Dilworth Projects (Kenilworth, Morehead, East)

[southslider]

Does anyone else find it ironic that a streetcar suburb would fight transit-oriented development?

[voyager12]

If I am not mistaken Burgess lives over on the Latta Park side of Dilworth. I would be in more agreement with the DCDA Board if this site was further into the older section of the neighborhood. I wish this site would continue to be an affordable spot. However these upcoming condos will fit in with the changing and more upscale density on this border of Dilworth.

[14thumb]

Have you made these points to the DCDA?

The site plan for the rezoning of McEwen's Funeral Home to allow a 13-story office tower on Morehead is now online.

Site Plan

I was originally excited about a 13-story office building at that location, but after looking at the site plan, I've changed my mind unless they make some serious revisions.

#1. There is no need for the curb cut on Morehead. Yes, the funeral home has one, but it is really only used for processions. A 180,000 sq. ft. building would generate about 650 employees, which would add a good bit of traffic to a part of Morehead that is already difficult (and dangerous) to make turns across traffic. It's also dangerous to turn out onto Morehead due to the very wide trunked trees lining the street. Even pulling out of Royal Ct. isn't the safest. A stop light at Royal Ct. should be required as well.

#2. The building makes Royal Ct. it's b*tch with a 4 story parking deck pressed up against the road (a la Met Midtown against Kings). Royal Court Condos does a decent job in providing an urban streetscape to the street, and this would ruin that effort (as well as the views for the people living on the south side of RC).

#3. There is a real need for some retail in this location. I would be nice if there was a token sandwich shop of something. There is a good bit of office in this area, which means there is a lot of midday traffic of people driving to lunch because there are no option (1 less now that Longhorn is gone). Looking at the site plan, it seems easy enough to turn that ground level office space into 1 or 2 retail spots.

#4. They want to maintain the current sidewalks along Morehead, which are woefully inadequate (5 ft. I think, 6 ft. max.) They should be a minimum of 8 feet, but 10 makes more sense for such a major corridor. I used to walk home this way, and between the people jogging down the sidewalks, and high-speed traffic close by, it feels horribly claustraphobic to walk there.

Dilworth (DCDA) has been timid about concerning themselves with the other side of Morehead, but here is an instance they should work for something better, rather than spewing the same old anit-condo rhetoric for parcels near the transit stations. I believe E Morehead is supposed to get a streetscape plan at some point. Hopefully city planning staff has enough foresight to see that this will conform to the likely urban vision for the corridor.

[voyager12]

Another old apt house along Park near Bi-Lo is up For Sale. I wonder if this one will be converted to single family like the one up the block at Park&Magnolia and the old plex along Ewing. I am thinking condos. More affordable housing in Dilworth on the way out. Yippee

There was another armed robbery in the middle of the afternoon near Latta Park this past Saturday. Add this to one last month around the same time of day. Several cars were broken into around Latta last week as well. Not to mention house robberies have been on the upswing on the streets surrounding the park. The trend seems to be moving beyond petty or holiday crime spikes. The police will increase patrols but their resources are stretched. There is talk of hiring private security patrols and starting a neighborhood crime watch. The incidents are certainly getting more brazen. Hopefully someone will not have to be shot to get it under control.

Edited January 7, 2008 by voyager12

[not_4_sure]

The reaction of the outgoing DCDA president regarding the rezoning at Tremont and Euclid is a little immature in my opinion. The CBJ asked for his reaction to City Council's approval and what he was going to do, he said he was going to move out of the neighborhood

actually, it was a misquoted exchange via email - ask the reporter and she'll back it up...email is dangerous - as are forums - if you can't hear the intonation behind someone's voice. CBJ did a nice profile the following week - Behind the Scenes 2007. Looks like a lot is going on in the neighborhood - glad people are involved and paying attention.

[not_4_sure]

The site plan for the rezoning of McEwen's Funeral Home to allow a 13-story office tower on Morehead is now online.

Site Plan

I was originally excited about a 13-story office building at that location, but after looking at the site plan, I've changed my mind unless they make some serious revisions.

#1. There is no need for the curb cut on Morehead. Yes, the funeral home has one, but it is really only used for processions. A 180,000 sq. ft. building would generate about 650 employees, which would add a good bit of traffic to a part of Morehead that is already difficult (and dangerous) to make turns across traffic. It's also dangerous to turn out onto Morehead due to the very wide trunked trees lining the street. Even pulling out of Royal Ct. isn't the safest. A stop light at Royal Ct. should be required as well.

