j-man Posted March 10, 2021 Report Share Posted March 10, 2021 8 hours ago, The Real Clayton said: Have you ever thought that the only reason houses were built with "so much thought" is because every single piece was milled, poured, baked, smelt, chopped, soldered with 10 fingers, two hands, and one brain? Now its done on an assembly line, by massive teams that figure out the "cheapest" and "most efficient" ways to do things? To recreate a brownstone or an east village row house from NYC in Charlotte would cost millions. Regionalism in architecture existed because we were a regionalistic society. Now we are worldly. Yes I have. That’s my entire point. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post videtur quam contuor Posted March 10, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 10, 2021 As a unique anecdote my Dilworth house, circa 1906, was built with hands, no power tools, natural products, et cetera. How-some-ever, the only reason it did not collapse was constant care over years due to poor construction technique (by our standards). Foundation of a single brick width with no concrete support. Main summer beam beneath the floor did not extend to the rear rim joist leading to a pronounced sag in the floor, cracked plaster , doors cut across their top width to accommodate this sag, and other issues. IF there were plans, they were not followed. Poured crawl space concrete with floor jacks, sistered beams and drainage improvements kept the house from becoming my hat. Age is no guarantor of quality. My experience aside, the discussion may resume. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MarcoPolo Posted March 10, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 10, 2021 The comments/opinions expressed on this thread reveal the "double edged sword" of a globalized urban development system. Most of us on this site love the excitement, variety, life, and opportunity urbanism generates...and of course we, more than most, particularly fetish the built form that houses it all. Yet, at the same time, we may also feel disappointed by what is delivered around us. The ups and downs can be heart felt at times. Cities that grew large pre-war, and those that have not grown much since, have more of the fabric The Real Clayton describes. The streets and buildings of this fabric inherently have more "value" because they were built, occupied, and maintained locally/regionally when they were built in the past. Nearly impossible to replicate in today's supply chain, financing, and insurance driven world whose participants are silo'd and scattered across the globe. Globalization has commodified the entirety of the process and it is the process, more than consumer preferences, that determines what succeeds. It is the same phenomena that makes a completely synthesized, factory delivered, smartly marketed, and colorfully bagged assembly of chemicals, which the fast food/snack industry delivers globally and with perceived variety, less expensive than growing and delivering local fruits and vegetables within a 100 miles of your home. Given a choice most would select local fruits and vegetables as the mainstay of their daily needs, but economics and convenience skew demand toward the cheaper, globalized system as the default. This default setting is hard to switch once the underlying infrastructure has been put in place. Same for city building. Older, large cities have more interesting unique places, but, they are not immune to globalized urban development either. Iconic places such as NYC, London, Paris, all have large swaths of " industry delivered could-be-anywhere" developments. If I dropped you, like the Google Earth Guy, on a sidewalk/street in Canary Wharf, Hudson Yards, Le Defense, and you didn't take cues from the language/accent spoken, you'd be hard pressed to define the "uniqueness" between one or the other. Still exciting places, fun to visit now and again, and to experience visually within the urban fabric in measured doses. Charlotte's urban fabric is so small by comparison and the age of most of its development is from the awkwardly anti-urban, post war era. The arrival of globalized product has no counter balance here. It arrives pre-packaged, a bit sterile and locally "nameless" so to speak. They land on the City a bit like parachuted supply packages from planes flying high overhead during WWII. Buildings on parking podiums poking into the City's skyline like children in high heels at an adult gathering. Contemporary townhomes and chain restaurants/businesses easily making their presence known along the City's generally low density and wooded public realms. Exhilerating, yes indeed. New people, new businesses, employment, prosperity, but definitely neither local, or value based (referring to the buildings, not the businesses, and people in them). The current system delivers urban development in a pre-packaged, bulk way, simultaneously exciting in act, but disappointing in outcome. Replacing it to get back to regional and local approaches is a herculean task. For now, one can only intercede here and there, in moments of action. It takes a special alignment of people, purpose and resources to enable what many on here lament as lost. There are communities that force such alignments and intervene on occasion to deliver special places. Charlotte is not yet there. Otherwise discussions and outcomes concerning Hall House and the Polk Building would have had very different tones and results, (fingers still crossed on Hall House). 