Vision | Community | Heritage a Preservation Plan for Charleston, South Carolina

Vision | Community | Heritage A Preservation Plan for Charleston, South Carolina

Vision | Community | Heritage A Preservation Plan for Charleston, South Carolina Prepared by Page & Turnbull, Inc. for The City of Charleston and Historic Charleston Foundation. January 2008. Vision | Community | Heritage A Preservation Plan for Charleston, South Carolina

Letter from the Mayor

Historic preservation is as much about our future As a Charleston native, I am proud of how deeply our as it is about our past. The stewardship embodied in citizens treasure the city’s diverse historic resources. preserving cities requires us to understand the past and Charleston is the freedman’s cottage and McLeod learn from it. The knowledge gained can propel us into Plantation, the urbanity of the Lower Peninsula and the future, for the best sort of progress builds upon suc- the rural landscapes of Johns Island. The city is our cessful history. neighborhoods, industrial lands, and the public realm, and the Plan explores its multiple challenges, in all their The Charleston Preservation Plan presents a vision complexity and promise. based on our city’s history. The Plan reexamines the city’s architectural past, explores its present, and lays As a citizen, I am driven by a sense of urgency because out comprehensive guidelines to help protect its heri- the future is not a distant place. The decisions we make tage. Importantly, the Plan addresses historic preserva- now will shape the city for years to come. Charleston, tion in the contemporary context of growth patterns now in its fifth century, deserves our commitment to and economic development, sustainability and natural progress that is built upon the city’s remarkable heri- resources conservation. These are tough issues that will tage. This Plan offers that promise. continue to impact quality of life for future generations of residents and visitors who care about Charleston. Mayor Joseph P. Riley, Jr. As mayor, I appreciate the collaborative effort by pres- City of Charleston ervationists and professionals from all across govern- December 2007 ment and beyond. This Plan also reflects the input of residents and community organizations from all parts of Charleston, and I am grateful for their interest and participation. These varied stakeholders demonstrate expertise but also heart and soul. I believe the Plan can serve our city well, and I urge Charlestonians to famil- iarize themselves with it. Letter from Historic Charleston Foundation

In 1974, Charleston set a national standard with the de- into the planning of these projects at a relatively late This plan is the people’s plan. It was developed during velopment of its ground-breaking Historic Preservation stage of the process. The large number and size of the numerous workshops held over the past year through- Plan. Historic Charleston Foundation played a seminal projects prompted us to take a hard, proactive look at out the Lowcountry, with thousands of public com- role in the development of that plan, when the preserva- the major preservation issues facing Charleston. The ments and the oversight of a diversely represented tion issues facing Charleston were a dying urban core Foundation’s trustees and staff decided that it was time Advisory Committee. Now the challenge belongs to all in the face of rising suburbanization and strip malls, for Charlestonians to assess the situation and potential of us, the public and private sectors, working together and areas within the historic district were blighted with direction for the future -- a future not limited to growth to implement this plan. While Charleston is unique, the derelict properties and an unkempt, littered waterfront. merely within the historic peninsular city, but beyond prevailing issues here are not so different from those Three key achievements came out of this plan: a build- in areas such as Johns and James Islands, the Neck, of other historic communities throughout the country. ing-by-building inventory south of the Crosstown; vital Daniel Island and Cainhoy, and the historic Hwy. 61 Still, the solutions must be sensitive to and informed recommendations for a revised height ordinance; and corridor. Clearly, HCF trustees and staff felt, it is time by the specific place where they are to be implemented. a strengthening of the Board of Architectural Review’s for a new plan that can take us into the 21st century. We are confident that with this plan in place, we can regulatory authority. achieve that goal. 2007 marked the 60th anniversary of the founding of Charleston in 2007 is a very different place from what it Historic Charleston Foundation, an organization that was in 1974. Thirty-four years ago Charlestonians were has taken the philosophy of preservation to a new level Katharine S. Robinson, Executive Director dealing with urban blight and a decaying downtown; in this country: from that of preserving individual Historic Charleston Foundation today we are dealing with the threat of unchecked buildings to preserving the living fabric of historic December 2007 growth destroying those things that are unique and neighborhoods and communities. What better way special about our historic community. to celebrate HCF’s many accomplishments over the past 60 years than with a gift to the city, that of a new In the early spring of 2006, members of Historic Preservation Plan? And so HCF pledged its financial Charleston Foundation’s Community Planning Com- support to co-sponsor with the city of Charleston the mittee began discussing a growing concern over the development of a new plan, herein presented. onslaught of large development projects in our community coming in rapid-fire succession. Furthermore, the preservation community was being brought Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary ...... 1 VI. New Paths for Preservation ...... 111 A. Sustainability and Preservation ...... 114 II. Introduction ...... 19 B. Archaeology ...... 118 III. Stewardship Principles ...... 33 C. Housing Affordability ...... 120 A. New Construction ...... 36 D. Disaster Preparedness and Recovery ...... 124 B. Land Use and Regulation ...... 44 C. Design Review ...... 49 VII. Neighborhoods ...... 129 D. Preservation Education ...... 68 A. Lower Peninsula ...... 134 E. Incentives for Preservation ...... 71 B. Mid-Peninsula ...... 142 F. Economic Impact ...... 73 C. Upper Peninsula ...... 151 G. Accessibility ...... 74 D. The Neck ...... 156 E. West Ashley ...... 161 IV. Charleston’s Expanding Horizon ...... 77 F. James Island ...... 169 A. Growth and Sprawl ...... 80 G. Johns Island ...... 175 B. Transportation and Infrastructure ...... 87 H. Cainhoy ...... 180 C. Institutional Stewardship ...... 91 VIII. Historic Resource Surveys ...... 185 V. Diversity of Place ...... 99 IX. Historic Context Statement ...... 195 A. Area Character Appraisals ...... 102 B. Character Map ...... 106 X. Next Steps ...... 253 B. Conservation Districts ...... 107 XI. Resources ...... 277

XII. Endnotes ...... 309

Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

reat cities have one common element: their differences. In this era of globalization, a new building may be designed in New York, located in Asia, and reference the shape of Ga structure in Europe. What distinguishes a great city is its singular history, expressed by multiple generations of residents in its architecture and development patterns. It is these cities, which successfully unite the historic and the contemporary, that are recognized as beautiful and lively places to live, work, and visit.

This Preservation Plan invokes a vision for Charleston based on the rich history of its buildings and people. The purpose of the Plan is to provide a direction for Charles- ton—renowned as a great historic city on the same world stage as Prague, Kyoto, and Edinburgh—to continue “...I who have known leading the way in protecting its built heritage and integrating a preservation ethos into everyday life. Her tenderness, her courage, and her pity, Have felt her forces mould me, mind and bone, Preservation is an everyday matter, especially in Charles- Life after life, up from her first beginning. ton. Synonymous for many with quality of life, preservation encompasses far more than bricks and mortar. It is a How can I think of her in wood and stone!...” social, economic, and cultural endeavor. Residents have affirmed this overlap of issues by calling for this Plan to - DuBose Heyward, 1922 tackle a vast sweep of concerns about transportation and traffic, affordable housing, open space, sustainability, and growth patterns. While preservation planning cannot single-handedly address these issues, it provides valuable input to these broader objectives. 4 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Thus, the Plan comes from many voices: the voices of Stewardship Principles Charleston. The vision presented here fuses the community’s thoughts and ideas with extensive policy research. With the current development boom, it is essential to Here is a plan specifically shaped to Charleston, to the in- articulate principles aimed at safeguarding Charleston’s credible wealth of historic resources and the central role historic resources. Modern architecture and build- preservation has played. Its relevance is heightened by ing practices differ dramatically from their historical continuing growth in Charleston and the region: in 2000 counterparts. Without thoughtful guidelines, even well- the city’s population was 106,000, and forecasts predict a intentioned new construction may be hard-pressed to 51 percent increase, to 160,000 residents, by 2015. contribute to the city’s context.

