The West End

[Exile]

28 minutes ago, ausrutherford said:

The new Convention will be for business conferences, the old for Auto Shows, etc.

 

And we really need to stop the whole "it loses money" or "why is the government subsidizing the private industry?" argument. Business and government are a symbiotic relationship. Governments can not exist without their tax revenue, businesses can not exist without Government's construction of infrastructure nor law system.

A convention center is infrastructure to businesses. Government funded convention centers are nothing new. They go back to ancient times to foster business and tax revenue alike.

Do convention centers loose money? Yes. But, what is important is the increase in tax revenue that results.

Even with that, if you still do not believe that. Ask yourself, how do roads make money for the government? Should we not fund them either?

You might want to consult Public Choice theory about what happens when government and business enter into symbiotic relationships. The result often isn't ethical.

It is absolutely true that government cannot exist without tax revenue, but history disproves the idea that business cannot exist without government. I don't subscribe to "You  didn't build that!"

As for your last paragraph, see the last paragraph of my second post above.

[PuppiesandKittens]

1 hour ago, ausrutherford said:

The new Convention will be for business conferences, the old for Auto Shows, etc.

 

And we really need to stop the whole "it loses money" or "why is the government subsidizing the private industry?" argument. Business and government are a symbiotic relationship. Governments can not exist without their tax revenue, businesses can not exist without Government's construction of infrastructure nor law system.

A convention center is infrastructure to businesses. Government funded convention centers are nothing new. They go back to ancient times to foster business and tax revenue alike.

Do convention centers loose money? Yes. But, what is important is the increase in tax revenue that results.

Even with that, if you still do not believe that. Ask yourself, how do roads make money for the government? Should we not fund them either?

How about if ALL state and local governments stop subsidizing convention centers.

Then if the private sector wants convention-sized meetings, the market would provide convention centers.  Likely there would be fewer convention centers than there are now, but I am confident that the private sector could work it out, without taxpayer cost. 

See below: so much promised increases in tax revenue do not end up happening, and the winners are hotels first and restaurants second:

http://www.governing.com/blogs/bfc/col-convention-center-promised-benefits-rarely-materialize.html

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/apr/27/city-lights-convention-centers-lose-bundles-money/#

If tax dollars are to pay for this, (1) shut down the convention center on Pleasantburg Drive (why would Greenville need 2 when neither is likely to be profitable) and (2) have the tax dollars be paid from hotel charges.

Edited March 14, 2019 by PuppiesandKittens

[GVLover]

10 minutes ago, Exile said:

You might want to consult Public Choice theory about what happens when government and business enter into symbiotic relationships. The result often isn't ethical.

It is absolutely true that government cannot exist without tax revenue, but history disproves the idea that business cannot exist without government. I don't subscribe to "You  didn't build that!"

As for your last paragraph, see the last paragraph of my second post above.

Aren’t Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) the “symbiotic relationships” you’re referring to? Greenville has been absolutely exceptional, to the point of being a national model, for PPP’s with that “symbiotic relationship.” Frankly put, business and government both need each other. I refuse to buy into the narrative that the “free market” can do everything — it can’t. 

The role of government in-respect to business is to help facilitate enterprise — that includes infrastructure. In Greenville County we’ve seen something interesting as sort of a local experiment that backs the narrative I am making.

Lets take a look at I-185; a privately owned highway, running through an area of the county without proper infrastructure investment from the county. Now let’s take a look at Spartanburg and Anderson County, they continue to enjoy an increased manufacturing sector all while, perhaps one of the most valuable areas left to develop in the county remains.. well.. largely undeveloped. 

A “symbiotic relationship” would entail relinquishing I-185 to SCDOT, creating a thorough and coherent master plan and infrastructure funding by the government. Greenville County is missing out on increased employment, investment and tax-dollars because it won’t fund the basics. 

On the opposing hand, a convention center isn't critical infrastructure like sewage and a highway is, but it does support events that present our city in a positive light. It does help with local employment numbers. It does bring in tax-dollars. I know you’re not debating rather the convention center should exist or not, but I don’t think a significant enough base of industry exists here that would be interested in fully-financing a convention center. It would be interesting to see if Greenville could pull that off. 

[ausrutherford]

1 hour ago, Exile said:

You might want to consult Public Choice theory about what happens when government and business enter into symbiotic relationships. The result often isn't ethical.

It is absolutely true that government cannot exist without tax revenue, but history disproves the idea that business cannot exist without government. I don't subscribe to "You  didn't build that!"

As for your last paragraph, see the last paragraph of my second post above.

If it was not for the symbiotic public-private partnerships that Greenville has built over the past 40 years, Downtown would still be the run down hulk it was in 1975.

Nearly every major development had public funds go towards its development...the Hyatt, ONE, RiverPlace, etc, etc, etc.

We are not talking about the Braves new ballpark here. We are talking about roughly $55 million in public funds helping create a $300 million project, a prominent art museum (something downtown in missing), a conference-oriented convention center, and hundreds of jobs.

