Morgan Square Redesign

[Spartan]

On 9/5/2023 at 12:09 PM, camtology said:

I think the designs could be made a little bit more interesting, I do at least like the new layout with the permanent stage and redone walkways, but I think the main problem with redesigning Morgan square is that if we want to make it permanently closed to traffic then the city needs to be working on these plans in conjunction with new or expanded transportation options for Spartanburg. I know this is somewhat the wrong thread to discuss this but if Morgan Square is going to become the earliest model of a carless area for Spartanburg they need to make sure that they think through it carefully

I think its a good compromise. Keep the ability to allow cars to circulate in case you need it (reduces risk of a permanent decision and having to undo).

[djh1963]

Now they want to possibly move the clock tower.

Spartanburg clock tower to possibly relocate (wyff4.com)

Why not just move the General again too?

and why do we have to learn about this from the Greenville news station? There is nothing in Goupstate or by WSPA, it is a sad comment when Greenville covers Spartanburg news better than our own news outlets.

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by djh1963

[Sparkleman]

Feels like a clown show downtown when it comes to Morgan Square.

Just leave it alone.

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Sparkleman

[mainonmain]

There is nothing special nor historic about that clock tower. There are better places for it, and certainly better uses for the dirt it currently sits on.

[westsider28]

The (original) clocks and bells are from circa-1881 (like the Daniel Morgan statue) and were in the Opera House at the west end of the Square until 1906 (25 years).  They moved to the Courthouse on Magnolia Street in 1907 until its demolition in 1958 (51 years).  They were in storage for 21 years.  The current clock tower was built in 1979 and located at East Main and Liberty.  It was moved to its current location in 1986, where's it's been for 37 years.  So the tower itself is 42 years old.

I wouldn't mind moving it to the Courthouse grounds, where the clocks and bells were for the longest period of time.  There will be plenty of space in front of the new courthouse, once the current one is demolished.  It would be an appropriate historic location.  I've never really liked the standalone clock tower's "small town" vibe.  And I love the idea of re-establishing the Square's sight lines and street wall all the way to DMA.

There's a pretty detailed summary of the plans on the City website.  The Square would be redone in two phases, with Phase 1 being the upper square.  It would cost ~$15M and would likely be funded with hospitality taxes primarily, and also some private donations.  A formal proposal for funding of Phase 1 is likely for Spring 2024.

Additionally, the City has been in discussion with SCDOT about the possibility of changing the surface of N Church St. to better match the Morgan Square pedestrian space. Along with creating a new protective median in the former turning lane into Morgan Square that would no longer be needed, the surface change would serve as a signal to motorists to slow down as they enter an area of increased pedestrian activity. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by westsider28

[mainonmain]

The original clocks and bells were removed from the clock tower several years ago. The clock in there now is a digital contraption.

[drexel]

6 hours ago, Sparkleman said:

Feels like a clown show downtown when it comes to Morgan Square.

Just leave it alone.

 

I agree. There are better projects to spend our TAX DOLLAR on. Just expand brick pavers across Main Street and construct a permanent covered stage. The clock tower looks great where it is.

[mainonmain]

That 1979 clock tower adds no value to downtown. The only idea better than moving it is to strap it with some dynamite and blow it up. 

[westsider28]

21 hours ago, mainonmain said:

The original clocks and bells were removed from the clock tower several years ago. The clock in there now is a digital contraption.

I know they replaced the clock faces (which were wooden and deteriorating), but I thought the bells were still original.

19 hours ago, mainonmain said:

That 1979 clock tower adds no value to downtown. The only idea better than moving it is to strap it with some dynamite and blow it up. 

While I'm not a fan of the tower either, this is a bit of a callous statement that ignores the attachment that many people have to it (particularly if they donated toward its construction many years ago).  I think moving it is a good compromise.

19 hours ago, drexel said:

I agree. There are better projects to spend our TAX DOLLAR on. Just expand brick pavers across Main Street and construct a permanent covered stage. The clock tower looks great where it is.

Can you explain why you think it looks great where it is?  Is it just because you're used to it?  Would it not look out of place with a potential 4-story+ development (taller than the clock tower) right next door on the H-J lot?  What value does it have in its current location?  People rarely spend time at the base of the tower, as it's in the middle of the road.  If it were in a more park-like setting in front of the Courthouse, people could hang out there, more easily read the plaque, and appreciate the history better, IMO.

