Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it's ok to make demands as a city to make the aesthetic better but I also believe that Columbia has made and continues to make mistakes in what they demand from developers.
1. Insisting that The Hub preserve some of the original "dirty brown cement" color original to the building as it was constructed. That left those design engineers in a difficult place. While I agreed that the splashes of color they originally wanted to do was too much, I see no reason why they wouldn't have allowed the entire building to be the lighter gray color they painted parts of it.
2. Insistence on preserving architectural design of the old Mcrory Dollar building. I personally believe that this move delayed the sell of this building for a long time because although it looks nicer now than it did as an abandoned building, in my humble opinion there was no reason to "save" the design asthetic of this building.
3. Same with the Tapp's building. By "preserving" it's look you've limited what it can be. Now, the non condo part of the building has to pretty much be donated space just to have it occupied. This is prime real estate and this preservation (despite the existence of many condos) now just looks like an empty shell of an old store being "forced ' to remain on Main. Why preserve an old shut down store. Too late now because of the condos but what if an office tower could have been built there fifteen years ago. Could have livened up that side of Main and spurned more development.
4. Height restriction in the vista. I know this is a controversial topic on here because many people love what the vista is and what they are doing to maintain a certain feel but just because developers come in and pepper the area with taller buildings doesn't actually take away from the appeal of what was originally there. Look at Greenville's mix of building development. The existence of newer buildings brings PEOPLE! Had this area been open to taller construction it might feel less segmented now and main street area and vista just bleed into each other helping both areas(.my opinion)
I actually LOVE Columbia so I hope this doesn't come across like I don't but as it pertains to what was written here I just think that the issue isn't that Columbia has the nerve to insist on certain design that are better for the area... I believe it's fine to make some demands. I think the problem is the choices they make... you have people willing to develop and want to have an appealing space with the millions they are spending. They have design architects who take into account the area they are developing and I feel that many times Columbia gets involved and the development just gets more and more bland until they approve it.
To clarify, I'm not saying that I agree with every single decision the city has made when it comes to approving or denying development. Some of these examples represent the 'baby steps' the city is taking when it comes to deciding what leaders want the cityscape to look like in the future; sorting the priorities can sometimes be a trial and error type of thing. But at this point, I don't see where the whole "the sky is falling" mentality is coming from and I believe it's quite unjustified.
Conspiracy theory time. USC derailed plans for the original developer(ie Shadow Study) so they can get the land.
Is it a conspiracy theory if it's obviously true? I actually think USC had not really considered the impact of private development on Main Street before the threat of an outside influence- the developers from Memphis- threatened to interrupt the prescribed style of campus buildings. Russ Meekins' son is a friend of a friend on Facebook and responded to a story about Sandy's closing with a characterization of Icon on Main as "shoddy construction". No doubt that's the way USC viewed the building from an institutional perspective.
And if USC keeps swallowing prime downtown land and taking it off the property tax rolls . Columbia will eventually have no choice but to swallow forest acres and cayce
And if USC keeps swallowing prime downtown land and taking it off the property tax rolls . Columbia will eventually have no choice but to swallow forest acres and cayce
If they could do that, why haven't they done so already? I'm just curious. I thought that's what Columbia has wanted all along.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
