Greenville County Square redevelopment

[gman430]

http://www.greenvillecounty.org/County_Council/_Agenda/Meetings of 2016/County Square Development Ad Hoc/2016.08.25/agenda.htm

[ausrutherford]

Hopefully we get to see something...

[cabelagent]

3 hours ago, gman430 said:

http://www.greenvillecounty.org/County_Council/_Agenda/Meetings of 2016/County Square Development Ad Hoc/2016.08.25/agenda.htm

 

1 hour ago, ausrutherford said:

Hopefully we get to see something...

That's a short & sweet agenda!  

[gman430]

Update: http://greenvillejournal.com/2016/08/25/county-prepares-university-ridge-redevelopment-proposals/

[ausrutherford]

Prays for City Target...prays for City Target.....

[distortedlogic]

5 hours ago, gman430 said:

Update: http://greenvillejournal.com/2016/08/25/county-prepares-university-ridge-redevelopment-proposals/

Interesting, not really sure what to make of it. It talks a pretty good game, but I bet it ends up kind like the Gnews site; semi-dense, low-midrise (if that) and probably too much surface parking. I really hope they consider and plan for much more than 20 years down the road. They should be thinking way farther than that, as this site may not be redeveloped again for a century. This site (especially as the article includes Univ ridge and the health dept side in it's description) is very large compared to DT itself, and could truly remake DT Greenville as we know it. IMO, this site should be ultradense, vertical, and something truly special. Make a new tallest for the new county office building, plan for future office needs, build a new tallest residential/mixed use building, have no surface parking, make all parking underneath buildings and have parking garages for all above ground parking, make some pedestrian roads, redo both sides of Univ Rd and make this a city within a city. Spend some time on the architecture, don't just sketch it out on a napkin, but really put some thought in. Build an iconic building, put in a circulating restaurant or observation tower on our new tallest, dedicate one street to international influence to pay tribute to our international presence across the region, make this SPECIAL, A CITY within a CITY! Please, not another, McBee station/Gnews/SouthRidge/Main/Stone, etc.

[gman430]

I believe the city doesn't want anything over six stories tall on site from what I recall. The county offices building will probably be taller than that (10-15 stories) though.

Edited August 26, 2016 by gman430

[Spes]

22 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

...This site (especially as the article includes Univ ridge and the health dept side in it's description) is very large compared to DT itself, and could truly remake DT Greenville as we know it. IMO, this site should be ultradense, vertical, and something truly special. Make a new tallest for the new county office building, plan for future office needs, build a new tallest residential/mixed use building, have no surface parking, make all parking underneath buildings and have parking garages for all above ground parking....

I share your enthusiasm for the site and distaste for above-ground parking, but the site's disconnectedness from downtown-proper (i.e. walking distance from North Main) probably means it will only work as lower-density; highest case scenario is probably South Ridge-esque. But projections on demand for apartments/etc may limit that... If the occupancy rate on apartments in 3 years is lower than 80%, don't keep your hopes up

I hope it can be something great as part of downtown, but it would work well as a dense, transitional residential area

[vicupstate]

Quote

 

I really hope they consider and plan for much more than 20 years down the road. 

I read that to mean the demand/need for County office space not the project as a whole. It is pretty clear to me that the county will keep their 5 acres or so (hopefully less than that, somehow) and simply let the market determine the rest. 

The 6 floor height limit never made sense in the first place and makes a lot less sense now. It needs to be the first thing to go. For what the county could and should get for the site, economics would likely dictate at least a couple of buildings (at a minimum) would need to be taller than that. Probably as much as twice that. 

With so much attention from developers on this site, it certainly has the potential to be great.  

 

 

[mallguy]

16 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

Prays for City Target...prays for City Target.....

A real Target could easily fit on the site, with the same (or maybe a slightly larger) footprint as the Woolco building, which is still there.

I'm also hoping for retail.  It seems like plenty of national retailers will go downtown but they just need modern retail space to do so, and Main Street doesn't have that much new construction.

[Gville29601]

Density, density, density is key, in my opinion.

I'm less concerned about height than I am about no surface parking, a mix of office / retail / restaurant / residential on a grid like block pattern with quality buildings that residents can be proud of - for generations. 

