Icon on Main (15 stories)

[growingup15]

What entertainment center? Are you talking about building something in the convention center parking lot?

mmhmm awhile back they was talking about plans to build a Entertainment complex in between the centre and Arena in that parking lot. it was supposed to be huge with a hotel and a theatre. recently the mayor brought it up.

[carolinagarnet]

I've never seen anything about that. Without additional city-owned parking, I think that would not be feasible.

[colasc]

mmhmm awhile back they was talking about plans to build a Entertainment complex in between the centre and Arena in that parking lot. it was supposed to be huge with a hotel and a theatre. recently the mayor brought it up.

I think you may be referring to a private venture Ben Arnold has proposed, contingent on expansion of the Convention Center, right? I do not know exactly where it would be built, but it would be somewhere in the Vista/Innovista, and there was some talk it could include a movie theater. I have only heard of this through an article I recently read in the Free Times (I believe) about downtown development and Don Tomlin's tower(s) proposal. I'd obviously like to learn more.  

[carolinagarnet]

This strikes me as pretty ridiculous. USC or someone connected with it performed a "shadow study" that shows the new building blocking sun in the west side of the Horseshoe at 4:30pm in December? When is there ever sun at 4:30pm in December? I think USC is overstating the impact on the Horseshoe. If building height is such a problem they should consider demolishing Burnes, which is right across the street and casts a much larger shadow.

 

http://saveourhorseshoe.org/

[mr. chips]

I respectfully disagree, Carolinagarnet. As I have written before, I think that there should be height restrictions near the Horseshoe to protect that historical part of the city and help to create a uniform "look" to the campus area. I hope that people who agree will sign this petition and pass it on:

 

http://saveourhorseshoe.org/

[carolinagarnet]

The time for height restrictions would have been in the 1960s when Cornell Arms was originally proposed. I find it hard to justify turning down a proposal for much needed student housing when the University itself has buildings that violate its own argument. If USC was so concerned about the look and feel of South Main Street, it should have purchased the land from Sandy's and Baptist Collegiate Ministry itself. My suspicion is that the economics do not work at mid-rise level. While the height may bother some, we're talking about denser development, students much closer to campus (likely easing the burden on parking), and the potential for much more consistent business on South Main. If this somehow gets blocked, I wouldn't be surprised if the University purchased the land and announced it was building a large, superblock style dorm on the site.

[Spes]

This is hilarious. The picture below is seriously the worst view they could come up with? It's from one corner of the horseshoe, and it obscures the visibility of the University's own mid-rise across the @#*%@#$ing street. What about the University's 18 story high rise 2 blocks from the horseshoe in an area of even less matching character? Nearly all height restrictions are just forms of NIMBYism, and the University has apparently decided that it has no qualms engaging in it.

 

 

Has anybody considered the fact that the University has an interest as a direct competitor in the area of student housing?

[mr. chips]

The time for height restrictions would have been in the 1960s when Cornell Arms was originally proposed.

Just because no-one was thinking about zoning and aesthetics back in 1949 when Cornell Arms was built (yes, 1949, not the 60's!) doesn't mean that we should not think about it now. The place for high-rise buildings now in Columbia is on Main Street and in that area. Not in the Vista. Not near the campus. USC has a good plan in place for creating a recognizable aesthetic in that part of the city. We should respect and support that vision.

 

Lots of cities have height restrictions - in Madison, Wisconsin buildings within a mile of the capitol may be no higher than that. In Europe many cities have height restrictions to protect historic areas. Let's plan ahead and create a more beautiful Columbia with aesthetic guidelines for different parts of the city.  

[carolinagarnet]

Just because no-one was thinking about zoning and aesthetics back in 1949 when Cornell Arms was built (yes, 1949, not the 60's!) doesn't mean that we should not think about it now. The place for high-rise buildings now in Columbia is on Main Street and in that area. Not in the Vista. Not near the campus. USC has a good plan in place for creating a recognizable aesthetic in that part of the city. We should respect and support that vision.

