Greenville County Square redevelopment

[vicupstate]

On 5/8/2019 at 2:01 PM, vicupstate said:

Just got an email saying there wil be a Community Meeting on County Square on May 14 at 6:00 pm in Suite 400 of the building.  This is to get public comments on the modifications to the PD zoning. 

I will be out of town and unable to attend myself.   

A spokesperson for RocaPoint  elaborated on the meeting: 

The main presentation topics include the following: impetus for project, project/team roster, proposed zoning (uses, height, buffers, multi-purpose trails, location of open space/parks, etc),traffic study results, economic impact, and coordination efforts with the City, DOT, and other entities.

[gman430]

4 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

A spokesperson for RocaPoint  elaborated on the meeting: 

The main presentation topics include the following: impetus for project, project/team roster, proposed zoning (uses, height, buffers, multi-purpose trails, location of open space/parks, etc),traffic study results, economic impact, and coordination efforts with the City, DOT, and other entities.

Too bad none of this matters anymore.  

[vicupstate]

10 minutes ago, gman430 said:

Too bad none of this matters anymore.  

Actually, it would be the perfect venue to express disappointment in council's actions and put pressure on them to keep their word.   

[GVLover]

16 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

Actually, it would be the perfect venue to express disappointment in council's actions and put pressure on them to keep their word.   

Absolutely, again I remain moderately confident this project will go through but we can definitely say goodbye to the convention center/museum/mixed-use development. Haha

[gman430]

14 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Actually, it would be the perfect venue to express disappointment in council's actions and put pressure on them to keep their word.   

Most citizens in the county unfortunately probably support killing this project due to the concern that it might raise taxes. Welcome to the south. 

[Spartan]

17 hours ago, CLT_sc said:

SAT scores are no indication of the quality of a universities’ education.  Carolina has the highest number of applications of any school in SC.    And, it is increasing SAT scores while also adding to incoming classes.  Actual SAT scores are approaching 1,300 for a class of 6,000... much more if you get into the business school.  And, a lot more for the honor’s college.  It has more ranked graduate programs than all other schools in SC combined.  

Wofford and Furman don’t have bridge programs to help manage SAT scores.  If you get into one of these schools, you are in the school.....not tri county tech.

Please stop making off-topic posts. Consider this your one and only warning. 

 

[GVLover]

7 hours ago, gman430 said:

Most citizens in the county unfortunately probably support killing this project due to the concern that it might raise taxes. Welcome to the south. 

Anecdotal, but I follow a few pages on Instagram and one notably, GVLToday, posted about this project and a considerable amount of people were against it because they believe that the county was spending +$1b on this project as opposed to a developer and wanted development spread more evenly across the county. An information campaign should be in place to counter such a narrative and to better explain the impact of this project and the impact if this project is not built. 

[vicupstate]

The tax revenue that this project would create is quite substantial. Without that added revenue, a tax increase is more likely than if the project isn't done. Now, gettting people to understand that is another matter. 

[CLT_sc]

1 hour ago, vicupstate said:

The tax revenue that this project would create is quite substantial. Without that added revenue, a tax increase is more likely than if the project isn't done. Now, gettting people to understand that is another matter. 

I would love to see the financials used to justify this project.  My feeling in reading about it is that under a very optimistic set of conditions, the project may make sense.  But, based on the variance and spread in anticipated costs, I don’t get a good sense that the county has fully stressed the numbers to arrive at a worse case scenario and may be building in robust assumptions  to make the numbers work. There seems to be a lot of inherent risks with this project.

The financials and assumptions would be interesting.

[gman430]

15 minutes ago, CLT_sc said:

I would love to see the financials used to justify this project.  My feeling in reading about it is that under a very optimistic set of conditions, the project may make sense.  But, based on the variance and spread in anticipated costs, I don’t get a good sense that the county has fully stressed the numbers to arrive at a worse case scenario and may be building in robust assumptions  to make the numbers work. There seems to be a lot of inherent risks with this project.

The financials and assumptions would be interesting.

I definitely don’t disagree with this assessment. What if this country slips into another recession and the project never gets fully built out? Who gets the foot the bill for the new office building? Oh wait...the taxpayer. 

[goodbye]

I personally don't really care for the proposed design of the public building(s), but otherwise, the plan to open a significant amount of prime land for private investment in one of the most attractive downtown environments in the state is a very sensible idea and will likely generate significant economic benefits.

[vicupstate]

Given the conservative makeup of the council, the long period of time it took to complete the  agreement and the  fact it was approved unimously, that lends doubt that the financials were  shakey or  pie-in-the-sky.   I am not privy to the specifics but even if I were, I am not in  a position to properly judge them.  According to Butch Kirvens' Op-Ed in the Journal, the state offices  were budgeted at $40mm.  That is more than what the Halton complex cost with about $7mm left over.  The numbers from Fant/Greenville News are a lot lower and seem unrealistic.  I would like to know where this discrepancy lies. 