3 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacksonH Posted March 10, 2021 Report Share Posted March 10, 2021 MarcoPolo, I pretty much agree with everything you're saying, but I want to point out that La Défense in Paris is outside the historic core of the city. Paris is extremely careful about maintaining its historic architectural identity and sets aside those modern buildings and skyscrapers in a completely separate area. Charlotte takes very little care to maintain any of the small amount if historic value it holds. While I am as excited as anybody to see the explosive development in South End, I worry that the city is not taking steps to protect those historic assets that made the area cool in the first place. And perhaps they're also willing to allow structures that might not fit the neighborhood aesthetic. I do like the look of the Lowes building but feel that its height overwhelms nearby structures. And worry the same about the building coming to East/West. A couple months ago I posted this video in another thread. It explains this much better than I can. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ertley Posted March 11, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 11, 2021 My thirty two cents' worth? We're having the exact same debate that people in cities have had for all of eternity. Every generation in every major city around the world has argued over these same points. I truly think those of us familiar with Charleston have a skewed perspective about historic preservation, because it is one of the rare cities in the world that has its own endemic architecture, so it has truly always been unique, but even Charleston is dealing with these issues now... But excepting Charleston, look at the downtown areas of any small or medium sized town in the Metrolina area: Are any of them exceptionally unique, in terms of architecture? Each town might have one or two, at most, standout buildings, but generally they're pretty generic. And despite the charm of tree lined neighborhood streets, once you start approaching the 20th century, any form of true uniqueness starts to disappear, with houses can all easily be exchanged for very similar houses in other towns. Heck, we all know about the apotheosis of this: the Sears mail order houses. But in major cities, the same thing. If you pay attention in DC, when away from the Mall and the federal buildings, much of the city's housing stock from the post-Civil War era is uniform, and I mean uniform, blocks and blocks of interchangeable row houses. Blocks can vary, but interestingly the same blocks are repeated dozens and dozens of times throughout the city. What we see now as elegant and charming housing from the 19th century was nothing but spec construction on a massive scale: and I can guarantee that the older folks from the OG DC bemoaned the proliferation of "cheap," (for that era) ready-built housing. Even the iconic federal buildings by the Mall are the result of plowing over the original structures there; Federal Triangle was called "Murder's Row" in the 19th century because it housed some of the city's worst bars and gambling dens, in what were certainly early 19th century dwellings that were probably not particularly valued. New York? Same thing. Early 18th century New York was probably a pokey little town, nothing special, and certainly most New Yorkers thought so, because nearly everything from that era is gone: the original Federal Hall, the great houses that surrounded Bowling Green, yada yada. Because it obviously preceded DC by decades, the same proliferation of entire blocks of brownstones by speculative builders happened even earlier. Take a look at pictures of post-Civil War random New York blocks: just sameness, and in brown stone, too boot. Someone mentioned the old Waldorf Astoria being torn down to make way for the Empire State Building, well even that had been a re-do: The original Waldorf Astoria replaced "The" Mrs. Astor's townhouse, a bland brownstone that had been built on Fifth Avenue was it was ploughing through former farmland. London? Same thing: The poshest neighborhoods in Belgravia et al. are the products of massive speculative building, and just like in DC and New York, London still has blocks and blocks of houses that look exactly the same, and were modern architecture that wasn't necessarily "English" when they were put up. I'm sure ye old Londoners bemoaned their lack of "true Englishness." The other week Wikipedia highlighted an article on the burning of the original houses of Parliament, in 1837, which was basically an old castle (that looked like Windsor or Alnwick, any old fortified structure), and no one thought it was worth maintaining properly and was in such poor structural shape that it burned due to a hilarious reason (look up the article). The now iconic Houses of Parliament was a VERY modern replacement: a total faux simulacrum of Gothic architecture that then set the 19th century vogue for "neo Gothic," but was an incredibly modern, even brash, building to mid 19th century eyes, with two crazy high towers. Even Paris, the ne plus ultra of Western cities, is the result of forced homogeneity. Old Paris was far more like London or old cities in Germany: curved, narrow, winding streets, but in the 19th century Baron Haussmann basically tore down the original Paris and built the boulevards and avenues we love today: and if you look at much of those apartment blocks, they're pretty redundant in style, and fairly plain. I guarantee older Parisians were aghast at how modern architecture of their day was destroying the original character of Paris: Compare a Haussmann block from the buildings of the ancien regime, or even more humble relics, and they do look positively...spartan. I am absolutely sympathetic to both sides of this discussion. I bemoan every old building that's torn down: I thought the loss of those storefronts on Camden to build Dimensional Place was regrettable, and the same thing even with just those two nice old houses on West that were torn down for The Square development. If it had been up to me, none of them would have been torn down, but, as much as I hate to admit it, what replaced them may be worth it? I'm still torn, but I genuinely do think Charlotte needs to better protect its old structures, to help preserve the character of the city: Hall House is a perfect example, and the Polk Building is as well, in a negative way. BUT, what we're dealing