Greenville County Square redevelopment

[distortedlogic]

The Greenville news article says the two 20 story buildings are "gone." I didn't read it as possibly being added back later, though it did indeed say the council would have final say in the project. If they can override this change what was the point of it? If not, I wonder how Rocca will proceed, it sounded as though they were not quite happy with the change. 

I'm not sure I understand what the residents are concerned about. I do believe they should have a voice, but this is not about their properties per se, it's about the impact on their properties.  Wouldn't this increase the values of their properties considerably? I get that could cause taxes to go higher than they can afford but I'd imagine they could sell for a considerable profit and set them up for a long time. Again, I don't like the idea of a person having to move or feeling forced out of a long time residence but can they really expect to restrict the growth of a city like Greenville?  How is seeing a 12 story building from their porch significantly different than seeing a 20 story one? It may actually promote more sprawl down the road as it makes the development less dense. I also understand 12 is already a significant departure from the original 6, but as others have pointed out, that plan is nearly 20 years old and downtown is a very different place now, and county square is one of the most prime spots in the state. 

[ingvegas]

I'd take 2 ten story buildings over one twenty story building.  Take City Hall, for example. I believe it is approximately 10 stories stories. Now double the height AND put it up on higher elevation.  It will stick out and not look good.  Has anyone seen renderings of this building? 

I like the idea of clustering the taller buildings along northern side of the development and then tapering back height as it moves south to blend in with the residential areas there. 

Maybe with a proper mix of living, business, and retail/restaurants the traffic will not get too bad......maybe.

[gman430]

1 hour ago, distortedlogic said:

The Greenville news article says the two 20 story buildings are "gone." I didn't read it as possibly being added back later, though it did indeed say the council would have final say in the project. If they can override this change what was the point of it? If not, I wonder how Rocca will proceed, it sounded as though they were not quite happy with the change. 

I'm not sure I understand what the residents are concerned about. I do believe they should have a voice, but this is not about their properties per se, it's about the impact on their properties.  Wouldn't this increase the values of their properties considerably? I get that could cause taxes to go higher than they can afford but I'd imagine they could sell for a considerable profit and set them up for a long time. Again, I don't like the idea of a person having to move or feeling forced out of a long time residence but can they really expect to restrict the growth of a city like Greenville?  How is seeing a 12 story building from their porch significantly different than seeing a 20 story one? It may actually promote more sprawl down the road as it makes the development less dense. I also understand 12 is already a significant departure from the original 6, but as others have pointed out, that plan is nearly 20 years old and downtown is a very different place now, and county square is one of the most prime spots in the state. 

To my knowledge, RocaPoint is going to submit the same application that was presented today with the two 20 story buildings and all to the city council on November 25th for the first reading and again on December 5th for the second reading. I guess it's a city ordinance or law that it has to go before the planning commission even though they don't have the final say due to the proposed zoning change within the project site. Does seem kind of odd though due to the fact the vote tonight doesn't really matter either way.

1 hour ago, ingvegas said:

I'd take 2 ten story buildings over one twenty story building.  Take City Hall, for example. I believe it is approximately 10 stories stories. Now double the height AND put it up on higher elevation.  It will stick out and not look good.  Has anyone seen renderings of this building? 

I like the idea of clustering the taller buildings along northern side of the development and then tapering back height as it moves south to blend in with the residential areas there. 

Maybe with a proper mix of living, business, and retail/restaurants the traffic will not get too bad......maybe.

I could see both sides of that argument. The 20 story building would make the skyline look taller but the 10 story buildings would make it look more dense. I honestly don't have a problem with highrises though. If all of these other cities from Seattle to Atlanta to Charlotte to Nashville can get highrises built left and right why can't Greenville? What's wrong with us having them if all of these other cities can have them? The developers could have included two 40 story buildings on this site and I would still support it. Doesn't seem fair to me to leave this city excluded from economic development just because a few area residents have their panties in a bunch. 