#2. The building makes Royal Ct. it's b*tch with a 4 story parking deck pressed up against the road (a la Met Midtown against Kings). Royal Court Condos does a decent job in providing an urban streetscape to the street, and this would ruin that effort (as well as the views for the people living on the south side of RC).

#3. There is a real need for some retail in this location. I would be nice if there was a token sandwich shop of something. There is a good bit of office in this area, which means there is a lot of midday traffic of people driving to lunch because there are no option (1 less now that Longhorn is gone). Looking at the site plan, it seems easy enough to turn that ground level office space into 1 or 2 retail spots.

#4. They want to maintain the current sidewalks along Morehead, which are woefully inadequate (5 ft. I think, 6 ft. max.) They should be a minimum of 8 feet, but 10 makes more sense for such a major corridor. I used to walk home this way, and between the people jogging down the sidewalks, and high-speed traffic close by, it feels horribly claustraphobic to walk there.

Dilworth (DCDA) has been timid about concerning themselves with the other side of Morehead, but here is an instance they should work for something better, rather than spewing the same old anit-condo rhetoric for parcels near the transit stations. I believe E Morehead is supposed to get a streetscape plan at some point. Hopefully city planning staff has enough foresight to see that this will conform to the likely urban vision for the corridor.

They updated their plans to DCDA recently. Each one of these topics has been addressed. The curb cut along Morehead is gone, the parking deck is still "pressed" up against Morehead, but they've reoriented so the majority of the parking follows a North South orientation now, they proposed stepping the vertical elements back incrementally, they are proposing 15k sqft of ground level retail (with on-street patio to make way for the potential of a restaurant tenant), and they are satisfying a 24' setback consisting of 8' planting strip, 6' sidewalk, and 10' landscape buffer (all city mandated). In addition, they will be saving 3 of the 4 trees in the right of way...a huge plus and in my opinion should be an absolute requirement. DCDA has been involved with this developer for months and, in fact, highlighted MANY of the same concerns. Glad they did - looks like a better project already!

[atlrvr]

They updated their plans to DCDA recently. Each one of these topics has been addressed. The curb cut along Morehead is gone, the parking deck is still "pressed" up against Morehead, but they've reoriented so the majority of the parking follows a North South orientation now, they proposed stepping the vertical elements back incrementally, they are proposing 15k sqft of ground level retail (with on-street patio to make way for the potential of a restaurant tenant), and they are satisfying a 24' setback consisting of 8' planting strip, 6' sidewalk, and 10' landscape buffer (all city mandated). In addition, they will be saving 3 of the 4 trees in the right of way...a huge plus and in my opinion should be an absolute requirement. DCDA has been involved with this developer for months and, in fact, highlighted MANY of the same concerns. Glad they did - looks like a better project already!

^ I am very pleased with this news...and the fact that DCDA has taken an interest of what occurs north of Morehead. I recall the initial reaction to the horrendous ~35 faux-gold spired condo tower was actually one of moderate approval.

I am confused by what was referred to as a city mandated 8'-6'-10' set of setbacks. Is 8'-8'-8' not acceptable? It would certainly be much more pedestrian friendly. As this is a conditional site plan, I don't see how it couldn't be one of the stipulated conditions.

Also, I'm still hoping for the traffic signal at Royal Ct./Myrtle. Have the developer or city staff try to make left hand turns out of there today, and then imagine it will the additional cars (on the Royal Ct. side) and I think it will become pretty clear they are needed. Besides, with the new office workers and residents at RC, there will be significantly more pedestrians wanting to cross Morehead at this intersection, which is pretty dangerous, considering the speed of traffic there.

[not_4_sure]

^ I am very pleased with this news...and the fact that DCDA has taken an interest of what occurs north of Morehead. I recall the initial reaction to the horrendous ~35 faux-gold spired condo tower was actually one of moderate approval.

I am confused by what was referred to as a city mandated 8'-6'-10' set of setbacks. Is 8'-8'-8' not acceptable? It would certainly be much more pedestrian friendly. As this is a conditional site plan, I don't see how it couldn't be one of the stipulated conditions.

