Stream Realty/Durban Group/Suffolk Punch Tower

[KJHburg]

Since this will be the next big thing along the LYNX line and the Rail Trail it should have its own thread.

Stream Realty Partners, The Durban Group joint venture on mixed-use project in South End - Charlotte Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

""Stream Realty Partners, a Texas real estate firm with a growing Charlotte office, is working in a joint venture with The Durban Group, which owns brewery The Suffolk Punch and adjacent real estate at 2833 and 2905 Griffith St.  At that 1.7-acre site next to The Suffolk Punch, Stream and Durban will develop a 325,000-square-foot building, including about 300,000 square feet of office and the remaining space retail. Construction is expected to begin in the second quarter of 2022.""

Consider these some of the Before photos of the 2 existing buildings to be razed for the new office tower.  Suffolk Punch will remain.  Right at the New Bern station. 

first couple of photos are of the buildings to be torn down for the tower.   Suffolk Punch is not included.  The Bradham apartments and their retail should really benefit for this. 

Last 2 photos are from the other side of the tracks of the buildings to be razed. 

[Blue_Devil]

Excited to see the rendering. SouthEnd Architecture is really starting to pick up, but some of it can look out of place for sure (I am looking at you East/West tower, even if you do look great in the concepts) In the long run it won't matter as SouthEnd is going to have a lot of towers it looks like, but short term, projects like these stand out like islands, and a poorly designed one can look really bad.  

[rancenc]

Article on this proposed project in Southend

https://rebusinessonline.com/stream-realty-durban-group-to-develop-325000-sf-mixed-use-project-in-charlottes-south-end/

[KJHburg]

walked by the future site of this 20 story tower.  Great location really right at the New Bern station.  Suffolk Punch will remain of course but the 2 buildings next to it heading towards uptown will be gone. 

[KJHburg]

this may be in the news quicker than you think.  Don't forget about this one.  I almost did. 

[stiluvclt]

Tell us, tell us!

[Hushpuppy321]

Will be surprised if this site gets off the ground with Inflation and Rate Hikes still on-going.  Economy definitely slowing rapidly 

[CLT Development]

36 minutes ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

Will be surprised if this site gets off the ground with Inflation and Rate Hikes still on-going.  Economy definitely slowing rapidly 

Actually you can expect it to go spec in Q1 2023, its financed 

[Hushpuppy321]

9 hours ago, CLT Development said:

Actually you can expect it to go spec in Q1 2023, its financed 

Wow - SouthEnd is killing it!  

[JorgiPorgi]

Anyone know what this one will look like? 

[KJHburg]

I am hearing rumblings about this tower and the rumblings mean it could be started soon.  Don't ask me when soon is but this could be one of the next office towers to start in Southend.  No idea on height or what it would look like but re-read the first post in this thread.  

[Prodev]

There is no chance. I'm not discrediting your intel, but I'd be willing to bet that it came from the fact that Stream/Durban told Suffolk Punch to vacate the adjacent event space building at the end of this year. That notice was given to them over a year ago, so it has been in motion prior to the strongest of the economic headwinds occurring. There is no way any office building starts anywhere in the next 18+ months unless it's owner occupied. There's just too much vacancy in the market, debt and equity are too scarce right now and the economics just don't make sense as return requirements have gone up, rents have leveled off or gone down and construction costs have been flat. 

[Guest]

I mean, i agree that it doesn’t make sense but I’m going to assume KJ knows something to think it’s ready

[KJHburg]

Well I guess we will see if nothing office related starts in the next 18 months.   I do believe a couple of things will what is the question.  

anyway CBRE says this about 2024 office market and this is surely happening in this market as well:

Office/Occupier | CBRE

but this is an interesting comment:

""Office location, quality, flexibility and amenities will be more important than ever to attract occupiers. While economic headwinds and the prevalence of hybrid working will play a major role in occupiers’ decisions in 2024, those that do lease space will flock to submarkets with an abundance of walkable amenities that help attract and retain the best talent.

More than half of the respondents to CBRE’s 2023 U.S. Office Occupier Sentiment Survey said they plan to further reduce their office space in 2024. The flight-to-quality trend of recent years will continue to support demand for newer, prime office product with the best amenities. Since 2017, absorption in newer post-2010 assets has been positive and we expect this will continue in 2024. For pre-2010 buildings, absorption has been negative for the past four quarters. Quarterly demand for post-2010 buildings is expected to begin outpacing new supply added to the market by Q4 2024. A recent increase in tenants that are actively looking for space across major markets suggests that leasing activity will rise by 5% in 2024 but will remain between 20% and 25% below pre-pandemic levels.""

 

[KJHburg]

this site is one to watch in 2024.  

[Guest]

I trust your intel KJ but this project, or any high rise in the immediate area, makes no sense. Assuming it will need a huge parking garage as it is office, what roads would be used most to access it? Griffith, Poindexter and Fairwood are all quite narrow, I just don’t see a reality where this whole area isn’t an immediate mess for pedestrians. 

Edited January 5 by MothBeast

[KJHburg]

2 hours ago, MothBeast said:

I trust your intel KJ but this project, or any high rise in the immediate area, makes no sense. Assuming it will need a huge parking garage as it is office, what roads would be used most to access it? Griffith, Poindexter and Fairwood are all quite narrow, I just don’t see a reality where this whole area isn’t an immediate mess. 

I kinda thought the same thing of the Line but this location is right at a station unlike the Line (for now) and is on 2 lane streets as well.  But it is only a block really off South Blvd and a couple off S Tryon between 2 exits of I-77. 

[Guest]

I’m worried about the immediate area’s pedestrian experience; the building will have good access but I’m saying that will be at the cost of any pedestrian friendliness. Most people walk in the street as there aren’t sidewalks along most of those streets. I feel like the immediate area will be gridlock if the trend is to build high here and the city doesn’t make an effort to pedestrianize/widen the right of way on these streets. If the plan is to wait for the developers to do it then I sure hope there aren’t too many lulls in coming development cycles because these areas in mid development with half built infrastructure are becoming dangerous.

The intersection of Hawkins and West Blvd is a good example, the city is clearly waiting for some development at that intersection to pay for the improvements, but there are already high rises being built down Hawkins and people are running across west blvd with no crosswalk in major traffic. I’ve seen a few close calls, not to mention cars making drastic attempts to turn left/right or cross the street because there is no light there. My car was totaled by another (also totaled) which tried to cross West Blvd with no vision since traffic was blocking the intersection. I see evidence of wrecks there all the time and that’s just one example.

Sorry, this turned into a manifesto about the city’s delay in improving its infrastructure in rapidly urbanizing areas.

Edited January 5 by MothBeast

[CLT Development]

8 minutes ago, MothBeast said:

I’m worried about the immediate area’s pedestrian experience; the building will have good access but I’m saying that will be at the cost of any pedestrian friendliness. Most people walk in the street as there aren’t sidewalks along most of those streets. I feel like the immediate area will be gridlock if the trend is to build high here and the city doesn’t make an effort to pedestrianize/widen the right of way on these streets. If the plan is to wait for the developers to do it then I sure hope there aren’t too many lulls in coming development cycles because these areas in mid development with half built infrastructure are becoming dangerous.

The intersection of Hawkins and West Blvd is a good example, the city is clearly waiting for some development at that intersection to pay for the improvements, but there are already high rises being built down Hawkins and people are running across west blvd with no crosswalk in major traffic. I’ve seen a few close calls, not to mention cars making drastic attempts to turn left/right or cross the street because there is no light there. My car was totaled by another (also totaled) which tried to cross West Blvd with no vision since traffic was blocking the intersection. I see evidence of wrecks there all the time and that’s just one example.

Sorry, this turned into a manifesto about the city’s delay in improving its infrastructure in rapidly urbanizing areas.

Say it for the folks in the back.

[jjwilli]

2 hours ago, MothBeast said:

The intersection of Hawkins and West Blvd is a good example, the city is clearly waiting for some development at that intersection to pay for the improvements, but there are already high rises being built down Hawkins and people are running across west blvd with no crosswalk in major traffic.

OT to the thread yet relevant, I put in a 311 request for a light at this intersection over the summer and below was the response from CDOT.  I am not really sure CDOT is aware of the actual need for a light here so it’s doubtful they’d push for one even with future development.

 

Recommendation (8/15/2023):  No action for signals. Refer intersection to the Pedestrian Crossing Committee to consider other pedestrian treatments.

Last count:  Tuesday 7/19/2023

• Northbound Hawkins volumes with 1411 vehicles over the 13-hour count are much higher than southboundHawkins with 227 vehicles
• The highest left turn volume for northbound Hawkins was from 3:45-4:45 with 148 vehicles
• Volumes meet the 8-Hour warrant 1a for 2 hours and 1b for 4 hours.  The 4-Hour volume warrant was only met for one unique hour of the count.
• The count data showed 159 pedestrians crossing West Bv at this intersection.

Crash Data reviewed for January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022:

• Over this 5 year period there were 41 total crashes.  Thirteen of the crashes were of types susceptible to correction by signalization.
  • 3 in 2018 (1 Angle, 2 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
  • 1 in 2019 (Angle)
  • 1 in 2020 (Angle)
  • 4 in 2021 (3 Angle, 1 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
  • 4 in 2022 (2 Angle, 2 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
• There was 1 suspected minor injury crash (B), 4 Possible Injury crashes (C), and 7 non-Injury crashes

Field observation by SSD on Wednesday 5/31/2023 between 3:30 and 4:00 PM.

