Jump to content

The West End

gs3

By gs3
in Greenville

 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

vicupstate
vicupstate

I heard last night from Mayor White why the city backed out. I myself wondered what was going on, and for some reason it wasn't followed up on by the media. The P&C article above doesn't really ch

Danmire
Danmire

Just stumbled across this.  A proposed 33 story building at Falls and River St by Hughes Investments.   SGA was tasked with providing the schematic architectural design for a 33-story mixed-use h

GVLover
GVLover

Looks like we’ll begin to see containers at Gather GVL soon.   

Posted Images

GvilleSC Megalopolis

GvilleSC

Posted
Posted

That is going to be one tiny restaurant, then. The Port City Java space was okay for an intimate coffee shop, but I don't see how a restaurant will work there. :dontknow:

Compadre's made out with a similar sized space for a while, but eventually they, too, had to expand... That's going to make the entire ground floor of the Fieldhouse into restaurants (minus parking, of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goodbye Metropolitan Area

goodbye

Posted
Posted (edited)

My favorite part of the proposed revitalization is the buried utilities. That alone will transform the look and feel of the street in a way that simply adding organic elements could never accomplish. The bioswale idea is interesting. Not sure if I will love it there or not. I am absolutely in favor of preserving the aged warehouse district vibe while creatively breathing new life into existing buildings along the street. Notice the old Chicora site between Rhett and Boggs streets, near RiverPlace (formerly proposed for Tom Croft's "The Chicora"), is highlighted for adaptive reuse. Obviously the plans for a residential tower on that site never materialized.

Edited by Skyliner
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GvilleSC Megalopolis

GvilleSC

Posted
Posted

My favorite part of the proposed revitalization is the buried utilities. That alone will transform the look and feel of the street in a way that simply adding organic elements could never accomplish. The bioswale idea is interesting. Not sure if I will love it there or not. I am absolutely in favor of preserving the aged warehouse district vibe while creatively breathing new life into existing buildings along the street. Notice the old Chicora site between Rhett and Boggs streets, near RiverPlace (formerly proposed for Tom Croft's "The Chicora"), is highlighted for adaptive reuse. Obviously the plans for a residential tower on that site never materialized.

:huh: . This study for the future of Rhett Street was obviously done independently of any private developer's plans. To my knowledge the project was on hold, is it not? I'm not saying it will be built, but I would definitely not take my information on projects based on this study....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)

:huh: . This study for the future of Rhett Street was obviously done independently of any private developer's plans. To my knowledge the project was on hold, is it not? I'm not saying it will be built, but I would definitely not take my information on projects based on this study....

The sales office on Main Street has been turned into an art gallery. Tom Croft is trying to make it work but right now it's too hard to say whether it will get built or not. Oh and the Rhett Street improvements are at least a year or two away from happening due to the city taking money away from it to use for other capital improvement projects.

Edited by citylife
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GvilleSC Megalopolis

GvilleSC

Posted
Posted

The sales office on Main Street has been turned into an art gallery. Tom Croft is trying to make it work but right now it's too hard to say whether it will get built or not. Oh and the Rhett Street improvements are at least a year or two away from happening due to the city taking money away from it to use for other capital improvement projects.

When people use the quote button to respond, it makes me think they are replying to that particular post. If that's the case, then we may need to work on our comprehension skills. :dontknow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)

When people use the quote button to respond, it makes me think they are replying to that particular post. If that's the case, then we may need to work on our comprehension skills. :dontknow:

Ummm...I was quoting you. :mellow: You were asking whether Chicora was on hold or not so I answered it for you. This is the part of your previous post I was answering: To my knowledge the project was on hold, is it not?

Edited by citylife
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GvilleSC Megalopolis

GvilleSC

Posted
Posted

Ummm...I was quoting you. :mellow: You were asking whether Chicora was on hold or not so I answered it for you. This is the part of your previous post I was answering: To my knowledge the project was on hold, is it not?

I can kind of see that, however in the discussion, as I read it, it didn't follow the topic. So, I apologize, but I didn't view the stating of old facts as an answer to the question (despite however rhetorical it may have been on my part).

The point of the post was to say that the Rhett Street plan has no implications on the project. It will not be blocked because of this plan, nor can we conclude that it has been cancelled as a result. The plan shows potential, not regulations. Thus, as far as we know, the project is on hold (and in no part as a result of the study). [insert blurb about the art gallery and such here if you see it relevant to the discussion of the Rhett Street streetscaping].

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted

GvilleSC, you obviously missed citylife's initial reply, which was essentially a resolute "yes, the project is dead." Notice how much time lapsed before he edited his post to offer the considerably more ambiguous answer you read later.

I thought it was dead but then I contacted somebody in the know and found out it is simply on hold. Sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goodbye Metropolitan Area

goodbye

Posted
Posted
I see. Well, I guess we just shouldn't bother posting or reading posts that are more than a few hours old. Carry on.
I hope you're not upset by my post. It was intended to shed a little light onto a possible reason for the confusion. I agree with your frustration, mainly because citylife has a habit of editing/changing his posts so frequently and even much later than the initial reply, but I would change your quote to, "Well, I guess we just shouldn't bother posting or reading posts that are less than a few hours old." If it was posted by a certain person, it may be edited during or after your reply. ^_^
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)

I hope you're not upset by my post. It was intended to shed a little light onto a possible reason for the confusion. I agree with your frustration, mainly because citylife has a habit of editing/changing his posts so frequently and even much later than the initial reply, but I would change your quote to, "Well, I guess we just shouldn't bother posting or reading posts that are less than a few hours old." If it was posted by a certain person, it may be edited during or after your reply. ^_^

Would you rather had me leave the post the way it was and be wrong about the development? :unsure: Normally when I edit a post, it's within a few minutes not hours. Like I said earlier, I apologize for it. I just didn't want people thinking the project is dead when it's not.

Edited by citylife
Link to comment
Share on other sites
goodbye Metropolitan Area

goodbye

Posted
Posted

No, it was good that you corrected your post to reflect what is apparently true. The only problem I see is that you neglected to tell GvilleSC that you had hastily posted what you thought was right, only to later learn that it was incorrect information. That's all I'll say about the misunderstanding.

Regarding the property in question, I remain neutral as to whether it should be completely redeveloped (new building) or creatively revitalized (renovation). If there is a way to preserve the old structures and breathe some form of creative life into them, then perhaps that would be preferable since the skeleton is already in place. I would not be opposed to a new residential tower, but let's face it, this has been on the board for at least two years now with little or no real progress in a positive direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted

No, it was good that you corrected your post to reflect what is apparently true. The only problem I see is that you neglected to tell GvilleSC that you had hastily posted what you thought was right, only to later learn that it was incorrect information. That's all I'll say about the misunderstanding.

Oh, I misunderstood you. Sorry about that Skyliner. :) And yes I should have told GvilleSC.

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.