Jump to content

sc smitty

Members+
  • Content Count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

92 Excellent

About sc smitty

  • Rank
    Whistle-Stop

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    Greenville, SC

Recent Profile Visitors

2019 profile views
  1. I believe the proposed Dunbar connection is to make Thruston St tie into Dunbar with some kind of S curve through the housing authority site. Would have made a lot more sense to tie Dunbar to Church St at the Haynie/Pearl intersection like the master plan proposed, but guess they missed the boat on that one with the housing project already under construction being in the way now.
  2. Using classic architectural styles and proportions isn't an inappropriate or foreign concept for Greenville today. Architects have been using the styles of classical Greek and Roman architecture for thousands of years. They are seen in churches, civic buildings, and residences all over America, and not limited to 1400-1600's Europe. Those buildings are not merely replicas of older buildings, but take a historic form and use it for a new purpose, be it a museum, courthouse, residence, place of worship, etc. There's nothing fake or stagnant about buildings like Greenville's old county courthouse, old Washington St. post office, or the old First Baptist Church. I think they are actually some of the best examples of good architecture in town. Greenville doesn't even have that many examples, as we are so prone to tear down anything old. While I tend to prefer more traditional architecture, I think either a classical or modern building would be appropriate for an art museum. There are some great iconic examples of modern museum buildings. Even the current art museum is a decent example of a modern museum. At the same time, I think some modern buildings tend to look odd when they try too hard to be unique and different (think Frank Gehry). That being said, I don't know that this site is the best spot for a classical style building, being wedged between River St and the Academy St bridge. I think a monumental style building would have the most impact with a significant public space in front of it, or set on an axis that places it in an important spot in its surroundings.
  3. Mostly a big sales pitch from the developer about their previous projects and experience, and an overview of the entire county square project. Also stressed out how we should all be completely honored and impressed that the world class architect Foster & Partners is gracing little old Greenville with their wonderful design. Not too much time spent on changes to the existing Haynie Sirrine PD, other than they are proposing changing the height limit from 6 stories to 20. Taller buildings would be limited to the central zone, and step down to a 4 story limit at the west and south edges. There were a lot of comments raised about a lack of public input and affordable housing, which were generally blown off in typical political fashion by county leaders.
  4. At the corner of Church St/Pearl Ave: https://www.eatnstor.club/ Driving by this morning, I saw the sign and thought it was just more typical boxy apartments, but apparently it's some kind of self storage/ fast food drive through combination. I hate seeing these self storage units being put in such prominent locations. Definitely not the type of mixed use neighborhood center envisioned in the Haynie Sirrine master plan.
  5. They are definitely out of scale with the rest of the neighborhood. Seems more like the sort of thing I'd expect to see in the typical subdivision along Woodruff Rd somewhere, rather than in a development billed as TND.
  6. That section of oversized suburban McMansions really sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the development when viewed from overhead.
  7. I heard it's an architect's office.
  8. Something about the scale or position of it right at the front edge of the building looked odd to me. A feature from the old design that I think would have been nicer to keep was the colonnade on either side of the front entry.
  9. This looks so much better than before. It actually looks like a federal courthouse design. Glad to see the odd looking cupola is gone.
  10. The original plans for the Poinsett Highway revitalization also called for a planted median, but after pushback from a few businesses, county leaders caved and removed it. DOT doesn't care about making things look nice, they just want to move as many cars as fast as possible. A median would actually make sense for improving safety, as it could eliminate a lot of left turns across 3 lanes of traffic, restricting them to signalized intersections. Improvements to Wade Hampton sound great, and are much needed, but it will require city leaders pushing to make something nice happen.
  11. That's always a sign of good quality construction, right? These buildings actually have some decent looking design details that would stand out a lot better if almost everything wasn't stark white.
  12. Don't think I claimed to be an expert on the house or said to have completed a full inspection on it, so not sure where you got that impression. I simply stated that based on looking at images of the house from inside and out, I see evidence of a lived-in, well built and well maintained home that shows no signs of severe structural issues or falling into disrepair as you state. If you have knowledge of the supposed defects or disrepair you speak of that would justify demolition, please share and enlighten us. I have been involved in construction projects and renovations of historic properties for some time, and have seen many buildings that can legitimately be described and neglected and deteriorated, with actual major structural problems be restored, often for much less than the exorbitant cost initially estimated by architects and contractors.
  13. Watching the video, it's pretty safe to make the statement that this house is not anywhere close to being run down, without being "arrogant". And built in 1938 certainly qualifies as being historic by historical preservation standards (50 years old is the usual minimum qualification). I'm not saying they don't have the right to demolish the house, but I certainly don't think it's the best use, or of any benefit to the community as a whole. I know that this is the finest piece of architectural history in Greenville, but it is yet another historic part of the city that is being too quickly discarded.
  14. That house didn't show any signs of neglect or being in need of major repair. Sure, things like HVAC, kitchen, baths, etc. might need of updating, but no way that's more expensive than tearing it down and starting over. Why spend 1.5 million on a house, only to tear it down? If they didn't want to renovate it, they should have figured that out beforehand and left the house alone for someone that would, instead of destroying yet another piece of Greenville history.
  15. When you have too much money and no common sense: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2018/07/09/demolition-underway-augusta-road-home/767269002/ Here's a previous view inside this historic home that's currently being destroyed:
×
×
  • 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.