Jump to content

distortedlogic

Members+
  • Content Count

    2197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

259 Excellent

About distortedlogic

  • Rank
    Burg

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4133 profile views
  1. The house is kind of a character piece and and I could see it being a well-known house if it was in a tourist city (it'd probably have nickname), but I wouldn't fight to keep it if it has no historical significance, even though I kind of like it. I do hope they childrens' park can remain, my little ones love it. And I like the idea of having this type of unique children's park as an alternative to the traditional playgound type park.
  2. Yes. Plus several of the apt projects DT could have easily been that tall with smaller footprints. One thing about the County Square site is that we (and developers) should think 4th demensionally. This will be around for a long time and will take awhile to build out. What will Greenville be able to support or need in 2030 or 2040?
  3. Ok I see what you're doing. I don't know about the height. The Daniel/Landmark is 305. With this being an apt building, I think the floor heights are usually 10 to 12 feet per floor. That only works out to around 200 feet give or take a few depending on whether it's 16 or 18 or 19. The museum and conference floors could be pretty tall but who knows yet. The description says only about 100 residences. This illustrates my point about some of the other projects with 200-350 apts spaces, imagine if they had a small footprint how many floors they could have been.
  4. I get you but compared to most of our modern boxes this would be a little daring a different!
  5. Looks like the top facade would be number 19 to me. What rendering are you looking at to see 3x the Embassy? If this is atop the museums and conference space, (maybe 40 feet for those two floors) , 19 floors would be about 200ft , so maybe the height of the Camperdown? But as we've said, who knows, this is just conceptual I'm sure. And I woud rather have a really nice architectually appealing and beautiful design here over a tall boring box anyway.
  6. If those are indeed floors, I count 18 on top of the other stuff, not 16, and that does not include the top roof portion.
  7. Didn't Canvas decide to go back with their original plan and do apartments and condos, instead of office?
  8. I thought the 20 was good and would have allowed for more density and that the neighborhood would not have been more threatened by it. And, in fact, may be more affected by sprawl sooner because of it. The 12 is a missed opportunity in my view, maybe a compromise of 16 could have worked?
  9. Annnnnd, now... back to county square?
  10. Typical behavior here, don't take bait fellas. Just another thread to boast about how much better Charlotte is. A complete troll thread.
  11. Here is a short thread from 2005 about the mall and site. https://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/topic/12679-bell-tower-mall/
  12. Very interesting. It sounds like it would have been a very nice project for its time but I wonder what would have happened after. Not long after this (70s) was when all the major players fled to the suburbs and other stores and DT essentially died. I wonder how that would have affected such a development, or how such a development would have affected downtown's decline. Until the past 20 years, the 20s through the early 60s time period was the prime for DT before declining quickly for a couple decades.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.