Archived

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

Charleston native

New Office Building to Be Built Next to Citadel Stadium

24 posts in this topic

As usual, the NIMBYs in a DT Chas neighborhood are displeased with another building improvement project. The school's plan to incorporate a National Guard armory into the renovated Johnson Hagood Stadium has some residents of the surrounding neighborhood thinking that The Citadel is breaking an agreement about the stadium's size. The building will be 100-feet tall and will be setback 25 feet from Hagood Avenue...attached to the building will be the home side of the renovated stadium with luxury suites and press boxes. The neighborhood president said that the neighborhood thought it would be open space where the building is being constructed. The link for the article is below.

Is there no end to NIMBYs and their meddling? The school has not broken the agreement for constructing the stadium, the building will improve Hagood Avenue, and the Guard being located there will be beneficial for the whole neighborhood. What is the freaking problem?!?! I've said it once, I'll say it again: if you don't want to hear loud crowd noises or be near big city developments, MOVE!

Neighbors accuse Citadel of breaking stadium deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I found some interesting things about the stadium. I've got a few pics of the design:

Overhead plan of entire renovated facility

overhead-lg.jpg

Sideview of home stand section

sideview.jpg

View of the home section in the stadium

grandstands.jpg

View of stadium from Hagood Avenue

frontview.jpg

Here is the link for the website of the new stadium here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This link is the latest on the Citadel trying to placate neighborhood residents about the stadium plan. To sum up, most of the residents still are not pleased. One actually said she "felt violated". :rolleyes: Give me a break! The NIMBYs here really need to remember that there is more to their neighborhood than their own houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIMBYism reaches new heights in historic Charleston as compared with other cities. People need to realize the school is a neighbor as well, and as it grows, it will need to expand its facilities and build new buildings. Geesh, get a grip people!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not In My Back Yard

Another less common acronym is "BANANA"

Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heck the Citadel neighbors are nothing compared to the residents of fair Ansonborough, they are totally BANANAS!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The neighborhood has every right and even a DUTY to question this. I don't have enough information to make a go/no go decision on this, but several things 'stink' about this deal.

* Isn't the height restrictions in DT Charleston, or at least part of DT Charleston 40 feet or maybe 50? This would be DOUBLE that. I realize these limits have been relaxed for MUSC and what not, but where does it end? That alone is reason to closely examine this. You let this get built at 100 feet, and how do prevent it being a precedent for something else. Before long, a multitude of 100 foot buildings could change the entire mass and scale of Charleston.

* The Citadel made an agreement with the neighborhood not to develop this area. Whatever happened to that? What is the neighborhood getting in return? How can they trust any future promises of The Citadel?

* This last one is very disturbing and makes me feel the neighborhood is being screwed more than anything. The Citadel did not take their plans to the neighborhood itself, before submitting them to the city. There is no reason or excuse for that. Either they thought they could 'sneak' it through, which is stupid, or they don't really care and are determined to push it through regardless. Either way, the neighbors have a right to be upset and to believe The Citadel is dealing in bad faith.

What makes Charleston the special and unique place that it is, can be lost. It won't happen in one fell swoop, it will happen bit and bit, piece-by-piece. The "free market" will not protect Charleston's history, and appearance. Only diligent and persistent "NIMBYs" will. Thank God for them. Without them Columbia would not have the Palmetto building that is being renovated into a top-notch hotel. Charleston would not have many of its landmarks, including the Meeting Street shops of Charleston Place.

That's not to say "NIMBYs" are always right, or should get there way in every decision. But let's stop this nonsense that they don't have a say in the debate, or that they are extremists by definition.

What usually happens, is a compromise that is superior to the original idea, gets approved. What is wrong with that?

Building for building sake is nothing but mindless sprawl. I say protect the Hwy 61 corridor, protect John's Island's rural character, preserve the Charleston we know and love. As long as Noisette, Magnolia, and numerous other options exist, (including densification) there is no need to scarifice quality for quantity.

