Misc. Uptown Projects/News

[KJHburg]

Maybe someone like @Tyree Ricardo can come up with a proposal to save these buildings as the parking lot shown in the survey in the flyer could be built on with a like a hotel or something and have the older buildings restored into restaurants meeting space or even leave as office space.  there is NO reason these 2 buildings need to be destroyed and if you read the history they were designed in the 1920s by famous Charlotte architect CC Hooks.  We need to get in front of this so they don't have the fate of the Polk building and yes Northwoods I am still angry about that one. 

I think you could put a tower behind these buildings on the parking lot incorporate parking in it aka like FNB Tower and preserve the buildings.  SOMEHOW developers are able to do this in Raleigh Durham and Winston all day long but Charlotte developers have DH Griffin demo on speed dial.   Please help Senor Ricardo  vaya con Dios! 

[videtur quam contuor]

David Furman preserved the 115 East Park Avenue facade. Read about it and more for an historical perspective:

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/charlottefive/c5-worklife/article236151668.html

[Guest]

https://ui.uncc.edu/story/Charlotte-closing-these-streets-help-solve-our-lack-public-open-space

Not sure where to put this, but I wrote a thing.

[SydneyCarton]

23 hours ago, Tyree Ricardo said:

https://ui.uncc.edu/story/Charlotte-closing-these-streets-help-solve-our-lack-public-open-space

Not sure where to put this, but I wrote a thing.

I’ve always thought that Tryon should be a one way street, and one lane should be closed which would enable the construction of much wider, landscaped sidewalks.

Also, taxi parking should be banned.  Taxis should que on side streets.

The elimination of traffic lanes by the WTC and the planting of green medians has been fabulous.

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by SydneyCarton

[ertley]

On 3/6/2020 at 11:20 PM, j-man said:

OMG I was just talking about this on here about three days ago with no idea about the actual sale of this. It would be nice if these buildings could get a little TLC and keep the character. It would also be great if the area of the lot next to it facing the street could be sold and a developer builds an addition to these buildings connected to it. But for sommmmeee reason I think they may demolish these. Ugh

I am 100% serious that UP needs to rally, and everyone needs to protest in whatever means available to us if they try and demolish these. The Polk building was bad enough, but these buildings are so lovely, ESPECIALLY the one with the green (tiled?) facade. It would truly be a crime to demolish them. 

[elrodvt]

I'm sure I'm being naive but I just don't get why we can't do some kind of "historic district" zoning. There must be plenty of zoning rules to easily copy where it's been successful right?

[atlrvr]

They are already in the 4th Ward Historic District.

[tozmervo]

18 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

I'm sure I'm being naive but I just don't get why we can't do some kind of "historic district" zoning. There must be plenty of zoning rules to easily copy where it's been successful right?

Like a rezoning, you need buy-in from existing property owners. You're straddling a fine line of government intervention on private property. 

NoDa has often considered a historic business district designation, but many of the good things that have happened would have been made much more difficult with that designation. To the best of my knowledge those conversations have generally died.

edit: oh! it's already zoned historic. good times. 

Edited March 9, 2020 by tozmervo
see: atlrvr

[nicholas]

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

I’ve always thought that Tryon should be a one way street, and one lane should be closed which would enable the construction of much wider, landscaped sidewalks.

The elimination of traffic lanes by the WTC and the planting of green medians has been fabulous.

I've posted this before, and I will continue to post this whenever someone suggests converting a two-way street into a one-way street.

One-way streets are terrible for pedestrian environments for two main reasons: one is that people drive faster when every lane is going in the same direction.  Faster traffic = uncomfortable pedestrians, which obviously leads to fewer pedestrians.  The other is that one-way streets end up primarily being utilized by commuters one time a day (either going to, or coming from, work).  This leads to lots of traffic at rush hour, but dead zones at pretty much all other times (SOME blocks have businesses or other attractions that manage to thrive despite this, but they are exceptions to the rule - generally, two-way streets are much more attractive to both businesses and pedestrians).

In Raleigh, the urban streets that are seeing lots of pedestrian activity and growth (Glenwood Ave, Hillsborough St, Fayetteville St, West St) are ALL two-way streets with on-street parking.  Any guesses as to which streets are struggling to attract businesses and pedestrians?  Multi-lane one-way streets (McDowell St, Dawson St, Edenton St, etc).  In fact, the city of Raleigh is working on converting a few one-way streets that border really desirable areas (Blount St and Person St) into two-way streets, to slow traffic and attract more people outside of rush hour.  Charlotte would be wise to consider converting some of its one-way streets into two-way streets, especially those that have a lot of potential, such as Church St (due to Bearden Park, Kimpton, etc).

[Windsurfer]

3 minutes ago, nicholas said:

I've posted this before, and I will continue to post this whenever someone suggests converting a two-way street into a one-way street.