Win-Win-Win-Win

[ausrutherford]

Also, remember the City will likely pay most of this through their hospitality tax. 

Hospitality taxes can not fund many other parts of government. They have to be spent on tourism-like items. A convention center is one of those items.

It can be spent on sewer and roads, but for tourism related items. So a new road to a new hotel, a new sewer line to take homes off septic near a public beach, etc. 

Replacing a sewer like in North Main or Nicholtown would not count.

 

 

[PuppiesandKittens]

1 hour ago, ausrutherford said:

If it was not for the symbiotic public-private partnerships that Greenville has built over the past 40 years, Downtown would still be the run down hulk it was in 1975.

Nearly every major development had public funds go towards its development...the Hyatt, ONE, RiverPlace, etc, etc, etc.

We are not talking about the Braves new ballpark here. We are talking about roughly $55 million in public funds helping create a $300 million project, a prominent art museum (something downtown in missing), a conference-oriented convention center, and hundreds of jobs.

Win-Win-Win-Win

But if the government hadn’t subsidized huge suburban developments, downtown wouldn’t have declined in the first place.

[gman430]

I can see both sides of the argument here. It is funny how the government can spend millions of dollars on a new park and convention center downtown but can’t seem to spend any on Greenlink to help improve it. Priorities. Lol. 

[GVLover]

14 minutes ago, gman430 said:

I can see both sides of the argument here. It is funny how the government can spend millions of dollars on a new park and convention center downtown but can’t seem to spend any on Greenlink to help improve it. Priorities. Lol. 

I’m confident Greenlink will see relatively significant investment in the near future. Greenville is excellent at PPP’s and listening to business leaders and they’re telling officials “the lack of investment in Greenlink is preventing us from expanding downtown.” Now that I think of it, that could even be part of why we saw InvestiNet move out of downtown.

Personally, I’d like to see a mobility company, such as Lime or Lyft, come in to fill some of Greenlink gaps while also putting continued pressure on the County government to help fund it. Unreal how conservative the county can be on something that has such positive benefits for them. 

[gman430]

Now county council is coming out and saying the project funding is premature and that they would possibly look at helping it if the $5 million goes through: https://amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/3155864002 One of the council members even said the county square project is in jeopardy due to deep political divide among the council members. Yeesh. 

If a consultant came out and said the downtown convention center was a bad idea then why does the city still want it?  To help with the mayor’s ego? 

Edited March 15, 2019 by gman430

[gman430]

Hughes and Windsor Aughtry are donating the land they own for the project. Condos, retail, office space, etc to be included. Formal announcement with renderings expected soon: https://www.wyff4.com/article/plans-in-the-works-to-build-a-convention-center-in-downtown-greenville/26829933?utm_campaign=WYFF&utm_content=5c8b2bb69ebbef00013bfb99&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=trueAnthem%3A+New+Content

[ausrutherford]

7 hours ago, gman430 said:

Now county council is coming out and saying the project funding is premature and that they would possibly look at helping it if the $5 million goes through: https://amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/3155864002 One of the council members even said the county square project is in jeopardy due to deep political divide among the council members. Yeesh. 

If a consultant came out and said the downtown convention center was a bad idea then why does the city still want it?  To help with the mayor’s ego? 

The last idea for a convention center came next to the Well. I agree it would not have worked there. It was also going to be just a convention center. No mixed use, no museum.

[Exile]

10 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

If it was not for the symbiotic public-private partnerships that Greenville has built over the past 40 years, Downtown would still be the run down hulk it was in 1975.

How do you know this? Contrary-to-fact assertions are just that and only that--assertions.

It amazes me how people think that human beings who happen to hold government positions have some "baptism of the Spirit" that enables them to achieve what seasoned businessmen and women--who also care about their communities--couldn't possibly.

12 hours ago, GVLover said:

I refuse to buy into the narrative that the “free market” can do everything — it can’t.

Without getting into a back-and-forth "Yes it can!" "No it can't!", I'll just observe that this borders on a statement of (non)faith.

[vicupstate]

If the private sector can build and do things that have typically been done by government, then it would have already done them.  That is particularly true in the US. For the vast majority of our history, business was unregulated and powerful and the government did very little.  During the Guilded Age there was no private funded infrastructure to amount to anything, and there is a reason for that- it was not profitable.         

[Exile]

11 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

If the private sector can build and do things that have typically been done by government, then it would have already done them.  That is particularly true in the US. For the vast majority of our history, business was unregulated and powerful and the government did very little.  During the Guilded Age there was no private funded infrastructure to amount to anything, and there is a reason for that- it was not profitable.         

I've already acknowledged that there are certain things that it makes sense for government to do--sewer and roads, I believe we mentioned.

But for non-necessities, like convention centers for example, then your first sentence, "If the private sector can build and do things that have typically been done by government, then it would have already done them," is an argument for the government not to do them. If profit-seeking entities won't risk their capital on an idea because it's a money-loser, why must the public be forced to finance it anyway? gman430 may be onto something when he observes:

9 hours ago, gman430 said:

If a consultant came out and said the downtown convention center was a bad idea then why does the city still want it?  To help with the mayor’s ego? 