 

Lots of cities have height restrictions - in Madison, Wisconsin buildings within a mile of the capitol may be no higher than that. In Europe many cities have height restrictions to protect historic areas. Let's plan ahead and create a more beautiful Columbia with aesthetic guidelines for different parts of the city.  

 

Ok fine, the 1940s would have been a good time to impose height restrictions. If the University is so concerned about the height of buildings near campus, why isn't it opposing the 12 story University SC Tower on Assembly two blocks away? As much as USC might like to control all land between main campus and the river, it cannot insert itself into a private real estate transaction without a stronger case. Main Street probably should have been included in the master plan and subject to the Innovista Design standards, but it appears that the area was excluded. I think the University is trying to set a precedent knowing that there are several other plots of land adjacent to the EdR site that can be redeveloped into student housing. Considering how underutilized South Main is at this point. I hope other developers see the potential and build similar apartment buildings (as long as they have ground level retail).

[carolinagarnet]

And another thing- if the University was so concerned about Main, it would not have allowed the street to serve as an outlet for so many university parking lots. I lived on the Horseshoe for four years and was frankly embarrassed that what should be the most iconic street in the city was so dilapidated. Aside from Hunter Gatherer, Which Wich, and the Nick (now relocated), there is nothing even remotely appealing north of Devine. The redevelopment of the entire corridor is long overdue.

[mr. chips]

Ok fine, the 1940s would have been a good time to impose height restrictions. If the University is so concerned about the height of buildings near campus, why isn't it opposing the 12 story University SC Tower on Assembly two blocks away? As much as USC might like to control all land between main campus and the river, it cannot insert itself into a private real estate transaction without a stronger case. Main Street probably should have been included in the master plan and subject to the Innovista Design standards, but it appears that the area was excluded. I think the University is trying to set a precedent knowing that there are several other plots of land adjacent to the EdR site that can be redeveloped into student housing. Considering how underutilized South Main is at this point. I hope other developers see the potential and build similar apartment buildings (as long as they have ground level retail).

In the 1940's no one was thinking about urban design in Columbia, SC. There was little zoning, no discussion about aesthetics. Besides, no one was thinking about the university growing down towards the river - it was growing in the opposite direction. And there were very few proposals for new high-rises (Cornell Arms was the exception). We need to have higher standards now - and many cities that care about how they present themselves to the outside world do set these standards. 

[mr. chips]

And another thing- if the University was so concerned about Main, it would not have allowed the street to serve as an outlet for so many university parking lots. I lived on the Horseshoe for four years and was frankly embarrassed that what should be the most iconic street in the city was so dilapidated. Aside from Hunter Gatherer, Which Wich, and the Nick (now relocated), there is nothing even remotely appealing north of Devine. The redevelopment of the entire corridor is long overdue.

I do agree with you about Main - that really should be developed into the "backbone" of the university as a place for people to gather - restaurants, shops, pedestrian zone, trees, public art.

 

Isn't it a shame that the two blocks between the Horseshoe and Assembly are not contiguous university buildings - that would really create a campus feeling as it moves down towards the river. I hope that someone at USC is thinking about that!

[gman430]

This is why I am a Clemson fan.

[growingup15]

If USC was concerned about "Height" they should of thought of that decades ago. Honestly in my opinion. USC is a major area for growth and with restrictions you shun growth that you've been looking for. yes Main St is a good area for development but where are we supposed to grow once Main st is filled with skyscrapers and no avaliable land. USC and the Vista are great areas for more higher devlopment. we are not talking about 25-30 floors but 10-20 floors in USC and Vista area that complies with the Design code and what not would fit perfectly. and from the original design of this 15 story tower it looks like it would fit perfectly in that spot since they are about to build a 12/15 story on assembly st 2 blocks from the Horseshoe and this proposed tower. coming up Assembly from the Blossom st side.  it would look right for the area. 

