David Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Development

WWYDW: Cameron Village

User Enigma commented on a recent post about new construction in Cameron Village.  The lurker wants to know: What would you do with: Cameron Village? Perplexed by the New Raleigh community’s ‘negative comments’ Enigma essentially says ‘let’s see you do it better.‘ Good idea, let’s. We aren’t asking for renderings here, but we are willing to bet the audience does indeed have some good ideas about more appropriate development in CV. 

Having been a lurker for a while and reading through all the commments on this site and numerous others about this project, I’m curious about something.  Since there’s been a number of negative comments made about height, traffic, and exterior skin, I’m asking this.  If the magic fairy granted a wish making you the owner of Cameron Village, what exactly would you do to improve what’s there?  I hope the reponses will be reality based to some degree.  Voicing some examples and references to existing projects anywhere else would be interesting to hear, and quite possibly, helpful to the developer.

Read More Development

Filed Under:

  • J. andrews08/05 12:10 PM

    The problem is the Cameron Village’naysayers’ don’t have any alternatives except “no change” at all.  Case in point is the Oberlin & Wade project, knicknamed “Coker towers’ by the neighbors.  They complained and complained and won.  What they ended up with is a parking deck and apartments.

    Unfortunately, Raleigh still struggles with the concept of “Urban living”.  Most neighborhoods talk about how they support these concepts (ie: higher density, taller buildings) UNTIL a project is proposed anywhere remotely in their vicinity.  Hayes Barton is the worst offender.  Most recently, a proposed project to build a 2-3 mixed use story building on Fairview met with the “Complaint Factory” and has since been shelved so Five Points continues to flounder with a few cool restaurants and a bunch of antique shops.

    the usual complaint is ‘Traffic’.  you live in a City. Traffic is a given. Second, you will always end up with traffic if you don’t give people an alternative such as building a ‘live, work, & play’ enviornment.  Even smaller cities like Winston-Salem and Greensboro appear to have adopted urban living at a faster clip than Raleigh.  Of course, the best example to get under the skin of Raleigh residents is to point to Charlotte and their embracing of urban concepts…a metro are approximately the same size as Raleigh Metro, (1.5million), yet Raleigh is woefully behind Charlotte.  One could add Richmond, Atlanta, Jacksonville, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, or even Asheville to this list. Until Raleigh embraces good urban planning with projects such as Cameron Village’s new proposal, It will continue to be the antithesis of good urban development with low-rise, low density, “strip mall” building concepts.

  • lunarvision08/05 03:36 PM

    I’m one of the commenters who complained. The short answer to what I would do better w/ the Cam Vill project:
    - significantly change the exterior styling.

    How & to what?  I suppose if the challenger wanted me or the other complainers to draw up architectural renderings, then (speaking for myself) perhaps that can be arranged.

    Though at this moment, for me the argument comes back to simply building something *unique*.  That would mean, something relatively unseen in Raleigh (surrounding areas?).  Taking a chance with bolder structural shapes, exterior materials, or incorporating more artist elements.  Hell, just “paint” the thing different colors! (joke)

    In other words, the existing design looks no different from 90% of the drab, uniform N. Raleigh office complexes, storage units, & urgent care centers.  Yet, this project is not in N. Raleigh - so take a chance, stand out a bit, design something that will at least get a double-take, curiosity, even a nickname (“the raleigh victorian” “cameron glass”..whatever).  Just don’t water it down to zero personality!

    Obviously, I don’t have an architectural degree or the vocabulary (insert onslaught of criticism/jokes), but that doesn’t negate my opinion.

    With regards to the commenter above, I may be the exception to the rule, but I have no problem with increased building density/mixed use & much taller buildings.  I was in full support of “Coker Towers” and resent the “not in my backyard” inside the Beltline hypocrites who nagged that project out of existence.

    (sorry so long)

  • Rusty08/05 04:18 PM

    I’d like to know more about the content of the building personally. “28,000 sf of retail” doesn’t tell us what that would be… More high-end boutiques offering ITBL trendiness? And “290 residential units” doesn’t speak about the kind of socioeconomic diversity that (I feel) Cameron Village is (or at least should be) all about.

    In a nutshell I’d like to see: extremely high performing building (high level LEED certification as a start), legitimate low-income housing in conjunction with middle and higher end residential units, useful tenancy in that retail space (which would necessitate affordable leasing prices), and top it all off with some great office space. The exterior isn’t as important to me personally, so long as it is pedestrian friendly and well proportioned.

    It’s an awful lot to ask, and I think we can all agree that somewhere in that laundry list compromises would have to happen.