When I was a teenager, my father gave me some money intended for one purpose, and I used it instead to buy the Alpine car stereo I had long wanted. I couldn't help myself because I was basically insensate. And boy was I in trouble! I can't help but think that cities' irresistible urge to follow through on questionable projects like this resembles my teenage covetousness.

[vicupstate]

Glad to see this idea seems further along than the initial report would indicate.  It does sound like this woud be a rare setup in that it would not replace the existing ceneter and would be more of a 'conference center' than a true Convention center in the usual sense. It also has a lot of private involvement too, which is typical for Greenville but not most projects like this.    

[oklahoma75]

This project, while still very premature, seems like a wonderful fit for downtown.  From an outsiders opinion (Oklahoma is way outside!) the existing convention center works just fine for boat shows, dog shows, gun shows, etc.  and i suspect that wont change - those types of shows don't really need to be downtown.  What needs to be downtown are the ULI meetings, Synnex corps big annual meetings,  hosting Michelin, and similar types of conferences that would benefit greatly from being in the heart of downtown.     In my opinion,  the city consultants that were hired that said downtown didn't need a convention center were absolute right - downtown doesn't need a gazillion sf convention center downtown but it could benefit GREATLY from a smaller more intimate conference center and this wasn't what the consultants expertise.  There will always be huge public discourse whenever public/private partnerships are introduced but in my view projects like this can be game changers for communities like Greenville!  Look at what Riverplace did for the WestEnd and that was a huge public/private partnership.  I truly hope this works out and the conference center and museum end up going along with the hundreds of millions of dollars of mixed use development  that will surely follow.

[vicupstate]

Quote

If a consultant came out and said the downtown convention center was a bad idea then why does the city still want it?  To help with the mayor’s ego? 

Actually if you read the 2016 article that I posted above, the project that apparently is being pursued is the only option that the consultant thought would work.  A 'conventional' convention center was panned but a convention hotel was found to be workable.  This was also the recommended site.   

[GvilleSC]

14 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

Glad to see this idea seems further along than the initial report would indicate.  It does sound like this woud be a rare setup in that it would not replace the existing ceneter and would be more of a 'conference center' than a true Convention center in the usual sense. It also has a lot of private involvement too, which is typical for Greenville but not most projects like this.     

That makes sense. The level of mixed-uses and private development happening immediately on the site seems like classic Greenville, and a very good setup. This could be a huge development for downtown Greenville. 

[vicupstate]

Quote

In my opinion,  the city consultants that were hired that said downtown didn't need a convention center were absolute right - downtown doesn't need a gazillion sf convention center downtown but it could benefit GREATLY from a smaller more intimate conference center and this wasn't what the consultants expertise.

I was surprised when his report was made public that a traditional COnvention Center was the focus. I expected it to be based on the smaller, more narrow vision that seems to be actually where this is going. 

[PuppiesandKittens]

1 hour ago, vicupstate said:

If the private sector can build and do things that have typically been done by government, then it would have already done them.  That is particularly true in the US. For the vast majority of our history, business was unregulated and powerful and the government did very little.  During the Guilded Age there was no private funded infrastructure to amount to anything, and there is a reason for that- it was not profitable.         

During the Guilded Age railroads were almost entirely funded by the private sector (with some exceptions such as in the West, with land grants made), as was electrical infrastructure.

The private sector builds plenty of meeting and event space.  In my view, covention centers are simply excess supply of meeting and event space.

[gman430]

Various projects: 

1-

2-

3-

4-

5-

6-

7-

Edited March 18, 2019 by gman430

[SCphil]

Looks like they released some early conceptual renderings of the River Street/Reedy Museum and Convention Center here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/greenvillejournal.com/2019/03/19/proposed-downtown-events-center-could-drive-new-tourism-business-to-greenville/amp/

It’s surely too soon to critique, but I’m glad they’re contemplating something both sculptural and industrial for this site.  We shall see how this develops overtime. 

[SVL]

This is great lot, would love to see something fill in here.

[gman430]

LifeStorage project on hold if not dead: http://www.greenvillebusinessmag.com/2019/03/27/193339/-yeahthatagenda-falls-walk-townhouses-get-moving-update-on-proposed-west-end-self-storage-development-swamp-fox-distilling-man-sues-company-for-boss-flatulence

“The latter project -- a mixed-used site featuring air-conditioned storage units, a co-work space iShare, artists units, and retail -- had received final approval, but according to a TD Development representative, the group is currently reviewing the project and considering all of their options.”

Edited March 27, 2019 by gman430

[vicupstate]

1 Logan St (Swamp Rabbit Inn) as well as 5 and 7 Logan Street  all have survey stakes.   I know SRI has been on the market, so it is likely that whole side of Logan from Wardlaw to Ferguson St. is about to flip.  If so that is about a half acre combined.