Does downtown Greensboro need additional skyscrapers?

[Rwarky]

Does central Greensboro need one or more skyscraper to enhance its skyline?

[krazeeboi]

Unfortunately, skyscrapers aren't built for the sake of skylines. There must be a need for them, and building them must make sense financially.

[cityboi]

Unfortunately, skyscrapers aren't built for the sake of skylines. There must be a need for them, and building them must make sense financially.

Downtwon Greensboro definately needs them. They are a number of factors that make it deifficult for having a bunch of towers under construction in the center-city.

first and foremost, there is not a demand for vast amounts of office space so that kills the idea right now for building office towers. Of course the planned federal building is the only office tower that is in Greensboro's near future.

Residential Towers are far more realistic. But its difficult because availble land is running short and to make these large scale projects feasible, there has to be enough parking for such large structures. So the question is, does the available proprties have enough land for a tower and a large parking structure? There are some avalible. The only reason Center Pointe is happening is because there are parking decks nearby. One solution is to stack the parking deck many storeis within the tower itself. That would be my solution. I do think we will be surprised with a highrise residential development, particularly after the success of Center Pointe.

highrise hotels would contribute to Greensboro's skyline, but there isnt alot of demand for a large number of hotel rooms in the center-city at this point. There is a plan on the table to build a midrise hotel on the south end of downtown but those plans have a big hurdle. Once again its a parking issue. In order to make that plan financially feasible, the developer wants the city to help build a parking deck next to the hotel.

but back to office towers. Ray Gibbs of Downtwon Greensboro Inc. is trying to figure out a way to make downtown more attractive than the suburbs for office space. The suburbs are currently more attractive because office space is cheaper in an office park than a downtown location. There needs to be some sort of incentive that will entice companies to move downtown. The growing residential may be a part of that solution as companies realize people want to work nearby where they live and having an office/residential tower is even more enticing because you cane live and work in the same building. That may be the future of office towers in downtown Greensboro which includes residential space. That could also be the answer in competing with suburban office parks or airport locations.

[twincity]

^good observation.

i vote yes

[nowensone]

For aesthetic reasons only, yes, GSO needs one tallish scraper. I was at a Hoppers game recently, on the side that affords the great downtown views, and noticed it just needs one 40+ story building to anchor everything and create that "pyramid" effect with the existing ones. One thing that I think is great about GSO, being a smaller city and late bloomer, is that hopefully it won't raze it's great old, historic mid-rise buildings (like Charlotte regretfully did on a couple of occasions) as it starts to really grow in the next few decades.

[sax184]

Greensboro needs 3-6 story buildings that face the street with parking in the rear much more than it needs a skyscraper.

[nowensone]

^Of course GSO does not need a skyscraper, but strictly adhering to the question of it needing one to enhance the skyline, then it is easy to say it does. The question itself is kind of effect-cause in nature, but just to answer it anyway...

[Beany]

Does a fish need water?

I think another scraper would really help the presence of dt. But building scrapers is certainly not easy or cheap. I think a mixed use tower would be most feasible at this time. 2 stories of retail, 8 stories of office space and 15 stories of residential sounds good about right.

[intcvlcphlga]

For aesthetic reasons only, yes, GSO needs one tallish scraper. I was at a Hoppers game recently, on the side that affords the great downtown views, and noticed it just needs one 40+ story building to anchor everything and create that "pyramid" effect with the existing ones. One thing that I think is great about GSO, being a smaller city and late bloomer, is that hopefully it won't raze it's great old, historic mid-rise buildings (like Charlotte regretfully did on a couple of occasions) as it starts to really grow in the next few decades.

A 40+ story tower would overwhelm downtown as it would be 2x as tall as anything else there. I don't think GSO necessarily needs a new high-rise. The downtown seems to be doing pretty well without one and the city already has a nice urban fabric along Elm Street.

[cityboi]

A 40+ story tower would overwhelm downtown as it would be 2x as tall as anything else there. I don't think GSO necessarily needs a new high-rise. The downtown seems to be doing pretty well without one and the city already has a nice urban fabric along Elm Street.

The problem is, rightfully or not, a city is judged by its downtown and its downtown is judged by its skyline. I think there is much more to downtown than having a skyline. Yes I want more towers but if I had to choose between having a vibrant downtown with no towers and a dead downtown with many towers, im choosing the downtown with no towers.

[monsoon]

This is a pretty pointless thread.