The West End

[ausrutherford]

Everything about this plan rather stinks. 

 

Service parking, gates, architecture, all of it. 

[vicupstate]

Given that a garage is not necessary and the parking is going largely where nothing can be built anyway, I don't think you can blame them.  I'd like to see a little more brick than stucco, but otherwise i think it looks fine.  I wish they would have included a Westfield St elevation though.   

[MAJIKMAN]

Everything about this plan rather stinks. 

 

Service parking, gates, architecture, all of it. 

 

I'm more inclined to agree with you. The developer ''is" from out of state, but they could not have read the zoning requirements. Gates are really a turn off. I know they were trying to use as much space as possible. But this is not a good site plan.  I would have like to see them mass the project more toward the corner of Academy and Westfield than how they have it now. More like what GvilleSC was talking about.

 

edit: I looked at the site plan again. The more I looked at it. The more suburban it looked. I can put my finger on it...... But I have seen this somewhere before.

Edited November 8, 2014 by MAJIKMAN

[vicupstate]

Given this is single use project, not mixed, there is no particular reason to orient and mass the project toward the Westfield and Academy intersection.  Plus that barber shop is still across the street, and who knows how long that will remain.  I think that is why it is oriented towards the other intersection.   

 

ideally, this would be more mixed use, but a retail or restaurant in that location would be a bit of a pioneer (Westfield at Academy, that is).  It might actually be more condusive to put the retail/restaurant on Westfield just at it meets the S.R.Trail.  However, then you are in the floodplain.

[ausrutherford]

Given that a garage is not necessary and the parking is going largely where nothing can be built anyway, I don't think you can blame them.  I'd like to see a little more brick than stucco, but otherwise i think it looks fine.  I wish they would have included a Westfield St elevation though.   

 

If you can not build anything on the site due to it being in the floodplain, then that section of the property should be left natural. Natural flora in that area would absorb any flood a lot better than impervious pavement like a parking lot. 

 

Then there is the aesthetics of the current plan...

[NBNY2GRNVL]

This is one of the last big parcels left in Greenville. I was really hoping for a big project that required easy in and out for people coming from outside the city. Something like they're putting at the Greenville News site or a multi floor department and grocery store with a tall parking garage. Multi floor Super Target anyone? Oh well.

Edited November 8, 2014 by NBNY2GRNVL

[Gville29601]

Agree with all who say this is a bit disappointing for a key gateway site to our downtown from the West. More plantings in the flood zone. More stucco and brick. I understand if it can't be mixed use because of flood zone issues. 

[vicupstate]

This is one of the last big parcels left in Greenville. I was really hoping for a big project that required easy in and out for people coming from outside the city. Something like they're putting at the Greenville News site or a multi floor department and grocery store with a tall parking garage. Multi floor Super Target anyone? Oh well.

If Target (in any of it's incarnations) were to come to DT, it would be at The Greenville News site or perhaps County Square. The area surrounding this site is still largely low income. Academy is still a five lane high-speed highway too. A more hefty project might would end up on this site, but only after many more years of redevelopment and improving demographics have taken place. 

 

In some respects this site is similar to the Gateway (Memorial Auditorium)site.  Both are high visibility and rather large, but they are somewhat isolated from the true urban core and are not pedestrian oriented. 

[MAJIKMAN]

^ A retailer/restaurant along with residents on this site would have been a plus. But the area's restraint would and do give developers challenges. Being honest. It's got only one real restraint. And that's being partly in a flood plain. Not demos or being pedestrian friendly. These folks see dollar signs and nothing else. Just in a hurry to throw anything up. This place will seem outdated in five to ten years and folk will say what were they thinking.

 

 The project virtually next door to this shows what could possibly happen. Come to think of it. This one is virtually in the same boat as the proposed Westfield and Academy site. Being in the flood plain, being isolated and demos. But they worked it out. Do any of us think they could have done that any cheaper, because that's the Greenville Lofts developers pretense. And I am thinking a majority of us would same "HELL YEAH".  But it would not be as high quality as it is. It would have been just another apartment complex. Nothing more. And do any of us think the mayor would have indorsed that project.  I would be inclined to probably say NO. 

 

 They could have done better and I know they know that. Its folks like you vicupstate, who support almost anything proposed. Just for infill sake. Read on vicupstate......... This wasn't an attack on you. It's just an honest observation of what I see on here. But for me. When I see crap. I say I see crap. And this is crap. Suburban Crap dropped in the middle of the city. And using the guise of using Greenville's textile mill history for inspiration was a big load of crap.    