Edited October 18, 2019 by gman430

[distortedlogic]

1 minute ago, ingvegas said:

I'd take 2 ten story buildings over one twenty story building.  Take City Hall, for example. I believe it is approximately 10 stories stories. Now double the height AND put it up on higher elevation.  It will stick out and not look good.  Has anyone seen renderings of this building? 

I like the idea of clustering the taller buildings along northern side of the development and then tapering back height as it moves south to blend in with the residential areas there. 

Maybe with a proper mix of living, business, and retail/restaurants the traffic will not get too bad......maybe.

I agree with clustering and tapering. However, I think people are overestimating a 20 story building. Ten story buildings are nothing height wise, often not much taller than surrounding trees. While a 20 story building on a hill would be more noticeable, we are not talking about an 800 ft behemoth here. Granted all 20 story buildings are not created equal, but a 20 story building with mostly hotel and living space will be more on the moderate height scale. 

[gman430]

Is the building height limit in terms of floors including the parking garage podium at the bottom of the building or just the building itself? Like could you have seven floors of parking and a twelve story building on top of it or can you only have five floors of building on top of a seven floor parking podium adding up to 12 stories?

Edited October 18, 2019 by gman430

[vicupstate]

Height restrictions can be either in feet or floors. Thus will be floors. As currently planned all the garages would be stand alone garages.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[gman430]

2 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Height restrictions can be either in feet or floors. Thus will be floors. As currently planned all the garages would be stand alone garages.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

The site plan shows and states two 12 story buildings over a parking podium. One is 300,000 square feet with the other being 250,000 square feet.  

Edited October 18, 2019 by gman430

[vicupstate]

Thanks Gman. I stand corrected. 

[gman430]

30 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

Thanks Gman. I stand corrected. 

 So does that mean we could actually have a taller building then 12 stories due to the parking garage at the bottom?  

[distortedlogic]

14 minutes ago, gman430 said:

 So does that mean we could actually have a taller building then 12 stories due to the parking garage at the bottom?  

Perhaps. Plus, if it's an office building it would have taller floors than a hotel or apt building. I'm surprised the neighborhood didn't express their desire for limits based on height in feet rather than floors. 

[GvilleSC]

23 minutes ago, gman430 said:

 So does that mean we could actually have a taller building then 12 stories due to the parking garage at the bottom?  

Unlikely. Odds are that they would have occupied floors adjacent to the garage (similar to Aloft), and in general, I think the garages would count in the story count. But I like your optimism

Edited October 18, 2019 by GvilleSC

[apaladin]

I thought on channel 4 last night they said they approved the rezoning and there would be 2 20 story buildings? Doesn't really matter, I am still very skeptical that we ever see one shovel of dirt turned on this project. Just too big and too many people involved. These  days it's hard to get 2 people to agree on something, much less hundreds. 

[vicupstate]

4 minutes ago, apaladin said:

I thought on channel 4 last night they said they approved the rezoning and there would be 2 20 story buildings? Doesn't really matter, I am still very skeptical that we ever see one shovel of dirt turned on this project. Just too big and too many people involved. These  days it's hard to get 2 people to agree on something, much less hundreds. 

It isn't hundreds, at this point we need four out of seven.  City Council is not obligated to accept any or all of the conditions.  That said, this isn't a slam dunk, especially with some seats changing hands between readings.   

I'm glad the PC approved it, but the 20 story restriction is just a bad idea. No one's existing home is going to be across  the street from a 20 story building or a 12 story on either. And what is the difference between a 12 and 20 story building if it was across from your home.      

[distortedlogic]

31 minutes ago, apaladin said:

I thought on channel 4 last night they said they approved the rezoning and there would be 2 20 story buildings? Doesn't really matter, I am still very skeptical that we ever see one shovel of dirt turned on this project. Just too big and too many people involved. These  days it's hard to get 2 people to agree on something, much less hundreds. 