Having followed politics at all levels for several decades, I can tell you that there could also be other things at play here.  Hidden agendas and vendettas, among other things have sidelined laws and projects before, in places I have lived or just followed closely.      

As for a recession, that would probably be the best thing that could happen to this project. In a recession construction companies hunker down, cut their profit margins, (sometimes to zero) just so they can  keep their people and weather the storm .   Given the County building and the infrastructure have to be built first,  before  land  can be sold to private buyers,  this could generate significant savings to the  County/RocaPoint.    Any  project that expects an 8 year building out should have accounted for a downturn sometime during that period in terms of sales as well.  Even if a recession interupted the full build out, that would not be any different than Riverplace. It stood half-completed for what, at least four years. It still was eventually completed and it has not been stigmatized.  RocaPoint is a big company and this isn't their first Rodeo.   

I would suggest everyone that wants more inforation and/or wants to see this project go forward go to the meeting on Tuesday and find out everything  you can.  The  height lovers can  advocate for higher height  maximums too, as that is one item directly covered.   I will be out of town of I would definitely be there. 

  

 

[goodbye]

28 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

Having followed politics at all levels for several decades, I can tell you that there could also be other things at play here.  Hidden agendas and vendettas, among other things have sidelined laws and projects before, in places I have lived or just followed closely.  

 

I cannot pretend to know what is motivating the dissension, but I do know Fant has a long history of sociopolitical activism in Greenville.

[CLT_sc]

5 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Given the conservative makeup of the council, the long period of time it took to complete the  agreement and the  fact it was approved unimously, that lends doubt that the financials were  shakey or  pie-in-the-sky.   I am not privy to the specifics but even if I were, I am not in  a position to properly judge them.  According to Butch Kirvens' Op-Ed in the Journal, the state offices  were budgeted at $40mm.  That is more than what the Halton complex cost with about $7mm left over.  The numbers from Fant/Greenville News are a lot lower and seem unrealistic.  I would like to know where this discrepancy lies. 

Having followed politics at all levels for several decades, I can tell you that there could also be other things at play here.  Hidden agendas and vendettas, among other things have sidelined laws and projects before, in places I have lived or just followed closely.      

As for a recession, that would probably be the best thing that could happen to this project. In a recession construction companies hunker down, cut their profit margins, (sometimes to zero) just so they can  keep their people and weather the storm .   Given the County building and the infrastructure have to be built first,  before  land  can be sold to private buyers,  this could generate significant savings to the  County/RocaPoint.    Any  project that expects an 8 year building out should have accounted for a downturn sometime during that period in terms of sales as well.  Even if a recession interupted the full build out, that would not be any different than Riverplace. It stood half-completed for what, at least four years. It still was eventually completed and it has not been stigmatized.  RocaPoint is a big company and this isn't their first Rodeo.   

I would suggest everyone that wants more inforation and/or wants to see this project go forward go to the meeting on Tuesday and find out everything  you can.  The  height lovers can  advocate for higher height  maximums too, as that is one item directly covered.   I will be out of town of I would definitely be there. 

  

 

I am not sure I would agree with your first sentence, there are many instances where public and private entities with a conservative slant made poor financial decisions.  It is very hard for financial professionals with years of experience to dissect a proforma with tiered financial structures.  And, with a 10 year build out, you are estimating interest rates, bond yields, land values and estimated office demand.  A shift in anyone of those drivers could vastly change the project’s financials.

I don’t expect many on council, if any, to understand all assumptions related ROI and the linked effect of various decisions. 

Understanding that along with the limited spread of estimates, no coalescence in numbers  and buying office buildings with a 75% premium over a couple of years makes me question this project.

[vicupstate]

Quote

And, with a 10 year build out, you are estimating interest rates, bond yields, land values and estimated office demand.  A shift in anyone of those drivers could vastly change the project’s financials.

It is much too soon for any of those  shifts to have happened. I believe a 10 year build out is not that uncommon either. 

Quote

Understanding that along with the limited spread of estimates, no coalescence in numbers  and buying office buildings with a 75% premium over a couple of years makes me question this project.

What are you referring to with limited spread of estimates and coalescence in numbers?   Not sure what you base 75% premium on. If the seller bought the building at a discount and is selling at market rate, that is not a premium, IMO.   The appraisal supports that  as well.  The county could and probably should have simply made a counter offer if it thought $33mm is too much. 

[PuppiesandKittens]

How come no anchor tenants have been announced for the site, other than government offices?

And is it really that great of a site?  If so, how did Bell Tower Mall fall almost immediately?  

[distortedlogic]

28 minutes ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

 

And is it really that great of a site?  If so, how did Bell Tower Mall fall almost immediately?  