  • TSnow2760408/05 05:07 PM

    I agree somewhat with the previous posts.  I too would like to see LEED certification in the new DTR (or ANY) new developments.  If the market is tough, eco-friendly is a great way to create a premium on your product.  As for affordable housing, I hope this is taken into account but I don’t know if Cameron Village is the site.  It’s not like anyone is getting displaced as no one currently lives there and I don’t think it’s realistic for a developer to price and sell a property only to watch the new owner (or whoever had the deposit) turn around and immediately sell it for a substantial profit.  I would however love to see taller buildings with residential but as with all things in our car-centric culture/city, parking is the problem.  Design along the lines of the library would be great in my opinion.

  • go go girl08/06 12:31 PM

    The focus seems to be on the here and now. Is the builder obliged to conform to today’s esthetics and lifestyles or is the design, size, structure and form permitted to plan for a few decades out when density and traffic might be a whole different beast.


    While the future can’t be predicted can it be safely envisaged? If density is a goal for the Triangle – as opposed to suburban sprawl – how will that desired density impact CV?


    Was the overlay district meant to maintain the status quo or guide the development towards higher density over the next 50 years?  Or is “smart growth” only meant for a twenty year timeline? Or thirty?


    I think the belief that in 50 years CV can still be the quaint neighborhood shopping center, where it’s possible to pull up to the desired store, is a bit unrealistic – but maybe others disagree.


    Maybe others would like the CV in 50 years to be fairly reminiscent of what it is today and that planning and zoning are necessary to maintain the existing density, the existing tempo and the existing utilization.


    So - when gas is $10/gallen, global warming has made us a coastal city, the rich are richer still and the rest of us are getting poorer by the minute, and more to the point - the cataract-riddled boomers still like to party – what does Raleigh look like?

  • Jenna08/06 12:53 PM

    As someone (I think it was JZ) commented in another post, CV is the only walkable development in Raleigh where you can meet all your needs: grocery, post office, pharmacy, etc.

    I live .3 miles from CV and I’d love to be able to shop there for *everything* - not just the basics. There are only a few places I go that aren’t in CV: Ace Hardware, Target, Whole Foods, the movie theater. A few (non-burger) bars/restaurants. I’d like to see stores in CV meet those needs.

    If space is used wisely (reopen the underground, allow large-scale development at Clark/Oberlin), maybe CV can become the best walkable neighborhood in Raleigh.

  • georgia08/10 05:31 PM

    I hope these comments get to the drawing board. The livability matrix is not just about high end development. We are going to seriously miss our old raleigh if we do not learn how to merge the two AT the same time and space. This is the model that was left to us and I hope we can honor them.

  • Christopher Triplett08/11 11:21 AM

    Specific to Cameron Village:

    Something high rise with a low vertical profile (and NOT covered in a glass curtain wall) could take advantage of the views from Cameron Village.  A low profile would thwart any “looming tower” discomfort. 

    Simple notes:

    Residential space in the downtown area is too expensive and non space conscious for most potential “Urbanites.“

    Therefore, Raleigh needs an adoption of a new type of living way before an adoption of new aesthetics. 

    But until then, developers will continue to squish giant units and amenities into stucco and brick shells.

  • joshua08/12 12:09 AM

    i’m with lunarvision on this one. try something visually unprecedented for the area. rather than something that looks like the paramount or west at north (IE: bricks and beige). BUT if it has to be bricks, what about doing something inspired with them? check out what places like Anagram Architects in India have done with humble materials. http://www.architecturalreviewawards.com/ar_awards_2007/arawards2007pages/anagramhm.htm

  • Tony Spencer09/04 10:13 AM

    Just received email from the neighborhood association.  Not good:

    “Sadly, the Planning Commission voted unanimously for the proposed project (who stands for neighborhoods?) ignoring THE NEIGHBORHOODS’ request to address

    1)The Wade/Oberlin Small Area Plan that calls for retaining the height limits set by the existing Shopping Center zoning

    2) Adhere to the agreed upon 30 units per acre as opposed to 320 units per acre recently approved by the city council and

    3) Produce a traffic impact analysis for the entire Cameron Village area in order to make informed decisions about how all this proposed density is going to affect the roads and neighborhoods surrounding Cameron Village.“

  • Christopher Triplett09/04 11:16 AM

    Ridiculous isn’t it?

  • Tony Spencer09/04 12:35 PM

    The newest drawings look even more hideous than the first. Beyond being ugly though, shouldn’t we keep the dense growth in the dense area (downtown). I just don’t see how these residential streets can handle big housing.

    Pic of the new nastiness on:
    http://www.savecameronvillage.com

  • Enigma09/07 11:54 AM

    Mike Ramsey and his architectural team at GMK Associates http://www.gmka.com/ provided the hideous model Emily chose to use in her smear campaign.  Christopher said it best, ridiculous isn’t it?

  • Enigma09/07 12:19 PM

    Local architect Mike Ramsey’s affiliation with GMK may be inaccurate.  If so, my apologies to GMK.

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.




Remember my information for next time I comment

Send me an email of follow-up comments?