Edited November 9, 2014 by MAJIKMAN

[gman430]

The other apartment projects proposed and under construction downtown (400 Rhett, Stadium Apartments, River's Edge, Reedyview Apartments, Fountains at Greenville, SouthRidge, Link Greenville, North Main at Stone, etc.) include parking garages. This one should too preferably underneath the building. Kill off the suburban parking lot along with the gates and put in some landscaping like the Kroc Center has. 

Edited November 9, 2014 by gman430

[vicupstate]

^ A retailer/restaurant along with residents on this site would have been a plus. But the area's restraint would and do give developers challenges. Being honest. It's got only one real restraint. And that's being partly in a flood plain. Not demos or being pedestrian friendly. These folks see dollar signs and nothing else. Just in a hurry to throw anything up. This place will seem outdated in five to ten years and folk will say what were they thinking.

 

 The project virtually next door to this shows what could possibly happen. Come to think of it. This one is virtually in the same boat as the proposed Westfield and Academy site. Being in the flood plain, being isolated and demos. But they worked it out. Do any of us think they could have done that any cheaper, because that's the Greenville Lofts developers pretense. And I am thinking a majority of us would same "HELL YEAH".  But it would not be as high quality as it is. It would have been just another apartment complex. Nothing more. And do any of us think the mayor would have indorsed that project.  I would be inclined to probably say NO. 

 

 They could have done better and I know they know that. Its folks like you vicupstate, who support almost anything proposed. Just for infill sake. Read on vicupstate......... This wasn't an attack on you. It's just an honest observation of what I see on here. But for me. When I see crap. I say I see crap. And this is crap. Suburban Crap dropped in the middle of the city. And using the guise of using Greenville's textile mill history for inspiration was a big load of crap.    

 

I assume you are referring to the Reedyview project (Westfield and Broad St.) although you didn't call it by name. I don't believe any of that site is in the flood plain. Nor does it incorporate any use other than residential. That despite the fact that Broad is a narrower and calmer street than Academy. Reedyview will have a garage but both the Kroc Center and Whittenburg use strictly surface parking.

 

Without knowing the land price, the demos argument is bogus.  This site must be pretty expensive, because it has been on the market for more or less a decade.  Plus this site apparently requires environmental cleanup/remediation of some kind. None of us has the details on that.     

 

It is a stretch to call this suburban, when most suburban projects have in-front parking and are either 2 or 3 stories, on much greater acreage. This project DOES build up to the street, and most of the parking is interior to the buildings and the site.  This is 4 stories and most of the other projects DT are 4-5. 

 

Academy St and it's bridge are not conducive to creating a pedestrian oriented environment, and create a disconnect with the rest of West End/DT that is not present with Reedyview. Since it is a major US highway, I would be surprised to ever see a road diet, at least on THIS section of Academy.  I have lived here since 1996 and I can't say for certain that I have ever seen even one person walking on the Academy St. sidewalk by this site in that time. Common sense tells you that the residents will use the SRT to access DT, so I don't know that the project itself would change that either.  Such things DO matter.  Retail/restaurants sited at the Westfield/Academy corner would be pioneers to put it lightly. After you pass this site, it is all low income, distressed housing until you get to Pickens County.    

  

It would cost $10,000 per space to do a parking garage. Do the math, it is a lot of money. Doing a garage would allow more units, but the market and or financier may not support that.  Ideally, I would prefer to see a garage with more units and/or uses, but given the surroundings and conditions, I strongly question if that is economically reasonable.     

Edited November 10, 2014 by vicupstate

[gvegascple]

Retail/restaurants sited at the Westfield/Academy corner would be pioneers to put it lightly. After you pass this site, it is all low income, distressed housing until you get to Pickens County.  

 

We just moved to this side of town, along with our house, we are seeing a lot of houses being renovated (currently just in pockets but it is happening.)  With the development on the rise on Pendleton street, this area is right smack in the middle.  Add to that the new park that is on its way (eventually) and this section of downtown is the next are of prime real estate.  I live up past this spot on Academy and my "distressed" location is a one mile walk to Falls Park.  I think your assessment is short-sighted.  A screw up here could re-enforce that limited view of the future of West Greenville, a win could further ignite things.  I hope that he DRB is thinking of the latter.  I am a big fan of pioneers though.

Edited November 10, 2014 by gvegascple

[vicupstate]

^^ I can see a reinvention/road diet of Pendleton Street happening, but not Academy.  If this site stayed vacant for another 5-10 years, before it developed, I think it would be more likely to see it developed as you(and I) would wish.  It is not there yet.  No one is going to build something now, for a market that may or may not exist in 5 years.  I have learned these decisions are VERY nuanced.  

 

The new park is years away, and probably too far away to effect desirability of the Academy site for retail/restaurant.

 

Gateway is just a stone's throw from some very successful areas, but there is a reason why nothing has happened there. Greenville has been successful by not getting too far ahead of the curve of redevelopment. If this site is going to be redeveloped NOW, I think the current conditions have to be understood for the constraints they are.  

