Jump to content

SuperTARGET to anchor new Center at I-85 and Pelham

RestedTraveler

By RestedTraveler
in Greenville

Recommended Posts

gs3 Metropolitan Area

gs3

Posted
Posted

^ Yes, I'll readily admit that I am biased on this subject, due to my dislike of Wal-Mart. But you make an excellent point that is well taken and should also be applied by county council.....they can't easily deny one project while approving the other (which they seem inclined to be favoring the Wal-Mart development). I agree, in terms of impact on actual infrastructure there is little difference, so looks like the council should either approve both or deny both.....but I get the distinct feeling that isn't happening. I see the council favoring one over the other.

That said, I do see a difference in traffic congestion on the two sides of I-85. Congestion seems worse along The Parkway side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 233
  • Created
  • Last Reply
btoy Town

btoy

Posted
Posted
I like Target much better than Wal-Mart, but the proposed location is terrible. It bugs me that Greenville appears to be married to the wishes of developers. Aesthetically speaking, Greenville is much less attractive and natural than it was when I was growing up. The land along Garlington is not appropriate for this type of development, and it will only further the degradation of the natural beauty in Greenville.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wheatie Unincorporated Area

wheatie

Posted
Posted
I may have missed the beauty at this exit, but this spot seems perfect for Target......bound by I-85, Pelham and Garlington, with restaurants and a hotel across Pelham and office/light industrial across Garlington. I don't see this development as out of place. I would welcome this Target.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wellen Whistle-Stop

wellen

Posted
Posted
Yes, developing in a flood plain has no effect on natural systems or degrading the natural beauty of the county. I've worked on similar properties as a consultant, and these developments cause a lot more damage than people realize. The county should be encouraging redevelopment of underutilized properties and not greenfields.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
crescentmoon Whistle-Stop

crescentmoon

Posted
Posted

Someone else mentioned the developer paying to widen Garlington Road. Well, the offer is to improve the part of the road close to the property only. That doesn't address the concerns brought up. A million dollars doesn't go very far where road work is concerned.

<<And not having access to Pelham is not hte developers fault or a design probubly, it has to do with Federal Regulations regarding curb cuts and how close they can be to an interchange, hence the fencing and the old gas station that was shut down. It has been an inssue at many interchanges, just go up to HWY 14 and you have a waffle house a cas station and a stuckeys that were shut down after loosing access when the new fences went up. >>

I know this. And this is another reason why this particular piece of property is not a good fit for the project, IMHO.

<<you make an excellent point that is well taken and should also be applied by county council.....they can't easily deny one project while approving the other (which they seem inclined to be favoring the Wal-Mart development). I agree, in terms of impact on actual infrastructure there is little difference, so looks like the council should either approve both or deny both.....but I get the distinct feeling that isn't happening. I see the council favoring one over the other. >>

I don't understand why you think County Council is favoring the Wal-Mart development. The process for each is different since the Wal-Mart property already has the appropriate zoning and doesn't require the zoning change process that the Target property is currently going through. I'm pretty sure neither project has even made it to the council level yet. Council did decline to vote on the proposed 90 day moratorium proposed by the Wal-Mart opponents. Even if they had voted, that would have effected BOTH developments not just Wal-Mart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted

The article is a little confusing to me. It starts out seming to say that the project is on hold because residential is going to be added. I would say that would be good as it will be a case of more dense development, but then it would seem to make the traffic situation even worse than a Target alone, which was the reason for opposition in the first place. Then It ends by saying it may have only residential. So which is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gs3 Metropolitan Area

gs3

Posted
Posted

I really wish this article had been a little more clear. But from what I pick up, adding residential......that simply adds the same issue that a Super Target would.....more traffic. Does the COUNTY council really know what they are doing? I ask that question often. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clemson Crossroads

Clemson

Posted
Posted

Sounds like the SuperTarget is not going in there but other smaller development (strip mall?, mini-Greenridge?) will probably develop. The story mentioned one of the people leaving the meeting muttering something like, "...now we've got to do it again". What's that? Turning their sights on blocking Wal-Mart now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crescentmoon Whistle-Stop

crescentmoon

Posted
Posted
Sounds like the SuperTarget is not going in there but other smaller development (strip mall?, mini-Greenridge?) will probably develop. The story mentioned one of the people leaving the meeting muttering something like, "...now we've got to do it again". What's that? Turning their sights on blocking Wal-Mart now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
breed Hamlet

breed

Posted
Posted

Seems like information is missing.

One thing that might be good though... very often, when a proposal goes from its original request to a PD-zoning, there is very little change in the finished product, only the amount of oversight during the development. The fact that there may be some real change bodes well.

However, response from the developer is noticeably missing and limits the real value of the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
g-man430 Town

g-man430

Posted
Posted

County delays decision on Super Target. More info: http://greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...EWS01/702190325 Thoughts and opinions?

And just for the record, i'm for the Super Target. I know I said earlier I might as well be against it, but that was just me being sarcastic after seeing all of those signatures. Chickenwing is right though. 220 signatures for that area isn't a lot at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gs3 Metropolitan Area

gs3

Posted
Posted
After looking at the names on the petition, I find it rather suspicious that some names are in the same handwriting, and how some families, including children have signed the petition. 220 signatures in opposition does not seem like a lot considering the number of people in that area.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
charlie swords Whistle-Stop

charlie swords

Posted
Posted

personally i think they need to get over it, the land will be developed sooner or later and from what i have seen the development will be nice. Yeah, i'm sure the traffic will be problem and i would imagine somebody is working on a plan for that. It seems like they will oppose anything that tries to go next to them and i understand they don't want to live next to some huge development with traffic and a lot of lights but it will happen eventually in one form or another. I think the sight is fine for it but the traffic does need to be addressed that off ramp is already pretty bad about being backed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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.