• The volumes were much higher on Hawkinsthan the 2016 count.  There have been several mixed use/multi-family housing complexes recently built with access along Hawkins.
• A 30-minute delay study for northbound Hawkins showed 73 vehicles turning left, 31 vehicles turning right.  The average delay for all turning vehicles was 21 seconds with a maximum delay of 1 minute and 33 seconds
• The longest queue observed was 6 vehicles
• Five pedestrians crossed West Blvd approaches, and 10 pedestrians & 1 cyclist crossed the Hawkins legs of the intersection
• The nearby signals on each side create regular gaps

West Blvd is a four-lane city-maintained major thoroughfare with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.  Hawkins St is a two-lane city-maintained local street with a 25-mph speed limit.  There are no left turn lanes on any of the approaches of this intersection.  There are signalized intersections less then 500 feet to the west, Tryon & West, and to the east, Camden & West.  There is good connectivity both of the Hawkins legs that would allow access to existing signalized intersections.

 Conclusion:  Volumes, crashes, and delays do not meet warrants to justify a full traffic signal at this location.  However, because of the number of observed pedestrian crossings, high pedestrian volumes shown in the count data, the number of lanes to cross, and distance between crossing opportunities, the intersection should be considered for other pedestrian treatments.  

[shado_jaguar]

Hmm, If 160 ends at tryon then this is a good candidate to continue the east boulevard diet.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, jjwilli said:

OT to the thread yet relevant, I put in a 311 request for a light at this intersection over the summer and below was the response from CDOT.  I am not really sure CDOT is aware of the actual need for a light here so it’s doubtful they’d push for one even with future development.

 

Recommendation (8/15/2023):  No action for signals. Refer intersection to the Pedestrian Crossing Committee to consider other pedestrian treatments.

Last count:  Tuesday 7/19/2023

• Northbound Hawkins volumes with 1411 vehicles over the 13-hour count are much higher than southboundHawkins with 227 vehicles
• The highest left turn volume for northbound Hawkins was from 3:45-4:45 with 148 vehicles
• Volumes meet the 8-Hour warrant 1a for 2 hours and 1b for 4 hours.  The 4-Hour volume warrant was only met for one unique hour of the count.
• The count data showed 159 pedestrians crossing West Bv at this intersection.

Crash Data reviewed for January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022:

• Over this 5 year period there were 41 total crashes.  Thirteen of the crashes were of types susceptible to correction by signalization.
  • 3 in 2018 (1 Angle, 2 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
  • 1 in 2019 (Angle)
  • 1 in 2020 (Angle)
  • 4 in 2021 (3 Angle, 1 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
  • 4 in 2022 (2 Angle, 2 Left Turn; Different Roadway)
• There was 1 suspected minor injury crash (B), 4 Possible Injury crashes (C), and 7 non-Injury crashes

Field observation by SSD on Wednesday 5/31/2023 between 3:30 and 4:00 PM.

• The volumes were much higher on Hawkinsthan the 2016 count.  There have been several mixed use/multi-family housing complexes recently built with access along Hawkins.
• A 30-minute delay study for northbound Hawkins showed 73 vehicles turning left, 31 vehicles turning right.  The average delay for all turning vehicles was 21 seconds with a maximum delay of 1 minute and 33 seconds
• The longest queue observed was 6 vehicles
• Five pedestrians crossed West Blvd approaches, and 10 pedestrians & 1 cyclist crossed the Hawkins legs of the intersection
• The nearby signals on each side create regular gaps

West Blvd is a four-lane city-maintained major thoroughfare with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.  Hawkins St is a two-lane city-maintained local street with a 25-mph speed limit.  There are no left turn lanes on any of the approaches of this intersection.  There are signalized intersections less then 500 feet to the west, Tryon & West, and to the east, Camden & West.  There is good connectivity both of the Hawkins legs that would allow access to existing signalized intersections.

 Conclusion:  Volumes, crashes, and delays do not meet warrants to justify a full traffic signal at this location.  However, because of the number of observed pedestrian crossings, high pedestrian volumes shown in the count data, the number of lanes to cross, and distance between crossing opportunities, the intersection should be considered for other pedestrian treatments.  

I’ve lived nearby for years and it has ramped up in traffic significantly in the past year for sure. I regularly see up to 8-10 cars lined up waiting to turn on West Blvd especially at night when pedestrians are most prominent and visibility the worst. I agree they need eyes on the ground to change their assessment.

Also this shows that CDOTs approach to infrastructure improvement is truly reactionary. If we know they are going to add a few hundred residents at this intersection in the next few years so can they. Those volumes are just going to go up. I mean they are even implying not enough people have been injured severely enough for them to do something. Why wait for that to happen?

Edited January 5 by MothBeast

[Hushpuppy321]

If this planned Office Tower proceeds to construction, it would exacerbate the ongoing ‘flight to quality’ from Uptown to SouthEnd