On this particular proposal or on any county square project? I'm pretty sure something is going to happen here. 

[NewlyUpstate]

54 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

I'm glad the PC approved it, but the 20 story restriction is just a bad idea. No one's existing home is going to be across  the street from a 20 story building or a 12 story on either. And what is the difference between a 12 and 20 story building if it was across from your home.      

If I had to guess the direction, it seems like there's less of a 20 story restriction, and more of 20 story buildings aren't explicitly being zoned in to the plan yet.  The nice county building, the parking garages, the apartment buildings and a bit of a hustle of pedestrian traffic with ~10 story office buildings will all get planned and built, then once this area is normalized as a true multi-use hub of the city, the developer will come back and propose a flagship 20 story building with great architecture and they will go ahead and change the zoning.

That's what I see in my magic eight ball at least.  You gotta remember that the development of this area will take a long, long time.  Probably deep into the 2030s before it's all filled in.

Edited October 18, 2019 by NewlyUpstate

[CLT_sc]

9 hours ago, NewlyUpstate said:

If I had to guess the direction, it seems like there's less of a 20 story restriction, and more of 20 story buildings aren't explicitly being zoned in to the plan yet.  The nice county building, the parking garages, the apartment buildings and a bit of a hustle of pedestrian traffic with ~10 story office buildings will all get planned and built, then once this area is normalized as a true multi-use hub of the city, the developer will come back and propose a flagship 20 story building with great architecture and they will go ahead and change the zoning.

That's what I see in my magic eight ball at least.  You gotta remember that the development of this area will take a long, long time.  Probably deep into the 2030s before it's all filled in.

Based on the math, your timeline is very realistic.  The government buildings will be built in the immediate future.  But, for Greenville to absorb over 500k sq feet of office space given today’s office metrics will   require convincing a company to locate in Greenville.  Not impossible, but it would be close to a moon shot given the state’s lack of office recruitment outside of the Charlotte suburbs.  

[gman430]

2 hours ago, CLT_sc said:

Based on the math, your timeline is very realistic.  The government buildings will be built in the immediate future.  But, for Greenville to absorb over 500k sq feet of office space given today’s office metrics will   require convincing a company to locate in Greenville.  Not impossible, but it would be close to a moon shot given the state’s lack of office recruitment outside of the Charlotte suburbs.  

I tend to agree. The state in general has always been focused on manufacturing, distribution and even tourism over trying to land corporate headquarters. Anytime we do land a corporate headquarters they always seem to go bankrupt or get sucked up by a bigger company headquartered elsewhere. I know Fluor is looking at downsizing and relocating elsewhere in town so maybe they would be interested in locating at County Square. Hope so at least if they do decide to move in the end. 

[ausrutherford]

9 hours ago, gman430 said:

I tend to agree. The state in general has always been focused on manufacturing, distribution and even tourism over trying to land corporate headquarters. Anytime we do land a corporate headquarters they always seem to go bankrupt or get sucked up by a bigger company headquartered elsewhere. I know Fluor is looking at downsizing and relocating elsewhere in town so maybe they would be interested in locating at County Square. Hope so at least if they do decide to move in the end. 

Yet another large piece of land that would be prime for some redevelopment in the City. Granted less than County Square, but there is a lot of empty and underutilized land at their current HQ.

I know the City would love more residential around the mall in hopes of some redevelopment of the mall. No removing the mall, but prepping for the eventual big-box stores closing. The more people that live around it, the greater chance they can get for redevelopment. Also why the next proposed SRT extension goes up to meet the mall. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by ausrutherford

[CLT_sc]

10 hours ago, gman430 said:

I tend to agree. The state in general has always been focused on manufacturing, distribution and even tourism over trying to land corporate headquarters. Anytime we do land a corporate headquarters they always seem to go bankrupt or get sucked up by a bigger company headquartered elsewhere. I know Fluor is looking at downsizing and relocating elsewhere in town so maybe they would be interested in locating at County Square. Hope so at least if they do decide to move in the end. 