Honestly USC just hates change and can't accept the change thats coming. this tower wont do anything to the horseshoe they are just making some half ass excuse.

 

[Spes]

I do agree with you about Main - that really should be developed into the "backbone" of the university as a place for people to gather - restaurants, shops, pedestrian zone, trees, public art.

 

Isn't it a shame that the two blocks between the Horseshoe and Assembly are not contiguous university buildings - that would really create a campus feeling as it moves down towards the river. I hope that someone at USC is thinking about that!

That would be nice, but it sure isn't what's there now. The current stretch between Sumter and assembly looks like a bombed out soviet bloc. Maybe the horseshoe is nice along Sumter street, but the area between Sumter and Assembly is absolute crap, and the University is being disingenuous if it thinks that that site is just swimming in any kind of historic character. Seriously, stand on the corner of Main and College and tell me that it feels historic.

 

Your argument that the city should have zoned that area for height restrictions illustrates the fact that the city can't all of a sudden restrict the owner's project based on those nonexistent restrictions. Even if people "have higher standards now" they didn't use those standards to impose a height restriction on that @#$ing block. 

[mr. chips]

That would be nice, but it sure isn't what's there now. The current stretch between Sumter and assembly looks like a bombed out soviet bloc. Maybe the horseshoe is nice along Sumter street, but the area between Sumter and Assembly is absolute crap, and the University is being disingenuous if it thinks that that site is just swimming in any kind of historic character. Seriously, stand on the corner of Main and College and tell me that it feels historic.

 

 

 

I agree that the area between Sumter and Assembly looks horrible - and I am sure that the university does not think it has any historic character. I don't know who owns the land on Main Street - some of it probably belongs to the State. They should do the responsible thing and either develop it as part of the Statehouse complex, or sell it to USC to develop as part of the campus. Or sell it to someone who will develop restaurants and stores along Main street. 

 

I still envision the potential for Main Street to be a pedestrian mall, that is a grand entrance to the campus. They did something like that at UNCG with what had been an ugly street bisecting the campus - now it has enhanced the campus. Take a look at: http://ure.uncg.edu/prod/cweekly/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/091212Feature_MoreFreshman.jpg

 

South Main could be lined with restaurants, shops, artwork, jugglers, etc etc and be a central axis of the campus. 

[Spes]

South Main could be lined with restaurants, shops, artwork, jugglers, etc etc and be a central axis of the campus. 

That sounds swell, but whatever the most picturesque use may be, that's not a legally valid reason to restrict how someone uses their property without a valid regulation. I think your front yard would make a great courtyard with jugglers and artists and a statue of Alf but I wouldn't bring an administrative challenge to your putting up a mailbox in derogation of that pipe dream.

[mr. chips]

That sounds swell, but whatever the most picturesque use may be, that's not a legally valid reason to restrict how someone uses their property without a valid regulation. I think your front yard would make a great courtyard with jugglers and artists and a statue of Alf but I wouldn't bring an administrative challenge to your putting up a mailbox in derogation of that pipe dream.

I am sure that you are correct - but that is why we don't have many more beautiful cities in this country. And why we have railroads going through the middle of Columbia backing up traffic and we can't get rid of them; or not enough public parks; or the fact that the city is so un-friendly to pedestrians. Why can Greenville come together and remove a bridge to create a beautiful park and a lovely downtown. Remove a bridge!!! Why can't we just have some basic guidelines and zoning that enables more than just asphalt and ugly streets with power lines. Yes, I am frustrated! Sorry....