Also, I'm still hoping for the traffic signal at Royal Ct./Myrtle. Have the developer or city staff try to make left hand turns out of there today, and then imagine it will the additional cars (on the Royal Ct. side) and I think it will become pretty clear they are needed. Besides, with the new office workers and residents at RC, there will be significantly more pedestrians wanting to cross Morehead at this intersection, which is pretty dangerous, considering the speed of traffic there.

The city determines the setback. Morehead is a 24' setback consisting of an 8' planting strip, 6' sidewalk, and 10' buffer to the building. This measurement is from the back of existing curb. Setbacks are pre-determined - the conditional status relates to what happens behind the city right of way (behind that 24' setback).

As for the traffic signal - CDOT didn't make any mention of that in their analysis. I agree it will be a problem and wonder if there's a way to have a study done PROJECTING the increased traffic from Royal Court Residents and the 600 +/- that will be entering this building daily. Currently, CDOT only does the survey on CURRENT traffic to determine needs. With a light a block down and another a block up, they more than likely won't be able to interject a light mid block...but who knows?! At least they'll be looking at it. Are you going to take this to them?

[atlrvr]

At the moment, I'm more of an arm-chair developer/planner

In seriousness though, my current location in Boston keeps me from being as active as I was/wish to be....but I'm hoping to return to Charlotte this year. Until then, I simply call them like I see them, and hope someone else reads my ramblings and picks up my slack.....though I'd be happy to send a e-mail to whoever is deemed relevent.

As a side note, this is really a MUDD-O rezoning....I thought the O as opposed to a (CD), allowed them to make specific alterations to zoning codes, as opposed to simply being more restrictive like a (CD). In particular, I believe O allows developers to alter setback requirements.....The Vue and Wachovia certainly made use of it to encroach the building envelope into the setbacks.

[Charlotte_native]

As a side note, this is really a MUDD-O rezoning....I thought the O as opposed to a (CD), allowed them to make specific alterations to zoning codes, as opposed to simply being more restrictive like a (CD). In particular, I believe O allows developers to alter setback requirements.....The Vue and Wachovia certainly made use of it to encroach the building envelope into the setbacks.

Actually, at least in a case I was involved in, the O is pretty restrictive. It stands for Optional which sounds like it gives options, but it actually doesn't. In the case I was working on the O restricted the petitioner for the rezoning to what was in their plans submitted at that time -- period. Once the rezoning passess, and the MUDD-O is in place, any changes to the plans that are significant (materials and minor changes don't count) would require the same process as a full rezoning. You've somewhat locked in what can be done.

The U zonings, UMUD and others, were the most free for the landowner.

[atlrvr]

Hmmm....possibly....anyone here on city planning staff that can provide the definitive answer?

Certainly there has to be something on the books that can override the Morehead setback requirements that were most likely established as part of the 1985 Center City Plan....it's ridiculous to think that a developer should still be completely bound to this outdated plan.

[voyager12]

I am still not a great fan of Dilworth Walk as it nears completion. I am glad that it helps to give more of an urban feel to Kenilworth and makes Dilworth's "downtown" more dense. Unfortunately the full positive impact will always be negated by the adjacent annoyingly suburban style Blockbuster Video. Dare I hope that DW will help to end the Epicurean curse? Probably too much to hope for.....

Edited January 10, 2008 by voyager12

[voyager12]

Another armed robbery in Dilworth this week.....This one happened on Renssealaer Ave. The CMPD message on idilworth.org states two black males, one armed with a handgun were involved. No injuries to the victim and they fled on foot. I walk around Dilworth all the time day or night. I am certainly looking over my shoulder more often and sticking to walking along East Blvd where there is the most traffic as much as possible.

Edited January 11, 2008 by voyager12

[uptownliving]

I noticed some Demo permits come across for the buildings across from the Dowd YMCA on the corner of Caldwell and Lexington. Specifically 1031 and 1023 S Caldwell. Anyone know what is going up here?

[atlrvr]

Not sure...there was a rezoning for a new slightly more urban building there, but that rezoning was withdrawn.

[voyager12]

Another pizza place is going where MM used to be next to the photoshop at Kenilworth Commons. I hope they last. And it will be nice for that end space to have some life again.

[atlrvr]

The updated plan for "Morehead Center", a 12 story office building at Morehead and Royal Ct. is now online.

They updated their plans to DCDA recently. Each one of these topics has been addressed. The curb cut along Morehead is gone, the parking deck is still "pressed" up against Morehead, but they've reoriented so the majority of the parking follows a North South orientation now, they proposed stepping the vertical elements back incrementally, they are proposing 15k sqft of ground level retail (with on-street patio to make way for the potential of a restaurant tenant), and they are satisfying a 24' setback consisting of 8' planting strip, 6' sidewalk, and 10' landscape buffer (all city mandated). In addition, they will be saving 3 of the 4 trees in the right of way...a huge plus and in my opinion should be an absolute requirement. DCDA has been involved with this developer for months and, in fact, highlighted MANY of the same concerns. Glad they did - looks like a better project already!

^ As you said, most of my complaints have been addressed in the new site plan. I still argue that they should find a way to widen the sidewalk to a minimum of 8'. Otherwise, I'm much happier with this new proposal.

Rendering.

[83alphaunder]

The updated plan for "Morehead Center", a 12 story office building at Morehead and Royal Ct. is now online.

Rendering.

I am starting to enjoy the idea of a Dilworth/southend Skyline, as there seems to be one beginning to take shape. With this proposal, and royal court, joining the Y, Arlington, and Camden Grandview it definately seems to be a possiblity. Not to mention their is still a chance of 615 E morehead being reborn as a mostly office development, Ghazis plan, the plan for the longhorn steakhouse site and a few other buildings along morehead.

Edited February 7, 2008 by 83alphaunder

[voyager12]

Per the latest CBJ, SuperSuppers is closing at Latta Pavillion. The franchisee could not make it work. The limited parking and high rent did her in. Depressing. Has Latta Pavillon ever not struggled? Another baby clothes store is going into the space up from SS, wonder how long they will last.....seems like an odd choice to me since Beaux Belly is already on the same block.

[HopHead]

Per the latest CBJ, SuperSuppers is closing at Latta Pavillion. The franchisee could not make it work. The limited parking and high rent did her in. Depressing. Has Latta Pavillon ever not struggled? Another baby clothes store is going into the space up from SS, wonder how long they will last.....seems like an odd choice to me since Beaux Belly is already on the same block.

That's a bummer. I had been meaning to check that place out b/c I thought it was a good concept, especially being a single professional who doesn't always have the time to cook. Does anyone know how 131 Main is doing? I've been there a few times, but not in a couple months. They pour a good drink. The food is good, but not great... I like the atmosphere though.

[voyager12]

After reading all the positive reviews of 131 Main and knowing of their strong following elsewhere in town.... I was rather underwhelmed. There is certainly nothing wrong with the food but it's nothing special. Just standard American Bistro fare. 300 East is much better and their name actually makes sense

Edited February 9, 2008 by voyager12

[Charlotte_native]

After reading all the positive reviews of 131 Main and knowing of their strong following elsewhere in town.... I was rather underwhelmed. There is certainly nothing wrong with the food but it's nothing special. Just standard American Bistro fare. 300 East is much better and their name actually makes sense

You must remember how many people think PF Changs is the best Chinese they've ever had and Cheesecake Factory is high-end food! (no offense to anyone if that describes you!)

Edited February 9, 2008 by Charlotte_native

[dubone]

Well, the name doesn't make sense and the food might just be slightly above average, but it is a very good thing if it is popular and survives. Not only do we need something to survive there long term to prevent a complete reversal of the trend toward more urban retail in the city, but we help support a chain beginning that is based in this area.

I know people living in Huntersville that love it, but when my wife went there, she was also underwhelmed. But I still hope that it can succeed enough to stay open in this space.

[Wookie]

Add me to the underwhelmed list for 131 Main. Food is average, as is the atmosphere. Not sure what would work in that spot.

Best thing to happen to that area would be for the Epicurean land to be developed. What's the latest there?

[voyager12]

Best thing to happen to that area would be for the Epicurean land to be developed. What's the latest there?

^

That is hallowed undevelopable ground. Dubone beat me to it but I also wanted to say....personal opinion aside I also hope that 131 finds it's niche and does well. We need thriving businesses in Uptown Dilworth The past track record makes me pessimistic though.

Edited February 11, 2008 by voyager12