[mainonmain]

1 hour ago, westsider28 said:

While I'm not a fan of the tower either, this is a bit of a callous statement that ignores the attachment that many people have to it (particularly if they donated toward its construction many years ago).  I think moving it is a good compromise.

People's attachment to things is important, but so are memories, and blowing that clock tower up would be a spectacle that people would remember forever.

[drexel]

5 hours ago, westsider28 said:

I know they replaced the clock faces (which were wooden and deteriorating), but I thought the bells were still original.

While I'm not a fan of the tower either, this is a bit of a callous statement that ignores the attachment that many people have to it (particularly if they donated toward its construction many years ago).  I think moving it is a good compromise.

Can you explain why you think it looks great where it is?  Is it just because you're used to it?  Would it not look out of place with a potential 4-story+ development (taller than the clock tower) right next door on the H-J lot?  What value does it have in its current location?  People rarely spend time at the base of the tower, as it's in the middle of the road.  If it were in a more park-like setting in front of the Courthouse, people could hang out there, more easily read the plaque, and appreciate the history better, IMO.

The clock tower gives downtown a welcoming feel especially driving or walking west to east. Have seen a lot of pretty sunsets looking toward the clock tower from Morgan Square.  The clock enhances that view. Maybe a new building on the H-J site would dwarf it; but wait until that happens.  Also, I believe we should make minimal changes to the square and spend part of the $15 million on adding  permanent seating and a larger stage to Barnett Park. Still leaving  a good portion of the grassy hill.  More concerts would bring in money and the improvements should pay back many times over.  The park is so under utilized. 

[mainonmain]

16 hours ago, drexel said:

the improvements should pay back many times over.  The park is so under utilized. 

So improvements in Barnet Park will pay for themselves but improvements to Morgan Square won't? You actually ever looked at the financials on concerts?

Also, a 1979 clock tower improves a sunset the same way stilt houses improve a beach or a mountain.

 

[djh1963]

How many concerts are actually going to be held on Morgan Square, once the new stadium is built? It will house more people and if you want a smaller venue then we do have Barnet Park. I agree bench seating there would be much more useful.

 

[djh1963]

I'm going to ask another question here. With the Core project coming and that whole area looking to be pedestrian friendly and the new courthouse plaza area, do we need to cut off traffic flow down Main Street.? The restaurant owners who wanted this are losing outdoor seating with this new design. We will lose our fountain for a splash pad we do not need. Do we think this is still necessary or does the City think it has gone too far down this path to turn back?

[drexel]

10 hours ago, mainonmain said:

So improvements in Barnet Park will pay for themselves but improvements to Morgan Square won't? You actually ever looked at the financials on concerts?

Also, a 1979 clock tower improves a sunset the same way stilt houses improve a beach or a mountain.

 

About 10 years ago Brad Paisley did not play at Barnett Park because the stage is too small. More concerts would bring more out of towners staying in our hotels and eating at our restaurants. A $15 million redo of Morgan Square gets rid of the fountain and a lot of trees that are less than 20 years old.  Yes the new stadium may be used for concerts. Of course that  involves temp seating and erecting a temp stage.  I personally do not care if the clock tower is 1979 (or 1879) .  Get rid of it and widen the road coming into downtown?

Edited December 16, 2023 by drexel

[Spartan]

IMO the clocktower is now a part of our history. Like it or not, it is a landmark. Keep the tower - but the location doesn't really matter but I would prefer it to be highly visible to pedestrians, so somewhere on the Square would make sense.

I will say too that I am not a fan of the clocktower architecture. It's a super bland style that was popular in the 70s/80s and it hasn't aged well. I wouldn't hate it if they put a different roof or other slight modifications to make it less boring... but if given the option of removing it entirely or  keeping it as is, I'll always say to keep it.

 

When you Google "spartanburg" images, the tower features prominently:

 

[mainonmain]

"When you Google "spartanburg" images, the tower features prominently"

Yes. And what an unfortunate thing that is. Even more reason to blow it to smithereens.

[westsider28]

On 12/15/2023 at 2:44 PM, djh1963 said:

I'm going to ask another question here. With the Core project coming and that whole area looking to be pedestrian friendly and the new courthouse plaza area, do we need to cut off traffic flow down Main Street.? The restaurant owners who wanted this are losing outdoor seating with this new design. We will lose our fountain for a splash pad we do not need. Do we think this is still necessary or does the City think it has gone too far down this path to turn back?