with is the story of every leading city that we know and appreciate. If any of them had refused allowed new, and even less than stellar, buildings to be erected by developers who were less concerned with creating community than eking profit for themselves, sometimes cheek by jowl with older buildings, you wouldn't have the iconic cities you see today. London and Paris would look like the other old cities in their respective countries, lovely but not easily distinguishable, and New York would look a lot like old town Philadelphia, I suspect. DC, well, there was nothing there...but...Much of what we like about these cities is the result of what was, in the past, very much modern architecture and sometimes brutal urban planning and renewal . It's simply a constant battle of vigilance to preserve as much as possible, to allow a unique CITY to develop, and it ain't nothin' new. We just need to learn the right lessons. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kermit Posted March 11, 2021 Report Share Posted March 11, 2021 (edited) 50 minutes ago, ertley said: But excepting Charleston, look at the downtown areas of any small or medium sized town in the Metrolina area: Are any of them exceptionally unique, in terms of architecture? Each town might have one or two, at most, standout buildings, but generally they're pretty generic. I agree with your larger point, but I did feel the need to quibble with this. Both Winston and Durham have very unusual industrial districts (now residential or office/research) adjacent to their downtowns which were a product of cigarette manufacturing -- granted the downtowns themselves (with the exception of the Reynolds Building) are kinda blah. I would also hold up downtown Asheville as architecturally unique (for the South) thanks to all the money that was sloshing around the city in the 1920s. Granted, this is little more than a semantic issue. Edited March 11, 2021 by kermit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthomas Posted March 11, 2021 Report Share Posted March 11, 2021 (edited) 59 minutes ago, ertley said: BUT, what we're dealing with is the story of every leading city that we know and appreciate. If any of them had refused allowed new, and even less than stellar, buildings to be erected by developers who were less concerned with creating community than eking profit for themselves, sometimes cheek by jowl with older buildings, you wouldn't have the iconic cities you see today. London and Paris would look like the other old cities in their respective countries, lovely but not easily distinguishable, and New York would look a lot like old town Philadelphia, I suspect. DC, well, there was nothing there...but...Much of what we like about these cities is the result of what was, in the past, very much modern architecture and sometimes brutal urban planning and renewal . It's simply a constant battle of vigilance to preserve as much as possible, to allow a unique CITY to develop, and it ain't nothin' new. We just need to learn the right lessons. Fantastic comment, and a good perspective to remember. I do think there is one key difference between the developments of today and those of yesteryear - the scale of buildings. Older city blocks, even when developed rapidly, consisted of many smaller buildings, which produces a more human-scaled texture to the urban fabric. Today's developments often consist of one building occupying an entire block. There are a lot of reasons why this is less desirable - see this article for a detailed explanation. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/6/11/a-city-shaped-by-many-hands Edited March 11, 2021 by jthomas grammar nazi 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KJHburg Posted March 13, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 13, 2021 Miscellaneous Southend Railtrail photos Today. Dimensional Funds shows the city how to conceal a parking garage. Beacon Properties deserves credit for 1616 Camden as this was the first new Class A office building that started the boom in office construction in Southend. the variety of building heights and styles in Southend is what makes this area so special. Southend>Midtown ATL in terms of walkability livability etc. Factory South condos aka original Lance Cracker Factory where my aunt was a cracker packer before they moved to their new plant on South Blvd further out. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post atlrvr Posted March 13, 2021 Author Popular Post Report Share Posted March 13, 2021 I'll contribute this one from today. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KJHburg Posted March 15, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 15, 2021 Southend miscellaneous photos and forgot to mention last time I walked by the Holiday Inn Express it underbuilding parking lot was full. This hotel maybe doing good since there is no competition nearby except uptown. Today various buildings. any word on tenants for the 2100 South Tryon building at W Tremont and S Tryon? 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Blue_Devil Posted March 24, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 Another new Announcement! New Midrise office set to break ground in SouthEnd https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/03/24/renderings-marsh-properties-aston-properties.html Two Charlotte developers are preparing to break ground on the next phase of the large Sedgefield Shopping Center redevelopment in South End. Marsh Properties and Aston Properties will develop 2825 South, a five-story, 138,780-square-foot office building with ground-floor retail space. The building will include four floors of office space, 20,440 square feet of retail and structured parking. 14 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KJHburg Posted March 30, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 30, 2021 Miscellaneous Southend photos including the 2100 South Tryon Bldg. which looks great. Hope it leases up soon. Southend is truly one of the best urban neighborhoods in the southeast. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCMike1990 Posted March 30, 2021 Report Share Posted March 30, 2021 1 hour ago, KJHburg said: Southend is truly one of the best urban neighborhoods in the southeast. It has completely transformed since 2009 when I was working in Charlotte. SouthEnd was much quieter back then it seemed but now has so much life. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post kermit Posted March 30, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted March 30, 2021 (edited) I like Pollo Campero, but this little real estate exaggeration in a CBJ article on their expansion was just beyond the pale for me: Quote Pollo Campero opened its first location on Charlotte’s east side in spring 2016. It has since added a spot in South End. (their store is on South blvd at ARCHDALE! Before much longer Southend will reach all the way to Rock Hill) https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/03/30/pollo-campero-is-targeting-expansion-in-charlotte.html Edited April 3, 2021 by kermit 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeteron Posted March 31, 2021 Report Share Posted March 31, 2021 5 hours ago, kermit said: I like Pollo Campero, but this little real estate exaggeration in a CBJ article on their expansion was too much for me: (their store is on South blvd at ARCHDALE! Before much longer Southend will reach all the way to Rock Hill) https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/03/30/pollo-campero-is-targeting-expansion-in-charlotte.html I feel like Charlotte’s not-so-popular neighborhoods need to brand themselves better. Most people have no clue about Montclaire, Ashley Park, Ashbrook, Starmount, Biddleville, etc etc so they are always clumped with what is closest to them that people know. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stw52 Posted April 1, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 1, 2021 Some fresh retail for SouthEnd....Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlrvr Posted April 3, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2021 I wonder if Falfurius' investment into Carolina Foods accelerates them leaving South End to move to a new modern manufacturing plant? This is the Honey Bun plant on the full block at West/Tryon/Hawkins/Worthington. https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/04/02/falfurrias-capital-investment-in-carolina-foods.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_23&cx_artPos=1#cxrecs_s 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bikeguy Posted April 3, 2021 Report Share Posted April 3, 2021 36 minutes ago, atlrvr said: I wonder if Falfurius' investment into Carolina Foods accelerates them leaving South End to move to a new modern manufacturing plant? This is the Honey Bun plant on the full block at West/Tryon/Hawkins/Worthington. https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/04/02/falfurrias-capital-investment-in-carolina-foods.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_23&cx_artPos=1#cxrecs_s Stanly County would make sense... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue_Devil Posted April 4, 2021 Report Share Posted April 4, 2021 2 hours ago, Bikeguy said: Stanly County would make sense... Carolina Foods operations will remain based in Charlotte. The business has multiple locations here totaling 240,000 square feet. It operates a 100,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in South End. Oken said that space is adequate for continuing to grow the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rancenc Posted April 4, 2021 Report Share Posted April 4, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, atlrvr said: I wonder if Falfurius' investment into Carolina Foods accelerates them leaving South End to move to a new modern manufacturing plant? This is the Honey Bun plant on the full block at West/Tryon/Hawkins/Worthington. https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2021/04/02/falfurrias-capital-investment-in-carolina-foods.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_23&cx_artPos=1#cxrecs_s Edited April 4, 2021 by rancenc 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KJHburg Posted April 5, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 5, 2021 notice they are redoing the signs in Southend. Near the world HQ of Krispy Kreme. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ArchiCLT Posted April 6, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 6, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, KJHburg said: notice they are redoing the signs in Southend. Near the world HQ of Krispy Kreme. Ahh wow! The new street sign makes those 167 utility poles in the background just fade away! So beautiful! ❤ Edited April 6, 2021 by theronhobbs typo 2 10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
videtur quam contuor Posted April 6, 2021 Report Share Posted April 6, 2021 And the one about halfway down the block that is a dumpster in the air. Buckets, a box, a large coil of wire suspended, plus all the cables and wires. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post RANYC Posted April 6, 2021 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 6, 2021 (edited) These lines and poles in Charlotte - what a mess. Missing from this photo are severely misfigured trees around and alongside the wires...because no trees have been planted. One should also note that right in front of that sign, there isn't even a sidewalk! South End is odd...you have this sort of Central Business District encroachment, but I've not come across any plans to really holistically create a CBD streetscape, starting with much wider sidewalks. Edited April 6, 2021 by RANYC 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm2 Posted April 6, 2021 Report Share Posted April 6, 2021 Any word on Price's possibly being sold and redeveloped? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.