I am not sure why the state does not engage more in recruiting Hq operations or even some support type centers.  A lot of the large financial institutions are looking for space to locate out of NYC and the north east.  Places like Cola, Greenville and Ft. Mill are natural locations for these operations. But, as a state, SC wants to concentrate on manufacturing....which is not bad, just too one sided.

For Gvillesc and others who are quick to vote down my post, tell me how my math is wrong.  Based on Greenville’s ability to absorb office space without moving around tenants and government offices, current vacancy rates and available sub lease space, what math works to suggest that adding 500k feet of office space won’t be a long term event without either a relocation within the city ( which vacates space elsewhere) or a new company to the city?  And, this assumes the economy holds in a good way which is questionable.  Even in Charlotte where almost all new space is spoken for, adding one or two more towers to the dozen or so ++ in process is optimistic.  So, the down votes seem a little naive.

46 minutes ago, ausrutherford said:

Yet another large piece of land that would be prime for some redevelopment in the City. Granted less than County Square, but there is a lot of empty and underutilized land at their current HQ.

I know the City would love more residential around the mall in hopes of some redevelopment of the mall. No removing the mall, but prepping for the eventual big-box stores closing. The more people that live around it, the greater chance they can get for redevelopment. Also why the next proposed SRT extension goes up to meet the mall. 

Good idea,  incorporating residential space in and around malls is a solid way to ensure large boxes don’t sit vacant for years.  

[distortedlogic]

On 10/18/2019 at 9:53 PM, CLT_sc said:

Based on the math, your timeline is very realistic.  The government buildings will be built in the immediate future.  But, for Greenville to absorb over 500k sq feet of office space given today’s office metrics will   require convincing a company to locate in Greenville.  Not impossible, but it would be close to a moon shot given the state’s lack of office recruitment outside of the Charlotte suburbs.  

 

13 hours ago, CLT_sc said:

I am not sure why the state does not engage more in recruiting Hq operations or even some support type centers.  A lot of the large financial institutions are looking for space to locate out of NYC and the north east.  Places like Cola, Greenville and Ft. Mill are natural locations for these operations. But, as a state, SC wants to concentrate on manufacturing....which is not bad, just too one sided.

For Gvillesc and others who are quick to vote down my post, tell me how my math is wrong.  Based on Greenville’s ability to absorb office space without moving around tenants and government offices, current vacancy rates and available sub lease space, what math works to suggest that adding 500k feet of office space won’t be a long term event without either a relocation within the city ( which vacates space elsewhere) or a new company to the city?  And, this assumes the economy holds in a good way which is questionable.  Even in Charlotte where almost all new space is spoken for, adding one or two more towers to the dozen or so ++ in process is optimistic.  So, the down votes seem a little naive.

Good idea,  incorporating residential space in and around malls is a solid way to ensure large boxes don’t sit vacant for years.  

CLT, I really do try to give you the benefit of the doubt; I really do, but your attitude in this forum is beyond tiring.  You are VERY complimentary of other places in the state,  (even outside the Charlotte areas of SC) such as Columbia and Spartanburg; and deservedly so. What is it about Greenville, in particular, that blinds you to it's positives? We all know it's not perfect and has it's ups and downs. Guess what; the same is true for Cola, Sptbg, and even your beloved Charlotte.  You're down votes have nothing to do with math and everything to do with the attitude of your posts. Once again, you have taken the opportunity, in a discussion about Greenville, to "put us in our place" while inserting your constant promotion of Charlotte and it's SC side of the metro.  We talk about the growth of our airport and you talk about how everyone really prefers CLT. We talk about our downtown and you desperately attempt to discredit everything with a statistic or comparison to CLT or Cola. Someone mentions the possibility of a high speed rail coming through the upstate (which would be a good benefit for us) and instead of discussing the benefits you take it as another chance to cheerlead for Charlotte. Go enjoy Charlotte (or where ever you live) and let us wallow in our Greenville shortcomings and blind boosterism of misplaced excitement. 

