Jump to content

The Gateway Site

gs3

By gs3
in Greenville

 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 946
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

btoy
btoy

sure between now and then you will tell us this project is dead at least 5 times.

distortedlogic
distortedlogic

Some hotel rooms on site sounds like a no brainer here with the well next door. It wouldn't have to be hundreds of rooms but even a few dozen seems like it should be automatic with this development. 

gman430
gman430

As of August 26, 2022, this project is transitioning into the design development phase. Construction slated to start in July 2023. 

Posted Images

gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)

I like it also. I imagine the materials, colors, architectural fin, and step-backs will really help with breaking up the boxy look of the building. Definitely the best proposal for the site so far either way. This proposal for example would have been a travesty for such a prime site downtown: 

https://www.wyff4.com/article/pictures-plans-for-new-downtown-greenville-apartment-complex/6967752

Hopefully the Canal Insurance buildings next door get sold off eventually. Not sure what the hold up is with putting them up for sale. :dontknow: 

Edited by gman430
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewlyUpstate Hamlet

NewlyUpstate

Posted
Posted (edited)

Still waiting to hear more about the old Canal building on stone as well...

But on topic. Yeah I think the massing is a big improvement. I like the rounded commercial with the balconies on residential. I think there's enough there to make it interesting enough with materials and color.

Edited by NewlyUpstate
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted (edited)

So here are the massing renderings from Feb with similar views from the more detailed renderings this week:

IMG_0983.thumb.webp.ca8e0cacafdbaac948b23e4322645850.webp.6ea26938bb03edf2435a5b69e2adf2b1.webp

 

image.png.544d6aaebe981aa95a14b7f4ce3a2c91.png

 

image.jpeg.ff0a9b8e1c9db6accf9790bfd1077e1b.jpeg

 

image.png.4338fa501e3e5a2360803ddb9be531ba.png

 

The newer details help a little (tiny bit), but the massing is still basically the same. It's a big wall. It's hard to make a wall look nice. As I said, it wouldn't take much to make it look way nicer; have a couple of step ins on the sides to break up the wall effect and put a penthouse on top or something to break up the roofline. I guess that little "fin" is an attempt to break it up but that ain't doing it.

 

image.png.62218bacd6fa2f66a9a460e2e055d088.png

 

There is just no way to make a building that wide and that flat at the top look like anything other than a box. We already have too many boxes in Greenville IMO. I mean wouldn't it be really easy (and no real extra cost) to take about 6 floors off one of the corners and move those appts to the top of the middle of the building? Something like that would greatly  reduce the boxiness of the building and give the "roofline" 3 layers of height... bingo, no more box. Heck, that would also give Greenville a new tallest. I can't be that difficult to make it look decent.

 

 

Edited by distortedlogic
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spero Whistle-Stop

Spero

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, distortedlogic said:

There is just no way to make a building that wide and that flat at the top look like anything other than a box. We already have too many boxes in Greenville IMO. I mean wouldn't it be really easy (and no real extra cost) to take about 6 floors off one of the corners and move those appts to the top of the middle of the building? Something like that would greatly  reduce the boxiness of the building and give the "roofline" 3 layers of height... bingo, no more box. Heck, that would also give Greenville a new tallest. I can't be that difficult to make it look decent.

 

 

Counterpoint: who gives a crap. Whatever it takes them to get shovels in the dirt faster, do it. Rubber stamp every application. No need to look a gift horse in the mouth

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Spero said:

Counterpoint: who gives a crap. Whatever it takes them to get shovels in the dirt faster, do it. Rubber stamp every application. No need to look a gift horse in the mouth

I tend to agree. Doesn’t look any more boxy or wider than Deca at Camperdown which I think looks fine. Nitpicking about little things like how boxy the building looks when in my opinion it doesn’t even look that boxy to begin with especially when the site has been empty for almost 30 years is silly.  The developer has financing and this is the best proposal for the site that has ever been proposed so I say build it. It has good height and pedestrian realm aspects which is what this site deserves. 

Edited by gman430
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Spero said:

Counterpoint: who gives a crap. Whatever it takes them to get shovels in the dirt faster, do it. Rubber stamp every application. No need to look a gift horse in the mouth

Like I've said before; does it matter at the end of the day? No. But then there's no point of having a forum to discuss opinions if we're just going to take that approach with everything. Why a have a DRB or development codes or any of that if we're just going to say "whatever is fine as long as it gets built"?

