City Hall Site

[GvilleSC]

Speaking of this. Did anybody see the design for Piazza Bergamo last night on WYFF? To me, it looked very nice. It's going to include green space (looked more than before after seeing the rendering), italian-style fountains, italian-style bricks, etc.

Are they still going to do the carousel?

[cdude9409]

Are they still going to do the carousel?

No. Definitely not. For the few seconds I saw it on WYFF last night, the design definitely semmed to look italian and not like a circus.

[GvilleSC]

No. Definitely not. For the few seconds I saw it on WYFF last night, the design definitely semmed to look italian and not like a circus.

That's great. They can keep the green space as long as there is no carousel! Thank goodness.

[cdude9409]

The bridge was gone and there was a large section of grass at the end next to BOA like there is now. Also, there were three rectangular sized lawns that looked to be half the size of the large BOA lawn that would be lined up long ways in the center of the Bergamo from Main Street to the large BOA lawn with italian fountains between them and there would be italian-styled tiles and bricks throughtout the entire area. There were probably other things in the rendering I didn't see or notice, but definitely not a carousel. Hopefully, we'll see a rendering released to the media and general public soon.

[distortedlogic]

I am undecided so far on this development, but I am more with the yawners. In some ways I think some development is better than none, but on the other hand, I think it might be better to wait for a better proposal for this site, which IMO is pretty high profile. When we first heard about this, there were three proposals. What happened to the other two? What happened to the 10-12 stories we heard about? AT 6 stories, it really will not even be above tree line, so you would only be able to see it from main st. I am not sure why the DPC is so against anything with height. Maybe they should go live in Charleston, where the limits would keep them from having to worry about it in the first place! In any case, I am confused. How can they put a 250k sf building with 150 hotel rooms, "significant office space", on the same lot with parking and green space, and have it be only 6 stories? That lot is not that big is it? Overall, I am disappointed with the proposal, and I would think any new hotel would want a little more visibility than this would bring. Also, someone else mentioned that maybe they did not want it to stick out too much from the surrounding buildings. But I think a 12-14 story building would work wonderful here, as all the other buildings are about 10 floors, it would give it an upward nudge, yet still fit very nicely. Just some thoughts.

[cdude9409]

I agree with what your saying, but did you forget the design is still "preliminary" and the city council along with Windsor/Aughtry is going to change it after they have a study of the area to see how many hotel rooms they can have in the development. In other words the 6-7 stories could change very easily as this is just basically a rough draft of the plans.

[distortedlogic]

But does that mean 6-7 floors is all that has been approved? In other words, will they have to seek reapproval if more are added, or was the approval for the project itself regardless?

[GvilleSC]

I am undecided so far on this development, but I am more with the yawners. In some ways I think some development is better than none, but on the other hand, I think it might be better to wait for a better proposal for this site, which IMO is pretty high profile. When we first heard about this, there were three proposals. What happened to the other two? What happened to the 10-12 stories we heard about? AT 6 stories, it really will not even be above tree line, so you would only be able to see it from main st. I am not sure why the DPC is so against anything with height. Maybe they should go live in Charleston, where the limits would keep them from having to worry about it in the first place! In any case, I am confused. How can they put a 250k sf building with 150 hotel rooms, "significant office space", on the same lot with parking and green space, and have it be only 6 stories? That lot is not that big is it? Overall, I am disappointed with the proposal, and I would think any new hotel would want a little more visibility than this would bring. Also, someone else mentioned that maybe they did not want it to stick out too much from the surrounding buildings. But I think a 12-14 story building would work wonderful here, as all the other buildings are about 10 floors, it would give it an upward nudge, yet still fit very nicely. Just some thoughts.

My understanding is that it's not just the plaza, but also the old fire station and other building that sits adjacent. It should extend from City Hall to Broad along Main and then down West Broad to Poinsett Corners.

I believe that one of the "other 2" proposals wasn't complete or on time to begin with, most likely throwing it out.

Here's something to think about:

Since we now know that this will not be a highrise, what do y'all think about it in comparison to the original plan to recreate the old City Hall...?

[cdude9409]

But does that mean 6-7 floors is all that has been approved? In other words, will they have to seek reapproval if more are added, or was the approval for the project itself regardless?

I think the whole project was approved. Somebody that works for Windsor/Aughtry told me that the designs were still in the planning stages and that the city council along with their company were going to make changes to the design most likely after it is approved. That's why you haven't seen a rendering yet. I'm not saying it is going to get any taller though, even though I sure hope it does. I emailed Jim Bourey earlier for an explanation of this.

My understanding is that it's not just the plaza, but also the old fire station and other building that sits adjacent. It should extend from City Hall to Broad along Main and then down West Broad to Poinsett Corners.

I believe that one of the "other 2" proposals wasn't complete or on time to begin with, most likely throwing it out.

Here's something to think about:

Since we now know that this will not be a highrise, what do y'all think about it in comparison to the original plan to recreate the old City Hall...?

Correct about where the site extends too and to answer your question, i'll have to wait and see the rendering before I decide whether a plan to recreate the old city hall would of been better than this. However, if they were to recreate the old city hall, there most likely wouldn't be a hotel involved like there is going to be now.

[GSP Tiger]

Many people are disappointed and annoyed with these confined 6-7 level structures coming along. Until we have more progressive initiatives to build higher rise towers, Greenville's downtown skyline will continue its stagnance.

Increased demand for downtown lodging, residential and office space in recent years are potent to having boastful towers visible for miles around.

We want towers to fit in with existing surroundings. We're speaking not on par with The Peace Center. This is along the lines of the Liberty Square, Landmark Building and Bank of America towers.

A mandatorium should be passed requiring new towering structures to be at least certain heights. A new would be at least 75m/246.06 feet, approximately 20 levels. Future surrounding towers would build higher to keep the skyline's height rising.

[GvilleSC]

A good representative skyline is NOT what Greenville has. It can't touch most other cities' and it has a good bit of work to do. But at street level, most other cities, even with their beautiful highrises and graceful skylines, can't touch Greenville's downtown. It's what we excel in doing- street level activity. Low to mid-rise buildings help make this possible. If Riverplace had been one building, it could have reached a height of atleast 40+ stories but with VERY limited street level retail, gallery, and resturant space. In reality, it is now made up of 4 (soon to be 5) buildings with an abundance of street level resturant, retail, and gallery space. As a result, we now have a beautiful Riverwalk along the Reedy.

As we continue to build more low to mid-rise structures downtown, the amount of desired available land will slowly become scarce. As a result, developers will take advantage of the opportunity to maximize space and build taller. McBee Station, Riverplace, the Fieldhouse, The Palmetto Bank, etc all contribute to this and will eventually pay off. Not to mention that the amount of street level activity will be increased and the desire to live and work downtown will become that much more desirable-- making future high-rises possible.

That's just my take on the issue and while I'd love to see another high-rise, I also realize that the time will come. Greenville's downtown wasn't revitalized in a day. Much the same, the skyline can't be brought up to par in that amount of time either.

[vicupstate]

I am undecided so far on this development, but I am more with the yawners. In some ways I think some development is better than none, but on the other hand, I think it might be better to wait for a better proposal for this site, which IMO is pretty high profile. When we first heard about this, there were three proposals. What happened to the other two? What happened to the 10-12 stories we heard about? AT 6 stories, it really will not even be above tree line, so you would only be able to see it from main st. I am not sure why the DPC is so against anything with height. Maybe they should go live in Charleston, where the limits would keep them from having to worry about it in the first place! In any case, I am confused. How can they put a 250k sf building with 150 hotel rooms, "significant office space", on the same lot with parking and green space, and have it be only 6 stories? That lot is not that big is it? Overall, I am disappointed with the proposal, and I would think any new hotel would want a little more visibility than this would bring. Also, someone else mentioned that maybe they did not want it to stick out too much from the surrounding buildings. But I think a 12-14 story building would work wonderful here, as all the other buildings are about 10 floors, it would give it an upward nudge, yet still fit very nicely. Just some thoughts.

Excellent post. I wholeheartedly agree. There are just too few chances left for a major 'anchor' with some much needed retail, to just let this site develope so far below it's potential.

A good representative skyline is NOT what Greenville has. It can't touch most other cities' and it has a good bit of work to do. But at street level, most other cities, even with their beautiful highrises and graceful skylines, can't touch Greenville's downtown. It's what we excel in doing- street level activity. Low to mid-rise buildings help make this possible. If Riverplace had been one building, it could have reached a height of atleast 40+ stories but with VERY limited street level retail, gallery, and resturant space. In reality, it is now made up of 4 (soon to be 5) buildings with an abundance of street level resturant, retail, and gallery space. As a result, we now have a beautiful Riverwalk along the Reedy.

As we continue to build more low to mid-rise structures downtown, the amount of desired available land will slowly become scarce. As a result, developers will take advantage of the opportunity to maximize space and build taller. McBee Station, Riverplace, the Fieldhouse, The Palmetto Bank, etc all contribute to this and will eventually pay off. Not to mention that the amount of street level activity will be increased and the desire to live and work downtown will become that much more desirable-- making future high-rises possible.

That's just my take on the issue and while I'd love to see another high-rise, I also realize that the time will come. Greenville's downtown wasn't revitalized in a day. Much the same, the skyline can't be brought up to par in that amount of time either.

I agree with this as well, but my problem with this project isn't just the height, but the fact that the uses are not anything new or unique.

This is a large site with block-long frontage on Broad, substantial frontage on Main, and is about dead-center of the CBD. It is comfortable walking distance to both the Hyatt 'anchor' and the Falls Park 'anchor'. Also, the city owns it the site in it's entirety, and there is no need to get a private landowner to sell or use the dreaded emenient domain tool. [Remember the vacant lot across the street had a major project killed for that very reason] I say the city should hold onto the site until something better comes along. Something with a Borders, or an IMAx or an urban movie theater. This is a very high-profile, catalyst site that needs to be developed to it's highest and best use. It might take awhile, but we can do better.

[vicupstate]

As for what got approved, the ONLY thing that was approved was the City Council agreeing to sell the site (which it owns) to Windsor/Aughtery. The Design has NOT been approved, and will not even be submitted until W/A has settled on a final design. Since there are numerous buildings nearby that are over ten stories (Poinsett Plaza, City Hall, Liberty Building) I seriously doubt the DPC would object to height in this case. The reason the building is only 6 stories is because the site is big enough to do that, and the apparent market demand for hotel rooms and office space does not dictate something bigger.

[EDPro]

Vicupstate, I have to disagree with you on this one (which is rare).

We have a major entertainment anchor across the street in the Peace Center.

What is most needed on this site is street level retail. One of Main Street's weaknesses is the stretch from Court Street to Camperdown that is all pretty much dead space. City Hall Plaza, Vivian Wong's Parking Lot, Greenville News block and the Peace Center significantly slow foot traffic between the West End and the CBD. Consider the street level frontage that an IMAX theatre would hog up. I'd much rather see 3-4 shops/restaurants/bars on Main Street and another 3-4 around the corner on Broad Street (it will be particulary nice to see Poinsett Corners retail 'linked' into another block of retail).

In general, major entertainment anchors shouldn't be developed in already vibrant areas (at least not with government assistance). Another major entertainment anchor would ideally be placed several blocks off of Main Street in order to stretch foot traffic east or west of Main Street. We have seen this occur with success in the case of the baseball stadium and the Peace Center, and with limited or no success with the Bi-Lo Center.

In summary, Main Street is far and away downtown's biggest draw. People love Greenville, because of the vibrancy up and down Main Street. Anything the city can do to constantly improve the level of street level activity on Main Street and to branch this out into bordering streets, will result in a much better return on investment in terms of visitors, land value, prestige, etc. than another anchor on Main Street. Main Street IS the anchor.

Heighth is fine if kept in scale, but Greenville's downtown works so well because of its walkability and street level vibrancy. Dozens of other cities haven't come to study us b/c of a pretty skyline.

[vicupstate]

Vicupstate, I have to disagree with you on this one (which is rare).

We have a major entertainment anchor across the street in the Peace Center.

What is most needed on this site is street level retail. One of Main Street's weaknesses is the stretch from Court Street to Camperdown that is all pretty much dead space. City Hall Plaza, Vivian Wong's Parking Lot, Greenville News block and the Peace Center significantly slow foot traffic between the West End and the CBD. Consider the street level frontage that an IMAX theatre would hog up. I'd much rather see 3-4 shops/restaurants/bars on Main Street and another 3-4 around the corner on Broad Street (it will be particulary nice to see Poinsett Corners retail 'linked' into another block of retail).

In general, major entertainment anchors shouldn't be developed in already vibrant areas (at least not with government assistance). Another major entertainment anchor would ideally be placed several blocks off of Main Street in order to stretch foot traffic east or west of Main Street. We have seen this occur with success in the case of the baseball stadium and the Peace Center, and with limited or no success with the Bi-Lo Center.

In summary, Main Street is far and away downtown's biggest draw. People love Greenville, because of the vibrancy up and down Main Street. Anything the city can do to constantly improve the level of street level activity on Main Street and to branch this out into bordering streets, will result in a much better return on investment in terms of visitors, land value, prestige, etc. than another anchor on Main Street. Main Street IS the anchor.

Heighth is fine if kept in scale, but Greenville's downtown works so well because of its walkability and street level vibrancy. Dozens of other cities haven't come to study us b/c of a pretty skyline.

I doesn't sound like we do disagree. I completely agree with your comments on retail. But instead of retail, we are getting yet another restaurant. DT needs things to do BESIDES eating. That's why I mentioned Borders. As for an IMAX, this site is big enough to do a multi-level project that would have the IMAX interior to the site and consume little if any Main St. frontage.

Ideally, I would like the entire Broad and Main St frontage to be retail such as a bookstore, and retailers such as Urban Outfitters or some unique local ones. The next level would be the office space and that would be topped with the hotel and maybe condos too. The IMAX or urban movie theater complex would have an entrance from Main or Broad, but would top the Parking garage or something.

Main Street is an anchor in that it attracts people, but people walking up and down the street does NOT generate economic impact. We need to give them places to spend their time and money. AFter they take in a meal, they need more to do. We need more Mast General-sized(or larger) drawing cards. To attract something like that, the location will HAVE to be on MAIN. There is no subsidy involved, BTW, the city is getting paid for the land sale.

The Peace Center is an anchor, but most nights it is dark. We need something that will offer something to do seven days a week, 52 weeks a year. The Peace Center will never be able to do that.

[vicupstate]

This is an example of what I had in mind. This Jacksonville FL project did not pan out, but it was 70 condos, 15,000 sq. ft of retail, as well as combination restaurant/IMAX movie theater. They were trying to get a specialty grocery for the retail part.

[GvilleSC]

This is an example of what I had in mind. This Jacksonville FL project did not pan out, but it was 70 condos, 15,000 sq. ft of retail, as well as combination restaurant/IMAX movie theater. They were trying to get a specialty grocery for the retail part.

That's really cool. I could see that working at the site, but with different tenants. It's only 4 more stories than a possible 7 that we should get now.

[Greenville]

A good representative skyline is NOT what Greenville has. It can't touch most other cities' and it has a good bit of work to do. But at street level, most other cities, even with their beautiful highrises and graceful skylines, can't touch Greenville's downtown. It's what we excel in doing- street level activity. Low to mid-rise buildings help make this possible. If Riverplace had been one building, it could have reached a height of atleast 40+ stories but with VERY limited street level retail, gallery, and resturant space. In reality, it is now made up of 4 (soon to be 5) buildings with an abundance of street level resturant, retail, and gallery space. As a result, we now have a beautiful Riverwalk along the Reedy.

As we continue to build more low to mid-rise structures downtown, the amount of desired available land will slowly become scarce. As a result, developers will take advantage of the opportunity to maximize space and build taller. McBee Station, Riverplace, the Fieldhouse, The Palmetto Bank, etc all contribute to this and will eventually pay off. Not to mention that the amount of street level activity will be increased and the desire to live and work downtown will become that much more desirable-- making future high-rises possible.

That's just my take on the issue and while I'd love to see another high-rise, I also realize that the time will come. Greenville's downtown wasn't revitalized in a day. Much the same, the skyline can't be brought up to par in that amount of time either.

This post is right on the money! I couldn't agree more.

We are evolving as a city, and I would rather improve street level retail first and THEN develop the skyline rather than have a great skyline and nothing to do (which is common in many cities). Our cityscape might not make for the best postcard at this point, but as GvilleSC stated, the progression from an improved street-level experience to increased density to a better skyline seems to make sense.

Someone in another thread mentioned stuff like Borders and IMAX. Don't forget the entire block next to Piazza Bergamo that can be developed. This area is a prime candidate for a 2-3 story Borders. I expect to see IMAX as part of the development on county square, and if that doesn't workout then there are other places downtown that are available.

[DT-Gville]

I doesn't sound like we do disagree. I completely agree with your comments on retail. But instead of retail, we are getting yet another restaurant. DT needs things to do BESIDES eating.

vicupstate, I'm not sure I understand why you think this includes restaurants and no retail. The article that I read said the proposal included 15,000 sq. ft. of retail space.

Gville News Article

Edit for typo...

[cdude9409]

As for what got approved, the ONLY thing that was approved was the City Council agreeing to sell the site (which it owns) to Windsor/Aughtery. The Design has NOT been approved, and will not even be submitted until W/A has settled on a final design. Since there are numerous buildings nearby that are over ten stories (Poinsett Plaza, City Hall, Liberty Building) I seriously doubt the DPC would object to height in this case. The reason the building is only 6 stories is because the site is big enough to do that, and the apparent market demand for hotel rooms and office space does not dictate something bigger.

Actually, how do you know the demand for hotel rooms isn't higher. You haven't done a survey or anything like the city of Greenville and Windsor/Aughtry are about to do to see how many more hotel rooms the downtown metro area can hold.

[btoy]

Anyone ever thought that maybe IMAX and BOrders have no interest in being in Downtown Greenville?

[RestedTraveler]

Anyone ever thought that maybe IMAX and BOrders have no interest in being in Downtown Greenville?

Borders not having interest in Downtown (or in Greenville, for that matter, aside from the small store in the Mall), I can believe. IMAX is another story. It's a technology moreso than merely a brand. What would be needed is someone (anyone) with the desire to put an IMAX theatre in downtown and the capital to back the idea. I, for one, think this is entirely possible.

Also, someone mentioned earlier in this thread how much store front a theatre would take up. This is not necessarily the case. I've seen a number of places where the theatre is embedded deep within the core of a building and surrounded by other retail store fronts without taking up too much store front space itself. That could happen here as well, if W-A chooses to try to entice a theatre as part of this development.

[vicupstate]

vicupstate, I'm not sure I understand why you think this includes restaurants and no retail. The article that I read said the proposal included 15,000 sq. ft. of retail space.

Gville News Article

Edit for typo...

A more detailed article appeared later. It was probably in the print edition. I can't find it on the Gville News iste, but it was there. It specifically mentioned a resturant that bordered a plaza area.

Actually, how do you know the demand for hotel rooms isn't higher. You haven't done a survey or anything like the city of Greenville and Windsor/Aughtry are about to do to see how many more hotel rooms the downtown metro area can hold.

Windsor is basing the number on rooms on it's current perceptions. A survey may raise or lower those expectations. Windsor Augherty has experience in this industry, if they feeel the demand is 120-150 rooms, there a good chance that is pretty close. My point is, they didn't base the number of stories on the DPC but on the floors needed to build the rooms they think are demanded.

Anyone ever thought that maybe IMAX and BOrders have no interest in being in Downtown Greenville?

I have heard IMAX rumors for over a year now. Of course that doesn't mean much. But there was a proposal for a movie theater complex. I was using Borders as an example. Barnes and Noble will work too. Or somehting besides a bookstore. But SOMETHING that will draw people in IS needed.

And while Borders or B & N may not be intereested now, they might be in a few years. ONe hting is sure though, they will want a top-notch site. That means Main Street. This site is already in public hands and it is as good a location as is available anywhere DT.

That's my point. Maybe the best thing is to wait for something better, something we don't already have in ample supply.

Charlotte's old convention Center sat vacant for years even though it was an extremely valuable site. [1 block off Trade & Tryon] When the city finally got a truly exception project offered, it took the offer.

[goodbye]

I am enjoying the current discussion here very much. Downtown Greenville easily has enough pedestrians/tourists/visitors on a regular basis to warrant an IMAX-level element. Many people are coming downtown because of the newly finished "iconic" attrations - Falls Park on the Reedy, RiverPlace, West End Field, etc. - and Greenville leaders must continue to add to that high-level of interest in order to capitalize on these relative newcomers. I am with RT on this site being a very prominent location for something great. I view the vacant Kimbrell's corner of Main as a similarly important location for something tremendously magnetic. It appears that tourism is a key industry for this city to latch onto NOW while so many are beginning to realize the potential.

[cdude9409]

Email from a very high-profile person that works for Windsor/Aughtry:

Thanks for sending me that link. I had never visited urbanplanet before. Apparently I should be keeping up with that better. I saw the comments about the building from Jacksonville, and really felt like while that is a pretty building it would be out of place in Greenville, SC. The role of a developer is very difficult, because you have to balance interesting designs, with actual demand, and get it to stay within a realistic budget. Failing to do so, can easily bankrupt any developer. As far as having an IMAX downtown, I would live to see one. The problem here is that IMAX is a very special niche, and we as a developer are not willing to speculate on the old adage of "if you build it, they will come." If you have someone interested in being the operating partner/owner, than we would be happy to meet with them and see about incorporating something into the project for them. I think I understand your position having not seen our proposal, but let me assure it is a first class design and would be a great addition to Downtown. Please also bear in mind that while height is function of land cost, it is also a compromise between City Council and the Developer. City Hall houses Greenville Leaders, and as such, needs to be a prominent building in a prominent location. Putting a high rise next to the current City Hall would dwarf the current building, and could potentially undermine Council and weaken their role as leaders in this community. You may recall one of the competing proposals for this site included a high rise that was significantly larger than City Hall and it is my understanding that this was one of the main contributing factors to not being awarded the land sale contract.