One-way streets are terrible for pedestrian environments for two main reasons: one is that people drive faster when every lane is going in the same direction.  Faster traffic = uncomfortable pedestrians, which obviously leads to fewer pedestrians.  The other is that one-way streets end up primarily being utilized by commuters one time a day (either going to, or coming from, work).  This leads to lots of traffic at rush hour, but dead zones at pretty much all other times (SOME blocks have businesses or other attractions that manage to thrive despite this, but they are exceptions to the rule - generally, two-way streets are much more attractive to both businesses and pedestrians).

In Raleigh, the urban streets that are seeing lots of pedestrian activity and growth (Glenwood Ave, Hillsborough St, Fayetteville St, West St) are ALL two-way streets with on-street parking.  Any guesses as to which streets are struggling to attract businesses and pedestrians?  Multi-lane one-way streets (McDowell St, Dawson St, Edenton St, etc).  In fact, the city of Raleigh is working on converting a few one-way streets that border really desirable areas (Blount St and Person St) into two-way streets, to slow traffic and attract more people outside of rush hour.  Charlotte would be wise to consider converting some of its one-way streets into two-way streets, especially those that have a lot of potential, such as Church St (due to Bearden Park, Kimpton, etc).

I still think they should eliminate, at all hours. left hand turns off of Tryon.  Most of the backups happen when people are yielding to oncoming traffic before turning.

[nicholas]

4 hours ago, Windsurfer said:

I still think they should eliminate, at all hours. left hand turns off of Tryon.  Most of the backups happen when people are yielding to oncoming traffic before turning.

Agreed, at least from 7th St south.  Not quite as bad once you hit the northern part of uptown.

[Guest]

23 hours ago, ertley said:

I am 100% serious that UP needs to rally, and everyone needs to protest in whatever means available to us if they try and demolish these. The Polk building was bad enough, but these buildings are so lovely, ESPECIALLY the one with the green (tiled?) facade. It would truly be a crime to demolish them. 

The group that is tied to this building, Whiteside Industrial, has been a big part in the revitalization and preservation of the Gold District. They have good intentions with this piece of history and intend to make sure it stays intact. 

[atlrvr]

22 hours ago, nicholas said:

I've posted this before, and I will continue to post this whenever someone suggests converting a two-way street into a one-way street.

One-way streets are terrible for pedestrian environments for two main reasons: one is that people drive faster when every lane is going in the same direction.  Faster traffic = uncomfortable pedestrians, which obviously leads to fewer pedestrians.  

Since you insist on posting this, I guess I insist on posting the rebuttal.  That sounds fine in a theoretical sense, but there are a multitude of factors at play, and street speeds are also heavily influenced by traffic calming implementations such as lane width, street parking, block length, etc...

I think the best reply is just anecdotal evidence.  Manhattan and the central Boston neighborhoods are 90%+ one-way streets, and have vibrant pedestrian activity.

1-way Newbury far more walkable than 2-way Mass Ave in Boston's Back Bay.

1-way Broome St far more walkable than Houston St. in NY's SoHo.

The same can be repeated for every neighborhood.

It's how the street functions MUCH more than if it's 1 or 2 directional.

Edit....my theory is that it is much easier for a pedestrian to cross mid-block if only concerned about traffic from one direction, but far more difficult if concerned about traffic from 2 directions, especially when curb cuts induce cars entering the street to compete with pedestrians for seldom breaks in the traffic. 

[Matthew.Brendan]

24 minutes ago, atlrvr said:

 

1-way Broome St far more walkable than Houston St. in NY's SoHo.

 

I can't comment on the other streets mentioned as I'm not familiar with them, but Houston and Broome isn't even close to being comparable in the first place. Houston is a *major* cross town street that feeds and is fed by the FDR. It's also 4+ lanes, 2 each way (plus turning lanes, plus dedicated bike path, plus a row of parking along the curb). Houston, despite the heavy traffic, is really perfectly walkable, including green/tree filled medians, plenty wide for crossing pedestrians and even benches for those who like to hang out "in the midst of it". Loud and busy, sure, but not *dangerous*. Broome in comparison is very much more of a quiet neighborhood street.

[atlrvr]

Fair, but I would say even Broadway far more walkable than Houston.  

I'm not sure Tryon needs to be 1 way, but I don't think it loses its pedestrian appeal if it was.  The poster who replied above disagreed with my Camden/Hawkins suggestion in a different thread, and I'd argue, like Broome, are both nice neighborhood streets. 

[cltbwimob]

3 hours ago, Tyree Ricardo said:

The group that is tied to this building, Whiteside Industrial, has been a big part in the revitalization and preservation of the Gold District. They have good intentions with this piece of history and intend to make sure it stays intact. 

I hope you are correct.  I know there is some modest level of institutional protection for these given that they are historic landmarks in a historic district. 

These two buildings may be the most beautiful examples of early 20th century architecture in the city.  Tearing them down would be a crime.  

Edited March 10, 2020 by cltbwimob

[nicholas]

1 hour ago, atlrvr said:

Since you insist on posting this, I guess I insist on posting the rebuttal.  That sounds fine in a theoretical sense, but there are a multitude of factors at play, and street speeds are also heavily influenced by traffic calming implementations such as lane width, street parking, block length, etc...