I'm confused by this statement.  The courthouse plaza and Project Core don't involve closing any additional streets (in fact, Library Street will reopen, and Project Core will have at least one new street).  All of downtown should be pedestrian friendly, though that doesn't always mean closing streets to cars.  But West Main has been closed to cars (open to people) for 3 years now, with overwhelmingly positive results, so I don't understand why people keep rehashing the closed/open debate still.

Also, what is people's obsession with the fountain now?  It's a tiny circular fountain that's not usable and just takes up space, vs a new splash pad that would be fun for kids to use and can be turned off to allow additional usable plaza space.  Far superior, IMO.

[Spartanburg Guy]

Have to say I’m not wild about this. I think the current configuration is great.

[djh1963]

I agree all of downtown should be pedestrian-friendly but we also should not cut off traffic flow down Main street. Yes, it as been closed for 3 years, and when it was originally closed it made sense but it should have been reopened when the covid crisis ended and people could eat inside again. That is my BIG problem with this.  Greenville has several pedestrian plazas but they are off to the side of Main Street not cutting it off in the middle of town. If this were on Broad Street  I would probably be more open to it. We have several splash pads in town already, do we really want wet children running all over the Square,  just looks like an accident waiting to happen.

 

 

Edited December 18, 2023 by djh1963

[gman430]

6 hours ago, Spartanburg Guy said:

Have to say I’m not wild about this. I think the current configuration is great.

Agreed. This is nothing more than a waste of taypayer dollars. There is NOTHING wrong with the current plaza area. 

[westsider28]

19 hours ago, djh1963 said:

I agree all of downtown should be pedestrian-friendly but we also should not cut off traffic flow down Main street. Yes, it as been closed for 3 years, and when it was originally closed it made sense but it should have been reopened when the covid crisis ended and people could eat inside again. That is my BIG problem with this.  Greenville has several pedestrian plazas but they are off to the side of Main Street not cutting it off in the middle of town. If this were on Broad Street  I would probably be more open to it. We have several splash pads in town already, do we really want wet children running all over the Square,  just looks like an accident waiting to happen.

The middle of town (Main Street) SHOULD be the place for pedestrians!  There's no reason we need cars on Main.  Make them go around, it's trivial for cars to go a longer distance.  Broad Street makes no sense for pedestrianization because it's "back of house".  Pedestrianization should be where the action is, where all the shops and restaurants are.  There's a reason that almost every "high street" / Main Street / shopping street in Europe is pedestrians-only.  Also, I think Main Street in Greenville should be pedestrianized too, so that's not a compelling alternate example.  As for splash pads, why limit a good thing?  You can choose whether or not to use it.

[mainonmain]

18 hours ago, gman430 said:

This is nothing more than a waste of taypayer dollars. 

Do you know what the funding source for this project is?

Pedestrianize Broad Street? So people can what? Safely walk from City Hall to the Square where they can be promptly run over by a car? The Square should be devoid of cars. Thankfully, it is and will remain so.

[djh1963]

6 hours ago, westsider28 said:

The middle of town (Main Street) SHOULD be the place for pedestrians!  There's no reason we need cars on Main.  Make them go around, it's trivial for cars to go a longer distance.  Broad Street makes no sense for pedestrianization because it's "back of house".  Pedestrianization should be where the action is, where all the shops and restaurants are.  There's a reason that almost every "high street" / Main Street / shopping street in Europe is pedestrians-only.  Also, I think Main Street in Greenville should be pedestrianized too, so that's not a compelling alternate example.  As for splash pads, why limit a good thing?  You can choose whether or not to use it.

We are obviously never going to agree on this. I can tell you I do not go downtown as much as I did before all this started. Oh, and Spartanburg is not in Europe where they have completely different lifestyles than Americans do.

[JonMere]

5 minutes ago, djh1963 said:

We are obviously never going to agree on this. I can tell you I do not go downtown as much as I did before all this started. Oh, and Spartanburg is not in Europe where they have completely different lifestyles than Americans do.

Right, Europeans are generally healthier, enjoy walking, having human-centric city centers, and an overall sense of safety from traffic. Keeping the squatted trucks and speed racer boys out of that part of downtown seems like a big plus to me.