The county has a great opportunity to demonstrate an innovative public / private partnership that the city has proven can be done to make Main St. / downtown such a great destination in the region.  

[Gville29601]

But speaking of development density ----

What type of development will typically create the most county revenue (taxes) over a long period of time? Office, retail, or residential? 

Sure, the county will get a nice sales price on the land (over a million per acre), but wouldn't the county be willing to sell at a lower price to a developer who will bring in "the right type" of development and density that will subsequently inflate county tax coffers -- for decades -- down the line? And the more sources of tax revenue they can squeeze into the site, the better, right?

Re: A Target. I think something like this is better somewhere else. Honestly, big boxes are going the way of the dinosaur. Amazon is winning. We might go to a small shop to see something in person, but then we are ordering it online and having it delivered the next day (or in some cities, the next hour). 

[gman430]

Good article here: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2016/08/25/county-square-redevelopment-moving-forward-affordable-housing-unlikely/89350074/ The county offices building will be 200,000-250,000 square feet which if including a parking garage on the bottom would make it fairly tall I would think.

Edited August 26, 2016 by gman430

[mallguy]

48 minutes ago, FUgrad02 said:

But speaking of development density ----

What type of development will typically create the most county revenue (taxes) over a long period of time? Office, retail, or residential? 

Sure, the county will get a nice sales price on the land (over a million per acre), but wouldn't the county be willing to sell at a lower price to a developer who will bring in "the right type" of development and density that will subsequently inflate county tax coffers -- for decades -- down the line? And the more sources of tax revenue they can squeeze into the site, the better, right?

Re: A Target. I think something like this is better somewhere else. Honestly, big boxes are going the way of the dinosaur. Amazon is winning. We might go to a small shop to see something in person, but then we are ordering it online and having it delivered the next day (or in some cities, the next hour). 

Office and retail generate way more property taxes for governments, generally, and consume a lot fewer government services, compared to residential areas, generally.

[ausrutherford]

The 6 story max rule is a law of the city since it is within the guidelines of the Planned Development zoning of this area.

However, the city would likely work with the county/developer to grant an exemption to allow higher height for the county offices. I imagine that for them to allow the greater density, they will have to have large public open space within the site that has organized events (example: the plaza for Camperdown).

The rest of the site will likely have to keep at 6 stories except the areas next to the houses along Howe St. They will likely only allow 3 stories max there (example: North Main Development). This will allow the stair stepping the city wants.

Also, the development will have to go before both the DRB and the Planning Commission before being approved by City Council. This will ensure it will be well designed.

7 hours ago, gman430 said:

Good article here: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2016/08/25/county-square-redevelopment-moving-forward-affordable-housing-unlikely/89350074/ The county offices building will be 200,000-250,000 square feet which if including a parking garage on the bottom would make it fairly tall I would think.

I think I saw that if they bring in the state agencies on site on the other side of University Ridge, it would increase to 300,000 ft!

[Jet-set]

1 hour ago, ausrutherford said:

...I think I saw that if they bring in the state agencies on site on the other side of University Ridge, it would increase to 300,000 ft!

The DMV definitely needs to move into a new space. It has to be one of the worst in the county as far as layout, parking, square footage for volume, etc.

Also, according to the article it is saying state agencies would require up to 300,000 square feet on their own; in addition to the 200,000 to 250,000 the county would need. Perhaps that isn't correct in truth but that's what the wording of the article says.

Edited August 27, 2016 by Jet-set

[ausrutherford]

50 minutes ago, Jet-set said:

The DMV definitely needs to move into a new space. It has to be one of the worst in the county as far as layout, parking, square footage for volume, etc.

Also, according to the article it is saying state agencies would require up to 300,000 square feet on their own; in addition to the 200,000 to 250,000 the county would need. Perhaps that isn't correct in truth but that's what the wording of the article says.

Well that would be even better...not to mention open up more land for redevelopment.

[gman430]

500K-550K square feet is a lot. To compare, the ONE office buildings combined are 381K square feet. 

