The article says "the structure has to be at least 25 feet tall but no less than 50 feet tall"
Do you mean 'at least 25 feet tall but no MORE than 50 feet tall?'
Building out instead of up is an absolute waste of an incredible opportunity. The way to prevent a city like Charleston from feeling more crowded is not sprawling, flatter buildings! Building up allows both residential volume AND use of the surrounding land, such as the nearby baseball field, playground, tennis courts, or even the simply open field adjacent to Lockwood/Broad, which gives the area a more spacious feeling. Not to mention, balcony views of Charleston and the water are incredible, but are sadly few and far between. Charleston's vibrant crowd of young professionals tend not to be millionaires (yet?), and as a student, I can attest to how difficult it is to find an apartment in a safe area, close to campus, with washer/dryer and dishwasher, and for less than $1,000/month per bedroom. A high rise is the only way to achieve such value; otherwise, it will be unaffordable, have a waiting list, or both (Bee Street Lofts). Ashley House is the only other high rise in the immediate area, and while many would consider it outdated (most units do not have W/D & DW), it remains 100 years more modern than the vast majority of other options its area. It blows my mind that it sounds like they've essentially ruled out the concept of building a tall, beautiful, modern, energy-efficient, building to replace an aging one - all in the name of flattening the skyline over affording a positive, attainable experience for the everyday residents who make this city so great. For the "mix of college students, MUSC nurses and interns, young urban professionals, and retirees" you mentioned who currently live there, a flatter development means more of those people would be forced to live elsewhere, which could mean more cars on the road - especially for the first 3 on that list who currently are able to bike/walk to work/class on the peninsula if they move out to West Ashley, James Island, or Mount Pleasant - and I think we can all agree we'd rather have less of that. Efficient use of the land should be a priority - the building can be designed to enhance Charleston's beauty, no matter how tall it is.
The public domain is police responsibility. That's why we pay tax dollars. I agree that you do not want a bouncer mixing it up in the streets and in parking lots. If this law passes I foresee a bouncer being attacked in a dimly lit lot. Remember, they don't carry anything to protect themselves besides their fists (maybe pepper spray). Further, if a bouncer tells me to get off a sidewalk I'm not going to listen to him since he does not have the authority to move me from the public space. Employees are going to be hurt and business will be sued. This is dumb.
An old building which has done a lot of good service to the community. I've lived there and it shelters a remarkable, diverse community. Some of these group's determination to drive everyone but the rich out of the city is gradually destroying the living city which once existed here. Almost no children grow up downtown now. Fewer young people live there. We're going to be left with a city which is a luxury experience largely enjoyed by older people who have made their money elsewhere.
After 20 years of relentless damage, during which my family had to leave for Mount Pleasant, Charleston is incapable of understanding that the city a century of poverty could not destroy is being leveled by the rich. The city's cultural institutions are weaker. The once active civic life is a shadow of what it once was. Do we have cooler restaurants? Sure. Can we put on festivals full of tourists and the occupants of trophy houses? Certainly. Do people here still know and honor each other's stories? Children, the young and those who need to earn a living need a city. A city should be devoted to the people who need and love it. It is not a product to be marketed to the highest bidder. Charleston and the Lowcountry's incapacity to comprehend that is why our communities are being obliterated.
Having seen the last strong years of the downtown community, an economically diverse, racially mixed experience and gone on to help attempt to recreated community in I'On in Mount Pleasant, I do understand what is at stake here. It's incredibly hard to maintain today. It is far more important and special than how the places look or how much parking you have.
"I don't get the rest of you. You have no skin in this game, and the purpose of it is to preserve relative peace and tranquility in Charleston."
Have you never seen a fight between a bouncer and a drunk patron? These happen all the time, and most of this occurs because the bouncers have no authority. If a cop shows up, even the toughest alcohol fueled badboy will become timid and docile. This is bad for the businesses, as their employees will be involved in additional possibly violent scenarios, which lead to lawsuits. It is bad for for those of us that frequent the bars, since we have to deal with possible increased violence due to less policing. The only people that win are the city government officials, who get to pay less for police presence.
ohhh that hurt whats a matter need thicker glasses? can't read lowercase? maybe all caps would be better? your definition of True and mine r prob different.
seen one liberal democrat seen em all.
It isn't my fault you don't know the difference between Big Letter Words and their lower case companions.
I'd like to see studies that show how Charleston bar traffic has or has not reached or crossed some sort of percentage threshold where an uptick in violent/vandalism activities will begin to be more common and more egregious. Then I'd like to see how much it would cost us all to hire the equivalent level of professional policing.