Believe me, if you own property and you live long enough, you too will one day be a NIMBY. When it's YOUR yard, the world will look a lot different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Yes there is a height limit in Charleston, but they seem to be loosening up on that... just look at the MUSC tower that they are building, and the various towers around Marion Square that are planned. The height limit isnt 50 feet.... its the height of steeple of St Michael's (or maybe its St Phillips)... which ever is tallest. (At least thats how I've always understood it)

I think that if Charleston is to be a modern city, and not just a museum, it needs to let some pieces of modernity into the mix. The city has so much history already preserved that these things will not erode what currently exists. In fact, I think that much of it would occur in the northern parts of the peninsula, where it is needed the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with the Citadel's plans. An open plaza on Hagood would mostly be dead space except on game days. However, like most bureaucracies, they have no idea how to communicate with real people. They changed their plans without notifying anyone, which instantly made people suspicious and angry. And remember, the Citadel has been secretive and disingenious throughout this entire process. Does anyone recall how they repeatedly said they weren't interested in moving the stadium to Stoney Field, only to suddenly present detailed plans to do exactly that? Instead of calling people who are upset over this latest broken promise names (NIMBY, BANANA, etc.), just understand that most people are open-minded as long as they are approached in a respectful, honest manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you guys do have a point regarding open, honest communication. But I have a feeling the reaction would have probably been the same had Citadel officials taken that route first anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you guys do have a point regarding open, honest communication. But I have a feeling the reaction would have probably been the same had Citadel officials taken that route first anyway.

The reaction might have been opposition, but believe me, it makes things a lot worse when the project's proponent tries an "end-run". It costs them tremendously in ill-will and credibility. The Citadel doubled it's problems by doing that. I have personally seen that happen numerous times.

I am 98% sure that anything over 50' requires a variance throughout most of DT Charleston. An area excluded from that restriction is probably in place for MUSC. The whole point is to allow the 'Holy City' moniker to remain, by allowing those steeples to be the tallest structures in the city.

As for the Marion Square, it was and still is a controversial decision to allow the hotel. But even it is not 100 feet. Also, hotels of that size do bring a lot of activity and benefit. I don't think this project would been to compare to that impact. The pros outweighed the cons for the Hotel, but not as much in this situation IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SCREW THE NIMBYS!!!! :sick: can't the feds or someone step in and ship them all out to some deserted isle so they can all comserate together and leave the city alone already. i am so sick of them i could vomit!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The neighborhood has every right and even a DUTY to question this. I don't have enough information to make a go/no go decision on this, but several things 'stink' about this deal.

* Isn't the height restrictions in DT Charleston, or at least part of DT Charleston 40 feet or maybe 50? This would be DOUBLE that. I realize these limits have been relaxed for MUSC and what not, but where does it end? That alone is reason to closely examine this. You let this get built at 100 feet, and how do prevent it being a precedent for something else. Before long, a multitude of 100 foot buildings could change the entire mass and scale of Charleston.

* The Citadel made an agreement with the neighborhood not to develop this area. Whatever happened to that? What is the neighborhood getting in return? How can they trust any future promises of The Citadel?

* This last one is very disturbing and makes me feel the neighborhood is being screwed more than anything. The Citadel did not take their plans to the neighborhood itself, before submitting them to the city. There is no reason or excuse for that. Either they thought they could 'sneak' it through, which is stupid, or they don't really care and are determined to push it through regardless. Either way, the neighbors have a right to be upset and to believe The Citadel is dealing in bad faith.

...Building for building sake is nothing but mindless sprawl. I say protect the Hwy 61 corridor, protect John's Island's rural character, preserve the Charleston we know and love. As long as Noisette, Magnolia, and numerous other options exist, (including densification) there is no need to scarifice quality for quantity...

Sorry, vic, I have to disagree with you on this. This is not an issue of building height in, per se, the historic district. The Citadel stadium and neighborhood is nowhere near the district, it is actually west of MUSC...near the starting point of the Magnolia project! The point is, this stadium, which has been the home of the college's football team has been in its same location for almost 60 years, before the neighborhood was built up around it. Therefore, what right do these people have to complain about what is built there?

Hagood Avenue has been an embarassment for many visitors to Chas and The Citadel. When you turn into it off of Spring Street, you pass a couple of office buildings (which, BTW, are more than 100 feet tall) then pass slum areas before getting to the stadium. Sidewalks actually exist on some blocks of street, but not others. It floods sometimes during high tides, and the street needs constant repaving.

This project intends to change all that. It is a mere renovation of a football stadium which was close to 100 feet in height already, and it adds versatility to a facility that was hardly being used at all. It also brings more jobs to the DT area (albeit not alot of them) and increases the area's security with the National Guard. A 100-foot addition to a stadium with a skybox just as high is not a detriment to the area. As lsgchas said, the original plan would be open dead space when the football season is over. This will not set a precedent, vic, and that statement sounds like alarmist's thinking. I don't think you'll see a massive office building development on that side of town. Even if this did happen, the area is in need of economic and infrastructural refurbishment, and additional buildings on this side of the DT area would be far more understandable, considering that this area is west of MUSC, much farther from the historic areas.

