Camperdown (Greenville News Building Site)

[gman]

Nice!

[Gville2012]

http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/greenville-news-site-design-wins-partial-approval/ - here is an angle from Broad that shows the plaza

Edited January 29, 2015 by Gville2012

[goodbye]

The Greenville News says the plans now include 18 condos, which explains the additiinal floor.

Access to the movie theater lobby was moved to Falls Street. I understand having an entrance there, but it may seem odd to put the lobby there, considering the lack of retail and pedestrian activity along that stretch. Most of the ground-level facade along that side of the street will be occupied by parking structures.

[GvilleSC]

For-purchase units are really making a comeback right now downtown.

Edited January 30, 2015 by GvilleSC

[ausrutherford]

I would ask for a few differences...

 

I don't see the opening to the Movie Theater on Falls street, but if it is there, that facade needs to be redone to be more welcoming. There is no clear entrance to theater. Theres no trees on that side either.

 

A big issue is that there is no stairs/elevator connecting Main Street to Falls Street on this side of the development. That is needed for foot traffic. Also, the city should redo that side of the river to add an patio/artistic element to draw people to that side of the river even more. 

[goodbye]

I would ask for a few differences...

I don't see the opening to the Movie Theater on Falls street, but if it is there, that facade needs to be redone to be more welcoming. There is no clear entrance to theater. Theres no trees on that side either.

A big issue is that there is no stairs/elevator connecting Main Street to Falls Street on this side of the development. That is needed for foot traffic. Also, the city should redo that side of the river to add an patio/artistic element to draw people to that side of the river even more.

The overall architectural design of these preliminary renderings is definitely a disappointment. I realize the drawings likely will be modified as each component is brought to the city for review over the next several months. My primary concern is the generic façades and overly simplistic (bland, in my opinion) architectural features will remain prominent in the final design.

The current design fails to encourage pedestrian activity along Falls Street and Japanese Dogwood Lane. The components appear to be literally stacked on top of one another like an afterthought rather than integrated with subtle uniformity. Why not cover the parking structure with façades that match or at least compliment the features of the buildings above? The same applies to the extremely disappointing condo and main office exteriors.

By the way, the plans include a strairway on Falls Street.

[NBNY2GRNVL]

Because these are the new 

 

The overall architectural design of these preliminary renderings is definitely a disappointment. I realize the drawings likely will be modified as each component is brought to the city for review over the next several months. My primary concern is the generic façades and overly simplistic (bland, in my opinion) architectural features will remain prominent in the final design.

The current design fails to encourage pedestrian activity along Falls Street and Japanese Dogwood Lane. The components appear to be literally stacked on top of one another like an afterthought rather than integrated with subtle uniformity. Why not cover the parking structure with façades that match or at least compliment the features of the buildings above? The same applies to the extremely disappointing condo and main office exteriors.

By the way, the plans include a strairway on Falls Street.

Because these are the new gulags for people to smart to realize they are being imprisoned. I kid, I kid, but they really could have done better on the architecture. I can't wait for that movie theater, that's going to bring a lot of fun to downtown!

[gman430]

http://f.tlcollect.com/fr2/315/10953/Main_St_S_305_Camperdown_Site1483.pdf

[GvilleSC]

This is going to be awesome

[ausrutherford]

The two holdouts sold to the developers.

[GvilleSC]

I really hope they don't tear those buildings down.

[goodbye]

http://f.tlcollect.com/fr2/315/10953/Main_St_S_305_Camperdown_Site1483.pdf

I remain unimpressed by the overall design. I see a collection very bland boxes and no indication that this development will raise the bar for architectural quality in Greenville.

[sc smitty]

I really hope they don't tear those buildings down.

I'm sure they will want to.  Greenville's current obsession seems to be out with the old and in with the trendy, bland box.

[GvilleSC]

I remain unimpressed by the overall design. I see a collection very bland boxes and no indication that this development will raise the bar for architectural quality in Greenville.

