CONSTRUCTION THREAD: ONE Greenville (Main @ Washington)

[distortedlogic]

Great discussion here guys! I like to read different view points and get a good discussion going. I hope you guys are correct about this being able to start in a year or two. I still have serious doubts, and maintain that it would be nice to have something more useable and pretty in that spot until the time comes. But, I can see the other side as well.

One thing that might be worth considering is that we are getting quite a few of these type parcels spread throughout DT, with this one being right in the heart of the main draw. It is not really a major thing, ie it won't likely dampen one's impressions of greenville, but when we add the green moster and adjacent run-down buildings, with the Peacock foundation, the wall around the lot beside Wachovia place, the green mosnter beside the A-N, the rotting Kimbrell's building, and other such sites; they just kinda break up the fabric of DT, and stick out rather blantantly. Suppose someone had come in and put up a temporary pocket park or something useable at this site in 1995. It would have quite a different feel today, and yet would not preclude something like our current proposal form being done. Would it have greatly enhanced DT and greenville? Probably not. But it would have been a more proactive approach, rather than just to let building sit and rot. I think a good example would be on N Main where the old gas station etc was torn down a couple of years ago. They did'nt need a pocket park there, but it at least looks better than letting the buildings rot for decades. Obviously there was no way to know it would take so long for a proposal for this site (despite the ownership issues), just as there was no way to know the auditorium site would still be empty. But this is part of the point. Why not make a minimal investment to improve on what is there if nothing is eminent? What we may think is only a year or two off may well be 5, 10, or 20. Just some thoughts.

Edited April 8, 2009 by distortedlogic

[Greenville]

Regardless of how long it takes some of these developments to happen, I feel that we have an environmental responsibility to avoid building parks just to "fill in the space" while waiting for a development, only to undo it later. Let's say we raze the buildings on the Main @ Washington site, and put a nice park there with trees, flowers, grass, etc. Despite the monetary investment for a temporary park, what kind of statement are we making when we destroy that same park in 3, 4, 10, or 15 years? I simply don't like the idea of planting things, nurturing them, and watching them grow only to casually discard them when we are ready to build something there. Either commit to having a permanent park there, or don't. Otherwise, we don't really mean it when we say "Keep the green in Greenville."

[gs3]

I say we tear down parts of McBee Station retail and condos that haven't leased. It's been there over two years with some empty retail spots. Tear it down.

Or how about we tear down Fluor Field.....it is empty a good portion of the year.

[btoy]

The owner of the lot next to the building that used to house rocks and ropes has applied with the DPC for permission to install a community vegetable garden on the lot.

[gman430]

I say we tear down parts of McBee Station retail and condos that haven't leased. It's been there over two years with some empty retail spots. Tear it down.

Or how about we tear down Fluor Field.....it is empty a good portion of the year.

Don't forget about the landmark building. That has some empty office space too.

[gs3]

the wall around the lot beside Wachovia place, the green mosnter beside the A-N, the rotting Kimbrell's building, and other such sites; they just kinda break up the fabric of DT, and stick out rather blantantly.

You do realize the wall around the empty lot next to Wachovia WAS a building much like the Woolworth building? Right? I believe it was the old JCPenney. It was torn down to make way for a development that did not happen. Why follow the same pattern with the Woolworth building???? Had the old JCPenney buidling remained, who knows what might be in it now....a few restaurants, offfices, retail....who knows.

As far as breaking up the fabric of downtown, IMO, only if you have blocks upon blocks of vacant storefronts / vacant buildings does the fabric break up. Greenville does not have that problem. Greenville has randomly spaced empty spots as does any city (gasp, even New York and Chicago).

I can hear the tourist review now "We went to Greenville and there were these randomly empty spots. It bothered us so, that we couldn't even enjoy our meal at any of the 80 plus restaurants downtown. There were these cows roaming the streets and spaces saying MOOOO".

(We haven't had a good moo in a long time).

DL, I TOTALLY agree with you about pocket parks, and what things would be like if pocket parks had been done in 1995......BUT, lets put the pocket parks in place of current parking lots or empty lots, not lots with a building on them (as is Woolworth). Since you brought up the empty lot beside Wachovia, wouldn't city money be much more wisely spent to put a pocket park there, instead of on a spot currently occupied by a building (Woolworth)?

Don't forget about the landmark building. That has some empty office space too.

Kapow....lets implode it!

[GVLbikeNboard]

Somebody say something about cows and pocket parks??

[gs3]

Somebody say something about cows and pocket parks??

Love it! We need that in downtown Greenville. What city is this in? Looks like an Asian city?

Mooo....

Mooo....

Mooo....

[GVLbikeNboard]

What city is this in? Looks like an Asian city?

I think somewhere in Japan, but I'm not completely sure. Google image searched "pocket parks" and found it!

[gman430]

Demolition of existing empty buildings on site slated to start January 4th, 2010. A temporary park will be put into place after demolition is complete: http://www.greenvillesc.gov/CouncilAgendas...009/Item15a.pdf

[Greenville]

Demolition of existing empty buildings on site slated to start January 4th, 2010. A temporary park will be put into place after demolition is complete: http://www.greenvillesc.gov/CouncilAgendas...009/Item15a.pdf

This is progress, at least.

The temporary park is because the developer is unsure when Washington Square buildings will begin construction?

[gman430]

This is progress, at least.

The temporary park is because the developer is unsure when Washington Square buildings will begin construction?

Yes, mainly due to the recession. Washington Square will get built. It's more of a question of when not if. A master plan for the project will be completed by the end of this year. Right now, it's looking like construction will start in late 2010/early 2011 on the buildings. Subject to change of course.

[GVLbikeNboard]

I don't see anything wrong with this, at least the space will get used for the time being. It won't add much of an urban feel as far as being surrounded by concrete but it will add more green to Greenville, even if temporary. It sure is gonna look funny though! Not sure how long it'll take to get used to that.

[pompusmaximus]

I would rather maintain the street wall than bulldoze these buildings for a green band-aid. Demolition of mainstreet buildings should only be done when construction is imminent and not sort of in the air.

[gman430]

The only problem I have with this is that tax dollars are going towards something that is "temporary."

[GVLbikeNboard]

I would rather maintain the street wall than bulldoze these buildings for a green band-aid. Demolition of mainstreet buildings should only be done when construction is imminent and not sort of in the air.

Why? The space isn't being used now. It's such a waste. Nothing good is coming from the buildings that are there unless something went into them temporarily, but I don't know what kind of business would agree to that knowing they had to leave after a year or two (then again...unless it's a bar that seems pretty typical). What could be done with the existing buildings? What would you want to be in there, or do you just want them sitting there...empty?

If citylife is correct the new buildings will be built. It's just a matter of when. Obviously not within the next year if they're going to spend money on greenery, benches, etc. Seems like a good place for a hot dog cart to be!

[gman430]

If citylife is correct the new buildings will be built. It's just a matter of when. Obviously not within the next year if they're going to spend money on greenery, benches, etc. Seems like a good place for a hot dog cart to be!

I just received an update on the project a little while ago. Cousins does not yet have enough tenants to build the project. However, they are negotiations with several companies looking at moving into the development including a fairly large one who is looking at moving their headquarters into the office building. The company that is looking at moving their headquarters is currently not located in Greenville. Keep your fingers crossed.

[GvilleSC]

I just received an update on the project a little while ago. Cousins does not yet have enough tenants to build the project. However, they are negotiations with several companies looking at moving into the development including a fairly large one who is looking at moving their headquarters into the office building. The company that is looking at moving their headquarters is currently not located in Greenville. Keep your fingers crossed.

That would be extremely ideal! Fingers are definitely crossed on this whole thing...

[Greenville]

Fingers crossed in Charleston.

[gs3]

I would rather maintain the street wall than bulldoze these buildings for a green band-aid. Demolition of mainstreet buildings should only be done when construction is imminent and not sort of in the air.

I agree.

Demolishing the current structure will change the light/shadows, etc and the Main Street feel on that corner. Temporary parks can have a tendency to become permanent.

Leave the current buildings until the actual development is ready to be built....saving dollars and duplicate work.

[Greenville]

I agree.

Demolishing the current structure will change the light/shadows, etc and the Main Street feel on that corner. Temporary parks can have a tendency to become permanent.

Leave the current buildings until the actual development is ready to be built....saving dollars and duplicate work.

I'm kind of torn on this. If it were definitely going to be 2-3 years until construction began, I could see the argument for a temporary park. The current buildings really are an eyesore, and offer no opportunity for temporary use until demolition. They will be torn down anyway, so why not go ahead and do it now?

On the flip side, a corporation could be relocating to this development. It seems that the construction timeline could be moved up, and if so I would hate for things to be held back because someone felt obligated to keep a park there for more than a few months. And as you said, it would be a shame to see this "temporary park" turned into a permanent fixture.

[GvilleSC]

The Greenville News article today about the demolition of the old Woolworth's building states that the developer of Washington Square may be considering a design change... It will still be a mixed use development.

I wonder what sort of changes we may be talking about here?

[gman430]

The Greenville News article today about the demolition of the old Woolworth's building states that the developer of Washington Square may be considering a design change... It will still be a mixed use development.

I wonder what sort of changes we may be talking about here?

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20...owntown-history

I'm hearing possibly less office space and maybe residential added. That's just a rumor though so I can't confirm whether it's true or not. I definitely like the sound of this though:

Nancy Whitworth, Greenville's director of economic development, said the aim is to design a development that's "spectacular for the city."

Edited September 12, 2009 by citylife

[GvilleSC]

There's definitely some great things happening with this project behind the scenes it seems. It sounds as though any temporary park space would be very temporary if things are looking up like this... Speaking of temporary park spaces, does anyone ever use the one for Bookends II?

[krazeeboi]

Ideally, if things sound this promising, I don't even see why money has to be wasted on creating a temporary park. Just sign the tenants, raze the existing buildings, and immediately build the project. While the redesign sounds good, it also sounds like it will result in even more of a delay, even more so if the original design has already been approved. I just hope this temporary park doesn't stay in place five years or more.