Spin topic...Columbia's Location (West Columbia, Cayce: land , flood plain, streets)

[CarolinaSouth803]

I was reading the stereo-type thread and Waccamatt made a post that made me think.

Originally Posted by waccamatt

As far as Columbia being set in a bowl, nothing could be further from the truth since downtown Columbia was laid out at the top of a hill. Back in 1786, malaria was a problem so downtown Columbia was built on the top of a hill to lessen the number of mosquitoes and had all of its streets 100' and 150' wide because it was thought, at the time, that mosquitoes couldn't fly that far before dying. I sometimes wonder where so much misinformation comes from.

Even though i've heard of the mosquito logic many times...i was wondering... How would Columbia look now if it wasn't for that terrible bit of information? I'm thinking Cayce and West Columbia were only townships then, so how would the city look laying near the river vista instead of on top of the hill?

[waccamatt]

It is an interesting question. Before Lake Murray was built, floods were common along the Congaree River, which is one of the reasons Columbia's riverfront development has been a fairly recent phenomenon. In recent years, most flooding along the Congaree now occurs a little further downstream, which is one of the reasons I-77 is built so much higher than the surrounding land and one of the reasons that flood plain shouldn't be developed, IMO. If the city had been built lower, the skyline probably would look less impressive, but other than that and an earlier problem with flooding, there probably wouldn't have been much of a difference.