The West End

[Gville2012]

Vegas style is right, yuck. I get the throwback vegas style but mixing it with a hotel name/logo I think pushes it too far. They should just pick one, the style or the name, having both at the same time kills the irony behind going retro vegas for me and just makes it look like a cheap motel sign.  I imagine it would be bright as heck too.  Tacky, makes me wonder who is behind the development.  What is the story with this place anyway? Its been sitting there seemingly ready to open for a long time.  It also looks like someone put some money into it too only to sit unused.

Ive been confused about this place too.... it looked as if it was unfitted for an opening of a bar/restaurant of sorts long ago then once completed just sat there.

[Greenville]

Wow, that Whiskey Hotel design is awful.  I wouldn't even want that in the suburbs, much less in the West End.  Hopefully the design gets shot down.

[GvilleSC]

The townhouses at the corner of Arlington and Mallard have started. Permits were issued earlier this month at $230,000 each. Another under utilized parcel bites the dust.

[gman430]

Still nothing on M West. Bids went out back in September. I'm thinking it's dead. And don't even get me started on Markley Row and Stadium Apartments. Those two likely died months ago. Yep, i've got financing alright...or not: http://www.upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/stadium-apartments-construction-set-spring/

 

However, it does look like Trey Cole's project is moving forward. Lots of new survey stakes and spray paint markings on site. 

Edited January 12, 2015 by gman430

[vicupstate]

The Main at River, old Green Monster' project was approved by city council.

 

http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/south-main-river-gets-council-ok/  

[Spes]

The Main at River, old Green Monster' project was approved by city council.

 

http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/south-main-river-gets-council-ok/  

It's unclear which proposed design they're reporting was approved of: the first or the second from the following application

 

http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2014/DECEMBER/DesignReviewBoard/12-04-2014/CA-14-288-702SouthMainStreet.pdf

[Gville2012]

It's unclear which proposed design they're reporting was approved of: the first or the second from the following application

 

http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2014/DECEMBER/DesignReviewBoard/12-04-2014/CA-14-288-702SouthMainStreet.pdf

Whoa - I don't remember seeing the updates. I hope it was the original design (as shown in the article). It also looks like the December submitted design looks to have much less residential.. maybe condos instead?

[Gville2012]

Those plans were the 2008 compromise that allowed the building to be demolished. It will be the design toward the bottom of the December DRB submission: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2015/01/15/main-river-project-fit-west-ends-history-future/21805655/

[btoy]

I was at the DRB hearing for this and more than one member of the committee made it clear that is the 2008 design were to come before them they would vote it down and they were very much against the mix of old and new.  More than one member spoke against trying to recreate the past and that architecture should be a reflection of the time in which it was built.

[sc smitty]

Just because a building represents the era in which it was built, doesn't mean it's good design to begin with.  Look at the Greenville News building.  Clearly modern for its time, it's pretty much universally hated now, and bound for demolition less than 50 years after being built. The current trend of lego block style architecture will similarly look dated and out of style in the same period of time.  I was also at that DRB meeting, and I would question several of the member's statements that architecture should be forward thinking, and never repeat the past.  Have they never heard of Greek revival or colonial revival architecture, or seen the current craftsman trend of many new neighborhoods today?  Plenty of public buildings and churches all around are using elements and forms of architecture that were used thousands of years ago. Sounds like the DRB could use a little education in architecture, rather than pushing their preference for the latest trend. 

Edited January 15, 2015 by sc smitty

[gman430]

This new design is MUCH better than the old one in my opinion. I'm glad to see the DRB and city be forward thinking.

[MAJIKMAN]

I see that there is a crew out today at River Walk drilling again. Is there anything imminent going to happen on that site.

[GvilleSC]

All of his projects are very well kept secrets and move very quickly once they become public, i.e. Riverwalk and Rivers Edge. Maybe we will see a DRB application within the next few months?

[MAJIKMAN]

Yeah I know thats how he works. That's why I asked. He must be real close to announcing something.

[GvilleSC]

There's essentially no reason to be drilling if they're not calculating structural loads and such for that site. I would say they're definitely moving forward with something and beyond the conceptual stage if they're looking for real data and paying for tests.

[ausrutherford]

Isn't the other half of riverwalk suppose to include a parking garage? 

[transplant08]

The townhouses at the corner of Arlington and Mallard have started. Permits were issued earlier this month at $230,000 each. Another under utilized parcel bites the dust.

foundation work has started

[goodbye]

All of his projects are very well kept secrets and move very quickly once they become public, i.e. Riverwalk and Rivers Edge. Maybe we will see a DRB application within the next few months?

As an outsider looking at the current economic climate, I would be surprised if Hughes decides to wait on this project.

Hopefully the second building at River and Broad will soon follow and that Centre Stage parking lot will "disappear."

[GvilleSC]

The question becomes: what will the building be? If there's no parking component, then it would have to be apartments or office. If parking is included, would we see condos or a mixture of these?

The impact of the Greenville News redevelopment is certainly a possible factor to the mix of uses and time table.

[apaladin]

In riding around the West End area today I realized that this area is barely in the city limits. The Greenville City limits are just ridiculously small.

[ausrutherford]

In riding around the West End area today I realized that this area is barely in the city limits. The Greenville City limits are just ridiculously small.

 

Welcome to SC annex laws

[MAJIKMAN]

The city is way larger than the actual boundary perceives it to be. Lots of people who come in to town wonder why the city limits are so lop-sided. I say it's partly the battle between special purpose districts and the annex laws. So cities have to fight that battle on two fronts. But I guess the city of Greenville has had some successful negotiations with a few of the neighboring districts. Now they only have to deal with the laws now. I think things will get better over time.

[B&R]

The added complication in Greenville's case is that the mill owners to the west of town didn't want to be annexed and pay higher taxes.  They wanted to run their own shows.  The only leverage city officials had was the water system and they just made deals with the mills for water supply.  

[MAJIKMAN]

That was true. Can't argue with that. But things are a lot more complex now. All of these things are discussed in another thread.

Edited January 31, 2015 by MAJIKMAN

[vicupstate]

http://www.greenvillesc.gov/PlanningZoning/PlanningApplications/Applications/2015/MARCH/DesignReviewBoard/03-05-2015/CA-14-360-WestfieldStreet.pdf

 

This has only gotten worse, IMO.