This is not a blueprint that identifies which buildings The stewardship principles value heritage for its contribu- to preserve. Rather, it is a broadly focused policy road tion to a relevant, lively future. Education and incentives map that outlines how the city can continue to protect are discussed as the basis for a more pluralistic practice and add to its layers of built history for new generations. of preservation, so that more people and resources can be 1.1 More than 500 Charlestonians participated in an extensive The Charleston Vision frames the Plan, while 600 policy engaged in protecting the community’s historic resourc- public process to help shape the plan. recommendations advocate specific guidelines, identify es. The Plan suggests updates to the City’s Preservation opportunities, and suggest actions. The Plan lays out new Ordinance to reflect contemporary concepts of preserva- Twenty-first-century preservation reflects this complex- ideas as well as those with a history of success. tion. Other sections address the importance of historic ity in its challenges, rewards, and stakeholders. The Plan preservation as a local economic engine and explore how brings together a broad spectrum of planning tools, Charleston is home to an enviable wealth of historic the design review process can be streamlined. citizen input, multidisciplinary expertise, and related resources, and preservation has played—and must con- ideas from cities around the country and the world. A tinue to play—a central role in its ongoing stewardship. More Resources, More Protection concerted effort was made to involve Charlestonians This Preservation Plan encourages forward-thinking with diverse backgrounds and concerns, and more than preservation by all Charlestonians—not only those Although outstanding individual buildings sparkle, five hundred residents participated in community meet- with historic houses, but all individuals who care about it is the volume, diversity, and quality of historic ings and focus groups (Figure 1.1). the built and natural environments that shape life in resources that make Charleston one of the world’s great Charleston. historic cities. Because many areas that contribute to its character currently lie outside historic districts, expanded protection and financial resources for preservation are vital as those areas face development EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5

This Preservation Plan encourages forward-thinking preservation by all Charlestonians... who care about the city.

pressures. The Design Review section outlines a program for expanding the Old and Historic District, increasing project review south of Mt. Pleasant Street, and putting all National Register Historic Districts under the jurisdiction of the Board of Architectural Review (BAR), in addition to designating conservation districts (Figure 1.2). The Incentives for Preservation section describes specific preservation tools, such as the Bailey Bill and Transfer Development Rights (TDRs), that can benefit historic properties and their owners. The Interiors section affirms that historic interiors, as irreplaceable records of outstanding craftsmanship and materials, should be protected through easements whenever possible.

Vision for the Future

The ten statements in the Charleston Vision constitute the heart of this Plan and of future policies and plans. They seek to reinforce historical development patterns and existing construction quality through continuing stewardship of existing resources and standards for new development. The conviction that local heritage is the best foundation for growth begins with the Plan’s first vision statement—“Historic preservation is an integral part of Charleston’s history and will continue to inspire Existing Individual Landmarks Existing Historic Districts Existing Old & Historic District Existing Old City District the City’s vision and its approach to planning and (National Register) (National Register) (City of Charleston) (City of Charleston) development”—and is reinforced throughout the Plan. City County Boundaries Boundaries

1.2 Existing historic districts will need to change to include resources throughout the city. 6 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Common Design Principles

Charleston Vision While a well-articulated vision is necessary to guide the city, it must be translated into building-by-building 1. Historic preservation is an integral part of Charleston’s history and will continue to inspire the City’s principles. This is the role of the urban design principles, vision and its approach to planning and development. which render the sweeping statements of the Charleston Vision into tangible guidelines that residents, developers, 2. Charleston will sustain its rich and dynamic cultural heritage by retaining its long-standing communi- and City staff can work from when they look at and talk ties. Housing affordability is a crucial part of this effort. about buildings and their contexts. 3. Charleston will look like Charleston, with recognition that the city’s eras of development each have a distinct and valuable character, which collectively represent the continuity of its rich history. There are no easy answers to the question of appropriate architectural styles for Charleston. This issue requires 4. The peninsula will continue to grow as a dense and diverse urban community consistent with its ongoing community dialogue. The buildings that often historic development patterns. prompt public controversy—large structures with little 5. The natural landscapes in Charleston are important parts of the city’s cultural and environmental historical or stylistic precedent in Charleston—are espe- heritage. These landscapes will be protected with planning and conservation tools. cially important to assess. The Plan recommends that a New Charleston typology, focused on integrating large 6. Suburban neighborhoods are the potential historic resources of the future. They will be treated ac- new buildings into the existing context, be developed. cordingly, with the goal of reducing sprawl through development consistent with traditional patterns.

7. Dense urban architecture and infill development will be encouraged where infrastructure supports such development. Publicly accessible open space is central to successful development. 8. Charleston’s historic architecture sets a high and challenging standard. This tradition of high-quality architecture and building materials will be required in all projects in the city. 9. Charleston’s policies will encourage a balance of diverse, appropriate, and compatible uses to make it a truly living city with continuing neighborhood vitality and livability. 10. Charleston will be a responsible steward of its environment, both built and natural: environmental and cultural sustainability will be considered in planning decisions that affect development. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

In the thirty years since 1974, the population has grown to nearly 120,000 and land area has increased fivefold to more than 100 square miles.

Charleston’s Expanding Horizon

The Charleston of today is very different from what it was in 1931 and 1974, when the original Preservation Ordi- nance and the Historic Preservation Plan made national history. Between 1931 and 1974, Charleston’s population rose from 62,000 to 67,000, and land area grew from 6 square miles to 18 square miles. In the more than thirty years since 1974, the population has grown to nearly 120,000, and land area has increased fivefold to more than 100 square miles (Figure 1.3). Pre-1960 1970 This growth, unprecedented in Charleston’s history and projected to continue, requires visionary thinking to ensure that it builds upon past success. An influx of interest and financial wherewithal has opened the door to growth on an unprecedented scale. With growth comes great opportunity to reinforce and add to the Charleston landscapes. While standards for guiding growth are set forth in Stewardship Principles, the sections within Charleston’s Expanding Horizon outline practical steps across transportation, infrastructure, and institutional planning to handle that growth.

1990 2007

1.3 Charleston’s growth, 1960–present

1.4 Development near Drayton Hall 8 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Institutions and Preservation It is this diversity of place that makes preservation planning so complicated. Neighborhoods cannot be lumped Several large institutions, including colleges and together in planning efforts. Recognizing this, the City the Port, oversee a number of historic resources and of Charleston is moving toward neighborhood-based indirectly influence many more through their actions. planning. This Plan reinforces that shift by evaluating Effective integration of large institutional buildings that historic resources and issues neighborhood by neigh- border historic neighborhoods should be explored to borhood. Dedication to maintaining each area’s unique help define campus boundaries and positively reinforce character is reflected in Neighborhoods, which explores neighborhood edges. the history, issues, and opportunities present in each area of the city.

Diversity of Place To Each Place Its Own 1.5 Wagener Terrace, in the Upper Penninsula, is a cohesive twentieth-century neighborhood. A drive or stroll through the city reveals a variety of Building type and style, lot size, streets, landscaping— historic resources, from the very urban to the very rural: each neighborhood is composed of many factors that Smarter Growth gracious homes and intimate alleys south of Broad make it an interesting, well-rounded place. Wagener Street, cohesive neighborhoods along Rutledge Avenue, Terrace is noted for its cohesive architectural feel, but The city limits encompass a rare mix of dense urban residential neighborhoods and spreading oaks west of this element combines with generous front lawns, similar fabric, older suburbs, industrial brownfields, rural land, the Ashley River and on James Island, the expansive building placement on lots, gables and porches, doors set and recent development. The large lots of new suburbs, vistas on Johns Island, Cainhoy’s unpaved lanes. These into the front façade, and street trees to make it a distinct which relax historically tight development patterns, vastly different landscapes maintain a record of the neighborhood. The proposed Area Character Apprais- threaten the rural landscapes that embody a way of life. Charleston area’s growth and development, from the als, or ACAs, study a particular neighborhood, then With preservation of place taken as a given, the Growth late seventeenth-century street grid through modern articulate the elements that contribute to neighborhood and Sprawl section presents ways to lessen the negative building construction in progress. These diverse, well- character. ACAs will be used as a planning and design impacts of existing suburban development and promote preserved landscapes and the histories they recall elevate review tool to ensure that new development reinforces smart planning for future growth (Figure 1.4). Charleston from a small town to a great historic city. the existing context (Figure 1.5). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9

“Only a preservation effort that maintains the vibrancy and diversity of a community as well as its built heritage can truly succeed.”