 

Certainly way better than a 27 year old rotting fence, but as long as we're building, why not make it as nice looking as possible?

1 hour ago, gman430 said:

I tend to agree. Doesn’t look any more boxy or wider than Deca at Camperdown which I think looks fine. Nitpicking about little things like how boxy the building looks when in my opinion it doesn’t even look that boxy to begin with especially when the site has been empty for almost 30 years is silly.  The developer has financing and this is the best proposal for the site that has ever been proposed so I say build it. It has good height and pedestrian realm aspects which is what this site deserves. 

I agree with every word of this except your second sentence. Part of the reason I think it's worth nitpicking is exactly because it's been 27 years and this one of the most prominent spots in Greenville. Isn't the project worth a few extra details that would be minor in the grand scheme but have big impacts on how the building presents? Again; it wouldn't take much at all to tweak the massing a bit to break up the wall and box effect.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
vicupstate Metropolitan Area

vicupstate

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, gman430 said:

Deferred. LOL. Gotta love the DRB. I wish this state would outlaw them like North Carolina has done. 

That's news to me, although it wouldn't surprise me. 

North Carolina is turning into another Mississippi. The very things that made it so much more successful than other southern states are slowly being reversed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman Hamlet

gman

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, gman430 said:

Deferred. LOL. Gotta love the DRB. I wish this state would outlaw them like North Carolina has done. 

I don't think DRB's are outlawed in N.C., at least not in most growing cities. In fact, the Design Review Committee in Asheville is very active. https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/city-clerk/boards-and-commissions/design-review-committee/

Edited by gman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, gman430 said:

Deferred. LOL. Gotta love the DRB. I wish this state would outlaw them like North Carolina has done. 

Doesn't seem like a big deal to me; sounds like the board just wants to review all the plans at the same time; nothing wrong with that.

https://upstatebusinessjournal.com/square-feet/gracie-plaza-site-plans-deferred-greenville-design-review-board/

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)

It got taller. :shok: 30 stories now. Around 303 feet tall and that doesn’t include the architectural feature on top. Before it was 26 stories and 277 feet without including the architectural feature on top. Around 338 feet tall to the top of the architectural feature which is 38 feet taller than previously: 

https://www.greenvillesc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/27668/24-171-PUBLIC-POSTING-250-N-Church-Street_MAY-2024

Edited by gman430
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horatio Nelson Unincorporated Area

Horatio Nelson

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, gman430 said:

It got taller. :shok: 30 stories now. Around 303 feet tall and that doesn’t include the architectural feature on top. Before it was 26 stories and 277 feet without including the architectural feature on top. Around 338 feet tall to the top of the architectural feature: 

https://www.greenvillesc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/27668/24-171-PUBLIC-POSTING-250-N-Church-Street_MAY-2024

Wouldn't that make that taller than the windstream/landmark building? On the skyline context slide they look about even, but I'm not sure of the ground height difference between the two sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Horatio Nelson said:

Wouldn't that make that taller than the windstream/landmark building? On the skyline context slide they look about even, but I'm not sure of the ground height difference between the two sites.

Landmark building is 305 feet tall so this building would literally be exactly as tall with just including the actual floors. It’s a new city tallest and only a little over twelve feet shorter than a new state’s tallest if you’re including the architectural element on top. 

Edited by gman430
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah this breaks up the "wall effect" that the previous massing had and is far superior in that regard; now the materials will be key.

So yes; at 338 ft tall this would be a new city tallest. The shorter side of the Daniel Building is 305, but the taller side is 325 so this would still beat it by 13 ft, and only our second building of 300+. That would have a huge impact driving into town.

image.jpeg.aea3900900062cfdca8ce9c0791e2eff.jpeg

Edited by distortedlogic
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
distortedlogic Town

distortedlogic

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2024 at 1:12 AM, gman430 said:

Should just go ahead and make it a few feet taller so it becomes a new city tallest. Lol. 

 

Prophetic? 😁

So the original had the plans for 2 buildings with the taller one 180ft, then changed to one building of 299 ft, now 337ft; almost twice as tall as the original proposal.  I like the trend:D! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gman430 Megalopolis

gman430

Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

Prophetic? 😁

So the original had the plans for 2 buildings with the taller one 180ft, then changed to one building of 299 ft, now 337ft; almost twice as tall as the original proposal.  I like the trend:D! 

 

If it works: Should just go ahead and make it 350 feet so it’s a new state’s tallest. :D 
 

Hopefully the DRB is okay with the height. 

Edited by gman430
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
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.