Archived

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

vicupstate

Charleston not the only city concerned with height

18 posts in this topic

Height may be an issue for 10 Story Condo proposal

I posted this as an example that Charleston isn't unique to issues of height, and appropriateness in historic areas. While Charleston has more of these controversies arise, that is primarily a function of it's vastly larger quantity of such buildings.

Just a few months back a proposal to raze a 3 story building and replace it with a new 4 story building was unanimously defeated by the DPC. Height was one issue raised in that case as well. That building also had been the site of a meeting to promote Wade Hampton's initial campaign for Governor (circa 1870's).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The Vista in Columbia is another example. It is a historic district that enforces height restrictions. Perhaps Greenville should do the same for the West End?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few months back a proposal to raze a 3 story building and replace it with a new 4 story building was unanimously defeated by the DPC. Height was one issue raised in that case as well. That building also had been the site of a meeting to promote Wade Hampton's initial campaign for Governor (circa 1870's).

It would seem to me the difference of a 4 story building vs a 3 story building isn't much to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem to me the difference of a 4 story building vs a 3 story building isn't much to worry about.

My Bad. It was a 2 story building being replaced with a 4 story one. I think the 4th floor was recessed though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice that G'ville is not concerned about giving height restrictions throughout the entire city limits. For Chas to even consider this move is ridiculous and unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Height may be an issue for 10 Story Condo proposal

I posted this as an example that Charleston isn't unique to issues of height, and appropriateness in historic areas. While Charleston has more of these controversies arise, that is primarily a function of it's vastly larger quantity of such buildings.

Just a few months back a proposal to raze a 3 story building and replace it with a new 4 story building was unanimously defeated by the DPC. Height was one issue raised in that case as well. That building also had been the site of a meeting to promote Wade Hampton's initial campaign for Governor (circa 1870's).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Zahc, the main reason why Chas has ugly midrises is because of the hesitancy to advance into the 21st century and the prior zoning that existed DT to begin with! The new zoning that Chas enacted extends throughout the city limits, and this will hurt true urbane/highrise development, especially if the city wishes to prevent developers building houses throughout the other counties.

According to the new ordinance, exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis. This will only slow the process of developing a pristine urban environment in the dilapidated areas of DT and the Neck.

Greenville can be seen as being cautious, since it is starting to achieve an impressive skyline; but in Chas' case, it could be a bigger way to shoot itself in the foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would seem to me the difference of a 4 story building vs a 3 story building isn't much to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Greenville's highrise was passed. The only difference is that the building is now going to be 8-stories tall instead of 10. Also, a 7-story and a 12-story building were both passed within the past 2 months too. Greenville doesn't have height restrictions. In fact, the DPC passed a proposal for a 20-story building here that would of been a new state's tallest, but it never got built due to the high cost of construction material after Hurricane Katrina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^Zahc, the main reason why Chas has ugly midrises is because of the hesitancy to advance into the 21st century and the prior zoning that existed DT to begin with! The new zoning that Chas enacted extends throughout the city limits, and this will hurt true urbane/highrise development, especially if the city wishes to prevent developers building houses throughout the other counties.

According to the new ordinance, exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis. This will only slow the process of developing a pristine urban environment in the dilapidated areas of DT and the Neck.

Greenville can be seen as being cautious, since it is starting to achieve an impressive skyline; but in Chas' case, it could be a bigger way to shoot itself in the foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...here's what found out over the internet about Charleston's 1970s proposed high-rises, which was supposed be a commerical development and a dense residential area in what was then considered a "blighted" part of town:

"...In the late 1970s, plans were unveiled to develop the site for a high-rise and dense residential and commercial development, which would have severely damaged Charleston's skyline and forever removed the last remaining undeveloped waterfront property from public access.

The city responded, aided by a generous gift from two friends of the city, and by a matching Department of the Interior grant, and acquired this significant site for a park in 1979..."

and this:

"...In the late 1970s, a developer approached the city with plans to build high-rise offices on some weedy lots along the harbor. The proposal would have cleaned up a blighted area and immediately added prime real estate to the property tax rolls. Riley said no. Instead, he pushed forward his own plan for a waterfront park..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine a Charleston where highrises blocked the waterfront vista! I'm glad these didn't pan out, largely due to location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston's first major high-rise in decades proposed.

SOme perspective from another city.

Note that even Boston doesn't allow the market alone to determine height, particularly around the Common.

This is an issue many cities deal with, particularly historic ones.

I think certain areas of CHas, such as the Magnolia Project should be exempt from the height restriction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine a Charleston where highrises blocked the waterfront vista! I'm glad these didn't pan out, largely due to location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with highrises back then is that they would have largely been dependant on location near the water. You would have seen a wall of towers near the water, with the interior buildings having no access to the water. I think that Mayor Riley was right to deny those propasals. Charleston's best asset is the public's access to the water, and to downtown in general.

Charleston is not Boston. As contemporary cities they share similar histories, but I don't see highrises as a part of Charleston's immediate future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


BTW, the 10 story building in Greenville that I started this thread with has been reconfigured and has been approved by the Design Preservation Commission.

The building was reduced to eight floors. The number of units and the total square footage has not changed, so i guess they just made each floor broader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Native Charleston,

Thanks for sharing Magnolia development link. I had not seen it & found myself breathless and content by this spectaular proposed vision. What a beautiful site Magnolia has instore for a new Charleston "Neck". The City is going to look entirely different than the one I left in 1983 for what was supposed to be only a 2-month holiday in San Francisco. I would imagine Magnolia will be better managed under someone like Mayor Joseph Riley than North Chuck's--rather chaotic Noisette redevelopment that (I assume) has some 30 years to go & I'd be retired & probably living back in the low country...preferrably on Daniel Island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an example of forward thinking by city officials in Honolulu that have recommanded building up rather than out to limit the increasing sprawl and traffic and other associated costs of poor urban planning. Our urban leadership here in South Carolina, especially Charleston, could learn a few lessons about compromising sprawl with density imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.