Jump to content

234 North Church St. office project


westsider28

Recommended Posts

This was discussed in the Downtown Developments thread, but I figured it was worth its own thread.  A 3-story office building is proposed at the Montgomery Development owned site at 234 N Church Street.  It will go for preliminary/conceptual approval at the Dec. 7 DRB meeting.  It's approx. 31,000 sq ft with 73 parking spaces.  Not sure if retail is planned, but it at least looks possible.  Screenshots from the PDF below.

I like the design generally, especially the obvious homage to the Montgomery Building with the ground floor design.  Materials are solid (mostly brick and cast stone).  I think it could use a cornice or something; the top looks a bit bland/unfinished.  And I don't like the curb cut on Main.  But otherwise, pretty solid infill building.

What do y'all think?

1632213281_234NCrenderfront.thumb.jpg.1b5e3da3e2f64de0b9dbc7162d438bcd.jpg

376058081_234NCrenderangle.thumb.jpg.3056ec03243484b40260dfc02dccf60d.jpg

1785896059_234NCrendersidewalk.thumb.jpg.be8e87f7e8f7ca31d2ca851d0fed43b3.jpg

1463811616_234NCsiteplan.thumb.jpg.50339a20a465089f96ad56f30ae8f1e0.jpg

277222768_234NCelevfront.thumb.jpg.8960cc35a34376fad7bd54691829503e.jpg

1797229112_234NCcontext2.thumb.jpg.f2d24fb022e58dcb2edc12ecbc312139.jpg

Edited by westsider28
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


57 minutes ago, westsider28 said:

This was discussed in the Downtown Developments thread, but I figured it was worth its own thread.  A 3-story office building is proposed at the Montgomery Development owned site at 234 N Church Street.  It will go for preliminary/conceptual approval at the Dec. 7 DRB meeting.  It's approx. 31,000 sq ft with 73 parking spaces.  Not sure if retail is planned, but it at least looks possible.  Screenshots from the PDF below.

I like the design generally, especially the obvious homage to the Montgomery Building with the ground floor design.  Materials are solid (mostly brick and cast stone).  I think it could use a cornice or something; the top looks a bit bland/unfinished.  And I don't like the curb cut on Main.  But otherwise, pretty solid infill building.

What do y'all think?

1632213281_234NCrenderfront.thumb.jpg.1b5e3da3e2f64de0b9dbc7162d438bcd.jpg

376058081_234NCrenderangle.thumb.jpg.3056ec03243484b40260dfc02dccf60d.jpg

1785896059_234NCrendersidewalk.thumb.jpg.be8e87f7e8f7ca31d2ca851d0fed43b3.jpg

1463811616_234NCsiteplan.thumb.jpg.50339a20a465089f96ad56f30ae8f1e0.jpg

277222768_234NCelevfront.thumb.jpg.8960cc35a34376fad7bd54691829503e.jpg

1797229112_234NCcontext2.thumb.jpg.f2d24fb022e58dcb2edc12ecbc312139.jpg

That stretch of North Church needs a boost or catalyst.  This looks like a good start. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concrete(?) edges of that building are weird.  I know it says "cast stone" but TBH if that means the beige of the Montgomery building then I'm not a huge fan. It only works for that building because its actually historic. I'd love to see something more detailed and interesting than flat beige there...

But this is a solid project. Great design, great location. Even if its a bit weird looking its still a win!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to agree that this is a great start to "kick-starting" meaningful development on that corridor. 
Love the homage to the MB. Overall like the design, brings new and old together, I just wish, as it was stated above, that the new had a bit more character. A cornice, as mentioned above would be a big plus, and I agree that the beige is just bleh. BUT, overall great start for the area and yes the MB style store-fronts and main entrance are solid. Make it a redder brick, lose the beige, hell make the whole thing brick with a cornice and some cool ornate brickwork and we've got a winner no doubt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was perusing McMillan Pazdan Smith's portfolio on their website, when I stumbled across an incredibly similar building at 349 W Coleman Blvd in Mt Pleasant (Google Streetview).  The building proposed in Spartanburg (also by MPS) is a near copy-paste!  Not that it's necessarily a bad thing.  I think that other building looks pretty nice, and it gives a decent example of what this project may look like in real life.

349_coleman_mt_pleasant.thumb.jpg.5e3a9a1457a22f732c9710981381a1a2.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spartanburg Dude said:

The building is fully "spec" (i.e. speculative; without a confirmed tenant) which shows confidence in our office market (and the lack of currently available space).

They also mention potential retail or restaurant use on the ground floor, which would be great!

And the article mentions that "the new building is part of a bigger picture for development downtown and is likely the first of many on the North Church Street block."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This building is being pre-leased on Colliers.  Minimum lease space is 2,000 sq ft, up to the whole building (30k).  They claim it will have a Q4 2022 move-in, which I think is pretty ambitious.  Though they mention that temporary space is available through local economic development incentive programs.  Hope they get plenty of interest / commitments (and hopefully a ground-floor retail tenant).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Very good point.  I did have to chuckle a bit that 234 N. Church is nowhere to be seen on their marketing booklet! Makes sense of course, being competitors for the same type of customer. I have to say, I am impressed with how thorough the marketing pamphlet you highlighted for us is. The estimates for completions were quite welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.