Spartan 1504 Report post Posted February 12, 2006 There is an interesting article in The State today that highlights 6 areas that USC is likely to expand into. Of particular interst to me are these: Addams bookstore property on South Main Ballpark site near Colonial Center Burger King site on College Street The USC Development Foundation is buying the land that Addams is on, and will lease it to an Atlanta devleloper who wants to create a residential & retail project. So long as Addams will have a home in this new facility I don't mind. That and the development of the Horizon center accross the street would really change the way that area looks. The Ballpark site itself isnt that important, but the remainder of the bullet point is.... "Why it’s important: USC wants Greene Street to be the school’s new Main Street, stretching from the Horseshoe to the Congaree River. But Greene is broken at the railroad tracks near the Colonial Center. USC officials would like to see a bridge built over the tracks to make the connection unbroken" That is very exciting to me. I have been saying that Greene St needs to be restored for some time now Finally, the old BK site. That is just a horrible eyesore, and I don't understand why it hasn't been redeveloped yet. What a great place for a real restaurant (not fast food). Or better yet, a small building with a restaurant on the groundfloor and some residential (ie student) units above it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CorgiMatt 79 Report post Posted February 12, 2006 There is an interesting article in The State today that highlights 6 areas that USC is likely to expand into. Of particular interst to me are these:Addams bookstore property on South MainBallpark site near Colonial CenterBurger King site on College StreetThe USC Development Foundation is buying the land that Addams is on, and will lease it to an Atlanta devleloper who wants to create a residential & retail project. So long as Addams will have a home in this new facility I don't mind. That and the development of the Horizon center accross the street would really change the way that area looks. The Ballpark site itself isnt that important, but the remainder of the bullet point is.... "Why it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vicupstate 653 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 I assume that since the Addams Bookstore project is being leased from USC, that it will be apartments, not for-sale units, at least initially. The down side to that (and the rest of these USC purchases) is that these properties will leave the tax rolls. Columbia has a lot of untaxed property. Of course the Bull Street project going private will be a big help in that respect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doug L 0 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 I assume that since the Addams Bookstore project is being leased from USC, that it will be apartments, not for-sale units, at least initially. The down side to that (and the rest of these USC purchases) is that these properties will leave the tax rolls. Columbia has a lot of untaxed property. Of course the Bull Street project going private will be a big help in that respect. First of all, all this property is NOT being purchased by USC but by the USC Foundation. There is a huge difference between the two. The properties in question will NOT leave the tax rolls until it is actually transfered to USC at the time of construction of a new project; then it will be RE tax free. The big problem I have with the aquasition of all of this property to be held by the foundation until USC is ready for it is that they let their properties fall into disrepair. There are a number of rotting down buildings that USC Foundation owns and is sitting on. They keep their taxes low by letting the properties go derelict. They have a tendensy to be very bad neighbors. I also hate that they destroyed the old Radison Hotel building and THEN announced that it will remain a vacant lot. What a waste! What a disgrace! What bad, bad neighbors! They also announced that they (USC) will not build any new towers. More and more 'squat' buildings. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krazeeboi 173 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 I'm a little uneasy about the foundation holding on to prime, downtown property. It really seems as though USC is almost trying to take over DT Columbia. I'm glad that Innovista is a public/private venture though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 First of all, all this property is NOT being purchased by USC but by the USC Foundation. There is a huge difference between the two. The properties in question will NOT leave the tax rolls until it is actually transfered to USC at the time of construction of a new project; then it will be RE tax free. The big problem I have with the aquasition of all of this property to be held by the foundation until USC is ready for it is that they let their properties fall into disrepair. There are a number of rotting down buildings that USC Foundation owns and is sitting on. They keep their taxes low by letting the properties go derelict. They have a tendensy to be very bad neighbors. I also hate that they destroyed the old Radison Hotel building and THEN announced that it will remain a vacant lot. What a waste! What a disgrace! What bad, bad neighbors! They also announced that they (USC) will not build any new towers. More and more 'squat' buildings. But these buldings are not unattractive buildings. I don't see why USC can't have solid mid-rise structures. I look at Strom or the new School of Health as examples of quality construciton that is both low-mid rise and still visually attractive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sonofaque86 11 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 Soon downtown will just be USC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doug L 0 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 But these buldings are not unattractive buildings. I don't see why USC can't have solid mid-rise structures. I look at Strom or the new School of Health as examples of quality construciton that is both low-mid rise and still visually attractive. There is no doubt that the new USC buildings are attractive and yes quality. It is, however, unproductive to announce and follow through on a program that disqualifies towers as a part of the mix! As the midtown real estate becomes more and more expensive it behooves all developments to consider going up; instead USC is choosing to artificially escalate RE costs by gobbling up excessive amounts of land and then just letting it go to waste until THEY are ready. Bad, bad, neighbors! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vicupstate 653 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 As far as the Vista goes, there are height restrictions anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CorgiMatt 79 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 As far as the Vista goes, there are height restrictions anyway. But an 8-story office building for the corner of Huger and Gervais just cleared its first zoning hurdle at City Hall the other day. And the mayor in his state of the city address said the city needs to review its height limits in the Vista. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doug L 0 Report post Posted February 14, 2006 As far as the Vista goes, there are height restrictions anyway. Restrictions can be changed! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheCarolinaKing 4 Report post Posted February 15, 2006 Change'Um Change'Um Change'Um! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted February 15, 2006 I'm sorry, but Ijust don't think the lack of skyscrapers will detract from Columbia's downtown. There are many great cities out there that don't have a ton of skyscrapers downtown. (Charleston, DC, London) Besides, isn't a tower for S Main in the works? There is plenty of space for towers in Columbia. If USC is to be succesful then it will have to expand. The city and downtown is very much tied to USC, just as USC is tied to downtown. I think that the success of one will be the success of the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krazeeboi 173 Report post Posted February 15, 2006 It was stated on another thread that the impression wasn't given that the tower to be built by Holder Properties on S. Main would be a high rise. I have no problem with Innovista being primarily a mid-rise development, if that's what's being referenced. As long as we get good street level retail that will generate pedestrian activity, I'm all for it. Unfortunately, that is exactly the thing that towers in Columbia DON'T do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doug L 0 Report post Posted February 15, 2006 It was stated on another thread that the impression wasn't given that the tower to be built by Holder Properties on S. Main would be a high rise. I have no problem with Innovista being primarily a mid-rise development, if that's what's being referenced. As long as we get good street level retail that will generate pedestrian activity, I'm all for it. Unfortunately, that is exactly the thing that towers in Columbia DON'T do. I agree that a tower just for the sake of a tower generates no pedestrian traffic, however, properly done towers could be the panacea for midtown. I refer specifically to the multi-purpose building wherein every new tower would include street level retail, parking either above the retail or below ground, and above floors designated in groups to offices, research, class rooms, and/or living space. Any of these combinations would work very well to increase density in our city and generate more pedestrian traffic. This particular type of building would work best east of Assembly Street on top of the hill, however, having an occasional high rise, even in single family home neighborhoods, as an exclamation point is very attractive (See Toronto). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted February 15, 2006 What what you say is very true Doug, it is not plausible in Columbia- at least not at this point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted October 17, 2007 There is a new building coming to the Innovista part of campus. "On Friday, September 14, the Buildings and Grounds Committee of the University of South Carolina Board of Trustees approved a site at Pendleton and Assembly streets for an approximately 100,000-square-foot Alumni Center, setting the stage for final approval by the full Board." Here's the link: http://www.mycarolina.org/articles/display.asp?CID=304 Thats a crappy sketch, so I'm hoping some better site plans and renderings will be made available soon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted December 20, 2007 This thread is for the discussion of USC construction projects including the proposed School of Law, the SC Honors College, other new dorms, renovations, etc. Anything that comes up that is not considered a part of Innovista or Athletics Master Plan. Here are some links to other discussions: USC Athletic Facilities Master Plan USC Baseball Park Innovista Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Firefox 1 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 How many guys have seen the new tower crane up at the Honors college site? Told you guys they would put one up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheCarolinaKing 4 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 Yes! I saw it today. I wondered, as I approached the area, what the heck it was for. I was really begining to miss those big metal things. Its quite exciting. Can't wait to see the finished project and the effect it has on the various views. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrasilnSC 22 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 That's exciting! I'll be sure to ride by there on my way home today. Hopefully we'll see another one when Horizon II starts construction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krazeeboi 173 Report post Posted February 1, 2008 Even though this development will technically be in Innovista, it will really be its own building and won't be research related, which is why I'm posting it here: USC is close to an agreement to lease its business school building to a federal agency in exchange for rent that would pay for a new, $100 million Moore School of Business in the Innovista. Under the preliminary design and budget for the new business school, no state taxpayer funds would be needed, said USC chief financial officer Rick Kelly. The new academic home for the No. 1 ranked international business program in a public university probably will be on Foundation Square near the Colonial Center. It would be at Lincoln and Greene streets on one of the two undeveloped corners on the south side of Greene Street, Kelly said. The university owns the block east of Lincoln, while the city owns the block west of Lincoln. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spartan 1504 Report post Posted February 2, 2008 What happened to the plans to renovate the BA building? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GamecockEngineer 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2008 I thought I heard the renovations got canned and they are determining a location for a new building... but I'm not positive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Worley 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2008 ^I think that's the Darla Moore school that you're thinking of. The feds are taking it and USC is building a new one in Innovista. I believe it was in The State this weekend. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites