Recommended Posts

For more than a year, the biggest question surrounding County Square has been which one of six developers would be chosen and what would be included in the redevelopment described by Greenville County officials as “game-changing” and “evolutionary.”

That question is now answered.

Read full story on GreenvilleJournal.com: https://greenvillejournal.com/2018/04/26/developer-chosen-for-1-billion-county-square-redevelopment/

 

04-e1524750766604-1068x699 (1).jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Oh my... :yahoo::o:blink: I am speechless right now. $1 billion and three million square feet of space. Holy cow. The architecture of the county building is AMAZING. LOVE IT.

Edited by gman430
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the way the have rerouting down Thruston and dead ending at August is basically the same mess we have today.  We just trade the cluster at Harris and Augusta we have today for a cluster at Thruston and August.   It needs to be reworked somehow to meet up with Dunbar or Vardry with a traffic light to make it an efficient intersection.      

Edited by chuckyvt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, chuckyvt said:

I think the way the have rerouting down Thruston and dead ending at August is basically the same mess we have today.  We just trade the cluster at Harris and Augusta we have today for a cluster at Thruston and August.   It needs to be reworked somehow to meet up with Dunbar or Vardry with a traffic light to make it an efficient intersection.      

That doesn't bother me. They can address the intersection with Augusta with other measures.

The important thing to me is that they're routing the busiest/widest street further away, bringing more land area into a connected, pedestrian friendly zone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

That doesn't bother me. They can address the intersection with Augusta with other measures.

The important thing to me is that they're routing the busiest/widest street further away, bringing more land area into a connected, pedestrian friendly zone. 

Traffic flow, pedestrian access, aesthetics, it's all important, you don't get to pick just one.   Due to poor road layout and planning, the traffic flow in this area is already more than the side streets can handle, and this development will double the daily volume of traffic.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chuckyvt said:

I think the way the have rerouting down Thruston and dead ending at August is basically the same mess we have today.  We just trade the cluster at Harris and Augusta we have today for a cluster at Thruston and August.   It needs to be reworked somehow to meet up with Dunbar or Vardry with a traffic light to make it an efficient intersection.      

should be easy since the vacant housing authority site is on the one side of Thruston.  They could the line it up with Dunbar St.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I can call this a game charger. What is it is a show of confidence in Greenville and reaffirming Greenville's downtown commitment that started 40 years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, All About Greenville said:

04-e1524750766604-1068x699 (1).jpg

What exactly are those people walking around on the roof going to be able to see?? Even with the apparent pitch, it's seems like an odd perspective.

Having said that, I like the look of the building. It reminds me of a couple of buildings here in uptown CLT occupied by Johnson & Wales, with a canopy covering the open space in between--only this is much nicer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my first thought is just another bunch of 3-5 story buildings, regardless of architecture. Someone said they with the price of the property, they couldn't afford to put 3-5 story buildings, well I guess they can. Not impressed, but I will have to see more. Was hoping for a little height on this great piece of property but not surprised that there isn't any.

Edited by apaladin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Greenville not New York. If I could wish away one thing here it would be whining about height. Charleston has no height (self-imposed) and somehow they’re doing swell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, apaladin said:

Well, my first thought is just another bunch of 3-5 story buildings, regardless of architecture. Someone said they with the price of the property, they couldn't afford to put 3-5 story buildings, well I guess they can. Not impressed, but I will have to see more. Was hoping for a little height on this great piece of property but not surprised that there isn't any.

It’s been known for a long time that the chances of seeing any buildings over six stories tall on this site were slim to none. Still should have some good height and visibility being on that hill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, apaladin said:

Well, my first thought is just another bunch of 3-5 story buildings, regardless of architecture. Someone said they with the price of the property, they couldn't afford to put 3-5 story buildings, well I guess they can. Not impressed, but I will have to see more. Was hoping for a little height on this great piece of property but not surprised that there isn't any.

I wouldn't have minded more height, but I know someone on the council and they told me it would be more density than height. That being said, I think this is very nice and adds on to the urban feel of Greenville in a big way. DC doesn't have much height, but you definitely know it's a big city when you go there. I don't mind the mid-rise density. That signature tower you're looking for will come eventually. Just enjoy the ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Groundbreaking in 12-18 months. 10 year build out. $720 million in construction costs. $22.5 million annual tax revenue. 5,500 permanent workers on site. Three million square feet. $1.1 billion economic impact. 

And you all are worried about height. LOL.  You’ll get that with Camperdown and the new federal courthouse anyways. 

Edited by gman430
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SVL said:

I love this angle:

07.jpg

The rendering is not showing  the full-time window washers continually cleaning all that glass....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Density, with no surface parking lots, will be perfect for that location. Looks like a great start. We'll have the best county building in the state (region?). 

