Jump to content

Economic Development in South Carolina


goodbye

Recommended Posts

Actually, Krazeeboi, if you research back just a few years, you'll see that Columbia and Charleston have consistently gone back and forth on such lists. Columbia took a back seat on some lists over the last two years, but it was only a matter of time before we came out of our slump that followed the nation's slump from a little earlier in the decade.

I'm glad Expansion Management listed the top 50 cities alphabetically this time. It's a bummer to be on a good list but rank way down on the list.

In Columbia's case, it could bode well that we have made the Expansion Management and Forbes lists for 2007, because in May 2007 US Airways is going to have a 33-page spread on the city in the airline's magazine that they put in every slot behind every seat on every plane. Five million passengers fly US Air every month, so if 2 million read about Columbia, maybe a good portion of that 2 million will be business executives who also read Expansion Management and Forbes. The 33-page spread is a collaboration among the City of Columbia, the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce, the Columbia Convention and Visitors' Bureau, and maybe another partner or two, perhaps including USC - I forget. Copies of the article will be made available locally, they said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


...In the Forbes "Best Cities for Jobs" list, Columbia ranked first in the state (at #50 overall) and Greenville second (#68 overall) out of 100 cities. Both listed higher this year than last (Columbia was #63 and Greenville #91 in the 2006 rankings). As far as individual categories go, Columbia ranked #24 for job growth and #34 for income growth, while Greenville ranked #30 for cost of living and #47 for job growth. Definitely good news for both cities, although I will say that I'm quite surprised to see that Charleston didn't make the list; they usually tend to rank first in the state in these types of lists.

Wow, I'm surprised and disappointed to see that Chas did not make the Forbes list. Well, it was only a matter of time before my hometown's obsession with preservation, its hindrances of progress, and its slow-moving responses to economic opportunities would catch up with it. Here's hoping that Chas can get back on the board next year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I'm surprised and disappointed to see that Chas did not make the Forbes list. Well, it was only a matter of time before my hometown's obsession with preservation, its hindrances of progress, and its slow-moving responses to economic opportunities would catch up with it. Here's hoping that Chas can get back on the board next year...

Nonsense. These rankings mean nothing. One year a city will rank in the top ten and the next it will drop 30 positions. Did a metoer hit the city and destroy it's Business district? No. There is no good logical reason for such a shift. The writer probably doesn't know Charleston SC from Charleston WV. Another magazine will flip the rankings of this one. It's all a gimick. Give me a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense. These rankings mean nothing. One year a city will rank in the top ten and the next it will drop 30 positions. Did a metoer hit the city and destroy it's Business district? No. There is no good logical reason for such a shift. The writer probably doesn't know Charleston SC from Charleston WV. Another magazine will flip the rankings of this one. It's all a gimick. Give me a break.

Vic, I don't think I'd go that far. While some rankings out there are fluff, most do rely on hard data. It's usually that certain categories take priority over others depending on which entity is doing the ranking and for what purpose--in other words, you have to know how to interpret them. I think the Forbes ranking is one of the more reliable ones out there.

That said, I've still seen Charleston rank high on other lists, so you just need to look at the bigger picture which is provided by looking at a variety of sources. I guess you can't make them all--unless you're Raleigh, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense. These rankings mean nothing. One year a city will rank in the top ten and the next it will drop 30 positions. Did a metoer hit the city and destroy it's Business district? No. There is no good logical reason for such a shift. The writer probably doesn't know Charleston SC from Charleston WV. Another magazine will flip the rankings of this one. It's all a gimick. Give me a break.

Vic, as mentioned by others on here, Forbes is one of the most reliable studies. Many high-ranking businessmen/women use Forbes as a legitimate guide to explore expansion and/or relocation. I can't figure out why Chas did not even make the top 100, but the study is not something to just thumb your nose at.

Data that was used included, but probably wasn't limited to, cost of living expenses, income growth, restrictive zoning, and transportation infrastructure. In terms of the latter indicator, Chas lags behind the other two major cities in SC with only 1 major interstate and 1 semi-complete interstate beltloop. And most of us here know that while Chas has a vibrant and dense DT, restrictive zoning for preservation does inhibit a city's ability to draw in new businesses. Take a look at the top of Forbes' list. See Jacksonville at #3? Some Jax residents complain that the city does not preserve buildings well, but I guarantee you that has helped Jax become one of the business powerhouses in the South. Name one city on this list that has the level of preservation that Chas has!! Raleigh, Phoenix, Fort Lauderdale, Norfolk, Charlotte?! Notice the cities closer to home, G'ville and Cola, do not have Chas levels of preservation.

To be a good city for jobs, you must also be able to attract the companies that will employ workers at high pay. Restrictive zoning and transportation infrastructure will affect a city's "attractiveness". Chas is having some success, but not as much as others.