[carolinagarnet]

Alright, the tone is getting kind of aggressive. To answer your question, mr. chips, land ownership on Main Street is fractured between the city, SCANA, the Cornell Arms landlord, USC, and the companies that own the shops and restaurants there right now. In a sense, this is great as is prevents developers from building oppressive superblock developments. This has also likely prevented USC from buying contiguous plots of land. I agree that a pedestrian mall, or at least street level retail, is important. Adesso included first floor retail and Icon on Main has included space for Sandy's and Baptist Collegiate Ministry in its base. If the tradeoff for great street level presence is buildings with heights that are currently out of context for the area (though that will soon change), I think that's a small price to pay. It's worth noting that the campaign is being led by My Carolina Alumni Association rather than USC. I don't think it really has legs.

[Spes]

Mea culpa for the tone. My only point is that the city and the University have been complicit in this area's failure for nigh on the last 40 years, and it's frustrating to see them frustrate EdR's reasonable investment-backed expectations to make up for that. I am just as much in favor of guiding reasonable, sustainable development through guidelines and approval as much as the next person, but the basis on which the University has premised this objection is just blatantly without merit, and rejects the reality of the area's present and future. I think that South Main would be wildly successful by simply taking reasonable strides to more closely resemble Main North of statehouse, and that is entirely attainable. But reaching anything approaching housing density on the backs of student housing calls for height, which doesn't detract from street level experience when it's in the right context. 

 

Take Cornell Arms for example. It adds to the pedestrian experience from Sumter and Pendleton, where the focus is properly along the frontages and trees, and not its height. Cornell Arms from Main street is imposing because there's nothing else around that end. This is a matter of context that will be solved by infill, and the university's myopic focus on height is threatening to derail the only current investment in that blighted area. Think of this as the first step towards Main Street as a center of campus and that part of the city; more students living there will add the market for retail along the empty lots currently serving as surface parking. That's an end goal that is worth a shadow at 4:30 for less than a month.

 

In re the question on ownership, anybody that likes can see who owns what parcel by going to http://www.richlandmaps.com/apps/gmap/?lat=33.99738&lon=-81.03170&zoom=18&base=roadmap&expanded=39665{sodEmoji.|}40518&layers=33844{sodEmoji.|}54880&taxid=R08916-05-02

[mr. chips]

In re the question on ownership, anybody that likes can see who owns what parcel by going to http://www.richlandmaps.com/apps/gmap/?lat=33.99738&lon=-81.03170&zoom=18&base=roadmap&expanded=39665{sodEmoji.|}40518&layers=33844{sodEmoji.|}54880&taxid=R08916-05-02

Wow - that is fascinating. I have never seen this map. It is interesting to see how many little plots of land are owned by different groups in that area. No wonder the university has not been able to create a contiguous campus moving across Sumter from the Horseshoe. It basically jumped over those two blocks between Sumter and Assembly, and is building down towards the river from there on. It is too bad that those two blocks are so chopped up. That might prevent the beautification of Main for some time.

[carolinagarnet]

It is too bad that those two blocks are so chopped up. That might prevent the beautification of Main for some time.

 

I think the area is still primed for redevelopment, just not in a wholesale way. There is something to be said for piecemeal development that does not appear overly uniform. Main Street north of the Capitol is charming in large part thanks to the heterogeneous facades of the storefronts. Diversity is interesting if well conceived, which in this case means contiguous shops and restaurants that front the sidewalk and offer an interesting street presence. Unfortunately the area south of Devine is pretty set at this point (though the university could replace the law school parking lot with something more useful), but the vacant lots between Devine and Pendleton leave plenty of room for interesting redevelopment.

[Spartan]

I'm not particularly impressed with this tower. The idea of losing the sunset on the Horseshoe is sad, but I could tolerate it if there were a more attractive building in the way.

[growingup15]

Icon on Main is dead :'( 

Thanks again USC for ruining another project in our great city. Its sad now that land is empty and with boring buildings.

http://columbiabusinessreport.com/news/55678-developer-pulls-out-of-proposed-15-story-south-main-dorm

[carolinagarnet]

I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled an Edwards and built another complex somewhere less controversial.