 RocaPoint Partners/The Georgetown Company have a good track record? 

From Greenville News article: "The public health department, family court, Department of Motor Vehicles and state departments of juvenile justice and social services will be moved."
Seems like county / developer want lower income users to go somewhere else? I wonder where they'll put these services? 

19 minutes ago, cabelagent said:

The rendering is not showing  the full-time window washers continually cleaning all that glass....

At least we'll be able to actually watch "our tax dollars at work" - literally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Exile said:

What exactly are those people walking around on the roof going to be able to see?? Even with the apparent pitch, it's seems like an odd perspective.

Having said that, I like the look of the building. It reminds me of a couple of buildings here in uptown CLT occupied by Johnson & Wales, with a canopy covering the open space in between--only this is much nicer.

Going off the renderings, the building appears to be slightly taller than SouthRidge across the street. I used to live there and you can easily see all of the downtown skyline from the top floor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is going to be on the top floor or have access to the roof ? Probably not many. I just hope it doesn't block the views of DT from that intersection. Not a big fan of that huge overhang/canopy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There doesn't appear to be any contour to the land--the whole thing is rendered as if it's built on level ground. I remember some steep spots in that parking lot around the tire store on the corner--and wasn't there a Hess station there at one time?

I think it would be pretty cool if they graded that land at the intersection of Church and U. Ridge so that the bases of buildings there were higher than the intersection--unlike the way they've graded down for that new business school at Clemson :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vistatiger said:

Who is going to be on the top floor or have access to the roof ? Probably not many. I just hope it doesn't block the views of DT from that intersection. Not a big fan of that huge overhang/canopy.

From the rendering a restaurant type business could be located up there...hope a Starbucks does not become part of the  equation.

Edited by cabelagent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to remember that besides the county square building, everything else on site is conceptual and will change based on market conditions and who wants to locate here. This could lead to taller or shorter buildings, site plan layout changes, less or more square footage, etc

Edited by gman430

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By cammers1995
      As I said in my introduction topic, I am heavily facinated by the original Meijer Store on Lafayette St, in Greenville. (Aka, Store #1)
      This store still stands and is used for many things. The far right is used as a food pantry and a thrift store. The majority of the middle is a BMX track and the far left is some unknown thing. (I believe it WAS a chaple). The building is in bad shape though. The roof is leaking terribly and the thrift store has many storage totes sitting under the leaks. (There are at least 30 of them, no joke. Its bad.)
       
       
      I have many photos of the building from last year:
       
       
       
      Some of the coolest things are that the Welcome Sign above the non 24 hour entrance is still partially lit up, and the building still appears to look like a Meijer. 
      Anyone else have their own stories, photos, etc to share? 
    • By RuskinSquare
      Short version: Greenville City Council asked the planning and zoning department to push deleting the existing ordinance restricting gates on developments and neighborhoods in the City of Greenville. It's expected to be on the agenda for the City Council's 11/26/2012 hearing.

      The Planning Commission recommended wording that they felt would strengthen the existing requriement, but ultimately the final wording/deletion is up to City Council to decide.


      A petition is circulating to support the Planning Commission's recommendation to strengthen the existing requriement:

      http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/gates_GVL_SC/

      Long version in next post below

      Long version:

      The City of Greenville Planning and Zoning Department was asked by City Council to delete the City ordinance restricting gates, gate houses and guard houses unless the decision-making body determines there is public safety reason to allow them. (Reference: Planning Staff Report to the Greenville Planning Commission and City Council 9.13.2012, available online under the 9/13/2012 Planning Commission Agenda file Z-29-2012-TextAmendment.pdf)
      The Planning and Zoning Department proposed language that would eliminate the restriction altogether. At its September hearing, the Planning Commission felt eliminating the restriction completely was not consistent with goals of the Comprehensive Plan. They suggested the Planning and Zoning Department revise the language to require a public hearing and broaden the criteria by which the decision-making body would evaluate a proposal including gates, etc. There was further discussion of this issue at the October hearing. (Reference: Planning Staff Report to the Greenville Planning Commission and City Council 10.31.2012, available online under the 11/08/2012 Planning Commission Agenda file Z-29-2012-TextAmendment-Gates.pdf)

      At its November hearing, the Planning Commission approved recommended wording to City Council that they felt would strengthen the restriction on gates. The ordinance restricting gates is expected to be on the agenda for the November 26, 2012 City Council hearing. (Reference: my notes from the 11/08/2012 Planning Commission hearing). The Commission's recommended wording is based on Option 2 from the 10.31.2012 Planning Staff Report, less the word "marketability".

      My neighborhood has started circulating a petition supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation to strengthen the existing restriction. The petition is online at: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/gates_gvl_sc/