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.
The reality is people who live in downtown Charleston drive to those big box stores in the suburbs. There's no Best Buy or Costco on King Street. The idea a resident in downtown Charleston should be able walk to everything doesn't make sense. There's no room for big stores there.
There's very little grass in downtown Charleston. It is mostly concrete and asphalt with many buildings that aren't attractive.
I didn’t say a downtown Charleston resident should be able to walk to everything. But the King Street Target is patronized by a lot of downtown residents who would otherwise have to drive to the West Ashley location, and many of them walk to the downtown store. That’s just one example.
Don’t think for a second that no stores that would normally be big boxes in the suburbs won’t locate in an urban setting on the upper peninsula once the new apartments being built and/or planned there reach a critical mass of residents. Let’s not try putting the cart before the horse.
Charleston is known for its beauty, including its architecture. Not sure how a city would get that reputation with many unattractive buildings in its inventory. Maybe you mean unattractive for your anti-Charleston taste. And grass is out. Gardens are in.
Well here is one list we didnt make.50 worse run cities. I guess if it was the 50 worse run states... we would be on the list given there are 50 states.....the question would be where on the list...LOL
More negative national press about California would redound to SC's benefit (if you want growth) given you only have so many options if you want warmer weather, more sunny days and access to beaches. I don't think you will see the Post compare SC favorably to California.
Probably not since most of the folks leaving California head to other nearby Western states with Texas being about as far east as most go. In general, state-to-state migration patterns are largely within the same broader region or between adjacent regions. A big consideration seems to be that transplants like to be within a day's drive to their home states with direct interstate access being a priority. Hence SC (as well as NC) gets the traditional transplants from the I-95 northeastern corridor along with larger numbers of Ohioans and West Virginians in recent years with I-77 being a direct interstate connection. When I lived in metro Atlanta, I met a number of Michigan natives (I-75), many more than typically wind up in the Carolinas.
There are exceptions though. I hear Arizona is a popular relocation destination for transplanted Chicagoans.
Chattanooga of all places ranked 2nd and Baltimore placed 18th?
Ummmm....lol
Yeah. I dont know much about Chattanooga ... I do know a lot about Baltimore. If Chattanooga placed higher than Baltimore.. they have some real problems...LOL
Yeah. I dont know much about Chattanooga ... I do know a lot about Baltimore. If Chattanooga placed higher than Baltimore.. they have some real problems...LOL
Not really, at least comparatively speaking. It's in the mold of Greenville but without similar levels of population and economic growth.
If you read the methodology and the explanations under each city, you'll see just how...questionable...the criteria is. For instance, Charlotte's entry mentioned the lack of mass transit as an issue when it's arguably the most progressive Southern city in its weight class when it comes to transit. Plus it's a postwar Sunbelt city whose metro area population nearly doubled from the turn of this century to the present day. Lack of transit speaks more to the era in which Charlotte boomed and not the quality of its leadership.
Tell me you don't live here while not telling me you don't live here (or haven't for very long). We know what tourism traffic is and what local traffic is. Going into work at 7AM today is not tourism traffic. Sitting in chocked up traffic backed up on 41 and on 17 north of IOP Connector is certainly not tourism traffic. It's just the daily commute.
Traffic and growth has been an issue for Mount Pleasant. The town has an approach to how to improve it, but there's no such thing as a silver bullet to fix it. It takes a combination of efforts. Sadly it does take a certain amount of "pull your head out of your rear end this is no longer the small fishing village that your parents grew up in". The hypocrisy that people can have here is pretty big. They complain about traffic but then melt down when the Town needs to cut a sliver off the corner of Boone Hall to align an intersection. They complain about Costco coming and then proceed to spend lots of money there and later admit they love the fact they don't have to drive across town anymore to go to the one in West Ashley. But, will be right back protesting the next big box store that wants to come. They complain about commercial property being developed on land that's been zoned for commercial for years, that it's destroying the natural area for the poor baby deer while sitting in their home that's part of a subdivision that didn't exist 20 years ago on land that was complete woodlands.
The Town has a strategic plan that's multifaceted but was heavily modified due to the politics of the NIMBYers. The original plan was to increase alternate roads to move traffic off some of the main arteries this is the completion of Billy Swells parkway and the realignment of Longpoint on 17 to facilitate that alternative. Work with the State on expanding 526. Design residential and commercial hubs through the "town" to move office space and goods/services closer to residential centers. Within the Hubs they would allow higher density and taller buildings that scaled up from the roadway. Hubs would be surrounded by typical single family detached neighborhoods. They would increase the biking capacity between hubs and invest more in smarter public transportation. The problem hit when the NIMBYers forced the town to remove the higher density portion of the hubs and reduced the allowable building height. This was followed by the push for workforce housing initiatives that started to try and take the areas zoned for commercial to bring those goods and services closer to the residential areas and allowed zoning changes to residential.