[distortedlogic]

That's not how I read it. To me, it read that the county would need 200 - 250k and the state would need additional space beyond that, for a total of up to 300k. But even 300 would be a lot, and if contained in one building with a small footprint could deliver a new tallest.

[Jet-set]

Interpret how you will:

"..and the question of how to accommodate state and federal agencies currently in County Square is open. Those agencies would require more space than the county — up to 300,000 square feet."

Anyone know the square footage of county square right now? From the satellite it appears to be in the 275,000 to 300,000 sq. ft. range.

Edited August 27, 2016 by Jet-set

[mallguy]

County Square's mall building is slightly over 300,000 square feet. 

Is it all used as office space, though?  I recall walking through it even after the county bought it and the interior mall corridor and vacant retail spaces were still there.

[mallguy]

Maybe a hybrid lifestyle center with lots of office, lots of residential and some retail space would be the best mix for this site, with the retail being outlet mall-type retail, like a Saks Off Fifth?  As much as I don't care for outlet malls, they are where the growth in retail is these days, Greenville doesn't have an outlet mall (even Asheville now does) and perhaps the spaces could be transitioned to regular retail easily if the outlet concept doesn't work on the site.

[mallguy]

Hopefully the retailers at the new development will be better than these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Tower_Mall

Not one of them appeals to me now, and I am pretty sure that my family skipped over most all of them in the '70s in favor of McAlister Square.

Edited September 6, 2016 by mallguy

[Exile]

On 9/5/2016 at 8:19 PM, mallguy said:

Hopefully the retailers at the new development will be better than these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Tower_Mall

Not one of them appeals to me now, and I am pretty sure that my family skipped over most all of them in the '70s in favor of McAlister Square.

We used to go to the Baskin-Robbins pretty regularly if we were in that part of town. As I recall it had an exterior entrance next to the main mall entrance (just like the BR at McAlister). The theater was  a draw throughout the 70's and into the 80's. I vaguely remember the interior: I doubt I went inside more than a handful of times.

One odd thing: my memory may be faulty, but I believe that A&P and Winn Dixie were side by side on the lower level facing the theater.

On 9/5/2016 at 8:19 PM, mallguy said:

Hopefully the retailers at the new development will be better than these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Tower_Mall

Not one of them appeals to me now, and I am pretty sure that my family skipped over most all of them in the '70s in favor of McAlister Square.

We used to go to the Baskin-Robbins pretty regularly if we were in that part of town. As I recall it had an exterior entrance next to the main mall entrance (just like the BR at McAlister). The theater was  a draw throughout the 70's and into the 80's. I vaguely remember the interior: I doubt I went inside more than a handful of times.

One odd thing: my memory may be faulty, but I believe that A&P and Winn Dixie were side by side on the lower level facing the theater.

On 9/5/2016 at 8:19 PM, mallguy said:

Hopefully the retailers at the new development will be better than these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Tower_Mall

Not one of them appeals to me now, and I am pretty sure that my family skipped over most all of them in the '70s in favor of McAlister Square.

We used to go to the Baskin-Robbins pretty regularly if we were in that part of town. As I recall it had an exterior entrance next to the main mall entrance (just like the BR at McAlister). The theater was  a draw throughout the 70's and into the 80's. I vaguely remember the interior: I doubt I went inside more than a handful of times.

One odd thing: my memory may be faulty, but I believe that A&P and Winn Dixie were side by side on the lower level facing the theater.

[mallguy]

9 hours ago, Exile said:

We used to go to the Baskin-Robbins pretty regularly if we were in that part of town. As I recall it had an exterior entrance next to the main mall entrance (just like the BR at McAlister). The theater was  a draw throughout the 70's and into the 80's. I vaguely remember the interior: I doubt I went inside more than a handful of times.

One odd thing: my memory may be faulty, but I believe that A&P and Winn Dixie were side by side on the lower level facing the theater.

 

I grew up going to that Baskin-Robbins, too, and you're right.  You're also right about the grocery stores.  I recall watching the Winn-Dixie sign being taken down when the store closed; I was at the movie theater.

I have no idea why anyone thought that it was a good idea to have a small mall in a bad area, not visible from a major street, anchored by 2 grocery stores and 2 discount stores.