New Paths for Preservation of embodied energy, and recycles buildings and valuable community fabric. This Plan recommends linking efforts In 1931, Charlestonians rallied around individual of the environmental and preservation movements and buildings. By 1974, the focus was on renewing historic calls for the appointment of a sustainability coordinator neighborhoods. Today, this Plan envisions stewardship to work with the City, nonprofits, and the preservation of Charleston’s heritage as groundwork for the entire community. city’s growth. This vision requires preservation to engage multiple disciplines, pioneer new collaborative efforts, Preservation of Community and embrace fresh subjects and ideas. “Only a preservation effort that maintains the vibrancy and diversity of a community as well as its built heritage Archaeology can truly succeed.” Thus the Housing Affordability sec- Archaeology has the potential to reveal artifacts from tion opens. Because preservation has lasting effects on 1.6 Enston Homes, constructed “to make old age comfortable” precolonial days to the present, uncovering details of quality of life, property values, and demographics, com- for elderly Charlestonians, continues to provide affordable how people lived. The Mayor’s Walled City Task Force munity engagement is critical in building support for housing today. recognized resources in the oldest part of the city, but preservation as a democratic, pluralistic movement. archaeologically significant areas throughout Charleston Disaster Preparedness and Recovery should be protected. An Archaeology Ordinance should Charleston should continue to integrate historic be passed before the advent of major developments that preservation and community development by hiring Charleston’s wealth of historic resources and its remark- might otherwise permanently damage or obscure below- a development review/affordable housing liaison and able history of experiencing—and recovering from— ground resources. exploring cost-efficient, contextually sensitive designs for disasters make disaster preparedness and recovery a affordable housing. Funding should be secured to create necessary component of this Preservation Plan. An edu- more affordable housing in historic buildings and new cated, involved public is essential to effective preparation Sustainability developments, zoning should require new residential de- for and response to disasters. A Preservation Response Preservation has long practiced “the three R’s” of the velopments to include a percentage of affordable housing Network (PRN) of concerned agencies and organizations environmental movement—reduce, reuse, and recycle. units, and historic housing should be retained as owner- can formalize response efforts by developing and imple- Preservation reduces the amount of natural resources occupied and affordable rental units (Figure 1.6). menting a Heritage Disaster Management Plan. and land used in constructing new buildings, encourages reuse of structures and materials to make the most 10 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

1.7 Harleston Village, in the Lower Peninsula

1.8 Upper King Street, in the Mid-Peninsula 1.9 Moe’s Crosstown Tavern, in the Upper Peninsula’s North Central neighborhood EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11

Neighborhoods date much change, and new buildings must fit into the area while maintaining its historic value, diversity, mix established context in the few remaining development of uses, and affordability should be a priority. As in the This city’s dynamic history is communicated by its opportunities. Union Pier and Concord Park are notable Lower Peninsula, contextual, high-quality design should neighborhoods and landscapes, which often differ exceptions as large mixed-use redevelopment projects be required in all new developments (Figure 1.8). dramatically but collectively comprise the place that is with the potential to spark the development of a uniquely Charleston. It is no surprise, then, that stewardship of Charleston urban architecture—the New Charleston The area is currently under the jurisdiction of the Board these neighborhoods and landscapes presents distinctly typology. Elsewhere, infill development must respect of Architectural Review (BAR) and classified as eligible different challenges and opportunities. From the East the context of this most historically important district for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Side to Riverland Terrace, Hampton Park Terrace to (Figure 1.7). Expanding the Charleston National Register Historic Johns Island, historic suburbs in West Ashley to Cainhoy District would enable use of federal and state tax credits Village, this Plan offers a path for each that seeks to bal- In part because of successful historic preservation in this for rehabilitation projects. Combined with steps to retain ance growth and preservation. area, housing affordability has decreased. Increasing the housing affordability and increase homeownership, supply of housing that is affordable to a range of Charles- these incentives could greatly benefit current long-term While Area Character Appraisals (ACAs) and conser- tonians should be included in preservation, planning, residents. vation districts identify the individual importance of and nonprofit efforts, with innovative programs and new different parts of the city, the sections in Neighborhoods sources of funding explored. Improved public access to Upper Peninsula explore them more fully, focusing on issues and opportu- the riverfront would benefit residents, downtown em- nities specific to each area. ployees, and visitors. Upper Peninsula neighborhoods have remained remark- ably cohesive since their development in the early twentieth century. Hampton Park Terrace has been recognized Lower Peninsula Mid-Peninsula as a National Register Historic District, but neither it Planning for the Lower Peninsula requires balancing his- The Mid-Peninsula combines the historic architecture nor other area neighborhoods receive BAR oversight of toric preservation and development pressures; old build- of the Lower Peninsula with exciting opportunities for new construction or alterations. This Plan recommends ings and new ones; and the multiple needs of residents, redevelopment that can strengthen the existing com- putting all National Register Historic Districts and newly institutions, and visitors. As the traditional geographic munity character and benefit current residents. More created conservation districts under BAR jurisdiction, nexus of preservation in Charleston, this area has long outreach and responsiveness to community concerns are with BAR review eventually extended over the entire Up- been the center of revitalizing preservation efforts, and needed to connect historic preservation with community per Peninsula (Figure 1.9). its continuing protection must remain a top priority. rewards, as past preservation efforts have sometimes The area’s tight-knit historical fabric cannot accommo- lacked local support. Directing new development in this 12 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

1.10 Rosemont, in the Neck 1.12 James Island’s Riverland Terrace neighborhood

1.11 Byrnes Downs, in West Ashley 1.13 Johns Island EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13

Efforts to strengthen major north-south corridors and West Ashley A variety of historic resources, ranging from 1860s east-west axes should protect existing neighborhoods earthworks to twentieth-century Riverland Terrace, and the Upper Peninsula’s diverse commercial and Significant growth here underscores the need for a West should be recognized and preserved. McLeod Planta- civic uses. Infrastructure improvements should include Ashley Comprehensive Plan jointly developed by the tion, a major historic resource, should be the focus of a pedestrian pathways and cyclist routes. Planned new City and County of Charleston. Generic new develop- management plan developed with the American College developments present the opportunity to develop a New ments also highlight the need to protect the character of of the Building Arts, Historic Charleston Foundation, Charleston typology for large-scale buildings, with historic inner-ring suburbs through ACAs and conser- and the City of Charleston (Figure 1.12). special attention paid to contextual design at the edges of vation districts. These neighborhoods, most developed residential neighborhoods. between 1924 and 1950, show how Charleston responded Johns Island to the innovations and events of the early to mid-twentieth century. This relatively undeveloped area stands as an anomaly The Neck in Charleston’s booming building climate. Its rural A historic home to heavy industry, the Neck is poised for West Ashley’s older history as an agricultural area landscapes are invaluable cultural, historical, and transformation by extensive mixed-use developments. should also be protected. The remaining historic planta- environmental resources. To protect them, the Urban These new developments, if sensitively designed, could tions and rural land here should be protected through Growth Boundary must be maintained, and proposed help propel the New Charleston typology into architec- conservation easements and, less directly, smart growth large transportation and development projects should ture that belongs to Charleston as much as the single practices that reduce the land area used by new develop- be thoroughly evaluated for their impacts on the land, house. ments (Figure 1.11). residents, and ecology. City and County planning, land use, and zoning policies should be coordinated. It is important to protect compact existing residential James Island neighborhoods as these large new developments are planned and built. Zoning changes, sensitively designed On rapidly growing James Island, growth must be edges of development, and carefully planned new infra- directed wisely and sprawl contained. Conservation structure will help the historic workers’ communities easements and smart growth tools will help preserve the in the Neck retain their character and physical form. remaining open space on James Island. Creating pedes- Inclusionary zoning would allow longtime residents, 40 trian and bicycle infrastructure—both here and in West percent of whom live below the poverty line, to stay in Ashley—is a necessary step toward improving neighbor- the area (Figure 1.10). hood livability. 14 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

As development proposals on Johns Island increase, long-term communities and unrecognized historic resources must be protected. Heirs’ property, or land that has been divided between family members through succession, is closely tied to Johns Island’s long-standing African American community and rural development patterns. Cemeteries and other archaeological resources on the island should be recorded and preserved, along with rural roads and scenic corridors (Figure 1.13).

Cainhoy

Cainhoy illustrates the need for regional planning. Lo- cated on the edge of booming Daniel Island in Berkeley County, new development encroaches on Cainhoy’s historic resources. Historic village development patterns should be encouraged through low-density zoning and maintenance of rural roads.

The historic settlement should be protected through BAR review, both as a National Register Historic District and the proposed Cainhoy character area conservation district. As on Johns Island, heirs’ property issues should be resolved and archaeological resources protected (Figure 1.14).

1.14 Cainhoy Village store EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15

Historic Resource Surveys

Historic resource surveys should be integrated as planning tools and expanded to include context statements, cultural landscape components, and historic interiors. This underscores the Plan’s theme of recasting preservation as an active contributor to current and future planning efforts. This section summarizes surveys that have been conducted in Charleston, including a pilot survey undertaken as part of this Plan, and recommends specific steps to standardize, integrate, and expand surveys as tools for strong planning.