 

BTW, I have just purchased a lot within a mile of this site myself. Believe me, I didn't do that without expecting the area to continue to progress.        

[gvegascple]

I wouldnt compare this location to the Gateway site. They share being located at the edge of town where a major roadway comes in but that is where the similarities end.  This spot only has one major road way and its just along one side, not circling around it.  This location is both on the swamp rabbit trail and on the Reedy River.  It has a lot going for it and has few logistical issues unlike Gateway.  The flood plan could be spun into a positive seeing as it is riverfront property.  As downtown and the West End expands out, as development along the Reedy expands out, as Pendleton St expands out, as the park system expands out, it meets this area in the middle.  It has everything the Gateway site wishes it had without the pitfalls.     

 

I also wouldn't suggest Academy should have a road diet, it doesn't need one to solve an access problem like Gateway has. I don't think Pendleton St needs a diet either, just street scaping. I do agree that, like Gateway, it could be part of an iconic entryway into the city and because of that, extra care needs to be taken with how things proceed.

[vicupstate]

Gateway is more problematic and isolated. But I don't think you can just ignore that Academy St. is not at all conducive to pedestrian crossings at ANY point along this stretch, or for that matter anywhere in the city limits. That is also not likely to change. There is a visual and mental disconnect between this site and Riverplace created by Academy and especially by the land bridge.  I think the Markley Street office/restaurant and apartment projects stalled out because they too were just a bit too far in walking distance, and in 'mental acceptance' as part of the West End.  It's time will come, but it might be a couple of years yet.  

[transplant08]

Demolition at corner of Anderson and Dunbar this morning.  Don't know what is going in. Quinn Satterfield had put in a rezoning app a few months ago, but don't know what came of it.

[gman430]

Demolition at corner of Anderson and Dunbar this morning.  Don't know what is going in. Quinn Satterfield had put in a rezoning app a few months ago, but don't know what came of it.

A few new homes. Page 11 has the site plan: http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2014/JUNE/BoardofZoningAppeals/06-19-2014/V-14-178-312and316AndersonStreet.pdf

[transplant08]

A few new homes. Page 11 has the site plan: http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2014/JUNE/BoardofZoningAppeals/06-19-2014/V-14-178-312and316AndersonStreet.pdf

 Any idea on Price, Sq Ft?

[sc smitty]

http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2015/JANUARY/DesignReviewBoard/01-08-2015/CA-15-15-724SouthMainStreet.pdf

 

Seriously?  I guess now that the DRB doesn't bother enforcing the West End Design Guidelines, it doesn't matter how ridiculous your proposal is.   

[gman430]

http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2015/JANUARY/DesignReviewBoard/01-08-2015/CA-15-15-724SouthMainStreet.pdf

Seriously? I guess now that the DRB doesn't bother enforcing the West End Design Guidelines, it doesn't matter how ridiculous your proposal is.

I don't see the DRB approving that. At least I hope not.

[sc smitty]

I would hope not as well, but are they going to arbitrarily apply the design guidelines to one project and not another?  They blatantly ignored key guidelines for the last building at Main & River.

[gman430]

I would hope not as well, but are they going to arbitrarily apply the design guidelines to one project and not another? They blatantly ignored key guidelines for the last building at Main & River.

Even though they did ignore the guidelines, it is a good looking building so I am glad they approved it.

[sc smitty]

What's the point of having design guidelines then?  I've heard plenty of other people who think that building is ugly and out of place.  People's personal opinions will always vary on whether they like something or not.  The DRB's purpose is to evaluate a building based on the adopted guidelines, not on whether they happen to like the design or not.  Anything else will result in arbitrary decisions like we've been seeing.  How is it fair to hold one person to the guidelines and not another?

[goodbye]

I would hope not as well, but are they going to arbitrarily apply the design guidelines to one project and not another? They blatantly ignored key guidelines for the last building at Main & River.

Unless I am mistaken, the guidelines are not enforcible laws and therefore can be addressed arbitrarily. An excellent example is the second phase of the ONE development.

With that said, the two proposals in question are not equal. Both alter the historic nature of the district (which can be acceptable), but the latest proposal will not win approval with that giant, Vegas-style sign.

[gvegascple]

Vegas style is right, yuck. I get the throwback vegas style but mixing it with a hotel name/logo I think pushes it too far. They should just pick one, the style or the name, having both at the same time kills the irony behind going retro vegas for me and just makes it look like a cheap motel sign.  I imagine it would be bright as heck too.  Tacky, makes me wonder who is behind the development.  What is the story with this place anyway? Its been sitting there seemingly ready to open for a long time.  It also looks like someone put some money into it too only to sit unused.