Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But see that's my point, the first two buildings are very architecturally pleasing, which is basically Charlotte's development in a nutshell. Like the architecture is great, phenomenal, breath-taking, whatever, but it's still not helping the process of generating foot traffic or activity.
No foot traffic? Really? Have you come to Charlotte? Even in the evenings, there is tons of foot traffic, the development is connecting, etc. We're uptown a few times a month. Not trying to be a wise guy or anything. Just not sure if we're talking about the same city.
No foot traffic? Really? Have you come to Charlotte? Even in the evenings, there is tons of foot traffic, the development is connecting, etc. We're uptown a few times a month. Not trying to be a wise guy or anything. Just not sure if we're talking about the same city.
I don't understand why he's acting like he knows what he's talking about. For the past 15 years or so, there's been a very heavy emphasis in Charlotte on developments that appropriately front the street, has a mix of uses, generates pedestrian traffic, etc. Even the arena has retail space on the ground floor which isn't something you see very often at all.
I've been to Charlotte several times, and they have some interesting stuff downtown. There's an upscale nightlife cluster on the east end of downtown near the Lynx rail line and Time Warner Arena, and a handful of bars and restaurants on the west end of downtown just a few blocks from Bank of America Stadium and BB&T Ballpark. Lots of street art and sculptures all around downtown as well.
Of course, it's not entirely fair, given Indianapolis and Nashville have almost entirely merged the city and county, and Charlotte has a huge land area even if the city and county haven't merged.
Still, if you compare neighborhoods it's still unbalanced:
Of course, it's not entirely fair, given Indianapolis and Nashville have almost entirely merged the city and county, and Charlotte has a huge land area even if the city and county haven't merged.
Still, if you compare neighborhoods it's still unbalanced:
No foot traffic? Really? Have you come to Charlotte? Even in the evenings, there is tons of foot traffic, the development is connecting, etc. We're uptown a few times a month. Not trying to be a wise guy or anything. Just not sure if we're talking about the same city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77
Sigh...once again, you don't know what you're talking about. Let's just take the second development that you linked to in Charlotte, Tryon Place.
This project is especially designed to connect areas within the core, but most of Charlotte's core projects are infill--and appropriately so.
I don't know anything about that third project you linked to, but Tryon Place looks significantly larger with a greater mix of uses and I'd bet good money that it will easily generate more pedestrian traffic on its own than that project.
You keep getting this wrong. Just admit that you don't really know what's going on in Charlotte.
Ok, let me put it in a way so you can understand better. This and this are cohesive mixed-use projects, this and this is supposedly what you'll see in Charlotte. Picking up what I'm putting down?
And what I meant by connecting areas/neighborhoods within the core is trying to infill the areas between two already significant areas; which means adding business, urban housing, and retail to continue the flow of activity. In Seattle there's no drop-off between Downtown and Queen Ann/Capitol Hill, or in Miami with Downtown and BV.
I have no beef with Charlotte, I just hate the path it's going down. I'm not the only one who's said this as well, there's been others.
"The Best Place for Business and Careers" CAN (depending on the criteria, numbers used, and how those numbers are used) be different than economic growth and that growth over a set span of time. Charlotte and Nashville have done this very well over the last 20+ years. Too, I'm not a huge fan of Forbes' or Money's rankings in general. Usually they leave out buying power when using economic factors, which skews the numbers in term of knowing weather you're really getting a good bang for your buck in a given metro area. I actually love the Indianapolis area. They rank well in my own ratings. I just think Charlotte and Nashville are a bit higher in most economic factors in the past, now, and seems to have a great projected future.
Of course, it's not entirely fair, given Indianapolis and Nashville have almost entirely merged the city and county, and Charlotte has a huge land area even if the city and county haven't merged.
Still, if you compare neighborhoods it's still unbalanced:
Ok, let me put it in a way so you can understand better. This and this are cohesive mixed-use projects, this and this is supposedly what you'll see in Charlotte. Picking up what I'm putting down?
And what I meant by connecting areas/neighborhoods within the core is trying to infill the areas between two already significant areas; which means adding business, urban housing, and retail to continue the flow of activity. In Seattle there's no drop-off between Downtown and Queen Ann/Capitol Hill, or in Miami with Downtown and BV.
I have no beef with Charlotte, I just hate the path it's going down. I'm not the only one who's said this as well, there's been others.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.