Archived

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

Spartan

Charleston's Neck Revitalization

Recommended Posts

This is a great article because it alludes to the plans that the city has about redeveloping that area. If you've ever driven down 26 to downtown you know that it is basicly a large blight. Nothing attractive at all. This is an attempt to change the scence from heavey industry to a more downtown feel.

Neck plan rezoning to be studied

BY DAVID SLADE

Of The Post and Courier Staff

This evening a 162-acre patchwork of industrial land and Ashley River marsh could become the first area recommended for rezoning as part of the Charleston Neck Plan, the city's blueprint for redeveloping a huge section of the upper peninsula.

The rezoning request comes on the heels of a recent Charleston City Council decision to approve a special taxing district that could fund infrastructure improvements in the 3,800-acre Neck area, which runs from Mt. Pleasant Street to the North Charleston city line.

"This would be a first step toward realizing the Neck Plan," said Christopher Morgan, interim director of Planning and Neighborhoods. "I think this follows in lock-step with the plan."

Although the rezoning request and creation of the tax district follow a redevelopment timeline approved by City Council in 2003 after months of public meetings, some neighborhood leaders and council members have said things are moving too fast and that residents need more information.

The 162 acres that the Charleston Planning Commission will consider tonight is a portion of more than 600 acres of Neck area properties controlled by Clement, Crawford and Thornhill Inc., a group headed by local developer Robert Clement III.

The land is immediately south and west of the small community of Rosemont, and most of it is currently zoned for heavy industry.

If the rezoning request is ultimately approved by City Council, 91 acres of the land would take on the city's new "gathering place" zoning designation, which is aimed at creating walkable downtown areas where commercial and residential uses blend together connected by tree-lined sidewalks.

"It was created several years ago, but we haven't put it in place yet," Morgan said. "This would really be the first use of it."

He said the gathering place zone is aimed at creating development "kind of like what you would see on King Street."

The Planning and Neighborhoods staff is recommending approval of the zoning changes. The Planning Commission will make a recommendation that will be sent to City Council, which could vote on the issue in February.

Clement was out of town Tuesday and could not be reached for comment.

http://www.charleston.net/stories/Default....ction=localnews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


It does indeed. This has potential to be prime real estate due to its location downtown, near the main historic district, and near the river! It has everything going for it as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does indeed. This has potential to be prime real estate due to its location downtown, near the main historic district, and near the river! It has everything going for it as far as I can tell.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely! I think this area has the greatest potential for Charleston to actually have some potential skyscrapers, maybe not like Atlanta, but like Greenville, or even Jacksonville, FL. This could become Charleston's Uptown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely! I think this area has the greatest potential for Charleston to actually have some potential skyscrapers, maybe not like Atlanta, but like Greenville, or even Jacksonville, FL. This could become Charleston's Uptown.

Not so fast my fellow visionary. It seems that Clement's plans are more predictable.

192911482_af1530b5f2.jpg

http://www.shookkelley.com/pages/urban_07.html

This development is the subject of my thesis here at Columbia. My first intuitive response is that there's a big opportunity being missed here when you consider that nearly 620 sq. miles of natural or rural land may be converted to sprawl by the year 2030 (Charleston Urban Growth Model). This area would better serve as an alternative strategy for preserving greenspace, historic sites, and the standard of living through greater densities than what is currently being proposed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the densities proposed then? Just because there are no skyscrapers doesn't mean that the density is too low. It looks like it woud be similar to downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This development is the subject of my thesis here at Columbia. My first intuitive response is that there's a big opportunity being missed here when you consider that nearly 620 sq. miles of natural or rural land may be converted to sprawl by the year 2030 (Charleston Urban Growth Model). This area would better serve as an alternative strategy for preserving greenspace, historic sites, and the standard of living through greater densities than what is currently being proposed.

At first glance, the development appears to way too short, for a lack of a better word. Bobby Ginn's proposed development on the Neck is even worse- a golf course surrounded by vacation cottages. Yuck! When is this city going to stop talking about responsible growth and start making it happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the densities proposed then? Just because there are no skyscrapers doesn't mean that the density is too low. It looks like it woud be similar to downtown.

No definite word on density numbers. I've seen 3,000 and 11,000 "units". That's a significant difference. Clement's website only mentions "thousands". Three thousand units don't constitue a "sprawl buster" in my book, not when the potential sprawl could triple the current urban land area and the regional population exceed 1 million. I've read that a possible 60,000 people could be added with the Magnolia development. Perhaps that figure includes living and working population, but there's no clarification to that figure that I can find anywhere.

Skyscrapers are not what I'd suggest, if you talking something compareble to lower Manhattan. Midrise buillding of 10 to 20 stories would be great. They could even place a height restriction not to exceed two thirds of the Ravenel Bridge towers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we're thinking realistically if we think any infill development will automatically be a "sprawl buster." People like sprawling suburbs and that's not going to change, although we're presenting more and better options.

I just started reading This Land: The Battle over Sprawl and the Future of America by Anthony Flint which discusses why suburban sprawl seems to reign supreme despite new investment in urban cores. I hope to be able to provide some insight as I read the book. I did look in the index though, and the I'On development in Mt. Pleasant was mentioned. It was basically criticized as a more sterile, cleaned-up version of downtown Charleston, yet lacks the character of a true city that comes from the diversity among its people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Thanks for putting that info on here, krazee. I'On is indeed what the author stated, a basic copy-cat of houses and neighborhoods from DT Chas, only it is located in an isolated community. This neighborhood is what I would call a theme park version of the historic peninsula.

Has the comprehensive plan from Clement been released? I haven't seen anything from the newspaper (of course, I've been way too busy to do a search), but from the drawings and what you have revealed trm2105, I'm actually disappointed. As usual, Chas cannot get a true visionary to bring a modern skyline to some part of the city...this project is beginning to look like a theme park version of DT Chas as well! The plans look nice, but to even suggest midrises in this area when you can definitely still build them in the DT area lacks any imagination. I think if you're going to have a "sprawl-buster", you need to consider taller buildings, in the 20-40 story range. They could still build the majority of what is planned, but they need to mix those types of buildings to ensure 11,000 residential units (I believe Clement has said that amount for people to live there) are in the plan. Density and reducing the scope of suburban growth cannot be achieved if they go completely with this plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has a charette been held yet for this project? I know for the Bull Street project in Columbia, various options were laid out and the public was really engaged and included in the planning process. I think you generate more enthusiasm for what such projects will mean to the community that way.

It would be cool to see Magnolia incorporate elements of Mount Vernon Place in DC. Now THAT'S how you do density, even with height restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a great article from the Citistates Report series in the P&C about the "New Neck."

The New Neck, fast becoming one of the hottest urban redeveloping areas in the nation, extends northward up to North Charleston's Park Circle. In its new geography, it's a stretch of land as large as Manhattan.

In this region's debate about growth, about where more homes should be built or not built, the New Neck is the best staging ground to demonstrate how more people can live closer to major job centers. It's the proving ground for rebuilding whole neighborhoods without violating the legitimate rights and interests of people already there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.