Jump to content

Five Points


mr. chips

Recommended Posts


This is an interesting scenario. I, too, was a little concerned about the height, but I did think that parking was best suited for that location. I hope that the original design stays in place as much as possible. Would any changes in the design have to go before the DDRC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article said the developers would no longer have to get the approval of city council. Is it possible they will redesign and put a cheaper/more suburban structure there? I really liked the last design, and I think that was the optimal spot for the much needed parking garage. And, is their change of plans a result of city council's surprise (and irrisponsible) negotiation of the air rights at the last minute?

Fortunately, when I move back from China next month, I'll be living in five points for the first time (I used to live in Granby Mills), so parking won't be an issue for me.

BTW, I'm Stephen. I've read your posts for a long time, but have never actually shared on the Columbia forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen, welcome to the forum.

While the developers of FPS won't have to get approval from City Council, I think they will still need to meet the approval of the zoning board or the design commission (whatever the thing is called, lol) to ensure that the revision still fits with the nature of Five Points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article said the developers would no longer have to get the approval of city council. Is it possible they will redesign and put a cheaper/more suburban structure there? I really liked the last design, and I think that was the optimal spot for the much needed parking garage. And, is their change of plans a result of city council's surprise (and irrisponsible) negotiation of the air rights at the last minute?

Fortunately, when I move back from China next month, I'll be living in five points for the first time (I used to live in Granby Mills), so parking won't be an issue for me.

BTW, I'm Stephen. I've read your posts for a long time, but have never actually shared on the Columbia forum.

Welcome to the forum Stephen!

IMO the change is simply due to the sometimes lethargic nature of politics. FPS is basically tired of dealing with the City. I give them credit for trying to get a solid public-private partnership off of the ground, but unfortunately politics got in the way of progress yet again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

OK, this is disappointing. The developers of FPS are scaling back the project once more. They said this week they are going to build a free-standing bank, drugstore, small shop, and surface parking lot instead of the original six-story proposal. Developers Ron Swinson and Stan Harpe also said they are still open to discussing some form of public parking out of respect for Five Points merchants, but expressed extreme frustration with City Council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that sometimes the city takes too long to make decisions, the developers of this property were very inexperienced and are showing this with their attacks on city government. The biggest reason for the delay of this project was the necessary access to the tunnel under the property, though the debate about the parking and the height of the project caused some delays, also. I think it is interesting to note that experienced developers, like Holder Properties, have no problem getting projects off the ground. In reference to FPS' developers, I think it is wise to begin with small projects and gain some experience before trying to tackle a large project. As someone with many years of lending experience, I can almost guarantee you that when the city negotiated a smaller monetary contribution to the project, the financing fell through because the developers didn't have all of their ducks in a row.

If the owners of Yesterdays are smart, they will build a garage where their surface lot stands. Five Points acreage is worth too much these days to be occupied by a surface lot. IMO the FPS developers' best bet is to sell their property to an experienced developer or create a partnership with an experienced developer before proceeding with anything.

Edited by waccamatt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Wales Garden residents will enjoy their view of the rooftop HVAC's below them when they descend the hill into Five Points. Also, I wonder if the parking garage they still might build will be two stories and taller than the building. That'll look like hell.

Edited by CorgiMatt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that sometimes the city takes too long to make decisions, the developers of this property were very inexperienced and are showing this with their attacks on city government. The biggest reason for the delay of this project was the necessary access to the tunnel under the property, though the debate about the parking and the height of the project caused some delays, also. I think it is interesting to note that experienced developers, like Holder Properties, have no problem getting projects off the ground. In reference to FPS' developers, I think it is wise to begin with small projects and gain some experience before trying to tackle a large project. As someone with many years of lending experience, I can almost guarantee you that when the city negotiated a smaller monetary contribution to the project, the financing fell through because the developers didn't have all of their ducks in a row.

If the owners of Yesterdays are smart, they will build a garage where their surface lot stands. Five Points acreage is worth too much these days to be occupied by a surface lot. IMO the FPS developers' best bet is to sell their property to an experienced developer or create a partnership with an experienced developer before proceeding with anything.

Stan Harpe is a very experienced, successful developer. The Wales Garden association killed this deal. They are a strange bunch. I hope they enjoy what they are going to get because they deserve it.

I lived on Saluda Avenue for 15 years, the view of the original FPS coming down that hill would have been awesome. Yet another case of Columbia's small mindedness killing something that could have been awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that sometimes the city takes too long to make decisions, the developers of this property were very inexperienced and are showing this with their attacks on city government. The biggest reason for the delay of this project was the necessary access to the tunnel under the property, though the debate about the parking and the height of the project caused some delays, also. I think it is interesting to note that experienced developers, like Holder Properties, have no problem getting projects off the ground. In reference to FPS' developers, I think it is wise to begin with small projects and gain some experience before trying to tackle a large project. As someone with many years of lending experience, I can almost guarantee you that when the city negotiated a smaller monetary contribution to the project, the financing fell through because the developers didn't have all of their ducks in a row.

If the owners of Yesterdays are smart, they will build a garage where their surface lot stands. Five Points acreage is worth too much these days to be occupied by a surface lot. IMO the FPS developers' best bet is to sell their property to an experienced developer or create a partnership with an experienced developer before proceeding with anything.

The .5mm drop in funding, plus the lackluster (to put it mildly) condo market probably killed this deal more than anything. The latter probably being the biggest part. The Columbia market has never been big on condos, and the number of urban pioneers seems to be somewhat limited. Adesso and the the Williams-Brice projects have raised red flags and understandbly so.

Blaming the city is a convenient scapegoat, although the the city did drag it's feet, IMO.

If the developers can turn a profit on a single story development, then their would have been a big profit potential with the condos and parking added to that. I agree that the financing probably colasped. It's hard to get funding for anything these days, much less something out of the ordinary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt i usually agree with most things you say...but this is one that i'm gonna have to disagree about. I don't even think someone like Holder could have got this off the ground. True the tunnel issue arose, but after that it was straight pandering and bickering. It was never about the height in my opinion...but more so about having power and control and Wales Garden was allowed to dictate this outcome for all of that area. The city could have been more proactive if they wanted to but they weren't. Cutting a half of million was like a dagger in the back for those developers. First you want them to redesign it....not by yourself, but with the designers of the neighborhoods choosing...and then you change the plans twice....then right before it's to move forward...you say it's still not good enough because of the height....when is so confusing to me because of the USC towers and etc that are all around....and odd people forget that they live in a city! That neighborhood is next to an entertainment district and having frequented that neighborhood...that 6 story's wouldn't have had that much of an effect...10 stories...sure...but not 6. But then after all that and stilling to move on they take the parking money away....nah.....i don't blame them for scaling back...cutting the loss of higher gas prices, construction materials and wasted time.

They are better than me because i wouldn't build anything on that site. I would put a "Coming Soon" sign there and let the tumble weeds grow...let that site become an eyesore for the patrons and residents of that area. Call me immature, but i'm sure they would get the point then....

I know they said somethings that can be viewed as them scapegoating someone....but IMO...they didn't say anything that we all having though or said recently about this back and forth with the NIMBY's and developers. I doubt financing fell thru because of the economy...they probably got tired of waiting....if the finances were to fall thru it would have been fell thru a year ago....

Edited by CarolinaSouth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The finacing requirements recently went back to 50% pre-sold for condos, so I can see the financing being an issue with the condo market the way it was.

I think the tunnels were a HUGE part of the problem. I had doubts as soon as "Hey! We didn't know there were tunnels down there!" popped up.

And the Wales Garden residents...well...I don't think it is right to call them small minded just because they had a different opinion. They have to live with whatever gets built

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The finacing requirements recently went back to 50% pre-sold for condos, so I can see the financing being an issue with the condo market the way it was.

I think the tunnels were a HUGE part of the problem. I had doubts as soon as "Hey! We didn't know there were tunnels down there!" popped up.

And the Wales Garden residents...well...I don't think it is right to call them small minded just because they had a different opinion. They have to live with whatever gets built

I agree about the tunnels, Cap'n, however, I do think that the Wales Garden residents, city hall (Daniel Rickemann and Belinda Gergel in particular) are small minded and have a death wish for Columbia in general and Five Points in particular.

Please forgive me if I sound mean; but, frankly, I'm mad as hell! And, I live in the immediate vicinity of what is going to now look more like it belongs over in Lexington County and not in the center of Columbia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The finacing requirements recently went back to 50% pre-sold for condos, so I can see the financing being an issue with the condo market the way it was.

I think the tunnels were a HUGE part of the problem. I had doubts as soon as "Hey! We didn't know there were tunnels down there!" popped up.

And the Wales Garden residents...well...I don't think it is right to call them small minded just because they had a different opinion. They have to live with whatever gets built

Captain, I think you made that point better than I did. I had my doubts about the developers as soon as they said they didn't know about the tunnels and I rest by my assertion that they didn't really seem to know what they were doing.

Now I liked the design of the project, I didn't have a problem with the height or any of that and I know we joke about NIMBY's a lot, but in the long run would we rather have our city controlled by (all of) our residents (not just one neighborhood) or would we rather be controlled by developers? There is a happy medium that must be struck and that is why many developments take too long to get off the ground. The challenge for our part-time city leaders is that they must find that happy balance between letting developers do whatever they want (as happens in some cities) and letting the NIMBY's control everything (as happens in other cities). First off, I think we need to have a full time mayor's office. That isn't a knock on Mayor Bob, I just think he or anyone else could do a better job if they didn't have to work a regular job, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But is any of this a good reason to build a crappy freestanding bank!? Thats exactly what Five Points is supposed to get away from! You can build quality 1-level urban projects that aren't a drive-thru bank.

I think you have to look at the whole picture (which we don't have). It was in part due to the Council dragging their feet. It was also in part due to the economy. There are projects here in Charlotte that are being put on hold or cancelled because of that. I'm willing to bet that no city is immune. The developer, of course, thinks he's not at fault, but I think if we could actually get two sides of the story here you'd find that he messed up too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But is any of this a good reason to build a crappy freestanding bank!? Thats exactly what Five Points is supposed to get away from! You can build quality 1-level urban projects that aren't a drive-thru bank.

Agreed. Heck, if it has to be one story, make sure that story looks nice as hell. FPS and Kline...two area changing projects that are no more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Kline is just on hold. It will be resurrected, hopefully in the same form, or an even better one.

I think that the condo component of this project would have probably gotten scrapped anyway. But to just build three freestanding structures on that site, heck they could have let Kenny's stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One story structures at this site would be a waste of very valuable space. Why not at least build urban two-story buildings with condos, apartments or office space above. I know the market is not good right now, but I think fairly price condos would sell there, they don't have to be luxury. Either way, there needs to be some kind of mixed-use element to whatever gets built there. It'll be a failed development if it's not, IMO. I would still like to see a garage built there, maybe part of it covering Yesterday's surface lot and the rest on the Kenny site.

Something super urban needs to come out of all this. Please. :ermm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main point is to not fall back to standard suburban scale crap in an urban district. While density is preferred, at a minimum we should be requiring an urban design. I think the Future Five plan calls for that. The question is, what will the Council enforce?

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.

  • 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.