Jump to content

Is over gentrification killing the Pennisula?


monsoon

  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Is over gentrification killing the Pennisula?

    • No
      12
    • Yes
      7
    • Not sure
      2


Recommended Posts

Then that brings up the age old question - what is urban. Is urban high rises? Then a place like Panama City Beach or an edge city like Tysons Corner, VA is urban. Is urban high density? Then most of the peninsula of Charleston is urban which would be comparable in size to larger cities like Jacksonville, but in a more centralized manner.

Urban is street (including parking spaces), sidewalk, building, and parking behind the building or under it, with maybe a band of greenery between the sidewalk and the building and maybe a narrower band of greenery between the street and the sidewalk. The exception is parking garages, in which case it's street, narrow band, sidewalk, band, parking garage. No asphalt in your face, no sprawling strip mall or indoor mall surrounded by massive surface parking lots. Urban is pedestrians first, motorists second. It is greenspace well defined by the up-to-the-sidewalk buildings that surround the greenspace. It is wise use of land, not wasteful, automobile-oriented sprawl.

Sometimes I wonder why someone doesn't start a website called suburbanplanet.org for those who like a suburban setting where asphalt and automobile chrome are the visual focal points of their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sometimes I wonder why someone doesn't start a website called suburbanplanet.org for those who like a suburban setting where asphalt and automobile chrome are the visual focal points of their lives.

Ive done the urban, suburban and rural scene . The fact of the matter is, everyone should NOT be forced to live in one of these three settings. That is what makes this country great that you have a choice in what type of living setting you prefer to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a question of preserving architecture as many cities have managed to preserve architecture far older than what we have here yet build proper cities around this architecture. Charleston has failed to do this and instead, taken the path that most sunbelt cities have taken, and build nothing but automobile inspired development for most of the last 60 years. As a result, you have a historic downtown that is surrounded by sprawl that is characterized by multilane highways, no pedestrian activity, big box retail, cul de sacs, etc etc. ....you know the story.

So when you have a situation such as this, a very historic but very expensive part of the city surrounded by the type of development that is currently being built in Charleston, it becomes a museum. The place is cut off from the day to day lives of the inhabitants and it instead is a destination to be looked at, admired for what it once was, confused by many that it is a good city (forgetting that almost no one in the metro can live there), and never changing. Sure its worth preserving the architecture, but museum pieces don't make a living city.

Charleston was a huge opportunity lost.

However it does not have to remain that way. Removals of building restrictions and the construction of mass transit might go a long way to helping the city recover.

Good points! The topic is about gentrification, however, I agree that the preservation movement in Charleston is choking off the real growth of downtown. I have said in past threads that it will be weird to visit Charleston in 100 years and the construction of new buildings will mysteriously lack buildings from the late 20th century onward. I agree that the height restirctions are somewhat limiting. They seemto be loosening up on them though, since two new towers are planned adjacent to Marion Square in the heart of Downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a question of preserving architecture as many cities have managed to preserve architecture far older than what we have here yet build proper cities around this architecture. Charleston has failed to do this and instead, taken the path that most sunbelt cities have taken, and build nothing but automobile inspired development for most of the last 60 years. Charleston was a huge opportunity lost.

However it does not have to remain that way. Removals of building restrictions and the construction of mass transit might go a long way to helping the city recover.

I think your assessment of Charleston's growth over the last 60 years is spot on. But the answer isn't to destroy the integrity of the historic district in order to build highrises, etc. That area is simply too beautiful the way it is. Why destroy perfection, and if you tried to, trust me, a large majority of native Charlestonians would fight you tooth and nail. The answer is to expand the footprint of downtown Charleston. Have it extend up into the neck area. If it's possible to rehabilitate some of the area closest to downtown on the West Ashley side, make it more urban in nature, do that too. That seems to be the path Mayor Riley is dedicated to taking, and on this issue, I agree with him completely. There are many great cities that have older, low-rise areas that tend to be the artistic and cultural center of the city. This is what downtown Charleston could be. The 21st-Century business district could be a little further uptown. A little off-topic, but this is why I'm against Bobby Ginn's plans for his section of the Neck. He wants to build a golf course and vacation cottages. It's the totally wrong choice. That area should be used to help create a dense and very modern city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your assessment of Charleston's growth over the last 60 years is spot on. But the answer isn't to destroy the integrity of the historic district in order to build highrises, etc. That area is simply too beautiful the way it is. Why destroy perfection, and if you tried to, trust me, a large majority of native Charlestonians would fight you tooth and nail. The answer is to expand the footprint of downtown Charleston. Have it extend up into the neck area. If it's possible to rehabilitate some of the area closest to downtown on the West Ashley side, make it more urban in nature, do that too. That seems to be the path Mayor Riley is dedicated to taking, and on this issue, I agree with him completely. There are many great cities that have older, low-rise areas that tend to be the artistic and cultural center of the city. This is what downtown Charleston could be. The 21st-Century business district could be a little further uptown. A little off-topic, but this is why I'm against Bobby Ginn's plans for his section of the Neck. He wants to build a golf course and vacation cottages. It's the totally wrong choice. That area should be used to help create a dense and very modern city.

If you ask me, there are a few high-rises, or at least a couple, that Charleston needs to tear down because they are clinkers in the melody. Don't ask me to tell you which ones because I'm not familiar enough with what they are or where they are. I have just seen pictures that tell me the city needs to lose a few clinkers. And in person they stand out as inharmonious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you ask me, there are a few high-rises, or at least a couple, that Charleston needs to tear down because they are clinkers in the melody. Don't ask me to tell you which ones because I'm not familiar enough with what they are or where they are. I have just seen pictures that tell me the city needs to lose a few clinkers. And in person they stand out as inharmonious.

