The Gateway Site

[gman430]

Something like this which is currently under construction in Boise would be really nice for the site: https://www.livearthurboise.com Mostly glass high rise apartment building with a non-flat roof and 26 stories tall. 

I don’t know why architects around here have such a hard time designing good looking buildings for our downtown. It’s not THAT hard. 

Edited February 28 by gman430

[gman430]

@distortedlogic It doesn’t sound like the architectural plans are fully complete yet as that portion along with materials and colors isn’t slated to go to the DRB until August. Parking deck will be fully above ground also.
 

 

They now have financing for the entire project secured through Walker & Dunlop which is great to see: 

https://upstatebusinessjournal.com/square-feet/greenville-gateway-development-gets-a-25-story-single-tower-redesign/

The new site plans are tentatively scheduled to be reviewed by the Design Review Board April 18. If approved, the developers will then submit the project’s architectural designs for the board to review. If everything goes as scheduled, these plans could potentially go before the board in August 2024. 

Jeremy Pino, senior director at the project’s financing partner Walker & Dunlop, said construction for the project is hoped begin in the first quarter of 2025. 

Edited February 29 by gman430

[distortedlogic]

We'll see gman. I just wonder how much difference those details would make with this latest proposal.  I'm not sure how it could be anymore than lipstick on a pig. This building looks like a 60s brutalist monstrosity.  I don't think this is what we want to be the first thing that people will see driving in. 

I just don't understand why architects can't do better in Greenville. 

Here's the old one for comparison 

Edited February 29 by distortedlogic

[GvilleSC]

I’m not saying it’s going to turn out great, but for perspective:  if you stripped all of the variations in brick, stucco, panels, railings, and glass off of Deca, you’d have the same exact vibe. The architects should have strictly shown the mass, and not the openings, IMO. The facade is ultimately going to come down to what the developer can afford. Let’s hope it’s a lot, but I’m not convinced based on their last proposal. 

Edited February 29 by GvilleSC

[hauntedheadnc]

5 hours ago, distortedlogic said:

We'll see gman. I just wonder how much difference those details would make with this latest proposal.  I'm not sure how it could be anymore than lipstick on a pig. This building looks like a 60s brutalist monstrosity.  I don't think this is what we want to be the first thing that people will see driving in. 

Giving that architectural element to the right, the part that sticks up the tallest, a good pop of color, a mural, or some neon, would go a long way toward making this less boring.  If that thing was bright red, blue, or green, multicolored, or if it had a mural of something like a flowering vine, or if there were colorful neon strips, it would really stand out with just that one part decorated.

Edited February 29 by hauntedheadnc

[gman430]

A few more renderings below (sorry for the angles and quality) to give everybody a feel for the size and scale of the proposed building:

Edited February 29 by gman430

[distortedlogic]

If we're going modern, how about something like one of these:

 

 

It's not that hard to make a building look decent... the one they have isn't it.

[btoy]

They went to one building from two due to the costs and you really think then they can afford to making it all wavy looking?  Construction costs are at all time highs, you are not going to see some artistic wet dream, it is not a realistic expectation.  Regardless, its a massing study, I'll reserve judgement until they have submitted elevations.

[gman430]

27 minutes ago, btoy said:

They went to one building from two due to the costs and you really think then they can afford to making it all wavy looking?  Construction costs are at all time highs, you are not going to see some artistic wet dream, it is not a realistic expectation.  Regardless, its a massing study, I'll reserve judgement until they have submitted elevations.

Agreed. Just look at how much the new parking garage at GSP is costing for proof. And I don’t even like that wavy looking building. Looks like something that belongs in Miami not Greenville.  Something like the Boise building I posted would be much better if affordable for the developer IMO. If not, then hopefully the materials and colors used help offset the boxy and wide nature of the proposed building.

Edited March 1 by gman430

[distortedlogic]

26 minutes ago, btoy said:

They went to one building from two due to the costs and you really think then they can afford to making it all wavy looking?  Construction costs are at all time highs, you are not going to see some artistic wet dream, it is not a realistic expectation.  Regardless, its a massing study, I'll reserve judgement until they have submitted elevations.

I get it but new buildings don't have to be ugly boxes; plenty of other projects around the country going up now, and even others in Greenville have some attractive features and creativity. It doesn't take a lot of money to  avoid lazy architecture. We'll definitely have to wait to see the details of this but the massing part of is not appealing IMO. This particular project is literally the gateway into DT and a double size Scott Towers isn't a very good first image.

It's fine if you guys don't like the wavy building; I am not lobbying for those; just giving some examples of similar size buildings that don't have to be vertical walls. We already have that look with Decca and The Cinder Block hotel.

The Camperdown looks like 3 boxes stacked on top of each other. I know I am critical of a lot of the architecture in Greenville but I think it's warranted. Other peer cities have their stinkers too but they can manage to get attractive looking high rises in an expensive economy.

Edited March 1 by distortedlogic

[distortedlogic]

17 minutes ago, gman430 said:

Agreed. Just look at how much the new parking garage at GSP is costing for proof. And I don’t even like that wavy looking building. Looks like something that belongs in Miami not Greenville.  Something like the Boise building I posted would be much better if affordable for the developer IMO. If not, then hopefully the materials and colors used help offset the boxy and wide nature of the proposed building.

That's all I'm saying; it doesn't take a whole lot make a project look nice. The massing we see in those renderings are going to be hard to work with IMO because it is too wide; thus the wall look. Buildings should not look like walls. Putting details and colors on a wall is still a wall.

[gman430]

Greenville isn’t alone: 

Edited March 1 by gman430

[gman430]

It’s going to be a beautiful building.  

“We really tried to do something that is very sculptural and dramatic that will be really beautiful at night in the way its illuminated,” Johnston said

https://www.wspa.com/news/local-news/former-greenville-auditorium-site-to-become-gracie-plaza/

[gman430]

DRB signs now up on site. Agenda will be posted tomorrow. 

[gman430]

A little over 277 feet tall to the roof line and a little over 299 feet tall to the top of the decorative architectural fin:

https://www.greenvillesc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/27109/24-171-PUBLIC-POSTING-250-N-Church-Street

 

View looking south on Main Street from Stone Avenue: 

Edited April 3 by gman430

[gman430]

So no thoughts or opinions? Dang…this forum is depressing.  

[Trey Cole]

Thanks for all the info! Hope it gets built!

[distortedlogic]

Come on now, they gotta add 8 inches to this thing... 299 ft 4 inches... really?

So when do the attractive decorative renderings come out?

[gman430]

33 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

Come on now, they gotta add 8 inches to this thing... 299 ft 4 inches... really?

So when do the attractive decorative renderings come out?

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

Expect to see the full material and color renderings in July or August. 

[hauntedheadnc]

Well, on the one hand it's still Big Boxy Betty McLaren's big sister Beatrice.  On the other, I like the optical illusion of a tilt that those balconies create, and I love the idea of a sculpture garden -- although I'm going to reserve judgment until I see whether the sculptures themselves are actually meaningful in some way, or if they're of the pointless "Look, here's some art!" corporate modernist style.  

[GvilleSC]

From a massing perspective, I think they're going in a good direction with the base of the building. I like the curvature of the elements at street level. Materiality will play a big part, so I look forward to seeing more on that front. I'm encouraged by the restaurant space, creative studios, and commercial elements. This could be a big step in the right direction, but that will remain to be seen by who they attract to fill those spaces. 

 

[deltad22]

I am trying to be positive, but its just a box.  Might as well just name it Towers West.  Just once I would like for a developer to develop a signature building for Greenville.    

[rabbit seisin]

Agree with others who feel that this looks a little uninspired. However it's an improvement (imo) over the previous two-building design. 

I'll be the forum nutjob and suggest they build a 300 foot tower in gothic revival, in homage to the adjacent Christ Church Episcopal. If you don't think it can be done, google "cathedral of learning Pittsburgh" and jog your imagination. 

[GvilleSC]

Regarding the comments about design: you've got to remember what this is, and compare it to similar case studies. It's an apartment building.  It is not an office building for a fortune 500 company or corporate HQ. It is not multi-million dollar condominiums in Manhattan. It is not being funded by a university's endowment. Nor are we time traveling to 100 years ago.

A developer is interested in a site in Greenville, South Carolina in 2024. They've got to charge rent that will get leases signed, and adequately cover their investment and expected returns. As a result, they can set their budget for the building and build what that allows. 

[motonenterprises]

I like it.