The worst-kept secret in town has been announced: Live Arts, Second Street Gallery and Lighthouse have teamed up to build the City Center for Contemporary Arts, a new structure on Second and Water to house all three organizations. The four-story, 27,000 square foot building is mostly used by Live Arts, with gallery space and classroom space for the other two organizations on the bottom floor. You’ll have to read Jane Dunlap Norris’ article in today’s Progress to get all of the detils on this impressive new building.
News and meta-news about Charlottesville, VA, since 2001.
Sideblog
Police announced this afternoon that their investigation into what was initially believed to be a fatal fire on Rugby Avenue is now a homicide investigation. #
The Virginia Supreme Court has denied George Huguely’s appeal. His second-degree murder conviction will stand, WRIC reports. #
In a carefully worded story, and not citing specific sources, WTVR reports that forensic evidence belonging to Jesse Matthew Jr., the main suspect in the disappearance of Hannah Graham, matches forensic evidence collected during the investigation of Morgan Harrington’s 2009 murder. #
In the wake of Hannah Graham’s disappearance, and the evidence that came from private security footage, city officials are revisiting the question of installing security cameras on the downtown mall. #
Both Charlottesville Registrar Sheri Iachetta and former Electoral Board member Stephanie Commander have turned themselves in to the police on
foursix and four felony counts of embezzlement, respectively. #Ten years ago, the National Institutes of Health budget doubled and schools like the University of Virginia built massive new research facilities. A decade later, those buildings remain largely underutilized. NPR visits UVA in this story on the effect of federal binge and spurge spending in the sciences. #
In 2012, Council approved a new student housing complex on West Main—now some council members are questioning whether what they were shown matches what was built. #
The Architectural Review Board has approved a bike-themed mural on West Market, below the McGuffey Art Center, although at least one member expressed concerns that it might look like the bicyclists were riding away from Charlottesville’s downtown. #
City Police Chief Tim Longo is meeting with city leaders to work on protocols regarding the use of military surplus police weapons in Charlottesville. #
A 100-year-old Colonnades resident received military honors for her service in the WWII Women’s Army Corps #
-
Archive for Sideblog »
C-Ville also has it as their cover story this week, both in the paper and online. That link won’t be valid after 2/26, of course, but better than the Regress‘s site.
cover story
Gee, I wonder how C-ville got that exclusive story?
Jeez — you would think the C-Ville editors would be professional/responsible enough to place a disclaimer alerting otherwise unknowing readers about the most intimate connection between C-Ville Weekly and the City Center for Contemporary Arts (“3CA”) somewhere before the THIRTY-THIRD paragraph. And that the editors would present this information in a real disclaimer, rather than just in a society-column-style listing of well-heeled benefactors.
I wonder how business folks who paid for ads in this issue feel about subsidizing what was really just a fundraising kick-off brochure for the publisher’s wife’s pet project!
And gee, since Waldo did “The Hook’s” website, isn’t it interesting how he overlooked the Cville Weekly link?
couldn’t find the link on the left side of this page for C-ville? Also if you will remember the C-Ville links die after one week. The HooK has past issues so a link won’t die. Jump all over Waldo when he is being bias but this isn’t it.
You need a litte cheese with that whine?
And gee, since Waldo did “The Hook’s” website, isn’t it interesting how he overlooked the Cville Weekly link?
I’ve never linked to C-Ville Weekly. I will often link to The Hook. Conspiracy? Hardly — C-Ville’s links die after a week. I won’t link to the City of Charlottesville or the Daily Progress, either, for the same reasons. You’ll notice that I mentioned the Daily Progress article, but did not link to it. That’s why.
You’re right, if I’d made C-Ville’s website, I’d link to it: because I’d have better sense than to make a site that was reset every week. :)
Maybe part of the problem is in Waldo’s phrasing, “You’ll have to read Jane Dunlap Norris’ article in today’s Progress to get all of the detils [sic] on this impressive new building.” In fact, the details are available online from more than one source.
Maybe part of the problem is in Waldo’s phrasing, “You’ll have to read Jane Dunlap Norris’ article in today’s Progress to get all of the detils [sic] on this impressive new building.” In fact, the details are available online from more than one source.
You’re right, my intention was not clear: what I meant to get across was more along the lines of “you’ve just *got* to read the article in the Progress to learn all about this amazing new building,” not “in order to learn more about this building, the only place that you can do so is in the Progress.”
Oh well — that’s why the comments system exists. :)
Okay, I’m probably an idiot and/or missing the obvious, but where the hell is this thing going? I count two 2nd Streets within 2 blocks of each other, and nowhere does the C-ville article mention whether we’re talking East or West. Is it just me, or doesn’t it seem like the *exact* location of a prospective building seem like a pretty major detail to include in a report?
You’re right — I should have gone into more detail in my write-up, too. I had, but deleted it in the 2nd draft, because it was described adequately in the Progress article. Now that the Progress is off the stands, that logic doesn’t do anybody much good. :)
FYI, it’s going in what’s now a private parking lot at the corner of the Water St. Parking Garage. Imagine that you’re standing in front of the garage, facing toward the Mall. Turn left, and walk west toward UVa. You hit a light, and on your left is Garrett Square (up the hill and over the tracks), and on your right is a Mall side street with Liquid and the tourism center. Turn right and face the Mall. You’ll see the back of the Jefferson Theatre on your left a little bit, and a pay lot behind the bus stop, which is in front of you. That parking lot is the location of the new building.
I wonder what the Board of Architectural Review is going to have to say about such a contemporary design that close to the “historic” downtown mall? In the past they haven’t been too friendly to such styles.
And, that, my friends is why Waldo would be a good City Councilor. He’s confident, he’s patient, he listens to criticism, and he’s willing to adjust when appropriate. I’m just saying – I’m very impressed with the way he handles himself on this site.
dude, it’s art. no one cares how ugly it is.
Oh – now I get it. Is this one of those “Art In Place” deals?
Does anybody know if the BAR reviewed/approved the works that are part of Art in Place?
Please use a question mark when phrasing your question.
GP
I wonder how business folks who paid for ads in this issue feel about subsidizing what was really just a fundraising kick-off brochure for the publisher’s wife’s pet project! (see this is where you goofed up) Question mark, question mark. Though, in this case, they could work in tangent-!?
OK.
Could you be more anal-retentive, or more (needlessly) pendantic?
Did you mistake my sentence for something other than a (rhetorical) question, despite its missing question mark?
Did the obvious answer to my phrase rankle you? And why?
Don’t you have duties at C-Ville that you might better be attending to right now, rather than fixing punctuation on a “conversational” internet site?
Now that I’ve gotten my sleep (I’m 6 hours ahead of Charlottesville time) I see that my punctuation in the original message was ENTIRELY correct.
I made a declarative statement (“I wonder . . . “) to which I added emphasis with the exclamation mark. I did NOT compose this phrase as a quesion (“How do the advertisers feel about . . . .?).
But I suppose you will slither away and be silent in reaction to my rebuke (here, in this message) and my directed questions (above).
But if not, bring it on!
John, get back to work. And while you’re at it, stop reading other people’s email you fink!
Umm . . . what the hell do you mean, and who are you addressing as “John”?
I wrote the “P.S” message, the message before (“Could you be more anal-retentive . . . “) , and that message which pointed to the unprofessional lack of disclosure in the C-Ville article.
But I ain’t “John”, I don’t read other folks’ e-mail at work, and I’m several thousand miles away from this free tabloid squabble.
Or do mean that this “John” is the anal-retentive (and presumably C-Ville-related dude who took such offense to my post?
Curious, indeed.
sorry, thought you were someone else.. clearly!
OK — thanks for clearing that up.