The "town" with push from the mayor and the NIMBYers imposed large impact fee assessments to all new construction which hit commercial extremely hard. Rents are already through the roof in Mt.P and land is a premium. They're shockingly (sarcasm) finding it hard to develop much of their commercial spaces because of this. This drives prices for goods and services way up for those that do come in. So people don't shop at these new stores as much. The businesses don't have the cash reserves in may cases and burn out in 6 months of opening. Land owners not able to sell their land for development then try to have it rezoned (see above) for residential which undermines the plan. People moving from out of state seem to be willing to pay the impact fees on their smaller home than the commercial developments. So the NIMBYers want to whine about traffic then proceed to shoot themselves in both feet.
They've made it in the castle and now they want to raise the draw bridge.
Unless you want to consider the "Old Village business district" downtown, Mount Pleasant doesn't have a centralized official downtown area. Geographically there are challenges it's faced due to growth pushing north in a relatively straight line.
This is an area where I disagree with Charlestondata. You are correct he's very pro high density. But I don't believe people are moving to this area to live in high density. Some may, but most where I live that have moved in are either retirees or are predominately younger families looking for neighborhoods with some level of yard and space for their kids to play. I feel you are correct in that they are choosing suburbia and not choosing high density. I will grant that many of the newer neighborhoods have postage stamp sized lots, but they aren't flocking to or demanding multi household buildings or are attached town home style living. I believe the people who do pick up the available town homes are doing so out of pricing.
There’s a severe lack of high-density options to choose from, while there’s gobs of room for the construction of a lot more high-density housing, which would help bring down costs. Does everyone want high-density living? Never said that. But to not even have the option at an attainable price point for the masses is contributing to suburban traffic jams. That needs to change, and it will. Not fast enough, but it will.
CharlestonData used the expression "fake looking downtowns" while talking about suburbs. I assumed he was talking about shopping centers like Mount Pleasant Town Centre which does seem to be trying to be more like a downtown than most shopping centers. Perhaps he means the ones like Sandhills in Columbia that have some condos. These places aren't fake if you can buy stuff in em or live in em. He seems to have animosity for suburbs and kind of rose colored glasses regarding downtown areas, especially Charleston. There's a lot you could do to make downtown Charleston more athestically pleasing. It is kind of a gritty seaport city in my view.
Traffic in Mount Pleasant isn't only because of people who live in Mount Pleasant. People who tout Charleston for tourism should know this. You are right next to barrier islands with beaches, and near the most hyped up downtown in the south. It is located on a state highway. That's not your typical suburb.
There are massive parking lots in national parks. Parking lots are a fact of life. We can't parachute in to Costco.
It seems like every suburban town in SC has its traditional downtown. Simpsonville, Greer, Summerville, Lexington, etc. Those downtown areas have not been knocked over for big box stores or condos. Simpsonville has redeveloped some old textile buildings into condos.
I don't think most of the people moving to SC have a problem with suburbia. That's where most of them live.
I can spot a “downtown” that didn’t grow organically and incrementally instantly. I commend any commercial development that includes housing and vice versa. Such developments are a step in the right direction once development in general has sprawled out into the country. At least theoretically, such design puts fewer motorists out on the main thoroughfares for shopping.
To say downtown Charleston looks like a gritty seaport city in your view is strange after you’ve said Charleston lacks Savannah’s waterside presence and have touted Savannah’s look over Charleston’s. Savannah’s waterside has the old gritty look. I like that. Where I see it in Charleston, it’s limited: East Bay at Cumberland, the Old Exchange and Dungeon. Some along Broad, same with King. I like it. It’s largely what draws people. The restorations being completed these days seemingly on every 10th building downtown are exquisite. New downtown construction is looking good, too. I’m just defending, not promoting or cheerleading.
Really, you read all of that in to my few words? What talent.
SC politicians on the right are too partisan focused to make ideological decisions.
For me, that's about as fundamental as it gets when it comes to effective communication but because web-based and social media platforms have revealed just how many people are just plain terrible communicators, it can appear to be a heavy lift for those doing the bare minimum.
That said, I should elaborate a bit and say that you have a point but I need to walk what I said in my previous post back a bit. For most of America's history, it would seem that social conservatism has been mostly definitive of conservative political ideology as we conceive of it today. And historically, the exclusivist character of social conservatism in the South allowed for a full embrace of economic liberalism; one might even say the former made the latter the only viable option. It's no coincidence that the modern era of economic development incentive programs began in the aftermath of the Depression among Southern states with Mississippi leading the way. And now it's more or less ubiquitous across all states, even though it's no secret that the ROI is questionable at best for the most part. But hey, political expediency and whatnot.
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.
