"We don't want to become another Atlanta"

[GvilleSC]

There is a lot of growth occuring in Powdersville, which is in Anderson County, just south of the Greenville County line. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Anderson added back sometime in the not so distant future, because of commuting patterns. There's no doubt that the people moving here are a direct result of Greenville-- their location there is all of 10 minutes from downtown. (by the way, this was one of the options for a new baseball team...)

Just something interesting, that one of Greenville's larger and fastest growing suburbs is located partially in Spartanburg County...

I'd say it's all one big area- the Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson area. To take Spartanburg and Anderson Counties away from Greenville dramatically misrepresents what's really going on up here.

[distortedlogic]

Absolutely! MSAs, like many other numbers, are misleading, based on commuting patterns, not actual economical ties. The only reason Sptbg and Anderson counties are not included with Greenville is because they happen to include pretty healthy cities of their own that keep enough people there to work. The fact that these neighboring counties are healthy enough to be more than bedroom counties, actually makes Greenville MSA look smaller, since their numbers are not included. This is a rare event, health actually makes an MSA smaller! Again we see where numbers do not tell the whole story. Anderson and Sptbg are undeniably part of the Gville MSA, I challenge anyone to drive I-85 or US 29 from Anderson to Sptbg and tell me they do not see the interconnection between the three. Cola has all of its surrounding counties in it's MSA, but then there are none with pricipal cities healty enough in their own right to prevent commuting, thus influencing the MSA designations. This is not a superiority statement, merely factual. Just these three counties combined have a pop of 850,000. There is no other such area the state, period!

[krazeeboi]

In other words, the Upstate is more multi-nodal in nature, and thus decentralized, than the other metros. I agree. This can be advantageous in some instances, and disadvantageous in others. At any rate, at least the CSA reflects the interconnectivity of the regional nodes.

[krazeeboi]

If everyone is clamouring to not become Atlanta, I've yet to hear those people exclaim they want to be New York City, San Francisco or even Portland (if people realized what the cost of living was there).

Although I see your point (and it is a good one), I think Portland's COL factor, especially as it has been attributed to the urban growth boundary, has been a little overblown.

[teshadoh]

Although I see your point (and it is a good one), I think Portland's COL factor, especially as it has been attributed to the urban growth boundary, has been a little overblown.

True - there are other factors that have contributed to Portland's cost of living, as well as it's economy. But there is a general rule in all cities that densify further - land value increases.

[kayman]

I think its on the radar of the local governments, but the problem there is regional cooperation. The Legislature couldn't even buy a clue, since they're letting McConnell funnel all of the taxpayers' money to his pet project under the table. We have one of the most anti-city Legislatures in the nation. I just don't understand why we continue to elect these backwards-looking morons instead of people with true vision and foresight.

You are right my friend ONE of the most anti-city, but Alabama takes the cake of being the most anti-city and anti-urbanism. At least SC General Assembly allows your counties to have full home rule. Hell, most counties in AL except Jefferson & Shelby (both part of Metro B'ham), Mobile, Madison, Montgomery, and Lee counties are the only ones in the state that allows home rule (it's limited at that). According to Alabama state legislature, we are not allow full home rule because OUR counties can't be trusted with property tax regulation.

I believe what you guys need to do is primarily get the legislators from The Upstate to lobby for improvement in mass transit there. From there if it's successful in The Upstate then allow it to be improved statewide.

[krazeeboi]

I find it interesting how SC and Alabama are in the same boat on many issues. Thanks for providing perspective.

[g-man430]

What are we doing about our sprawl problems? Absolutely nothing, it seems like.

[krazeeboi]

Well, one thing I was going to mention, on a positive note, was the big infill projects occurring in our Big Three: Verdae in Greenville (the largest of the three), Noisette in Charleston, and the Bull Street campus in Columbia. All three are giving residents intown choices as opposed to sprawling subdivisions. My biggest concern with them, though, is affordability. You want people of all income levels to have a chance to get an urban experience, and not simply those with the heaviest pockets. I'm also hoping the architecture will be quality and won't look run down in 10 years.