Greenville's office market is just fine. Perhaps you missed (or just decided to ignore since it doesn't fit your narrative) that downtown absorbed over 112k sq ft in the second quarter of this year (yes, one quarter). While apparently it lost 166k sq ft in the 3rd quarter, the point is, Greenville is well capable of absorbing market space, and the trend has been to lower vacancies (as I'm sure you know). Just two years ago,  the vacancy rate was around 20%, now it is in the low teens. Like it or not, DT Greenville has as much or more development and growth going on currently (and over the past few years) than any city in SC and many peer cities in other regional states (and some bigger cities as well, which I'm sure you also know).  Despite all your dire warnings in past years with previous handles about how Greenville couldn't handle or succeed with developments "x", "y", or "z," it has done perfectly fine, it's growth and development have only accelerated, and there is a LOT of development on the horizon.  At what point do you get over whatever your beef is and give credit where it is due?  I hate Clemson football with a burning passion, but at some point I had to come to terms with their success and give them credit. They're a darn good program right now and that's just the way it is; congratulatons and a job well done to them. 

BTW, I agree with you on that I would also like to see the state be more agressive with HQ recruitment, that is a fair point. 

[motonenterprises]

Yet he is still here posting in the Greenville forum. Nothing going on in the Charlotte forum? This is an issue with the psyche. Let me put you down so I can feel good. It's a sickness.

[CLT_sc]

19 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

 

CLT, I really do try to give you the benefit of the doubt; I really do, but your attitude in this forum is beyond tiring.  You are VERY complimentary of other places in the state,  (even outside the Charlotte areas of SC) such as Columbia and Spartanburg; and deservedly so. What is it about Greenville, in particular, that blinds you to it's positives? We all know it's not perfect and has it's ups and downs. Guess what; the same is true for Cola, Sptbg, and even your beloved Charlotte.  You're down votes have nothing to do with math and everything to do with the attitude of your posts. Once again, you have taken the opportunity, in a discussion about Greenville, to "put us in our place" while inserting your constant promotion of Charlotte and it's SC side of the metro.  We talk about the growth of our airport and you talk about how everyone really prefers CLT. We talk about our downtown and you desperately attempt to discredit everything with a statistic or comparison to CLT or Cola. Someone mentions the possibility of a high speed rail coming through the upstate (which would be a good benefit for us) and instead of discussing the benefits you take it as another chance to cheerlead for Charlotte. Go enjoy Charlotte (or where ever you live) and let us wallow in our Greenville shortcomings and blind boosterism of misplaced excitement. 

Greenville's office market is just fine. Perhaps you missed (or just decided to ignore since it doesn't fit your narrative) that downtown absorbed over 112k sq ft in the second quarter of this year (yes, one quarter). While apparently it lost 166k sq ft in the 3rd quarter, the point is, Greenville is well capable of absorbing market space, and the trend has been to lower vacancies (as I'm sure you know). Just two years ago,  the vacancy rate was around 20%, now it is in the low teens. Like it or not, DT Greenville has as much or more development and growth going on currently (and over the past few years) than any city in SC and many peer cities in other regional states (and some bigger cities as well, which I'm sure you also know).  Despite all your dire warnings in past years with previous handles about how Greenville couldn't handle or succeed with developments "x", "y", or "z," it has done perfectly fine, it's growth and development have only accelerated, and there is a LOT of development on the horizon.  At what point do you get over whatever your beef is and give credit where it is due?  I hate Clemson football with a burning passion, but at some point I had to come to terms with their success and give them credit. They're a darn good program right now and that's just the way it is; congratulatons and a job well done to them. 