Historic Context Statement

Here you will find the story of Charleston. Beginning with Native American settlements that occupied the area for more than 12,000 years and continuing through the new Cooper River Bridge in modern times, the Historic Context Statement weaves the broad themes of history into the patterns of the city’s physical development. It helps explain how local and national politics, society, and culture shaped Charleston’s streets and buildings.

The Historic Context Statement lays an important foundation for policy and education. In tracking the 1.15 View of Charleston Harbor circa 1739 history that has influenced Charleston’s growth, it helps residents and policy makers to better understand the city’s physical, political, and social development—and how historic resources can be managed within their specific context. 16 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

ven in this brief Executive Summary, it is evident that the scope of the Charleston Pres- How to Use This Document ervation Plan stretches far beyond traditional boundaries. There is a growing awareness of This Plan has been written for both laypeople the impact that preservation values can make in the and preservation professionals. Thus, narra- E tive text in each section explains the concepts course of urban planning. The volume of comments re- behind recommendations, whether basic or ceived from Charlestonians on subjects such as transpor- advanced, and how they apply to Charleston. tation and affordable housing signals a readiness for this Bulleted recommendations follow the text. innovative and expansive approach to preservation and Many recommendations in the Plan appear in preservation planning. more than one place. These repeated recommendations are a reflection of integrated poli- This Preservation Plan speaks to Charleston as it is, as cies and are noted by different symbols. Letters it has been, and as it could be. It digs deep into local following some recommendations signify that history and potential to propose a vision for Charleston legal changes may be required (L) and that as a city renowned for both its history and its dynamic additional relevant information can be found in forward-thinking planning. In calling for preservation the Resources section (A). All recommendations to address nontraditional issues, this Plan opens up are included in Next Steps with responsibilities preservation in Charleston to all citizens: not only those and priorities assigned. with historic houses, but all who care about the city. Symbols For although this Plan was commissioned by the City of Charleston and Historic Charleston Foundation, it  Recommendation belongs to the entire community. Only public affirmation  Repeated recommendation can make its recommendations come alive. L Legal issues A See Resources section

1.16 The new Cooper River Bridge EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 17

Introduction

INTRODUCTION 21

harleston’s rich history is a vital component of this growing city. The city’s appeal raises a pressing question: how can necessary changeC be balanced with preservation of the buildings, culture, and history that make the city such a desirable place to live, work, and visit? The goal of this Plan is to answer that question through policies that support continuing stewardship of Charleston’s diverse historic areas and to chart a bright course for the future of preservation in the city. 22 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

As city limits and populations have shifted and expanded, perceptions of historic resources have changed.

Charleston’s boundaries have been static for much of changed. Early preservation efforts focused on the With recent and continuing annexations, the Charles- its history. However, in the ten years leading to 2000, oldest buildings south of Broad Street.4 Since 1931, the ton community again must consider the boundaries municipal jurisdiction more than doubled, growing to Old and Historic District has grown from 138 acres to and scope of its architectural and historical impor- 89 square miles (Figures 2.2-2.4).1 At the same time, over 1,000 acres and contains almost 5,000 structures tance. The Lower Peninsula and the Mid-Peninsula Charleston’s population grew 32 percent, more than built between 1712 and 1945.5 Upper Peninsula neigh- hold the core of the historic city, but the Upper double the growth rate for the previous decade and borhoods have gained recognition in the recent past, Peninsula and the Neck contain important records approaching the 47 percent growth rate of the 1840s such as with the listing of Hampton Park Terrace as a of the city’s later residential and industrial past. West boom.2 (Half the population growth is the result of National Register Historic District. Off-peninsula his- Ashley’s neighborhoods reflect the architecture and land annexation.) Still, growth has not peaked: the toric resources have also been recognized: portions of development patterns of the mid-twentieth century, city’s population is expected to increase by 51 percent West Ashley, James Island, Johns Island, and Cainhoy and several areas on James and Johns Islands and in between 2000 and 2015.3 have been surveyed since 1989, and properties both on Cainhoy are considered important by virtue of the Sea and off the peninsula have been added to the National Island/Lowcountry history. The historic significance of Just as city limits and populations have shifted and Register of Historic Places and the City’s Landmark these areas must be addressed, especially in the face of expanded, perceptions of historic resources have Overlay. encroaching development.

2.1 Panoramic view of Charleston, 1912 INTRODUCTION 23

2.2 Charleston, 1704

2.3 Charleston, 1974 2.4 As Charleston continues to expand, historic and architectural resources in all the city’s neighborhoods should be evaluated. 24 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

1974 to 2007 and has nearly 120,000 residents, and the center of population is shifting off the peninsula.7,8 Property Charleston’s first Historic Preservation Plan was values are rising across the city—a hardship for some, written in 1974, when the center city was languishing. but a definite sign of economic prosperity. Businesses on King Street were struggling, and the Cooper River waterfront had serious environmental Despite these drastic changes, many preservation- problems (Figure 2.5). Historic buildings on Meeting related concerns remain the same as they were in Street and East Bay Street were in serious disrepair, 1974. People continue to want traffic mitigation, and over half of the buildings on many blocks were de- better-maintained streets and sidewalks, zoning that teriorated. Charleston had a population of about 67,000 supports preservation efforts, and more open space— and covered 18.2 square miles.6 subjects connected to preservation as significant quality-of-life concerns. These issues comprise “place The Historic Preservation Plan was written in these making,” or the practice of creating healthy commu- 2.5 In 1974, Charleston’s waterfront and city center were conditions as an effort to catalyze investment in his- nities by establishing proportion, scale, and densities languishing. toric resources and improve the quality of life in the that best reflect community setting and character.9 city. It undertook a comprehensive survey of the city south of the Crosstown Expressway—Charleston’s first Increasing BAR authority, enforceable guidelines, building-by-building survey and a stron g marker of and a clear design review process for new buildings the value of the city’s historic resources. Its recommen- remain priorities. The potentially prohibitive expense dations included a stricter height ordinance downtown of maintaining historic properties is still a concern. and allocated more power to the Board of Architectur- Growth and change, a diversity of uses, and support al Review (BAR) through increased regulatory author- of local businesses were all issues then and continue ity and a larger geographic purview, with the goal of now as people look to the community’s economic countering disinvestment in the urban core. health.

Today, downtown Charleston is a thriving, densely Other issues from 1974 resurfaced in 2006–07, but historic place (Figure 2.6). Significant residential and with changed attitudes. Overcrowding and neglect commercial development is occurring off-peninsula. In were at the heart of housing worries in 1974. Now 2007, the city as a whole spreads over 100 square miles the focus is on the dearth of affordable housing and

2.6 King Street (above, 2007), has become a thriving commercial corridor since the 1974 Historic Preservation Plan was written. INTRODUCTION 25

“She guards her buildings, customs and laws.”

maintaining community diversity. Current comments There is a distinct language difference in how concerns reflect much more wariness of dense development than were articulated between the 1974 Historic Preserva- was expressed in 1974. The 1974 plan was less critical tion Plan and the public comments received for this of institutional expansion than 2006–07 comments, Plan. The 1974 plan spoke of Charleston’s heritage praising the College of Charleston for its adaptive re- reverently: legacy, lingering romance, a museum of use of historic buildings as college housing and offices. marvelous design skills and ingenuity. In 2006–07, Charlestonians approached preservation with respect, New concerns have arisen with the success of pres- but also with an urgent emphasis on vision. It is im- ervation efforts and the growth of the city in the last portant to look to the future, people urged, and create 2.7 Charleston Battery thirty-odd years. A lively debate over preservation policies and practices that support a city in which his- of interiors, county standards for preservation, reuse tory is living and relevant. of historic buildings, and standards for rehabilitation reflect the city’s desire to set a course for future preservation efforts. Concerns about tourism, absentee Context for the Plan or part-time homeowners, and condominiums speak to the city’s increased attraction. Charleston’s commitment to preservation began with its establishment in 1783. The nascent city’s motto— Land annexations have extended the potential field for “She guards her buildings, customs, and laws”— preservation to off-peninsula neighborhoods, while forecast a strong dedication to preservation of the local increasing recognition of Upper Peninsula historic re- built environment. 2.8 West Ashley sources may spur preservation in that area. The desire to expand preservation into the community shows in In 1931 Charleston adopted the first historic district concerns about public education and participation. zoning ordinance in the country and created the Other concerns about archaeology, FEMA regula- Board of Architectural Review (BAR) to oversee new tions, and accessibility for the disabled demonstrate construction and alterations in the Old and Historic public awareness of wide-ranging issues connected to District. This Is Charleston, a 1944 citywide survey of preservation. historic buildings, was the first published architectural inventory of an American city.

2.9 Upper Peninsula 26 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Charleston adopted the Feiss-Wright Survey and Historic Preservation Plan in 1974 to catalogue and protect local historic resources.10 While elements of city and area plans have since addressed preservation concerns in one way or another, it is time for another comprehensive look at historic preservation in Charles- ton. This Preservation Plan used a community-driven process to evaluate current and emerging preservation efforts and issues, consider the expanded city limits, and develop an updated vision for the future.

Other Plans

This Plan draws upon many existing planning documents. Of note are the 2000 Century V City Plan (Charleston’s Comprehensive Plan), the 2005 Consoli- dated Plan for housing and community development, the 1999 Charleston Downtown Plan and other area plans, the 1974 Historic Preservation Plan, and institutional master plans (Figures 2.10-2.12). South Caro- lina’s 2007 State Historic Preservation Plan, Preserving Our Past to Build a Healthy Future, provides a concise statement of the reasons and resources to support preservation and suggests further incentives. 2.10-2.12 This Plan will be used in conjunction with many existing planning documents, such as the Century The 1999 Charleston County Comprehensive Plan V City Plan (2000), the Charleston Downtown Plan calls for “preservation of rural community character, (1999), and the Historic Preservation Plan (1974). preservation of cultural resources, and traditional lifestyles”; public education about historic preservation INTRODUCTION 27

and its benefits; and coordinated preservation efforts Five surveys between 1989 and 2005 examined historic between county and city governments, state and fed- resources in off-peninsula areas. Over 1,200 historic eral agencies, and nonprofit organizations. Berkeley resources were surveyed in these efforts. Two surveys County is currently preparing a comprehensive plan; were commissioned in 1989 and 1992 to cover the City current policy does not include a historic preserva- of Charleston and the County of Charleston, respec- tion component. tively. Portions of James and Johns Islands were surveyed in 1989, Cainhoy Village was surveyed in 2001, and the Crescent Survey was completed in 2005. Historic Resource Surveys

Historic resource surveys collect information on an As part of this Preservation Plan, one pilot survey area’s historic resources, enabling those resources was conducted in partnership with the College of to be considered in planning decisions. Surveying Charleston/Clemson University Historic Preserva- can be done at reconnaissance or intensive levels, tion Program. The survey, which included portions but it always includes fieldwork and research into a of Lenwood Boulevard, compared past and current community’s history and architecture. Before the late historic resource survey standards and evaluated mid- 1980s, all surveys focused on the peninsula, reflect- twentieth-century suburban resources. (See Historic ing the long-held view that the bulk of the city’s Resource Surveys.) historic resources are located south of the Crosstown Expressway. The first effort, the 1944 This Is Charles- ton survey, included resources from the Lower and Mid-Peninsula areas (Figure 2.13). The 1972–73 Feiss- Wright Survey covered the Lower Peninsula and the Mid-Peninsula, and the Geier-Brown-Renfrow Survey covered the Mid-Peninsula in 1985. The Upper Pen- insula Survey was completed in 2004. Together, these four surveys documented 9,379 historic resources on the peninsula. 2.13 This Is Charleston (1944) was the first major effort to survey Charleston’s historic resources. 28 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

How Preservation Fits Other City departments address preservation from County Government other specialized angles. The Charleston Civic Design Coordination with county agencies is especially With Charleston’s history obvious in many of the Center provides a forum for public discussion, educa- important in West Ashley, James Island, Johns Island, spaces and paths of daily life, it is not surprising that tion, and involvement on issues of urban design, in- and Cainhoy, where lands under county and city many groups are actively engaged in preservation of cluding structures and areas in local historic districts. jurisdiction are interwoven. The Berkeley-Charleston- historic buildings, cultural resources, and open space. The Building Inspections Division of the Department Dorchester Council of Governments (COG) is involved Supported by a strong local preservation ethos, they of Public Service enforces code-related BAR decisions, in regional transportation and planning, two regional have pioneered preservation policies and explored both and Livability Court handles other BAR violations issues of particular significance in the hot development subtle and bold solutions to preservation challenges in when necessary. The Homeownership Initiative and climate. Charleston. Redevelopment and Preservation Commission, both of which rehabilitate historic homes, involve the Depart- County plans for transportation and open space were ment of Housing and Community Development in City Government prepared in 2006. To encourage continuing coordi- preservation. nation between the County and the City, staff liai- The Department of Planning, Preservation and sons should be designated for parks departments on Economic Innovation regulates protection of historic Yet more departments and divisions affect and are af- both levels of government. The 2006 Comprehensive resources, in addition to its zoning and urban design fected by historic preservation. The Office of Neighbor- Greenbelts Plan for Charleston County and the 2006 functions. More specifically, the Architecture and hood Services facilitates neighborhood associations, Proposed Comprehensive Transportation Plan should Preservation Division oversees administration of the which may be active in historic preservation efforts in be consulted in conjunction with planning efforts. local historic districts and provides staff support to the their neighborhoods. The Department of Parks main- citizen Board of Architectural Review (BAR). The BAR tains public open space and, in conjunction with the Preserving historically and culturally significant is responsible for the preservation of Charleston’s local Tree Ordinance and the Board of Zoning Appeals-Site properties is part of the Charleston County Parks and historic districts. Practically, this means that it reviews Design, protects trees on public and private property. Recreation Commission’s mission, and the Open Space rehabilitations, new construction, and demolitions in The Geographic Information System (GIS) staff pro- Analysis of the Commission recommends partnering areas and of buildings that have been deemed historic duces maps that show historic resources and how they with preservation organizations to acquire, preserve, and/or architecturally significant. This Plan recom- relate to other layers of information about the city. The maintain, and improve historic properties when fund- mends a number of changes in BAR jurisdiction (see Department of Traffic and Transportation maintains ing is available. The possibility of forming coalitions Design Review). infrastructure and plans for traffic to move residents, with foundations and preservation organizations to workers, and visitors around Charleston, and the Office fund, interpret, maintain, and operate historic proper- of Tourism Management regulates visitor activities. ties should be explored: Foundations might have the financial resources to acquire the properties, historic INTRODUCTION 29

preservation organizations could aid in rehabilitation The Preservation Society of Charleston, founded in In concert with one of the major themes of this and interpretation, and the CCPRC could assume 1920, is the oldest community-based membership document – the close relationship between preser- responsibility for maintaining the properties and preservation organization in the country. In 1931 the vation of physical spaces and preservation of com- keeping them open to the public. Society led the way in the City of Charleston’s adop- munities – successful preservation and revitalization tion of the first historic district zoning ordinance in require other strong community institutions. Schools, the U.S. The Fall Tour of Homes and Gardens, the churches, neighborhoods with a variety of uses, and Organizations annual Carolopolis Awards, the Society’s newsletter, safety and crime prevention are all part of building a A variety of organizations works to preserve historic the Historic Marker program, exterior and interior thriving, vibrant city. buildings, cultural landscapes, and other heritage easements, and a fifty-year-old Planning and Zoning resources in Charleston. Several affordable housing Committee are integral parts of the Society’s preser- nonprofit organizations also participate in historic vation advocacy. Scope preservation directly or indirectly. For the most part, these organizations’ efforts are targeted at specific -ar Preservation can relate to virtually every part of life Institutions eas and are addressed in the Neighborhoods section. in Charleston. In some parts of the city, evidence of Charleston’s principal preservation organizations Institutions are important players in Charleston’s history is everywhere: buildings, streets, a distinct air are Historic Charleston Foundation (HCF) and the preservation scene. They are discussed in the Institu- of the past infused with the vibrancy of modern daily Preservation Society of Charleston; a more complete tions section of Charleston’s Expanding Horizon. life. In other areas, contextual history is less easily felt list of organizations can be found in the Preservation but no less present. The suburbs of West Ashley, the Organizations section in Resources. rural island landscapes, and the neighborhoods of the Community Involvement Upper Peninsula all speak to important aspects of the Historic Charleston Foundation, founded in 1947, Under Mayor Joseph P. Riley, Jr., the City has pri- city’s history. approaches preservation as an advocate, educator, oritized citizen involvement in the planning and and conservator. HCF’s most prominent role may preservation process. One hundred neighborhood be as owner and operator of the Nathaniel Russell councils deal with localized concerns and opportuni- House and the Aiken-Rhett House museums. HCF ties, including preservation. The new Community also holds nearly 400 preservation easements and Districts Program focuses on improving particular protective covenants and operates volunteer commit- areas and focusing and prioritizing public invest- tees like the Livable City Committee, which tackles ments in each area.12 Fourteen Community Districts diverse issues related to tourism and other quality of have been delineated, with final boundaries contin- life concerns.11 gent on citizen approval. 30 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Charlestonians support this broad view of preservation. Nearly 1,500 public comments were gathered as Developing the Preservation Plan an integral first step in the Preservation Plan process. This Plan presents a vision for Charleston that encompasses the city’s rich The topics ranged broadly, reflecting the general history and dynamic future. Over the course of the last year, development view that everyday life in Charleston is inextricably of this vision has included completing field work, researching preservation entwined with historic preservation issues, from parks policies from around th U.S. and the world, collecting community input, and to traffic to housing. Preserving physical history is the consulting with local experts. This document exists for Charleston and her foundation and starting point for preservation, but the residents because a concerted effort was made throughout the process to field has expanded to include much more. involve Charlestonians with diverse backgrounds and concerns. A series of community meetings and focus groups, a standing Citizen Advisory Group, Preservation has become part of a larger movement and extensive public feedback were invaluable components of the planning to build sustainable communities with a strong sense process that served to strengthen the Plan: of their histories and clear visions for the future. This Plan envisions a framework for historic preservation • 7 community meetings that integrates preservation as a vital, exciting part of Charleston’s development, economy, housing, and • 11 focus groups environment. The policy recommendations contained • 500 participants in the public process herein should be viewed as guidelines for building that 1,500 public comments informed the recommendations framework. • • 100, 000+ Charlestonians will be affected by the Plan INTRODUCTION 31 32 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina Stewardship Principles

STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 35

he guards her buildings, customs and laws. Charleston’s motto leaves no doubt that the city is fiercely protective of its historic resources. BuildingsS mark Charleston’s progression from colonial village to antebellum town and through the postwar years. They endow the city and its residents with a strong sense of history, a high quality of life, and a thriving tourist industry. Charleston also has national and international significance as a well-preserved built record of history.

The sections in Stewardship Principles explore how to continue Charleston’s strong preservation record as new developments herald significant change. Contextual new design, wise land use, and clear, inclusive design review processes are emphasized as ways to safeguard and strengthen the city’s remarkable heritage. 36 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

New Construction

In the historic fabric of the peninsula and off-peninsula, Proposed Charleston Vision many opportunities exist for new development. Consid- ering how new buildings will interact with Charleston’s The Charleston Vision sets forth a long-term direction historic landscape is especially important in the current for Charleston (Figure 3.1). It is the heart of this Plan development climate, boosted by the city’s popularity. and should be the foundation of future planning and New buildings may contribute to Charleston’s distinc- development efforts. The ten vision statements possess tive architectural landscape, or they may serve only as a generality that will allow them to guide Charleston’s structural fillers between historic buildings. growth and preservation well into the future, yet are also definite enough to support specific policies. The clear To provide a framework for the design of new construc- language and unambiguous ideas should make Charles- tion and a direction for the larger development of the ton’s overarching priorities and standards clear to all city, this Plan proposes a Charleston Vision, elaborated citizens. by urban design principles. A form-based approach to 1. Historic preservation is an integral part of Charles- zoning could translate the Charleston Vision and the ton’s history and will continue to inspire the City’s urban design principles into zoning law, urban design vision and its approach to planning and develop- standards, and some architectural guidance. Area Char- ment. acter Appraisals (ACAs) complete the system by giving neighborhood-specific guidance on streetscapes and 2. Charleston will sustain its rich and dynamic cul- buildings for residents, developers, Board members, and tural heritage by retaining its long-standing com- City staff. FEMA requirements are also examined here munities. Housing affordability is a crucial part of for their significant impact on new construction. this effort.

3. Charleston will look like Charleston, with recognition that the city’s eras of development each have a distinct and valuable character, which collectively represent the continuity of its rich history.

4. The peninsula will continue to grow as a dense and diverse urban community consistent with its historic development patterns. 3.1 The Charleston Vision sets a long-term direction for Charleston’s future growth and preservation. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 37

A uniform style code is neither realistic nor desirable; new construction should take a variety of forms and styles, with the consistent expectation of quality design.

5. The natural landscapes in Charleston are impor- Urban Design Principles tant parts of the city’s cultural and environmental heritage. These landscapes will be protected with Urban design principles will help translate the Charles- planning and conservation tools. ton Vision into working policy by providing more specific ideas as to how a citywide vision can be reflected 6. Suburban neighborhoods are the potential his- in the built environment. These principles are widely toric resources of the future. They will be treated recognized in urban design: design, height, scale, accordingly, with the goal of reducing sprawl architectural rhythm, siting, and materials. They aim to through development consistent with traditional articulate elements of existing sites so that new develop- patterns. ment can better fit in, or to develop wise guidelines for 7. Dense urban architecture and infill development large areas of new development. will be encouraged where infrastructure supports such development. Publicly accessible open space Charleston’s present architectural vernacular en- is central to successful development. compasses diverse stylistic elements that reflect the evolution of the city to the present. With such a varied 8. Charleston’s historic architecture sets a high and background, a uniform style code is neither realistic challenging standard. This tradition of high- nor desirable; new construction should take a variety of quality architecture and building materials will be forms and styles, with the consistent expectation of and required in all projects in the city. requirements for quality design in the context of the 9. Charleston’s policies will encourage a balance of city, the area, the neighborhood, and the block. diverse, appropriate, and compatible uses to make it a truly living city with continuing neighborhood Charleston has few historic precedents for very large vitality and livability. buildings. During the late nineteenth century, when some cities were embarking on skyscraper co nstruc- 10. Charleston will be a responsible steward of its tion, Charleston was recovering from the economic environment, both built and natural: environmen- effects of the Civil War and the hurricane of 1886. Large tal and cultural sustainability will be considered in historical buildings in the city rarely reach higher than planning decisions that affect development. four stories. 3.2 Charleston’s buildings reflect the city’s evolution in their diversity of stylistic elements. 38 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Significant challenges arise in translating Charleston’s iconic small-scale architecture, such as the single house or the King Street commercial building, into larger buildings. The “one style fits all sizes” approach taken by Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Santa Barbara, Califor- nia, does not work here: enlarged replicas lack the detail and small scale that distinguish Charleston’s historic streetscapes and dilute the remarkable sense of authenticity created by so many historic buildings.1 Charleston has struggled to find an appropriate contextual vocabu- lary for new construction as new functions, building codes, and cost considerations demand larger buildings.

New buildings become local successes because they 3.3 Limits on the number of floors can preserve a city’s varied skyline more effectively than height limits. respect and draw from local traits.2 Quality design requires acknowledgment of surrounding buildings, whether a traditional or modern approach is taken. Ba- nal new construction, regardless of architectural style, dilutes the city’s rich sense of place. New buildings in Charleston must acknowledge their context and the city’s rich history. Buildings out of scale with their surroundings and the historic character of Charleston are not acceptable. (The Tower of London was considered for placement on UNESCO’s list of endangered World Heritage Sites due to skyscraper construction around the Tower that threatened its historic context.)3

The urban design principles presented here should form the foundation of future discussions on architectural 3.4 New buildings in Charleston should reflect the scale and 3.5 To retain the architectural rhythm of the city, new historic character of their surroundings. developments (Mid-Peninsula, above) should reference the style. By prioritizing contextual design, these principles patterns of the surrounding neighborhood. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 39

endorse the wealth of existing buildings in Charleston 4. Architectural Rhythm instead of a particular style. Ensuring that height, scale, — The building elements shall visually reference mass, architectural rhythm, siting, and materials are neighboring buildings in the location and frequen- compatible with neighboring buildings is a fundamental cy of placement. first step to quality designs for buildings of any size. — If it is a larger building, the design shall visually separate its bulk into parts comparable to neigh- 1. Design boring buildings. — The design shall reference but not imitate neigh- — The proportion of fenestration, details, and solid- boring buildings. to-void ratios shall be compatible with those of — The design shall insist that the building stands in surrounding buildings (Figure 3.5). Charleston, a place with notable architectural vital- 5. Siting ity, not on a generic highway or strip mall. — The building shall occupy roughly the same place 2. Height on the lot relative to neighboring buildings, unless — The building shall be roughly the same height as greater building height or function warrants differ- 3.6 The South Carolina Aquarium is a rare exception to the neighboring buildings. If it is taller, its function or ent placement. urban design principles. location shall warrant the increased height. — The building shall not interrupt the view of the — The building shall not interrupt the view of the block. Exceptions to Urban Design Principles city’s historic skyline, the block, or important 6. Materials viewsheds to water or along the water’s edge. — The materials shall be of a high and lasting quality. Recognizing that healthy cities are continually evolving, — The ratio of floor-to-floor heights shall be similar to — Materials shall convey the quality of the design and the appropriate architecture is occasionally that which that of neighboring buildings. If the floor-to-floor craftsmanship. goes beyond the bounds of context and urban design ratio is greater, the building’s function or location principles. In this way architecture reflects and contrib- shall warrant the increased height (Figure 3.3). utes to a dynamic, visually interesting city, articulating 3. Scale an important or unique function—or merely emphasiz- — The building’s architectural and massing elements ing local quirks. Exceptions should be rare and site- shall be sized to the same scale as those of neigh- dependent, but some major civic buildings, specialized boring buildings. uses, and smaller-scale buildings do merit exceptions. — The building shall not visually overshadow or over- The pyramidal addition to the Louvre is one example. whelm existing buildings (Figure 3.4). The South Carolina Aquarium and many of Charleston’s 40 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

