ADVERTISEMENT

Renderings of Indoor Track Renovation

uscbeckham

Well-Known Member
Staff
Oct 22, 2001
60,764
116,420
113
39
Chapin, SC
Before:

2B-USC-Field-House-Aerial.jpg


After:

new-track-facilities-6-669x272.jpg

new-track-facilities-7.jpg


1512BAA4-E51B-184C-4BAD796133B825E9.jpg

15197C53-B200-C127-ABC454B1632035DF.jpg

15175E9F-0A92-5300-F67C7316954DAB4B.jpg
 
I like the way they have 'opened up' the southwest corner of the facility (directly across form the Athletic Village). This will 'connect' the two areas very nicely, imo.

Since the university has future plans to demolish the old 'Carolina Gardens' (formerly the Wales Garden) apartments, do you (Beckham or anyone else) know if that block will be transferred to the Athletic Department? The new South Campus Housing Plan indicated some different use of that area, but I don't think they specified housing, academic or service use.

Btw, the South Campus Housing Plan is on 'go' per the last BOT meeting. There appears, however, to be a concern from some nearby residents about students 'walking through' their neighborhoods. Hmmmm . . . . shades of the 1950's?
 
I like the way they have 'opened up' the southwest corner of the facility (directly across form the Athletic Village). This will 'connect' the two areas very nicely, imo.

Since the university has future plans to demolish the old 'Carolina Gardens' (formerly the Wales Garden) apartments, do you (Beckham or anyone else) know if that block will be transferred to the Athletic Department? The new South Campus Housing Plan indicated some different use of that area, but I don't think they specified housing, academic or service use.

Btw, the South Campus Housing Plan is on 'go' per the last BOT meeting. There appears, however, to be a concern from some nearby residents about students 'walking through' their neighborhoods. Hmmmm . . . . shades of the 1950's?
The south campus plan calls for Carolina Gardens to be torn down and replaced, along with Bates, Bates West, and Cliff. The 1,200 beds in the four facilities will be replaced with 4,000 in a massive south campus village.
 
What's the distance 1-lap around that track? 200M? The rendering looks like we have plenty of room to increase from 6 to 8-lanes, any chance of that happening and 'banking-railing' the turns instead of just 'building them up', as shown?
THIS facility (if increased to 8-lanes and fully-banked) could/probably would host many more invitationals and/or SEC conference championships.
Even if completed exactly as shown it's still a huge upgrade/improvement.
 
I like the way they have 'opened up' the southwest corner of the facility (directly across form the Athletic Village). This will 'connect' the two areas very nicely, imo.

Since the university has future plans to demolish the old 'Carolina Gardens' (formerly the Wales Garden) apartments, do you (Beckham or anyone else) know if that block will be transferred to the Athletic Department? The new South Campus Housing Plan indicated some different use of that area, but I don't think they specified housing, academic or service use.

Btw, the South Campus Housing Plan is on 'go' per the last BOT meeting. There appears, however, to be a concern from some nearby residents about students 'walking through' their neighborhoods. Hmmmm . . . . shades of the 1950's?
Where was Carolina Gardens? Was that across the streets from Bates and Bates West?
 
The south campus plan calls for Carolina Gardens to be torn down and replaced, along with Bates, Bates West, and Cliff. The 1,200 beds in the four facilities will be replaced with 4,000 in a massive south campus village.
The school or private?
 
School wants to work with a developer unless something has changed. I haven't read anything different on it.

http://www.thestate.com/news/local/education/article37232841.html

The two dorms/retail fronts on Lincoln are partnerships between the University and a developer.

Do you know how many developers have submitted proposals and what the closing date is to submit a proposal?
I've read stories that several lawsuits were filed this summer intended to reverse tax-abatements granted several other student-residential projects located within the Columbia city-limits amounting to millions of dollars over the 10-year abatement period granted prior to construction.
If successful those suits would have a material impact on any bid for this project and play real havoc with the financing supplied for those other four or five projects already funded and built, all of which relied on the agreements they signed with the City.
It seems bizarre to me that a government entity (city, county or state) could/would enter into ANY 'agreement' subsequently relied on by a developer and his lenders that might be ruled 'invalid' by a Judge. If THAT does happen you might see a WHOLE LOT of nothing happening for a while 'cause banks have recourse against their borrowers, while the investors who bought their 'bundled' securities have recourse against THEM if.when promised 'fixed' yields take a tumble ... they don't take kindly being lied to (or 'misled' - intentional or not) by the political entity granting the permits to build.
 
man I love track and field!

My father put himself through school at Mizzou running track and cross country on a full ride! First in our family to attend college

I wish it got more airtime outside of the olympics
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscbeckham
Do you know how many developers have submitted proposals and what the closing date is to submit a proposal?
I've read stories that several lawsuits were filed this summer intended to reverse tax-abatements granted several other student-residential projects located within the Columbia city-limits amounting to millions of dollars over the 10-year abatement period granted prior to construction.
If successful those suits would have a material impact on any bid for this project and play real havoc with the financing supplied for those other four or five projects already funded and built, all of which relied on the agreements they signed with the City.
It seems bizarre to me that a government entity (city, county or state) could/would enter into ANY 'agreement' subsequently relied on by a developer and his lenders that might be ruled 'invalid' by a Judge. If THAT does happen you might see a WHOLE LOT of nothing happening for a while 'cause banks have recourse against their borrowers, while the investors who bought their 'bundled' securities have recourse against THEM if.when promised 'fixed' yields take a tumble ... they don't take kindly being lied to (or 'misled' - intentional or not) by the political entity granting the permits to build.
Not sure, but those projects were wrongly given tax incentives. Those were all 100% private. The private developments of late include Greene Crossing, The Station at Five Points, Park Place, and Pulaski Square. I don't know which ones were given the incentives, but the city definitely messed up. What else is new?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT