NoDa (N Davidson St Arts District) Projects

[Desert Power]

2 hours ago, Prodev said:

Camden Property Trust is developing Chadbourne Apartments and asking for a zoning variance to do less retail, so I can say with a high degree of confidence that there is no Publix, and there never was a deal with them on the table. 

Aren't those the apartments across the street? 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Desert Power

[Guest]

Aren't those the apartments across the street? 

No. Both sites have apartments and my commercial leasing contact had no idea what I was talking about. Publix is tied to a north tryon property

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Matthew.Brendan]

Less retail. Because of course. 

[Desert Power]

42 minutes ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

No. Both sites have apartments and my commercial leasing contact had no idea what I was talking about. Publix is tied to a north tryon property

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok.  That makes reducing retail here even more disappointing. 

[Guest]

Less retail. Because of course. 

I mean... based on demographics, population density, connectivity, do you expect people to want to lose money? It’s no where near sure fire on this stretch for retail.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Desert Power]

1 hour ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

I mean... based on demographics, population density, connectivity, do you expect people to want to lose money? It’s no where near sure fire on this stretch for retail.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is a light rail stop and 700 apartment units under construction (plus whatever gets built on that site) within 3 blocks.   I agree that Publix or a major grocerer isn't coming to this site, but downgrading retail space seems short-sighted.  

[kermit]

The cinder block wall facing 36th station is the cherry on top of the street frontage sh1t sandwich.

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by kermit

[jtmonk]

8 minutes ago, kermit said:

The cinderblock wall facing 36th station is the cherry on top of the streetfrontage sh1t sandwich.

 

 

I would bet they cover that up with a mural, no way they leave it like that.  

[j-man]

2 minutes ago, jtmonk said:

I would bet they cover that up with a mural, no way they leave it like that.  

Yes! I actually love that many things being built in Charlotte have all this canvas area for artists to go wild. 

[SgtCampsalot]

41 minutes ago, kermit said:

The cinderblock wall facing 36th station is the cherry on top of the streetfrontage sh1t sandwich.

And not even enough windows on the back side to feign the possibility of storefronts on that side.

/complain

[Desert Power]

1 hour ago, SgtCampsalot said:

2 hours ago, kermit said:

The cinderblock wall facing 36th station is the cherry on top of the streetfrontage sh1t sandwich.

And not even enough windows on the back side to feign the possibility of storefronts on that side.

/complain

It really is pathetic how they killed any street presence on 36th.  A mural is not substitute for retail.

[Matthew.Brendan]

You really need to stand down there on the sidewalk to fully appreciate the 30’ wall of nothing. 

[Guest]

Here’s a close up.

Firstly, The cinderblocks will be handed over to artists.

Second, y’all know that wall below exists because it’s a retaining wall for the tunnel. Right?

Can you imagine if the city and cats had to work with Sumitomo to build below grade tiered retail units facing 36th? We’d still be waiting for the light rail to open. It’s not great but there’s more factors than you guys realize. There’s a lot left to be done that will jazz up this wall, though I’m horrified with what Someone considered “art” in the tunnel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JacksonH]

1 hour ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

Second, y’all know that wall below exists because it’s a retaining wall for the tunnel. Right?

I haven't heard about this.  What is the purpose of the tunnel?  What are the end points. ?

[Spartan]

1 hour ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

Here’s a close up.

Firstly, The cinderblocks will be handed over to artists.

Second, y’all know that wall below exists because it’s a retaining wall for the tunnel. Right?

Can you imagine if the city and cats had to work with Sumitomo to build below grade tiered retail units facing 36th? We’d still be waiting for the light rail to open. It’s not great but there’s more factors than you guys realize. There’s a lot left to be done that will jazz up this wall, though I’m horrified with what Someone considered “art” in the tunnel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's only partially true. It is a retaining wall, but it wasn't specifically needed for the tunnel. Only the part underneath the bridge itself is actually needed for support. The reason that wall exists in that specific location is because the developer chose to leave the historic building there, thus forcing CATS to design around it (due to restrictions on federal funds interfering with historic structures). So the building stayed, and the wall went up. 

Now to those who aren't familiar with the site, you're probably saying to yourself, "No Spartan, you idiot, they just built those buildings and they are definitely not historic!" - and you'd be right on all three counts. You'll note, however, that the historic building the wall was built for in the first place is no longer there. The developer got their money from the city for ROW and easements and then razed the site shortly thereafter. The worst part about it, though, is that the wall precludes any sort of innovative two level structure that would allow for retail activation along 36th St AND having the existing stuff on top. Shortsightedness and greed win out and give us a moderately shittier pedestrian environment for eternity than  what could have been.

 

 

[SgtCampsalot]

6 minutes ago, JacksonH said:

I haven't heard about this.  What is the purpose of the tunnel?  What are the end points. ?

Because it was known that auto/ped traffic at this intersection would increase so much (at what was once a very dead intersection) that it made sense to give NS their own grade. For both street traffic comfort, and to eliminate horn noise (which will soon be eliminated between 16th St and somewhere beyond Eastway (I believe).