Until designs are submitted to the DRB, we really have no idea of what the finished product will look like, just an initial understanding of massing and unrefined aesthetics.

I'm sure they will want to. Greenville's current obsession seems to be out with the old and in with the trendy, bland box.

Unfortunately it appears that they will be tearing them down. I hate to see that their "vision" is unable to incorporate them.

[Gville29601]

Interesting article about design firm the city hired. 

 

http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/design-workshop-downtown-greenville-news-site-bridge-past-future/

[gman430]

Interesting article about design firm the city hired.

http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/design-workshop-downtown-greenville-news-site-bridge-past-future/

And yet people are still questioning this project. Hilarious.

Edited March 5, 2015 by gman430

[goodbye]

And yet people are still questioning this project. Hilarious.

That article says very little about the actual design of this development and the company was hired to oversee just the landscape elements. Why should anyone draw conclusions about the design of this development from an ambiguous article months prior to the release of final plans? My comments above are based solely on the drawings provided and recent architectural trends (fads) in Downtown Greenville.

[gman430]

I stand by my statement. Wakefield Beasley is an amazing architecture firm so I trust them 100%.

[sc smitty]

The article says they will be "looking at the development to ensure it meets the intent of the Design Guidelines and Downtown Master Plan." So basically the city is paying another firm to do the job of the DRB. 

[Gville29601]

The article says they will be "looking at the development to ensure it meets the intent of the Design Guidelines and Downtown Master Plan." So basically the city is paying another firm to do the job of the DRB. 

 

Based on the amount of development occurring elsewhere downtown, the importance of this project, the location of this project, and the size of this project --- I'm really glad the city has hired a specialist to assist the development and review. That's smart leadership.  The DRB has a full plate and this project is too important to not monitor closely.   

[MAJIKMAN]

I agree. The DRB shouldn't stretch themselves and make a bad decision. Very smart move. And for the people who will and are saying it's a waste of money. We will be getting it back in taxes some how.

[smcu2006]

I love how folks complain about the DRB when they make decisions and then they go hire an outside firm to oversee probably the most important development in Greenville and folks complain about that as well. Sometimes you just can't win.

And those two buildings need to go...would stand out like a sore thumb with the new development if they were to remain.

[MAJIKMAN]

I think that's the reason why they went on ahead and bought them. It reminds me of the situation at River Place in the beginning with the buildings on Main street. Everybody screamed bloody murder when they found out that the buildings would be demolished. But once the project got started everybody got amnesia. No one remembers the controversy surrounding those buildings. That's what going to happen with this.

And on a side note. The woman with business in the building said in an article in the Greenville News sometime ago that she was moving (anyway) because of the construction. But now she's surprised by the fact that the buildings would be sold and demolished and now wants the developer to help her move. Long of the short of it is I think she forgot what she said. A lot of people knew that the buildings would probably be involved in this development. We just didn't know when. Even the buildings owners knew. They just wanted to know what they would offer.

[vicupstate]

^^ To me the two situations are not comparable.  The Riverplace properties looked AWFUL. Structurally they were very questionable to say the least.  BTW, that fiasco cost the city millions of dollars that otherwise would have gone to the new Reedy River Park.  I certainly don't have amnesia about that part. 

 

These two buildings are in good condition and would not stick out like a sore thumb.  In any city of size, you see plenty of examples of new and old buildings side by side. These buildings were in great shape even when the Westin was distressed. Given the additional land, I hope we get more than just a 'wider stairway' to compensate for the lose of two storefronts.  

 

I wonder if one or both of these buildings could be moved.    

[MAJIKMAN]

Well the River Place fiasco was a lesson learned. The city would have to think long and hard about it before going back that. But in the grand scheme of things, the money paid out, was a drop in the bucket compared to what came out of this. I'm pretty sure the lawyers told them that.

But moving the either one or both buildings is a pipe dream. Will never happen. They're just to big. I with you on the design of the area where the buildings are. Hope they're not being torn down. Just to be torn down.