Many times vic, you defend the preservationist, obstructionist movement, and I feel that you ignore the detrimental effects these organizations have wrought onto Chas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Charleston doesn't loose by not having another interstate because it IS the destination. The port brings in a lot of commerce to that area. Even with its dorp in status its still one of the major Atlantic ports. North Chareston offers room for corporate expansion, even though we'd all like to see it downtown. It seems as though I heard something about building another interstate along the coast a while ago. I can't remember where I read/heard it or how legit it was though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CN, you make some good points but I would point out that the cities that you mentioned really don't have much to preserve, especially when compared with Charleston. I'd probably say the city that does have a lot to preserve, but has still managed to build up and not have zoning as restrictive as Charleston's is Richmond which ranked at #14. You could say it was DC at #5, but that's an entirely different beast altogether for several reasons. At any rate, the study was "Best Cities for Jobs," but it actually ranked metro areas. Indeed, N. Chas. offers room for expansion, but it doesn't exactly look appealing from a corporate relocation perspective for a few reasons (at least right now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both of you guys have good points. Spartan, the only other interstate that was proposed to go through Chas was I-95, and there was a big dispute between Cola and Chas reps about getting it built. As a result, we have I-95 going through the middle of nowhere throughout most of the state. The problem Chas faces is that many companies see interstate access as important when expanding or relocating a business. Chas is far enough away from I-95 to give CEOs or their boards the impression that Chas is not easily accessible. One way to change is that is to create an I-95 connector much like G'ville has with I-26.

Krazee, those are good comparisons, but there are some others such as Austin, San Antonio, and New Orleans. You're right, these are metro areas, but the impression of the north city (with crime, etc.) along with restrictive building in DT probably helped Chas to not even reach the top 100.

My point is that Chas will need to loosen its preservation grip in some areas and improve on cost of living if it is to be a "Best City for Jobs".

Edited by Charleston native
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No no, I mean a NEW interstate. This was recent (like within the past couple of months). It was part of the I-73 thing... connecting that to MB, then continuing it down the coast or something to that effect. It could have just been one of those random ideas that people throw out. I dont know.

Whats interesting to me is that if 95 had acutally gone to Columbia or Charleston itself, rather than in between, either one would likely be a much larger city today. Probably the largest in SC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ That's exactly my point, Corgi! :thumbsup: That is just a glaring example of why businesses find it more difficult to build downtown. Imagine trying to buy a full block of those houses to make a development for a 20-story tower with a parking garage. The property costs alone to just acquire the land would be close to $30 million! Then, you have to factor all of the BAR meetings the planners would have to go through, and the oppositional rhetoric from preservationist groups.

Hammett, I-26 is not really a great I-95 connector because of its direction from its intersection. You practically backtrack by going far northwest, then heading back southwest, just to head south on I-95. Or, you have to take the dreaded US 17 with its deadly, 2-lane section... :o

Spartan, if there was an idea to connect with I-73 from Chas, I did not hear anything about it...but it is a cool idea. Indeed, if I-95 had gone to Chas as originally foreseen, its port would be probably be far more prominent and the city itself would be greatly larger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats interesting to me is that if 95 had acutally gone to Columbia or Charleston itself, rather than in between, either one would likely be a much larger city today. Probably the largest in SC.

I guess it's possible for I-95 to have gone through Charleston and still go through Florence like it currently does, but not if it went through Columbia. In the latter scenario, the Pee Dee would be even more economically depressed than it already is. I-95 is really the only hope for the I-95 Corridor in this state.

I would have liked to have seen I-95 hug the coastline. We would definitely see a very different coastal South Carolina, and I think it would have been a good thing. Myrtle Beach would have really boomed by now, and the Pee Dee would definitely reap the benefits and I would imagine that I-20 would spur greater development in the Florence area. Georgetown would be larger--probably something of a shared suburb of Charleston and Myrtle Beach.

This is way off-topic, but I just thought I'd throw that in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the Herald-Journal's take. 1,500 employees is a lot of people. My hope is that this will play a role in making the Fairforest part of town more attractive to residents and reinvestment. The report on Channel 7 last night said that this place will use more technology, and will require more highly specialized workers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this article was interesting, as it dispels the notion that there is some type of Upstate bias present in the Sanford administriation (as it has been claimed on here several times).

Are you surprised by it?

One thing though, in the article Sanford implies that Greenville has not lost influence in Columbia, but how can you really say that? We've lost leaders in very important positions in Columbia. You can't pretend we're not here, but to acknowledge us doesn't give us influence. To ignore the largest county, the fastest growing county, arguably the economic engine of the state, a large base of your party affiliation, and in the end the largest region of the state would be flat out dumb. You'd end your political career right there and hold back the state as a whole. Give the state an issue where the low country and the upstate stand at opposite ends and we'll see who has the influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • 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.