news-record.com

BLOGS

Thinking Out Loud

Scoring downtown projects

I’m told by Ed Wolverton of Downtown Greensboro Inc. that the dress code for new downtown buildings and renovations will be discussed further by the public before going to the City Council for approval.

The design manual, as revised, now includes not one mandatory requirement, only guidelines and a nonbinding grading system based on the guidelines.

If a developer satisfies 75 percent of the guidelines (in the journalism classes I teach, that equates to a C) he or she gets fast-tracked approval.

Even if a developer went before a committee for evaluation of his or her project, that committee’s recommendations would be nonbinding.
The developer still could do whatever he or she wants to do.
It’s almost like taking a pass-fail class in which you grade yourself.
In my view, that’s far too lax.

If — and only if — a project goes before the City Council for a rezoning vote or incentives request, are there any teeth at all in the rule book.

But let’s give the new guidelines the benefit the doubt. Is the grading system tough enough?

David Wharton applied the grading scales to some recent downtown projects and here’s what his report card looked like:
• Carolina Bank: F
• Arbor House: F
• Bryan YMCA: F
• Center Pointe: B-
• 324 South Elm: D+

I’d say these are what I’d expect, though I thought the South Elm project would grade higher.

Read all of David's thoughts here.

City staff also are supposed to score some projects; I’d like to see how the grades compare.

I also hope they get tougher and make some guidelines mandatory and non-negotiable.

Permalink

Posted by Allen Johnson on Monday, June 28, 2010 at 3:00 am

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

brian444

June 28, 2010 - 5:18 am EDT

I see: all Greensboro architecture should conform to the aesthetic tastes of a media-industrial magnate and a classics prof. I just hope you guys don't start requiring standards for personal attire or haircuts.

triadwatch

June 28, 2010 - 12:14 pm EDT

and you wonder why i and many others are skeptical of anything roy carroll gets involved with because the trebic influence on everything in greensboro and guilford county is out of control and needs to be addressed and written about . I for one am fed up with trebic , especially with what happened a few years ago with protest petition. This whole downtown design and also the LDO for greensboro are 2 points where we have trebic and it's members who come in and clear cut every tree that the eye can see and won't even agree to plant one tree on each property, amazing.

Jarrow

July 3, 2010 - 7:32 am EDT

Trebic was involved in the downtown overlay that produced the strongest requirements. So, they are unfairly criticized here. The folks who fought back were the property owners who had been mostly omitted from the original process and very nearly were 'run over' during the original public hearing in April, 2009 even to the point of an attempt to prevent some from speaking at that very hearing. Part of the problem all along is that most of the folks pushing the hardest were not the folks being directly regulated in the ordinance. Trebic played no part whatsoever in the changes from the April, '09 edition.

Gymnaseum

July 2, 2010 - 3:02 am EDT

Well,it is certainly true the "new Arbor House" has nothing arbor not house about it. The YMCA is a big ugly block with beautiful views of sweaty stationary bikers and treadmillers. The Carolina Bank is so huge and blocks the lovely view of Firestone and Hardees towards downtown. Centre Pointe is okay, but those cheesy balconies are an eyesore on the potentially elegant silhouette,especially with the nice glass and dark "stone" facings.

Overall, lots of the new stuff is plain ugh-o, bland-o. The previous turn of century had much better taste. Granted, good materials and labor were cheaper (and more skilled). Greensboro isn't alone in the country for such a fall from grace, though.

Jarrow

July 2, 2010 - 7:31 am EDT

With regard to the Downtown Design Overlay . . . or any neighborhood overlay for that matter . . . continuing to put additional restrictions over and above zoning in order to codify current personal taste administered by second-level experts is problematic. It is clear that in the older buildings we celebrate as historical, part of the reason is the demonstration of change over time. The change is not only of design, but also in materials and technique.

I use the term second-level experts because the arbiters of design and taste by planning departments and consultants who haven't the experience or risk of a project can rarely if ever bring full understanding to bear. What is at work here is antithetical to the creative effort, which has its mistakes. If the opposite of making a mistake is to have designs essentially emulate to a standard design, then over the course of a generation change will come slowly or perhaps not at all. Too bad! Change is where we advance in life through trial and error.

Yes we have buildings we don't like to look at, yet it is the trial and error process that produces excellence at other times.

Through this whole Design Overlay process, I am constantly amazed at the number of folks who have never built a thing standing ground, adamant that they know how it ought to be - and it ought to be static, and their way. I say: go get some experience, learn how to finance and build something that will entice the public to pay you to be there. With that knowledge behind you, have your say and it will have weight. Else, it's just an exercise of power - and power consistently administered to prevent the extraordinary. In other words, it's surrender, a failure of faith.