[waccamatt]

I agree with Krazee; there must be affordable in-town housing to go along with the luxury accomodations. One way that Columbia is tying to level the playing field is to make low interest loans availble to low and moderate income folks, which greatly increases the value of home they can qualify for. Maybe the city could find a way to offer property tax breaks to homeowners in developments which offer a certain percentage of in-town low and moderate income homes.

[Spartan]

I think generally this subject isn't on the radar screen on the governments of any of the big 3 metros in SC, and certainly it isn't on the agende in the SC Legislature. The Legislature feels that any growth, no matter how bad is good. If they continue to have their way all of SC will be covered in Walmarts, McDonalds, and freeway exits.

Its on the radar screen of more people than you think. It is an issue of concern in the Upstate, since we are headed in that direction quickly.

Sometimes I wonder if everybody is really against "becoming another Atlanta" like they say they are. So many cities in the south compare themselves to Atlanta, and work incessantly on trying to compete with it; Charlotte is an example. I understand that they mean they want the positives and exposure atlanta has, but not the sprawl, traffic, pollution, ect. But you ALWAYS have to take the good WITH the bad in anything. Another example is how Spartanburg leaders have recently remarked that they do not want to become Greenville, yet so many of their actions and plans model those of Greenville with an aim to at least comete with it. Thus, essentially making it become another Greenville.

We at urban planet spend vasts amount of time debating on which of our big 3 or 4 has the most traffic, highrises, condos, hotels, population, etc, etc, etc. I have a hard time believing at least some of this isn't because we all want ours to be the "biggest or best." All these attributes are ones that we debate about and somehow give each of us a sense that our city is preferable. Aren't these the same attributes that Atlanta has, mostly to a greater degree than our cities? If these attributes are not ones we want, why do we spend so much time debating them and trying to make other's see that we are right?

Its true that Spartanburg's leaders say that they don't want us to become the next Greenville, but the real trueth is that they are doing nothing to prevent it from happening. Suburban growth is inevitable, but they have done nothing that I can see to make it happen in an organized way. IMO, Spartanburg is probably the least progressive of the larger cities in the state. I look at Boiling Springs and Roebuck as examples of this. Just drive down E Black Stock Rd. Its pretty digusting.

The other 3 cities have large scale urban redevelopment projects underway or in their plan. This cannot offset the suburban growth, but I think providing alternatives for people is a vital step in preventing the sprawl patter on Atlanta, or even Charlotte. They are also working on improving mass transit, which is something Atlanta has failed in miserably. Right now mass transit is not an issue, but if the urban projects that are being planned are to be sucessful, they will need a good and reliable mass transit system.

I think the real failures in this state are largely in the suburban areas. These places are usually in counties with little incentive or desire to control growth, as they want the money. It wil take a concerted statewide effort to make any real change. You have to make the playing field level accross the board or else nobody will play.

[krazeeboi]

I think the real failures in this state are largely in the suburban areas. These places are usually in counties with little incentive or desire to control growth, as they want the money. It wil take a concerted statewide effort to make any real change. You have to make the playing field level accross the board or else nobody will play.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. The suburban counties want to funnel more money into their coffers, so Kershaw County doesn't have a problem with a big sprawling subdivision at the edge of the county. And if you talk about manageable and sustainable growth, they say "Why should Richland and Lexington get all the dough?" The one big problem our cities/counties has is the inability to say "NO."

If it will take a concerted statewide effort, then I definitely will not hold my breath on that one. Current legislation doesn't even allow cities to capture most new growth as to better manage it, so until the state is more city-friendly, I don't see it becoming region-friendly anytime soon.

[g-man430]

These stupid people here are allowing these developers to build "vinyl villages" out in the suburbs and just causing more sprawl, just like when yesterday the paper said that Greer would be getting over 800 new homes. Same goes with the Shops at Greenridge and the Point in Greenville. All it is is more sprawl, disgusting.

[krazeeboi]

It appears as though TND is a lost art. It's a shame, really.