Off the top of my head: the Ashley House, the Riverview Hotel, the Howard Johnson Hotel, and the Sgt. Jasper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your assessment of Charleston's growth over the last 60 years is spot on. But the answer isn't to destroy the integrity of the historic district in order to build highrises, etc. That area is simply too beautiful the way it is. Why destroy perfection, and if you tried to, trust me, a large majority of native Charlestonians would fight you tooth and nail. The answer is to expand the footprint of downtown Charleston. Have it extend up into the neck area. If it's possible to rehabilitate some of the area closest to downtown on the West Ashley side, make it more urban in nature, do that too. That seems to be the path Mayor Riley is dedicated to taking, and on this issue, I agree with him completely. There are many great cities that have older, low-rise areas that tend to be the artistic and cultural center of the city. This is what downtown Charleston could be. The 21st-Century business district could be a little further uptown. A little off-topic, but this is why I'm against Bobby Ginn's plans for his section of the Neck. He wants to build a golf course and vacation cottages. It's the totally wrong choice. That area should be used to help create a dense and very modern city.

I couldn't agree more. I really hope Noisette and Magnolia will be catalysts in this regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off the top of my head: the Ashley House, the Riverview Hotel, the Howard Johnson Hotel, and the Sgt. Jasper.

Not Ashley House! That is my home! :rofl:

Seriously, this building is not beautiful but it is not nearly as bad as others. Besides, it is darker brick (which looks better than the light/tan brick) and was obviously built well to have withstood hurricanes for 40 years!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to The College of Charleston and lived downtown for years. Above Calhoun on Upper King when it was :shok: and :ph34r: That stretch has morphed from scary to funky and is on its way to plastic trendiness by now... Anyhow, from a tourism standpoint ,Charleston is a thriving gem. Socioeconomically the peninsula is an abject failure in planning a truly vital and authentic urban setting. Its quite sad when locals can't afford to live in the heart of what makes their city so special. I can't count the number people I know who have been forced off the peninsula because of rising real estate costs. The neighborhoods downtown are dominated by wealthy part timers who only come to town for Spoleto and leave their houses dark the rest of the year. Its a dead zone. A museum. The situation got so bad and the complaints from the few remaining residents got so loud that the City tinkered with passing an ordinance requiring habitation time for downtown sales but dropped it when the proposal did not pass the smell test. Its just too late to fix the problem now. Here and there bright spots occur. There was an article in this week's P&C about ION developing attractive affordable housing downtown through a partnership with the City but the program will never be comprehensive because the land is just too expensive. I can only hope that cities like Asheville and Savannah can learn from Charleston's mistakes before they sell out and lose the "soul" that makes historical cities so unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Miesian. It bugs me more everytime I go back to visit. Just seems to be such a waste. Hopefully some of the new infill projects will make a difference. One correction: I read about ION's downtown affordable housing partnership @ charlestoncitypaper.com not the P&C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I can only hope that cities like Asheville and Savannah can learn from Charleston's mistakes before they sell out and lose the "soul" that makes historical cities so unique.

Yep. Charleston is selling its soul. But its selling its soul because the "soul" of Downtown Charleston was one that has historically been the object of neglect anyway. So it comes as no surprise. I will say that I truly do miss the gem that was once Downtown Charleston. Yeah now its nice to finally see a lot of development, but at what cost. The cost is greater than the gain. Like many already said, the inhabitants, locals, and people that are real Charlestonians dont even get to live in the heart of the city that they call theirs. Before you know it DT will all be a bunch of College students and rich northerners. -_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Time to revive this one :)

The City of Charleston has estimated that the population of the peninsula has grown by over 2000 people, putting the total population of the peninsula at 36,433. Its good to see an upward trend, but lets also not forget that this is down from a high of somewhere near 50,000.

CenturyV.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its never going to be an impressive number given that 99% of downtown is built out. I think their approach is reasonable. Its a pretty standard way of making an educated guess about population change. Is it 100% accurate? Probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

We went to Charleston for the day during the week - the city was completely packed. Office workers, college students & of course tourists (such as ourselves). Having visited Charleston just a handful of times, I understand my perception might not be completely accurate - but Charleston appears very healthy, certainly not dying.

The reality - without the 150+ year architecture (or museum pieces going back to the early posts in this thread), Charleston isn't special. Obviously central Charleston will never be comparable to high growth sunbelt downtowns, but why is that a bad thing? If you want to call it gentrification (though historically the Peninsula has always been wealthy, only in the 100 years following the Civil War did it decline) - gentrify away!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charleston is not dying. Its very much alive and well. The origins of this thread are related to whether or not gentrification is driving out all of the residents, and "old Charleston" from downtown. By that, I mean that there are those who appreciated Charleston 20-30 years ago when it was more "Asheville" in terms of its shops and restaurants. The peninsula also held the majority of the city of Charleston's population until the 1990s. Both of these factors made Charleston a different place than it is today. Lets keep in mind that the wealthy part of Charleston is and has always been South of Broad. Today that appearance of wealth is spreading ever northward, and its impacts are noticeable.

Charleston will always have a soul that no other city can hope to achieve. The architecture, the history, and the people all play a role in that today. The only downside to the gentrification is that downtown has arguably become inaccessible for the average person to live in. Charleston needs to encourage and grow and urban environment where families can once again live and work downtown without being "forced" to live in the 'burbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • 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.