[JacksonH]

14 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

Because it was known that auto/ped traffic at this intersection would increase so much (at what was once a very dead intersection) that it made sense to give NS their own grade. For both street traffic comfort, and to eliminate horn noise (which will soon be eliminated between 16th St and somewhere beyond Eastway (I believe).

So the tunnel is for NS trains?  When I read ricky_davis_fan_21's comment, I was thinking it must be a tunnel for pedestrians.

[kermit]

7 minutes ago, JacksonH said:

So the tunnel is for NS trains?  When I read ricky_davis_fan_21's comment, I was thinking it must be a tunnel for pedestrians.

The tunnel is just the underpass (below the RR) for 36th street.

[11 HouseBZ]

Anybody know why the wall going under has designs and shaped panels on the Davidson St side while they straight up quit for the Tryon St side and just did smooth concrete panels?

[Guest]

 

That's only partially true. It is a retaining wall, but it wasn't specifically needed for the tunnel. Only the part underneath the bridge itself is actually needed for support. The reason that wall exists in that specific location is because the developer chose to leave the historic building there, thus forcing CATS to design around it (due to restrictions on federal funds interfering with historic structures). So the building stayed, and the wall went up. 

Now to those who aren't familiar with the site, you're probably saying to yourself, "No Spartan, you idiot, they just built those buildings and they are definitely not historic!" - and you'd be right on all three counts. You'll note, however, that the historic building the wall was built for in the first place is no longer there. The developer got their money from the city for ROW and easements and then razed the site shortly thereafter. The worst part about it, though, is that the wall precludes any sort of innovative two level structure that would allow for retail activation along 36th St AND having the existing stuff on top. Shortsightedness and greed win out and give us a moderately craptier pedestrian environment for eternity than  what could have been.

 

 

I’ll have to ask about this, It was not the lip service I got. But ur background leads me to believe you are probably correct.

 

Not sure why I defended this building, my opinion of crescent decreases daily, and this building disappoints me.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CTiger]

12 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

That's only partially true. It is a retaining wall, but it wasn't specifically needed for the tunnel. Only the part underneath the bridge itself is actually needed for support. The reason that wall exists in that specific location is because the developer chose to leave the historic building there, thus forcing CATS to design around it (due to restrictions on federal funds interfering with historic structures). So the building stayed, and the wall went up. 

Now to those who aren't familiar with the site, you're probably saying to yourself, "No Spartan, you idiot, they just built those buildings and they are definitely not historic!" - and you'd be right on all three counts. You'll note, however, that the historic building the wall was built for in the first place is no longer there. The developer got their money from the city for ROW and easements and then razed the site shortly thereafter. The worst part about it, though, is that the wall precludes any sort of innovative two level structure that would allow for retail activation along 36th St AND having the existing stuff on top. Shortsightedness and greed win out and give us a moderately craptier pedestrian environment for eternity than  what could have been.

 

 

This kind of post is the reason I come to this website.  Thank you.

[Desert Power]

14 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

That's only partially true. It is a retaining wall, but it wasn't specifically needed for the tunnel. Only the part underneath the bridge itself is actually needed for support. The reason that wall exists in that specific location is because the developer chose to leave the historic building there, thus forcing CATS to design around it (due to restrictions on federal funds interfering with historic structures). So the building stayed, and the wall went up. 

Now to those who aren't familiar with the site, you're probably saying to yourself, "No Spartan, you idiot, they just built those buildings and they are definitely not historic!" - and you'd be right on all three counts. You'll note, however, that the historic building the wall was built for in the first place is no longer there. The developer got their money from the city for ROW and easements and then razed the site shortly thereafter. The worst part about it, though, is that the wall precludes any sort of innovative two level structure that would allow for retail activation along 36th St AND having the existing stuff on top. Shortsightedness and greed win out and give us a moderately craptier pedestrian environment for eternity than  what could have been.

 

 

Not to mention the retaining wall was build very late in the process after the BLE was already operational.  

[Matthew.Brendan]

4 hours ago, CTiger said:

The developer got their money from the city for ROW and easements and then razed the site shortly thereafter. 

Is there truly no recourse for this type of behavior? It’s certainly not the first example and sadly not likely to be the last either. 

What can the City of Charlotte do to prevent and/or punish this mindset? More importantly is there even the will in the local government to do so?

It’s disappointing to see that seemingly “any development is good development”. 

[Spartan]

7 hours ago, Matthew.Brendan said:

Is there truly no recourse for this type of behavior? It’s certainly not the first example and sadly not likely to be the last either. 

What can the City of Charlotte do to prevent and/or punish this mindset? More importantly is there even the will in the local government to do so?

It’s disappointing to see that seemingly “any development is good development”. 

Nope. All perfectly legal. 

[Spartan]

20 hours ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

I’ll have to ask about this, It was not the lip service I got. But ur background leads me to believe you are probably correct.

 

Not sure why I defended this building, my opinion of crescent decreases daily, and this building disappoints me.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Given that we can't change anything, I would generally agree with the notion that what they have built, and what is being built on that site today, are probably about as good as we could hope for. That said, we have to acknowledge that it will probably take a while before the area between the station and N Tryon St to develop into anything meaningful, but I hope I'm wrong about this.