BTW, I agree with you on that I would also like to see the state be more agressive with HQ recruitment, that is a fair point. 

First, not trying to “put anyone in their place”, I love being in Charlotte and won’t apologize for being excited about how this city has transformed from a regional city years ago into a true national city.  It is a model for how business builds a city v planning a city for hopes of attracting a business.  It’s not a city where architects plan out massive blocks of the city hoping to attract business, but business employs architects and planners to build a bustling downtown area with over a dozen projects going up over 20 stories.  It won’t win a lot of “hey, look at this planned city”, but 60k people vote each year to move here and stay, that is worth more than any silly architect award.  So, let’s get that out of the way. 

Greenville’s approach has been different and nothing wrong with that, the Charlotte way of doing things won’t work there.  Greenville has utilized political capital, government assistance and other mechanisms to encourage development.  Nothing wrong with that, many cities do it and I wish Charlotte had the political capital to do more.  Greenville is pouring a lot of money into and asking the state for more to build a museum for Bob Jones with an attached conference center.   This particular project is employing government resources to kick start a development which hopes to add 550000+ sq feet of office space where the current rate sits at close to 15% not counting available subleased space.  Not sure where we see 20% 2 years ago, I actually see a WilsonKibler report from 3Q17 with a vacancy rate of 10% (cbd) which would suggest you are adding to the vacancy rate in 2018-2019.  So, I see it as a legit question to ask, how long will it take to absorb 550k when the vacancy percentage is at best flat lined and there is no concerted effort to attract office tenants.  This would be questions 1-10 if you were preparing a proforma, not sure why it generates so much heartburn.  

No need in getting into the airport or other issues you brought up, you distorted the actual airport conversation, and that’s fine.   But, Greenville folks do seem to have a hard time talking about the “what if’s”.....  However,  I will mention rail, high speed rail is a project to connect Charlotte and Atlanta.  Gvillesc tried to make it into a “we got it over Cola” argument which is 100% dead wrong.  The upstate will benefit, but the route is dictated by connecting Charlotte and Atlanta, not the upstate. 

As for more development than any downtown in SC, you may want to look around.  Both Charleston and a Cola have had a lot of development.  Charleston has been growing at breakneck speeds while Cola has just about matched Greenville in growth. 

For what it’s worth, I don’t see Greenville posters complimenting a Charleston or Cola on projects.  I hear a lot of Cola just being a government city and Charleston being for tourists, but no “good job”.  Rock hill attracted the Panther HQ and a couple of hundred jobs.  The only comments I have seen from anyone in Greenville have been critical.  So, it pays to look around the state and region, lots of things are happening in every city, and like it or not, Greenville is not leading every other city or metro (not even in SC), and there’s nothing wrong with that.

[vicupstate]

 

I can't say for certain but it certainly appears that the recent uptick in vacancy is 70% the BB&T building. I don't think one transaction can be that indicative of the market as a whole. If they had stuck to their original plan (convert to apartments), it would not have raised vacancy. Obviously if they thought the  space would sit vacant they would not have changed their plans.  

 

Quote

This particular project is employing government resources to kick start a development which hopes to add 550000+ sq feet of office space where the current rate sits at close to 15% not counting available subleased space. 

This is misleading at best.  It is more accurate to say the government is selling land it already owns at market rate.  The developer is not receiving  incentives.   The Panther relocation certaInly did  receive government assistance. 

As for the overall point, I don't think it is debatable that you always try to take the pessismtic view for all things Greenville.  

[GvilleSC]

Poor guy doesn’t know how Charlotte was/is built, and thinks no planning is cute. How incorrect and blind.  

[CLT_sc]

1 hour ago, GvilleSC said:

Poor guy doesn’t know how Charlotte was/is built, and thinks no planning is cute. How incorrect and blind.  

Lol, I know very well how Charlotte is being built. If you understood economics, you may understand as well.

Edited October 20, 2019 by CLT_sc