Why does Charlotte architecture "stink" so bad?

[swampfox43]

I almost gag everytime I drive by Ballantyne Office Park. All these bland, uninspired cookie cutter designs that already look dated. That tends to be the norm in this city, imo. Like someone mentioned earlier, too much brick and stucco in this town.

Charlotte lacks curves. Too many square box buildings with mediocre crowns (there are a few exceptions, sure).

Give me some wavy, curvy, shiny, colored tinted glass buildings like this:

[fulcrumsf]

I almost gag everytime I drive by Ballantyne Office Park. All these bland, uninspired cookie cutter designs that already look dated. That tends to be the norm in this city, imo. Like someone mentioned earlier, too much brick and stucco in this town.

Charlotte lacks curves. Too many square box buildings with mediocre crowns (there are a few exceptions, sure).

Give me some wavy, curvy, shiny, colored tinted glass buildings like this:

[Guest]

I almost gag everytime I drive by Ballantyne Office Park. All these bland, uninspired cookie cutter designs that already look dated. That tends to be the norm in this city, imo. Like someone mentioned earlier, too much brick and stucco in this town.

Charlotte lacks curves. Too many square box buildings with mediocre crowns (there are a few exceptions, sure).

Give me some wavy, curvy, shiny, colored tinted glass buildings like this:

[cityboi]

in general, NC is going through an "architectural drought" I havn't really seen any really new inspiring architecture, something so interesting that it becomes a land mark. As far as Charlotte, a bland example is the Arlington but one example of decent architecture is the Hearst Tower. I personally think thats the was the the best building built since the Bank of America Tower was built. I think the Charlotte's arena could have been designed better. The design is not "striking" or "sleek" enough. If they had to go with sort of the historic look for the arena, it should have had a more gothic look similar to the Hearst Tower. That would have been very unique.

[Andyc545]

I for one see Charlotte's architecture a step behind and conservative. We need something striking like we see them taking in Asia. Hearst Tower is special by the way it expands at the top, architecturally unique and beautiful. I think it won't be long before we get a more tasteful, exotic architecture to the city, because buildings are going to need to be distinguished, from a sales standpoint.

[Spartan]

A friend once told me that you can't have all "spice" buildings, because then none of them stand out. It sounds like what some of you want is a new slick looking skyscraper. From a distance (read: suburbs) it will look great. But from the context of the urban environment, you don't need that. People generally don't care what's on top when they're walking around. Its all about whats on the first few floors.

But for argument's sake- do you not think the new Wachovia building will accomplish that?

Is that picture in Vancouver?

[Miesian Corners]

You missed your chance to not be an ass. Calling a project like that "lowest common denominator" sets you way above the crowd. Not everyone is fond of Frank Lloyd Wrightian BS architecture. I, for one, do not enjoy living in glass boxes. I am not a Jetson.

Yes, innovation is most definitely something we need in this city, in terms of architecture, but show me an architect that is both innovative and practical, and I'll show you a mass of people waiting in line to pay him the millions he charges for his designs.

[chicagobearsfan]

Ouch. I guess you don't have to look out your window on a daily basis and see a 10 story faux chateau that towers over all around it. I, however, do (from my very UN jetsonian and very UN FLW 50s ranch). It is MY opinion that Rosedale calls out to the "lowest common denominator" for one very good reason: it does the expected. It asks nothing and speaks nothing. It's what new money craves: non-existent history. It (badly) copies good classicism and fails miserably.

[Miesian Corners]

This is a great conversation. One that will never end. Charlotte is like a clumsy teenager, not sure where or how to fit in. We hire 'experts' to tell us how to be cool or attract creative people, and that's not cool. The real problem with Charlotte architecturally is multi-faceted:

1. A lack of a comprehensive vision for archtiecture and urban design.

2. People who want to be creative but are afraid of politics.

3. A culture of quick, safe and easy fixes.

4. A throw away mentality toward buildings and just about everything else we buy.

5. A fear that developers will flee to the hinterlands in droves if we push for better design.

But the really sad part is so much of our original fabric has been destroyed, therfore, we wind up with a hodge podge of stuff, not quite knowing where or how to start over. So we ultimately go back to number 3.