I get the Libertarians view this is the literal end of the world. A city council enacting a law. "SlipperySlope!SlipperySlope!SlipperySlope!BigBrother!SlipperySlope!SlipperySlope!SlipperySlope!"
I get how business owners don't want to pay a new employee.
I don't get the rest of you. You have no skin in this game, and the purpose of it is to preserve relative peace and tranquility in Charleston. Preserve Charleston's brand as a gleaming, harmless tourist Mecca. Preserve a happy, clean, healthy Charleston for natives to enjoy. Preserve businesses' security to continue to grow and prosper unabated. It's a proactive move to preserve what we enjoy.
Folly Beach wishes they'd thought of it.
blahaahahahhahahahah... true democrats hate it. omg tell me some more..
best joke i heard all day. hahahaa snort.
As systems become larger, they become unmanageable.
True libertarians would know that.
True republicans count on it.
True democrats hate it.
We have a useless photo ID law that was created to intimidate minority voters and fully gerrymandered legislative and congressional districts to insure the power of the Republican party. We even have Mark Sanfraud as one of our Congressmen.
Does SC really need to prove to America once again that we are the stupidest state in the country?
Every one forgets that it was the paper ballots in Florida that caused the nation to have to wait for months to know who was President. They never were able to count them all. This is a ridicuous idea. Do you have any idea what two million ballots look like all stacked up in warehouses or how easy it is to make a few of those stack disappear? Stop being afraid of technology
This is a good way to insure election fraud. If there are issues with the electronic machines figure them out and fix them. Just like letting people vote without an ID this is supported by people who do not care about vote fraud.
I think this is about as stupid idea that city council has had scince the smoking ban.
I've participated in the elections where scanned marked paper ballots were used in Florida, under the supervision of a Republican controlled election commission and there was no problem with them. Everyone was satisfied with the new system, which replaced a system similar to ours which was junked after weird results were noted in several elections. That system replaced the old butterfly ballots in Florida.
After six years of disputed results, Florida was determined to end the problem and they did.
Keeping a set of printers operating while supervising voting is no minor undertaking. They'll malfunction. One scanner/tabulator/safe can serve dozens of individual voting stations, which at that point only have to be simple cardboard privacy screens on tables. The current machines are now decade old relics and compatible parts are no longer available. There is absolutely no reason not to go to a fully verified, failure proof system.
There is no reason that the electronic voting machines could not be programmed to create a printed copy of the ballot submitted, which then could be verified by the voter and dropped into a sealed box. If there were any questions about the electronic results, the printed ballots, all of which should be readable since they were printed by the machine, could be counted by hand. I think all election jurisdictions need to make this a requirement for the vendors of the electronic machines.
I've seen scanned paper ballots used in Florida, where they gave up on the touch screen machines after some very questionable election. People marked them in simple, card board table top booths, so time wasn't a huge issue. Then they were scanned. Valid votes got tabulated and dropped into a safe at the bottom of the scanner. Ones with problems like casting two votes for one office were kicked back and the voter got to try again with a new paper ballot. Whatever happened, all the hand marked ballots were locked up and safe for recount. Our touch screen machines aren't secure and can't be verified. There is absolutely no way to know what voters were ever cast on these machines in any reliable way. That realization is creeping through the SC political system despite the hostility of elected officials and both political parties. Republicans win on these machines, so they're OK with them. Democrats are afraid if people understand what is really going on that they'll stop bothering to vote. Increasing numbers of people don't bother to vote. South Carolina keeps them because we're cheap and because doubt in the mind of voters reduces turnout in disfavored groups.
There are no good voting methods. Let's not do it anymore.
Joel... you wrote, "I am highly college educated." I think you have just made Foodmancing's point for them. Well said sir!
Colbert Busch was supported by the unions that wanted to kill Boeing in the Charleston area. That alone should be enough to see that she didn't have the best interests of Charleston in mind. The district is largely conservative, especially in the fiscal sense and, all of his other faults not withstanding, that is the way that Sanford has always voted. ECB was evasive and vague about her positions so voters had to extrapolate her beliefs based on her supporters and donors such as the union support mentioned above. She had a very orchestrated campaign that largely only went to 'safe' situations. Like/agree with him or not, Sanford campaigned everywhere he could. Also, a bunch of her supporters were obviously not very informed as they thought they should be able to vote for her even though they did not live in her district. As for gerrymandering, it happens in every state, red or blue, and is done to benefit the party that was in power at the time redistricting happens. That is how I have the joy of being stuck in Jim Clyburn's district, arguably one of the worst Congressmen ever.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper