Bull Street Common

[krazeeboi]

I'm glad that Columbia, unlike many other cities undergoing "condofication," is making this a top priority. It will be very important in preserving the identity and vibe of Columbia that makes it an attractive place to live for many people.

[The_sandlapper]

I definatley think that's a plus make housing affordable and functional for everyone and cultivate a living breathing city core notjust for the rich because then you end up with the same problem of sidewalks rolling up after 6PM.

[krazeeboi]

Some wise words that Columbia city leaders should heed as they move forward with this development.

[krazeeboi]

OK, we haven't discussed the architectural merits of the housing complexes for this development. Any thoughts?

[Spartan]

I like them. They reflect the area and complement its existing architecture well. DPZ is known for doing that. I am interested to see some more details on how the buldings will look. specifically the denser ones. I know they have some on the PDF but those aren't enough for me

[krazeeboi]

Yeah, I would like to see some detailed, color, multi-dimensional renderings myself. It appears they're going for an antique, cottage look though, which isn't bad. I just hope it doesn't come off as "fake."

[TheCarolinaKing]

The desingns are okay IMO. They are nothing to rave over though. I think it could look a little better without taking away the running old ..."OLD" ...school theme that Columbia seems to embody . I really wish someone would put a viable movie theatre down town!

[Spartan]

Yeah, I wish that they had not taken the movie theater out of the plan. I think the problem there is parking.... Movie theaters ahve to be huge these days, and building a deck is expensive....

[krazeeboi]

^And Lord knows they're building enough parking decks in Columbia already.

[waccamatt]

I'd like to see an ultra modern development. Why does everything have to "look" historic?

[Doug L]

^And Lord knows they're building enough parking decks in Columbia already.

Parking decks do NOT have to look ugly. Example: USC's new parking facility on Blossom between Pickens and Sumter.

[Doug L]

I'd like to see an ultra modern development. Why does everything have to "look" historic?

Righ on waccamatt! Historic is important, however, it can definately be over done. It is time for something in Columbia to be futuristic! Whether it is the Bull Street development or a new high rise (and I don't mean 10 stories), Columbia NEEDS something that is unique, arcitecturally sugnificant, totally 'out there' and preferably tall.

[CorgiMatt]

Righ on waccamatt! Historic is important, however, it can definately be over done. It is time for something in Columbia to be futuristic! Whether it is the Bull Street development or a new high rise (and I don't mean 10 stories), Columbia NEEDS something that is unique, arcitecturally sugnificant, totally 'out there' and preferably tall.

But not so tall that it will stick up by itself for years, and not so "out there" that it is totally out of character for the city. For now I'd say 35 floors in the right spot would be the most appropriate height, and the design should recall some of the city's best existing architecture while pushing the envelope without being too provoking.

[waccamatt]

I agree a new highrise shouldn't be ridiculously taller than the next tallest building, but something radical wouldn't be so bad, IMO. I'd take the big Gherkin from London, or the Turning Torso, for instance!

[krazeeboi]

Parking decks do NOT have to look ugly. Example: USC's new parking facility on Blossom between Pickens and Sumter.

I never implied that they did. All you have to do is look at the ones in Spartanburg and Greenville.

[Spartan]

I never implied that they did. All you have to do is look at the ones in Spartanburg and Greenville.

And some of the newer ones in Charleston. They have some that you have to look at a couple of times before you realize they are actually garages.

[TheCarolinaKing]

I'd like to see an ultra modern development. Why does everything have to "look" historic?

Right On! How many time and ways must Columbia (SC) prove to the world that we are still stuck in the past! To me it just defeats the point of building something new!

[Doug L]

I agree a new highrise shouldn't be ridiculously taller than the next tallest building, but something radical wouldn't be so bad, IMO. I'd take the big Gherkin from London, or the Turning Torso, for instance!

I guess I fall between you and Corgimatt. I definately do not want to look like Charlotte's building twice the height of the rest of the city. 30 to 35 floors would be nice; but anything taller than 40 would be totally out of place.

As far as architecture, I'd hate to see anything built that would make us a laughing stock. ie gherkings and torsos. What I have in mind is something that is cutting edge like F. Lloyd Wright was in the 30's. Something special that can lead the way in inovation.

[Spartan]

Right On! How many time and ways must Columbia (SC) prove to the world that we are still stuck in the past! To me it just defeats the point of building something new!

That depends on what "ultra modern" means though. There's playing off historic architectural styles, and then there's mimicing existing buildings. I like a solid modern building (like Hearst Tower in Charlotte) but I don't like the "modern" or "international" style buldings (like the Richland County Juducial Center).

[krazeeboi]

Right On! How many time and ways must Columbia (SC) prove to the world that we are still stuck in the past! To me it just defeats the point of building something new!

Haven't you heard that everything old is new again?

I do hope the next highrise in Columbia is something shiny, with lots of glass and steel BUT will age gracefully. Don't know if it's possible to have both, but that's what I would like to see.

[sonofaque86]

Well, if you make it modern now. 100 years from now it'll be looked on as historic so why try to make it "look" historic now. lol

[krazeeboi]

Well, if you make it modern now. 100 years from now it'll be looked on as historic so why try to make it "look" historic now. lol

Because it will have been razed WELL before the 100-year mark.

[Spartan]

I am a big fan of regional architectural styles. I don't like seeng the same crap everywhere. That is boring. Thats why I don't like suburbia. Our historic architecture should be accented in our current bulidings so that we can maintain a distinct architectural style.

[Mr.Marc]

I am a big fan of regional architectural styles. I don't like seeng the same crap everywhere. That is boring. Thats why I don't like suburbia. Our historic architecture should be accented in our current bulidings so that we can maintain a distinct architectural style.

Good point. Columbia seems to be infatuated with brick (and red or dark red brick in particular), so why not build something to compliment that.

[goodbye]

I never implied that they did. All you have to do is look at the ones in Spartanburg and Greenville.

Here are a couple recent additions to downtown Greenville. They show the effectiveness of good design even though they are above ground. I'll have to get pics of a couple others with nice architectural design.

Photos taken by RestedTraveler