I'm not "in the know," but you're talking about what, 40 years ago? Greenville and downtown are completely different places than they were then. The county population has nearly doubled since 1980, just for example. 

[PuppiesandKittens]

7 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

I'm not "in the know," but you're talking about what, 40 years ago? Greenville and downtown are completely different places than they were then. The county population has nearly doubled since 1980, just for example. 

Downtown in the 1970s certainly had a larger share of Greenville’s office and retail space than it does now (pre-office park and pre- Haywood and Woodruff Road days), and Greenville didn’t sprawl as much then as now.  

Downtown is much nicer now and has surely significantly increased its market share over the last 20 years, but I read articles from the 1960s, as Bell Tower was being conceived, and there were a lot of things said about what a game-changer it was and how it was such a huge asset for a revitalizing downtown.  And see how it turned out: dead within about 10 years.

If the site is so great then where are the anchor tenants clamoring to come?

I’d say that redevelopment of the ratty-looking blocks downtown west of Church Street would be much higher-profile.

Edited May 13, 2019 by PuppiesandKittens

[distortedlogic]

2 minutes ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

 

Downtown is much nicer now and has surely significantly increased its market share over the last 20 years, but I read articles from the 1960s, as Bell Tower was being conceived, and there were a lot of things said about what a game-changer it was and how it was such a huge asset for a revitalizing downtown.  And see how it turned out: dead within about 10 years.

Well that was before my time, but maybe it coming about around the same time as suburban flight was taking off was part of its decline, especially after Mccallister Square was built? I've read and heard downtown went pretty far downhill during that same time period, and was pretty undesirable for most. 

[Exile]

42 minutes ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

How come no anchor tenants have been announced for the site, other than government offices?

And is it really that great of a site?  If so, how did Bell Tower Mall fall almost immediately?  

I don't think BTM was very well-conceived, but--I've said this before, so I won't belabor it--I think its demise was hastened by GHS relocating to GMH. The lion's share of Greenville's medical community was within a mile or so of BTM, and then, fairly rapidly, it wasn't. Add to that Furman's on-campus stadium...yada yada.

One problem with the site--a problem the development concept doesn't solve--is that it lacks a substantial, connected east-west thoroughfare. It just kind of hangs there over Falls Park with Church street along its short edge. Connecting Univ Ridge to Dunbar might have solved it. Otherwise they'd have had to tear down houses and offices to connect it to Vardry, which has its own problems.

[PuppiesandKittens]

40 minutes ago, Exile said:

I don't think BTM was very well-conceived, but--I've said this before, so I won't belabor it--I think its demise was hastened by GHS relocating to GMH. The lion's share of Greenville's medical community was within a mile or so of BTM, and then, fairly rapidly, it wasn't. Add to that Furman's on-campus stadium...yada yada.

One problem with the site--a problem the development concept doesn't solve--is that it lacks a substantial, connected east-west thoroughfare. It just kind of hangs there over Falls Park with Church street along its short edge. Connecting Univ Ridge to Dunbar might have solved it. Otherwise they'd have had to tear down houses and offices to connect it to Vardry, which has its own problems.

Great points.  In my view the site is desirable only to the extent that it is seamlessly integrated into downtown (so that someone walking down Main Street will just keep walking through the site, not noticing a separation).  The site certainly isn’t highly visible from Church Street.  Nor is it highly visible from the West End for now.

 

 

[GvilleSC]

2 hours ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

Great points.  In my view the site is desirable only to the extent that it is seamlessly integrated into downtown (so that someone walking down Main Street will just keep walking through the site, not noticing a separation).  The site certainly isn’t highly visible from Church Street.  Nor is it highly visible from the West End for now.

 

Good points— The integration of the site with the street network and fabric of the West End is critical to a successful redevelopment. And also a huge difference between this attempt and BTM. From my limited information: Bell Tower Mall wanted to be a mall. This new attempt wants to be a part of an urban neighborhood / lifestyle. I’m really not sure how you compare the two. They really tried to achieve two drastically different things despite the language of the day. 

[vicupstate]

a redeveloped County Square is going to be primarily residential, office, hospitality, restaurants, bars and such. I don't see big box retail going here, or at least not much.  Some support retail I would expect. The shopping center comparisons and requirements really don't apply.  

[PuppiesandKittens]

Agreed, it won't be a shopping center, but have ANY retailers or office tenants signed letters of intent or the like?

[vicupstate]

1 hour ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

Agreed, it won't be a shopping center, but have ANY retailers or office tenants signed letters of intent or the like?

No, but it is way too early to expect them. the County office building has to be built first. The site can't be cleared, until that is done. At this point the PD zoning changes haven't even been done yet.   Bull Street Commons had supposedly 30 or 40 LOI early on and none of them except maybe REI panned out, and that is assuming they were in the original bunch, which is unknown.