I think the best reply is just anecdotal evidence.  Manhattan and the central Boston neighborhoods are 90%+ one-way streets, and have vibrant pedestrian activity.

1-way Newbury far more walkable than 2-way Mass Ave in Boston's Back Bay.

1-way Broome St far more walkable than Houston St. in NY's SoHo.

The same can be repeated for every neighborhood.

It's how the street functions MUCH more than if it's 1 or 2 directional.

Edit....my theory is that it is much easier for a pedestrian to cross mid-block if only concerned about traffic from one direction, but far more difficult if concerned about traffic from 2 directions, especially when curb cuts induce cars entering the street to compete with pedestrians for seldom breaks in the traffic. 

It's not reasonable to compare Manhattan or Boston - both of which were developed almost entirely prior to automobiles becoming commonplace - to Charlotte, which didn't see the bulk of its growth until after WW2 when everything was being designed around cars.

Newbury St is two lanes in one direction, with on-street parking on both sides of the road.  Massachusetts Ave is two lanes in each direction, plus a physical median, plus bike lanes on each side, PLUS on-street parking on each side.  If we bring bidirectional roads with multiple travel lanes in each direction into consideration, walkability immediately takes a hit due to all of the traffic.  Same deal with Broome St vs Houston St.  There are exceptions; Franklin St in Chapel Hill is four lanes wide with on-street parking, yet is still walkable.  But that is an exception, not the rule.

Newbury and Broome Sts also have the advantage of being lined by century-old housing and retail structures that were developed prior to widespread automobile use, and thus have traditionally been treated as local neighborhood streets, not main thoroughfares like Massachusetts Ave.  Neighborhood streets are going to be more walkable because of this, despite being one-way.

Tryon St used to be what, six lanes wide through uptown?  NOBODY wanted to walk anywhere near it!  It wasn't until Tryon St was narrowed it to effectively one travel lane in each direction, with on-street parking, that it became as walkable as it is today. 

Again, I'm not saying that it's impossible to create walkable areas along one-way streets, I'm just saying that if you take a road (such as Tryon St) which is currently perfectly walkable, and introduce factors that generally make walking less attractive, less people are going to choose to walk.

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by nicholas

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

I hope you are correct.  I know there is some modest level of institutional protection for these given that they are historic landmarks in a historic district. 

These two buildings may be the most beautiful examples of early 20th century architecture in the city.  Tearing them down would be a crime.  

I can tell you the outlook I received was positive. 

[DMann]

I used to have an office in the green terra cotta building.  It worked for my purposes, but other than location it has no connection to modern offices.  I would love for the front to remain part of a new development, but from the back side of the terra cotta panels it could all go.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, DMann said:

I used to have an office in the green terra cotta building.  It worked for my purposes, but other than location it has no connection to modern offices.  I would love for the front to remain part of a new development, but from the back side of the terra cotta panels it could all go.

Personally I'd like the facade to be integrated into a modern boutique hotel. The parking lot is larger than Intercontinental's lot.

Edited March 10, 2020 by Guest

[KJHburg]

28 minutes ago, Tyree Ricardo said:

Personally I'd like the facade to be integrated into a modern boutique hotel. The parking lot is larger than Intercontinental's lot.

thats what I think the older buildings facing Trade can be saved and the parking lot developed into a high rise hotel. 

[KJHburg]

I don't Tryon should be all pedestrian mall I think it is fine and traffic moves very slow due to on street parking and the street used to be 6 lanes wide so the sidewalks are good sized.  I think you need the ability to drop off people at restaurants or valet park for all the restaurants along Tryon.   Otherwise people will go elsewhere where it is more convenient.   Raleigh tried this and it failed and now reopened up Fayetteville St with wider sidewalks on street parking and 1 lane in each direction and it works great.  Truly the most walkable street in downtown Raleigh. 

[nicholas]

2 hours ago, KJHburg said:

I don't Tryon should be all pedestrian mall I think it is fine and traffic moves very slow due to on street parking and the street used to be 6 lanes wide so the sidewalks are good sized.  I think you need the ability to drop off people at restaurants or valet park for all the restaurants along Tryon.   Otherwise people will go elsewhere where it is more convenient.   Raleigh tried this and it failed and now reopened up Fayetteville St with wider sidewalks on street parking and 1 lane in each direction and it works great.  Truly the most walkable street in downtown Raleigh. 

I don't think anyone has really suggested that (at least, not seriously), but there has been some discussion on here about the feasibility of converting a few streets around uptown and South End into one-way streets, and I've never seen an argument about infrastructure that I didn't want to engage in so I just added a ton of fuel to the fire

[DMann]

I hate one-way!

[j-man]

1 hour ago, DMann said:

I hate one-way!

Me too!! Some cities have very vibrant one way streets but Charlotte doesn’t seem like a city for that. Lol it’s just backs of buildings and parking garages and cars going way too fast.