and widely accessible mass transit people will require before you start restricting their abilities to travel places in cars. Personally, I think traffic and congestion alone will do the trick, not reducing parking space preemptively. I doesn't matter how much ample and even free parking is waiting at the end of a journey, if a journey itself is going to be too difficult, a majority of people (in general) will find other transportation options (for routine, non-once in a year trips). Time is money--ref: my prior paragraph about the economically disadvantaged.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great points ertley.  When parking/storage demand is met.  My $0.02 was going to be parking decks can convert to small DC space for businesses.  My mind went there but then found this Axios article

 

Quote

https://www.axios.com/the-future-of-parking-garages-98ae0851-885f-4ba8-a910-255c751cc38c.html

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So this (with the potential paint) is done?  Maybe these singular steel sticks every 10’ are the supporting framework for these pretty terra cotta colored blades they showed off in the renderings. 
 

no….?  :wacko:

A20474AC-8CBF-4E95-B75C-1576C1359D7A.jpeg

B31CBE40-1F06-4C12-9825-B9D88A7795EA.jpeg

It reminds me of Durham Centre, which is single handedly the worst example of street engagement I’ve ever seen of any building.  The entire block is wrapped in exposed parking with literally zero attempt to screen anything.  Nothing.  And an office plopped on top.   I know this will have stuff at the ground level, but c’mon guys. Really?  

8BC95B45-4611-4F99-8442-962132352425.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, turbocraig said:

So this (with the potential paint) is done?  Maybe these singular steel sticks every 10’ are the supporting framework for these pretty terra cotta colored blades they showed off in the renderings. 
 

no….?  :wacko:

A20474AC-8CBF-4E95-B75C-1576C1359D7A.jpeg

B31CBE40-1F06-4C12-9825-B9D88A7795EA.jpeg

It reminds me of Durham Centre, which is single handedly the worst example of street engagement I’ve ever seen of any building.  The entire block is wrapped in exposed parking with literally zero attempt to screen anything.  Nothing.  And an office plopped on top.   I know this will have stuff at the ground level, but c’mon guys. Really?  

8BC95B45-4611-4F99-8442-962132352425.jpeg

I like this project but you are absolutely correct...the renderings look significantly better. I do think the paint helps so hopefully they follow through on that (assume they will).  That building in Durham is...something else. Ours could be better but theirs looks like 3 buildings stacked on top of each other.  Just atrocious. 

  • 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.