[Spartan]

It appears as though TND is a lost art.

It is in SC.

[distortedlogic]

I think the real failures in this state are largely in the suburban areas. These places are usually in counties with little incentive or desire to control growth, as they want the money. It wil take a concerted statewide effort to make any real change. You have to make the playing field level accross the board or else nobody will play.

Yeah but is this really plausible? I cannot see Occonee, Pickens, Laurens, Anderson, or even Sptbg counites being presented with the possibility of a company locating with a couple hundred jobs, and then saying "No, you should locate in Gville county to cut down on sprawl." Ditto for the other MSA's. Usually those outlying counties are the ones that have the highest unemployment and need the jobs the most. Now in the case of SF locating on Woodruff instead of DT, that would be an example of where a company should have made a different decision, but the county and area undoubtedly gave them total freedom on placement as they would not have wanted to jeaopardize the deal. So what do you do?

[krazeeboi]

Well it's a bit different for the Upstate, as Anderson and Spartanburg are viable economic nodes in and of themselves; Columbia and Charleston are better examples. But I do agree with you that it's somewhat of a catch-22. Now in the case of my county, York, it's a much easier decision since a state border separates us from the primary city in the metro area--so in that case, yeah, bring on the jobs. I'm not ashamed to say that we parasitize Charlotte.

[goodbye]

Your perspective is a perfect example of why things are this way, krazeeboi. Now if every county across the nation were to adopt and strictly adhere to the same guidelines, it would allow for an even playing field. Otherwise, we would lose nearly every major expansion or relocation to other states within their sprawling metros.

[krazeeboi]

Yep, but the thing is, the playing field isn't even; our landscape is capitalist and not communist, if you get the imagery. That's what makes this whole thing difficult.

But here's a bit of good news. It's good to see the Beaufort area taking positive steps towards regional planning.

[krazeeboi]

A timely editorial detailing one area in which the state minimizes home rule. I hate the fact that the state feels as though it must micromanage everything and in the process give our entire state over to developers.

[teshadoh]

For Greenville / Spartanburg, and I hate saying this - it's a mega-Gwinnett County or Cobb County (Atlanta metro counties) in the making. Excluding the city centers of Greenville & Spartanburg which I have no intent to dismiss, but the built environment of those counties will eventually be similar to the metro counties mentioned.

My primary reasoning - interstate access. Most of the harm has already occurred - industrial & office developments were allowed to occur seemingly along the entire I-85 stretch. Precedence is the biggest problem - even if Greenville & Spartanburg wished to become proactive & follow a new urbanist strategy - it would require a tight-lock land use plan to hold up in court. I can surmise that most of the land along the interstate is already zoned industrial / office-institutional & certainly much of the land is at least partially developed, as well as purchased for the purpose of development.

Therefore the problem is, any county land use plan has to accept that the entire interstate corridor will eventually be totally built out. What can at least be done - is to promote additional mixed use developments along the interstate. But even so - it certainly isn't the most sustainable development pattern.

So the ideal of I-85 being contained isn't likely, which of course leads to a necessity to continually expand I-85 (though some transit service could be initiated serving the corridor) & lead to a multi-nodal commuting pattern. Hence the inability to plan for a region's commuting patterns or living choices when there is no central destination. Therefore - there will continue to be an interest to live along anywhere off of the freeway, which is how the sprawl started.

Regarding the downtowns of Greenville or Spartanburg - infill & growth will certainly continue, as Atlanta or Charlotte has shown, growth in the urban core will continue despite growth in the suburbs / exurbs. But in case some believe urban redevelopment 'counters' sprawl, not totally - because again as Atlanta & Charlotte has shown, even with tremendous growth in the urban core - sprawl continues unabated. So the prognosis - growth in the urban core & growth in the suburban periphery simultaneously.

[g-man430]

For Greenville / Spartanburg, and I hate saying this - it's a mega-Gwinnett County or Cobb County (Atlanta metro counties) in the making. Excluding the city centers of Greenville & Spartanburg which I have no intent to dismiss, but the built environment of those counties will eventually be similar to the metro counties mentioned.

My primary reasoning - interstate access. Most of the harm has already occurred - industrial & office developments were allowed to occur seemingly along the entire I-85 stretch. Precedence is the biggest problem - even if Greenville & Spartanburg wished to become proactive & follow a new urbanist strategy - it would require a tight-lock land use plan to hold up in court. I can surmise that most of the land along the interstate is already zoned industrial / office-institutional & certainly much of the land is at least partially developed, as well as purchased for the purpose of development.

Therefore the problem is, any county land use plan has to accept that the entire interstate corridor will eventually be totally built out. What can at least be done - is to promote additional mixed use developments along the interstate. But even so - it certainly isn't the most sustainable development pattern.

So the ideal of I-85 being contained isn't likely, which of course leads to a necessity to continually expand I-85 (though some transit service could be initiated serving the corridor) & lead to a multi-nodal commuting pattern. Hence the inability to plan for a region's commuting patterns or living choices when there is no central destination. Therefore - there will continue to be an interest to live along anywhere off of the freeway, which is how the sprawl started.

Regarding the downtowns of Greenville or Spartanburg - infill & growth will certainly continue, as Atlanta or Charlotte has shown, growth in the urban core will continue despite growth in the suburbs / exurbs. But in case some believe urban redevelopment 'counters' sprawl, not totally - because again as Atlanta & Charlotte has shown, even with tremendous growth in the urban core - sprawl continues unabated. So the prognosis - growth in the urban core & growth in the suburban periphery simultaneously.

Great quote.

[krazeeboi]

Teshadoh, you said it.

[CorgiMatt]

For Greenville / Spartanburg, and I hate saying this - it's a mega-Gwinnett County or Cobb County (Atlanta metro counties) in the making. Excluding the city centers of Greenville & Spartanburg which I have no intent to dismiss, but the built environment of those counties will eventually be similar to the metro counties mentioned.

My primary reasoning - interstate access. Most of the harm has already occurred - industrial & office developments were allowed to occur seemingly along the entire I-85 stretch. Precedence is the biggest problem - even if Greenville & Spartanburg wished to become proactive & follow a new urbanist strategy - it would require a tight-lock land use plan to hold up in court. I can surmise that most of the land along the interstate is already zoned industrial / office-institutional & certainly much of the land is at least partially developed, as well as purchased for the purpose of development.

Therefore the problem is, any county land use plan has to accept that the entire interstate corridor will eventually be totally built out. What can at least be done - is to promote additional mixed use developments along the interstate. But even so - it certainly isn't the most sustainable development pattern.

So the ideal of I-85 being contained isn't likely, which of course leads to a necessity to continually expand I-85 (though some transit service could be initiated serving the corridor) & lead to a multi-nodal commuting pattern. Hence the inability to plan for a region's commuting patterns or living choices when there is no central destination. Therefore - there will continue to be an interest to live along anywhere off of the freeway, which is how the sprawl started.

Regarding the downtowns of Greenville or Spartanburg - infill & growth will certainly continue, as Atlanta or Charlotte has shown, growth in the urban core will continue despite growth in the suburbs / exurbs. But in case some believe urban redevelopment 'counters' sprawl, not totally - because again as Atlanta & Charlotte has shown, even with tremendous growth in the urban core - sprawl continues unabated. So the prognosis - growth in the urban core & growth in the suburban periphery simultaneously.

But according to the latest US Census reports, both Atlanta and Greenville (city limits) continue to lose population.

[Mr.Marc]

Skyliner, what you bring up is the same complaint of residents of other areas that got broken up by the Census Bureau, including the Triad and Triangle in NC. But the standard the Bureau uses is tied to commuting patterns, and apparently Spartanburg and Anderson get enough commuters into their own counties to qualify as their own MSAs. Who knows, it may go back to the way it was in a few years if the definition gets revised once again.

Oops, i haven't been doing my studying. I thought the Triad and Triangle were the same thing.

Sorry to get off topic, but I needed to state that.