I own property myself, but I made an effort not to own a house practically next door to a football stadium which seats 22,000 in the middle of an urban area. These people should realize that if you are going to own and live in a house like this, you need to be flexible and understanding about this situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SCREW THE NIMBYS!!!! :sick: can't the feds or someone step in and ship them all out to some deserted isle so they can all comserate together and leave the city alone already. i am so sick of them i could vomit!!!!

Maybe we should have an acronym for people on the other side of the fence. How about Supports All Developers....? (S.A.D.) :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Well, I don't think I'd put myself in that category. ;) There are some areas where preservation is necessary, but this isn't one of them. If you take a look at what other cities are doing, such as Greenville and Columbia, you'll see they don't have NIMBYs and BANANAs breathing down their necks at every project development meeting. This attitude in this 21st century will hinder Chas from being competitive with other cities...read the culinary school thread and you'll see what I'm talking about.

If this project was bulldozing an established neighborhood, I'd be against it for certain. However, this is an area already built as a stadium and multi-use facility. There's no reason for the neighborhood to be up in arms about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldn't consider myself a SADist either but as chas native posted i don't think all the buildings in the ghettos need to be preserved. preservationist just go WAY to far. just because someone's great great great great uncle farted in a building a couple hundred years ago does not mean it needs to be saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldn't consider myself a SADist either but as chas native posted i don't think all the buildings in the ghettos need to be preserved. preservationist just go WAY to far. just because someone's great great great great uncle farted in a building a couple hundred years ago does not mean it needs to be saved.

Just about every old neighborhood has been a ghetto at some point in time. You knock those buildings down, build new ones, and if they last long enough, they'll be in a ghetto too some day. Or are you just saying that poor people deserve to have their homes torn down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^yes that is exactly what i am saying!!!!! i am totally devoid of a heart. all poor people should be thrown out of their homes and put in cardboard boxes under some bridge. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't think I'd put myself in that category. ;) There are some areas where preservation is necessary, but this isn't one of them. If you take a look at what other cities are doing, such as Greenville and Columbia, you'll see they don't have NIMBYs and BANANAs breathing down their necks at every project development meeting. This attitude in this 21st century will hinder Chas from being competitive with other cities...read the culinary school thread and you'll see what I'm talking about.

If this project was bulldozing an established neighborhood, I'd be against it for certain. However, this is an area already built as a stadium and multi-use facility. There's no reason for the neighborhood to be up in arms about it.

I don't have time to reply in depth, will will try to tonight or this weekend. But, for starters, I don't see the relevance of Johnson & Wales leaving for Charlotte. Charlotte's business and government communities paid them a boat load of money. It was about the money.

The statement about Cola and Greenville is not truth. They have FEWER controversies only because they have FEWER histortic structures. There have been plenty of controversial projects in both cities. Greenville had a major one just last month.

Details to follow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have time to reply in depth, will will try to tonight or this weekend. But, for starters, I don't see the relevance of Johnson & Wales leaving for Charlotte. Charlotte's business and government communities paid them a boat load of money. It was about the money.

The statement about Cola and Greenville is not truth. They have FEWER controversies only because they have FEWER histortic structures. There have been plenty of controversial projects in both cities. Greenville had a major one just last month...

Well, the impression I get from communities in Cola and G'ville is that there is much less controversy when projects and developments are planned and announced. Was there much opposition to the Wachovia Tower being built not even a block away from the old Palmetto building; were there many preservationist groups protesting it or demanding its height to be reduced? How about the new Meridian building where older facade buildings had to be torn down to make way for it? If there was opposition, their voice was silenced or not published. It appears that most people in this town seem to understand that to have progress in the city, you have to build taller buildings.

This mentality needs to be applied in Chas, in selective areas. Actually, the link below details the city zoning board approving the stadium renovation and National Guard armory addition, and in only one small sentence at the end of the article, we can read that many residents of all the surrounding neighborhoods approved of the plans. Yet, the people who opposed it (i.e. preservationists, obstructionists, alarmists) received most of the exposure and publicity with their comments. My point is that Chas can build taller in some places around DT, excluding the area within the historic district, or more importantly, where all the tourists go. Taller buildings will not destroy (or rape or pillage or whatever verb these extremists prefer to use) the historical charm of the city, especially if they are built away from it. I actually think preservationists need to be zealous in their efforts, but only in appropriate areas that actually warrant preservation.

Citadel's stadium project gets go-ahead from zoning board

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have come to the conclusion that Riley has a lot of sense, and though the approval process in Charleston is arduous, it is possible to get thigns done there. Riley is the saving grace of that city though. It will be a sad day when he leaves office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.