[archiham04]

I think that architecture in general is going through a rough spot. We are in an era after modernism and post modernism without a predominant popular style for architects, and the public, to sink their teeth into. Most of the good contemporary architecture you see in magazines are bold strokes from Star-chitects set against the back drop of a major city and its existing fabric. Charlotte doesn't have an existing fabric, its having to create it... and I'd agree that the bulk of it looks pretty bad.

[sax184]

I think that architecture in general is going through a rough spot. We are in an era after modernism and post modernism without a predominant popular style for architects, and the public, to sink their teeth into. Most of the good contemporary architecture you see in magazines are bold strokes from Star-chitects set against the back drop of a major city and its existing fabric. Charlotte doesn't have an existing fabric, its having to create it... and I'd agree that the bulk of it looks pretty bad.

[Andyc545]

I was just thinking... but Furman's projects here in Charlotte really have been exceptional in my opinion (Courtside and Trademark) and I think that has set a standard somewhat. Trademark really is one of my favorite buildings uptown, although not curved, it really stayed away from the typical "large box" building, and is extremely architecturally sound.

[fulcrumsf]

Is that picture in Vancouver?

[Andyc545]

In that picture of Vancouver, the smaller building to the right of the Sheraton looks a lot like the rendering for our new Vue, except with teal windows instead of blue.

[monsoon]

I was just thinking... but Furman's projects here in Charlotte really have been exceptional in my opinion (Courtside and Trademark) and I think that has set a standard somewhat. Trademark really is one of my favorite buildings uptown, although not curved, it really stayed away from the typical "large box" building, and is extremely architecturally sound.

[Mobuchu]

^^^Agreed. Courtside only has one good side. Trademark has one great side, 2 that are ok, and the back just isn't. Furman did a much better job halfway up the back of trademark, but the top is terrible. There's more EIFS then there are windows, and the AC unit is completely exposed???

[Miesian Corners]

^True, all of Furman's buildings have a "butt". It's like he forgets that a high rise structure will be seen in all directions at a great distance. What I really don't understand is why he didn't think he could sell units looking south and give that facade the same treatment as the Trade Street side?

[chicagobearsfan]

First of all, welcome to UP! Secondly, you said very eloquently what I tried to say clumsily. Great post and I could not agree more.

[cltheel.sdl]

So, I know Charlotte's architecture isn't the best, but what constitutes "good" architecture?

[Andyc545]

Courtsides "butt" as we're calling them isn't the best, but I still love the modern design of Trademark, "butt" and all. In fact, I love the use of materials. Maybe I just like the way it looks now, so we'll see if anything is covered up at the end.

[swampfox43]

So, I know Charlotte's architecture isn't the best, but what constitutes "good" architecture?

[Rebelde]

Charlotte is my favorite US skyline. It could be way bigger, but I think we got the best architecture. Yah, we have no stunning skyscraper, but one skyscraper does not mean the city as a whole has amazing architect.

I REALLY look forward to Wachovia, One Charlotte, and 300 South Tryon.

[chicagobearsfan]

So, I know Charlotte's architecture isn't the best, but what constitutes "good" architecture?

[NcSc74]

I like it and really you have to be in person to appreciate it. While the skyline is broken down to the BOA cluster and the Wachovia cluster there still some variety however there is a line that could be drawn as far trying to "blend" the towers in with the surrounding towers. Take avenue for example. I like the look but it looks too much like ILJ. A little variation of the exterior or something could have set it apart a little more. Is it me or is Charlotte missing that one art-deco tower that the skyline seems to be missing. Like someone forgot to build it or something.

[Spartan]

So, I know Charlotte's architecture isn't the best, but what constitutes "good" architecture?