Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a **** ton of areas around Charleston that are prohibited from development (or at least significant development) for a variety of reasons largely relating to environmental offsets, drainage issues (filling in swamps) or federal reasons (Francis marion national forest)
I have said over and over - away from the water, on the highest elevations, the City’s new approach to growth. They are writing it into their new codes.
There are gobs of such land on the peninsula. Buildings four to eight stories high, ten to 12 in spots, will house a lot of people, as I just saw a news report about local housing prices continuing their pace of increases in the face of a severe shortage that will be remedied only by building more housing units.
It’s the city. The city is the city. Cities (not paper cities that formed because they didn’t want to be in the city) grow when people are moving to the area and those cities offer attainable housing options through supply that meets and even exceeds demand.
No more filling in swamps. That would be robbing Peter to pay Paul in the 21st century water management manner of growing. Perhaps you need a consultation with a City of Charleston urban planner.
Are there any places in this country where rural areas around metros were prohibited from being developed? That doesn't appear to be the case using the eye test.
I don't think there's popular support for your approach. Urban planning requires accepting unavoidable constraints.
No residential or commerical development that is occupied can be described as willy nilly. The market is the invisible hand driving development.
Here's an article about a new development in the Cainhoy area. https://www.live5news.com/2024/04/25...rkeley-county/ This sounds like the kind of development you oppose but the Charleston Director of Planning, Preservation and Sustainability Robert Summerfield touts it.
It’s up to counties and cities within counties to zone. There’s nothing stopping counties outside of MSAs from growing if they have something attracting people.
It’s up to the counties and towns or cities within those counties what that growth looks like - more sprawl that requires new residents to drive on main roads to get to any amenities, or developments with amenities within them that are accessible without having to leave the development. And how far off their existing grid are they willing to develop to begin that growth? Are they willing to give a developer what the developer wants to build and sell? Can the farmer sell the land? Or is it in a preservation trust that his parents placed on it? Can the county block development based on their codes?
The Cainhoy article is missing information I need to say if I support the way it’s going to be built, or not. I have nothing against 230 some odd single-family houses being built in a city neighborhood that Charleston annexed in anticipation of growth in that area. If the residents have to leave the development to shop at the new stores the planner says will make the people already living in the general area happy, then I feel the planning could have been better.
Cainhoy in general is slated for dense development, although there is one subdivision of substantial size that was approved a long time ago, before density was on the radar screen. Joe Riley was approving of it. John Tecklenburg hoped the property’s developers would go back to the drawing board and not go through with building it in the way it was approved just because the developer had the right to develop it that way, since their timeframe to get busy hadn’t expired.
I haven’t heard anything about that proposed development recently. I don’t believe it’s the development you linked to.
There's a **** ton of areas around Charleston that are prohibited from development (or at least significant development) for a variety of reasons largely relating to environmental offsets, drainage issues (filling in swamps) or federal reasons (Francis marion national forest)
Thus what? More density to accommodate much of the population growth.
Looks like the city planner is okay with developing rural land in Charleston.
Except for “rural” land the City of Charleston purchased expressly for the purpose of dedicating it to natural habitats, any undeveloped land within the city that is on higher elevation and preferably not far removed from infrastructure is eligible for development. That includes Cainhoy.
Cainhoy was annexed in anticipation of development and population growth there. But for the Cooper River and wetlands, Cainhoy, like Daniel Island, would be a contiguous continuation of the peninsula’s urban footprint.
I can’t find an illustration I once saw showing what happened on the other side of rivers from cities in America versus what should have happened. It demonstrated that, beginning with where solid land begins on the other side of the river, dense development should have picked up where it left off on the initial side. Growth from there should have been incremental and contiguous to its dense beginnings.
Non dense growth should have been gradual the farther out the growth went, to where it would begin to break up as it left the grid and offered the more detached to rural style of living, before gradually becoming denser again on the way to the next municipality and dense again in that municipality. That’s the idea with Daniel Island and Cainhoy. James Island didn’t develop with that pattern. Some infill development close in on James Island is beginning to mimic that model.
Sounds like all a city has to do is annex all of its suburbs for you to be ok with the suburbs expanding. Seems like a big loop hole.
False. I want suburban areas to stop expanding all over creation. I want them to use open space within the existing footprint of development.
Metro Charleston has spread out so far that local governments were looking at putting a huge human waste treatment plant in southern Orangeburg county, just across a field and through some woods from a church where my ancestors are buried going back to fourth great-grandparents. The farming community there and the town of Bowman came together in large force against it, including my email to the Orangeburg County council, and yesterday the Charleston-area group rescinded its request to have the land rezoned for their proposed facility.
But they really figured, hmm, we’ve run out of room in the Tri-County region, so we’ll just cross on over outside the MSA in the country in the next county for our poop project. They didn’t know or care that my first and second cousins and their children and grandchildren live and farm there and are proud of their community. I was feeling it BIG TIME in letting the Orangeburg County council know how I felt about it, being just two miles if that from where my mother and perhaps I will have our final resting place. I was all over the MSA sprawl and land-raping concepts in what I had to say.
I don’t know where amidst the suburban sprawl that has touched virtually every corner of the Tri-County region they’ll find to process our waste. Too bad there must not be enough space left to build it far enough away from some big, spread out housing subdivision within the MSA. What gives? Hold your noses. I know it won’t be in Charleston proper.
I’m not sure how one defines “gobs” of land. Care to point out where these “gobs” are?
Drive around. I’m thinking on an urban design scale, not on a suburban sprawl scale. Not only on the upper peninsula in the Meeting Street Road area and across the span of the peninsula where large developments are planned but thus far not coming out of the ground, but in countless spots within the already dense footprint of the existing built environment there is gobs of room.
Morrison Road-NoMo is screaming for a continuation of construction to match what’s already marching up Meeting Street - taller structures, away from the steeples and shorter buildings of the historic district, on parcels that are removed from the big water and wetlands. It’s an urban designer’s dream. The Lowcountry Lowline wile bisect it.
John's island certainly has a lot of room and it will be used one way or another.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