3.7-3.12 The wide variety of historic resources in Charleston makes introducing new construction challenging. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 41

existing streetscapes provide more local examples, be required to explicitly demonstrate how a design is It is important to provide a forum for ongoing dia- showing both the city’s large buildings and its fine- in keeping with the Area Character Appraisal. ACAs logue—not just salvo exchanges—about buildings in grained fabric with natural variations. Even in excep- may result in the creation of conservation districts, thus Charleston. Differing opinions on architectural style may tional cases, the scale and massing of the surrounding adding a level of formal protection to areas that possess never be reconciled, but the issue can and should cata- buildings should not be ignored entirely (Figure 3.6). outstanding architectural integrity and/or value. lyze a lively public discussion on architecture; indeed, the question of what type of architecture is appropri- Another exception arises when neighboring build- A form-based approach to zoning should be considered ate in historic areas is being raised all over the United ings lack the quality architecture and materials that at the planning level. In general terms, form-based States and the world. Ongoing public dialogue about the distinguish so much of Charleston. When a building’s zoning embodies a long-term community vision for enduring face of historic Charleston should be encour- context is below par, the building should be encour- how a city should look on a smaller scale—that of the aged through a discussion series sponsored by the Civic aged to meet higher standards, not required to match street. Through a creative zoning approach, form-based Design Center or another urban design organization that that context. zoning prioritizes context-sensitive design by evaluat- draws together diverse community members. ing form in place of use. As policy, it can be altered to reflect changing city jurisdiction or landscapes. Taking those discussions as a starting point, a design Other Design Components Form-based codes, or a similar approach to zoning, competition might be held for a major public build- could help put the Charleston Vision and urban design ing or a prominent intersection, with emphasis placed Area Character Appraisals (ACAs) should interpret principles into practice and provide policy support for on design quality and attention to context. The built the urban design principles to the scale of individual Area Character Appraisals. language of the city can reflect diverse perspectives, but buildings and reinforce form-based codes. Conducted the character of the historic district should remain in on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis, ACAs On a large scale, the Charleston Vision should direct keeping with its historic fabric. define the existing physical character of an area by placement and density of new developments. All new focusing on the unique character, architectural style, construction and substantial rehabilitations in Charles- Whether by design competitions in Charleston or building forms, landscape resources, and cultural re- ton should be based on urban design principles, form- architectural reconnaissance work in other cities, good sources that make up the streetscapes and blocks. (See based codes, and Area Character Appraisals. Though examples of contextual architecture from a variety of Area Character Appraisals.) infill can contribute more local housing, commercial stylistic perspectives should be found. space, and opportunities for economic development, ACAs can provide substantive design guidance to buildings out of scale with their surroundings in any ensure that future development will fit in with the part of Charleston may damage that area’s historic established area character. The project applicant should character. 42 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

FEMA Requirements FEMA Map Index Grids

0355J and Out of Date 1998 Q3 Digital Flood Zone Data While the Charleston Vision and urban design principles 0260J 0280J 0285J 0310J 0330J 0335J should provide the ideological foundation for Charles- ton’s physical development, FEMA requirements exert a

very real and powerful effect on new buildings in much 0290J

of the city. Hurricane Hugo was a powerful reminder 0320J 0340J 0345J 0365J 0270J 0295J 0315J Streets

that Charleston’s many low-lying areas are vulnerable to FEMA Index Grids 0288J 0289J flooding. Continued global warming will increase the City of C harleston Water OUT OF DATE 1998 FEMA Q3 Digital Flood Z ones

chance of flooding, and FEMA flood maps will likely be (VE) 1% Annual chance flooding with velocity hazard

(A, AE) 1% Annual chance flooding 0527J 0477J 0481J 0482J 0501J 0502J 0506J 0507J 0526J revised again. The building elevation requirements in 0555J (X500) 0.2% Annual chance flooding

(X) Area outside 1% and 0.2% floodplains these maps can make new construction especially out 0535J 0455J 0460J 0480J

of scale with historic neighborhoods, but they may have 0553J 1 inch equals 12,000 feet 0483J 0484J 0503J 0504J 0508J 0509J 0528J 0529J

the greatest impact in large redevelopment areas. There, 0 5,000 10,000 20,000 blocks of raised buildings—usually with parking at the Feet 00.5 1 2 3 4 5 0517J 0536J 0537J 0541J 0542J 0561J ground level—may be devoid of visual interest at the 0486J 0487J 0491J 0492J 0511J 0512J 0516J Miles street level and discourage pedestrian activity. 0465J 0470J THE CITY OF CHARLESTON MAKES NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTY AS TO TH E CONTENT, SEQUENCE, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN OR DERIVED FROM THIS PRODUCT. THE READER SHOULD NOT RELY ON THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN FOR ANY REASON. 0518J 0519J 0538J 0539J 0543J THE CITY OF CHARLESTON EXPLICITLY DISCLAIMS ANY 0488J 0489J 0493J 0494J 0513J 0514J REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FEMA flood plain regulations affect large areas in FITNESS FOR A PARTICU LAR PURPOSE. THE CITY OF CHARLESTON SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR: 1. ANY ERROR S, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED; OR Charleston that are classified as V-Zones and A-Zones. 2. ANY DECISION MADE OR ACTION TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BY ANY PERSON IN RELIANCE UPON ANY INFORMATION OR DATA FURNISHED HEREUNDER. 0676J 0677J 0681J 0682J DATA REPRESENTED HEREIN REFLECT VARYING STAGES OF V-Zones may be subject to waves, hurricane-force winds, DEVELOPMENT, AND VARYING DATES OF ACQUISITION.

and erosion, in addition to flooding; A-Zones are usu- 0705J 0630J 0635J 0655J 0660J ally located immediately inland from V-Zones and have 0678J 0679J 0685J

fewer restrictions. In V-Zones, FEMA requires new liv- Printed 7/6/2007

City of Charleston ing and retail spaces to be elevated above the Base Flood Planning, Preservation and Economic Innovation Dept 75 Calhoun St, Third Floor Charleston, SC 29401 843.724.3787 Elevation—as high as 17 feet above the 100-year flood 0640J 0645J 0665J 0670J 0686J 0687J 0691J 0692J www.charlestoncity.info (c) Copyright 2007 City of Charleston All Rights Reserved level in certain parts of the peninsula (Figure 3.13). 3.13 FEMA map (1998) indicating flood zones in Charleston STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 43

This Plan joins with the Downtown Plan in supporting Design Policies Major Projects guidelines that offer architectural and urban design  Approve Charleston Vision statements as part of  Create a citywide 3-D digital model to help solutions compatible with both FEMA regulations and Plan planners, citizens, and developers see how Major Charleston’s historic character. The Civic Design Center projects or projects in sensitive areas will affect has successfully advocated for amended V-Zone height  Establish citywide urban design principles area character and density regulations that help activate streetscapes at the ground  Develop ACAs that can be used to assess develop- level. Its work should be expanded into publicly focused  Consider demolishing inappropriately scaled ment proposals and specify localized design char- guidelines with suggestions for gracefully increasing buildings and redeveloping the area with contex- acteristics to aid in decision-making consistency the height of a structure and increasing visual inter- tual buildings or public open space est at street level. A design competition for residential,  Consistently enforce design standards and BAR  Locate higher-density projects in areas of planned commercial, and mixed-use buildings could bring a decisions transit, near major transportation corridors, and wider lens to the issue.  Prioritize quality contextual design by providing in gathering places examples of appropriate contextual style and spon- Outdoor dining and merchant stands, display areas,  Expand the Downtown Plan height study to in- soring design competitions and lobbies can add further vitality to streets in V- clude major gateways outside the Old City Height Zones.4 Nonresidential buildings in the less-stringent  Set high design standards with civic, institutional, District A-Zone may be flood-proofed, or constructed to be and other large-scale buildings  Build on the Downtown Plan’s skyline assess- watertight, instead of elevating the lowest floor.5 This  Facilitate continuing public dialogue through the ment to identify contributing elements of the city measure allows buildings to be more engaged with the Civic Design Center about successful design skyline and protection strategies sidewalk. Commercial activity with a ground floor presence and a mezzanine for safe equipment storage  Consider a form-based approach to zoning A  Study adjustment of parking requirements in ar- helps streetscapes engage pedestrians. eas classified as transitional zones by the charac-  Change zoning to regulate the number of stories ter map to encourage appropriate redevelopment rather than a fixed height, to allow for varied Throughout all discussions of FEMA regulations and heights and roof forms and appropriate street-level architecture, the overarching importance of scale, proportions form, and materials should be recognized, along with the common goal of preserving a healthy, diverse, and dynamic city.

 Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section 44 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Land Use and Regulation

FEMA Design Requirements  Consider pursuing a higher community rating un- In terms of historic preservation, zoning should establish der FEMA’s Community Rating System to receive similar guidelines for form and function so that new  Consider a design competition to define a new discounted flood premium rates, in conjunction development is similar but not identical to existing Charleston architecture typology that complies with architectural and urban design solutions for buildings. This section complements the New Construc- with FEMA flood elevation requirements increased building elevation6 tion and Design Review sections by providing sugges-  Develop design guidelines to offset FEMA flood tions for regulating buildings, urban spaces, and the city  Explore the possibility of a point-based credit elevation requirements as a whole. system with insurance companies, in which insur-  Require nonresidential construction in flood zones ance rates for older, pre-Flood Insurance Rate Map Land use decisions made now will determine the shape to be flood-proofed per FEMA standards where (pre-FIRM) houses would be lowered if additional of Charleston far into the future. The next twenty possible flood-proofing conditions were met other than years—even the next ten—will be a defining time for elevating the building  Formalize the FEMA variance process to allow for the city. Increasing popularity supported by a hospitable more consistent reviews with the Building Inspec- economic climate foreshadow a wave of new develop- tions Division ment. While growth is not inherently bad, new developments consuming rural landscapes around the perimeter of existing urban and suburban areas could irreversibly damage one of the things that make Charleston special. New development should be directed to infill areas and transportation nodes and encouraged to use land in a sustainable, relatively dense manner, with smaller lots or clustered development. (See Growth and Sprawl.)

As large projects in the Neck move forward and planning advances for projects in Johns Island and the Upper Peninsula, the historic forms and spaces that define vari- ous parts of the city as unique, as Charleston, should be recognized and maintained by new developments.

This Plan offers few specific suggestions for zoning changes. Instead, it recommends adopting the Charleston Vision and urban design principles, using STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 45

Land use decisions now will determine the shape of Charleston. The next twenty years—even the next ten—will be a defining time for the city

Area Character Appraisals to evaluate individual areas, and adjusting zoning to align with the established principles and ACAs. A form-based approach, which emphasizes the importance of building form, should be considered to ensure that development projects fit in their context (Figure 3.15). (See Resources) It could be especially relevant to areas without BAR review because it requires that new development be in context with existing buildings.

Height dictates how well a building fits into its context, as well as the building’s square footage. Because it impacts individual profit and neighborhood character, height 3.14 In order to protect the rural landscapes around the city's 3.15 A form-based approach to zoning such as the one presented can become a contentious issue. Height requirements perimeter, new development should be appropriately dense and in the Bull Street Infill Development Plan in Columbia, South should be tailored to the existing neighborhood charac- directed to infill areas. Carolina (above), would be relevant in Charleston. ter through ACAs. To avoid the uniformly flat rooflines at the height maximum and lower first stories of many new buildings, fixed height limits should be replaced by a limit on the number of stories, with a minimum first floor height. This will allow development that maintains Charleston’s varied roofline and historic buildings’ grand first stories with less-stringent limits on square footage.

Like height, building density is an area-specific issue. Low-density development is appropriate in rural areas like Johns Island, especially outside the Urban Growth Boundary, whereas peninsula development has sustained a density that new infill should maintain. New development in largely undeveloped areas such as the Neck may reach an even higher density. The Charleston Zoning Or- dinance regulates building lot occupancy, or the percent- 3.16 Changing the approach to height limits will help maintain Charleston's varied skyline. 46 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Prevent developments which are not in harmony with the prevailing character of Charleston.

age of a lot occupied by buildings. Lot occupancy should Corner stores in a residential neighborhood show how continue to be used as a tool for maintaining historic landscapes underpin historical identity and culture, development patterns and preserving a historic propor- demonstrating historical development patterns and land tion of open space in lots. use priorities. Public open spaces such as parks create a space for public interaction and common history, serv- Density and lot occupancy should maintain historic prec- ing as stages for people to play out a continuing public edent in areas of newer development as well as historic story. Open spaces also can highlight monumental and neighborhoods. Because historic development patterns small-scale buildings around them or, like Charleston’s were established well before automobiles were present, marshes, play an important ecological role. they contribute to a mixed-use environment that requires less driving and uses less land. All ACAs should deter- As public and prominent parts of the Charleston land- mine a neighborhood’s historic uses, density, lot coverage, scape, the Ashley and Cooper Rivers should be accessible and building placement (such as with Sanborn fire insur- to everyone. Developments adjacent to the rivers that 3.17 Corner stores demonstrate historical development patterns ance maps). In newer areas, historic development patterns construct docks should provide at least one dock open and add vitality to Charleston's residential neighborhoods. should be recognized as more sustainable and adapted as to community members (potentially maintained by the appropriate for the context. City and County of Charleston).

In older neighborhoods, a diversity of uses has histori- Nighttime illumination has the potential to light cally thrived. Small shops and other businesses serving Charleston without compromising the historic appear- neighborhood residents were woven into the local fabric, ance of much of the city. Excessively bright lighting largely evidenced in corner-store building types. The high creates dangerous situations for drivers, pedestrians, price of housing in the Lower Peninsula has prompted the and cyclists; and use of modern fixtures detracts from conversion of many corner stores to housing units; how- nineteenth-century streetscapes. Historically appropri- ever, the Mid-Peninsula and Upper Peninsula still have ate light fixtures (luminaires) fitted with unobtrusive many mixed-use areas. The diversity of uses should be lightbulbs can light roadways, bridges, and key build- maintained in these areas and reintroduced to the Lower ings while maintaining a high level of safety and energy Peninsula, if possible. Mixed-use areas can be maintained efficiency. Lighting regulations should be developed for by discouraging changes from a mixed-use to single-use Charleston, with special attention to the historic districts zoning (“down-zoning”) and more easily enabling reuse and the approaches to them, such as over the Ashley 3.18 Open spaces like Charleston's rivers and marshes play of traditionally mixed-use buildings for neighborhood- River Bridge.7 important ecological and social roles. friendly commercial uses. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 47

Height, Scale, and Mass  Designate “nodes” in transition areas near major intersections and corridors, where zoning should  Establish citywide urban design principles permit higher-density developments  Enforce height limits by limiting variances  Reduce parking requirements for mixed-use devel-  Expand the Downtown Plan height study to in- opments by adopting standards that allow shared clude major gateways outside the Old City Height parking District  Utilize auxiliary buildings and garage apartments  Change zoning to regulate the number of stories as scattered-site affordable rental units rather than a fixed height, to allow for varied heights and roof forms and appropriate street-level Uses proportions  Preserve open space as well as buildings: develop  Require an area-specific minimum first-story an open space conservation plan to plan for strate- height, except when FEMA regulations require a gically located development on a citywide scale Base Flood Elevation of 5 feet or more  Encourage mixed-use development in neighbor-  Consider a form-based approach to zoning A hood commercial districts and in defined locations along traffic corridors by zoning target areas as Density Gathering Places

 Maintain historic lot coverage requirements for all  Conduct vacant/underutilized property survey 3.19 The 1974 Plan described Charleston's skyline as new projects, referencing Sanborn fire insurance  Reference the Charleston County Comprehensive "a vital part of the total city scene." To protect this feature, maps and other historical maps (e.g., the 1852 Brid- Greenbelt Plan to advance regional open space the Downtown Plan height study should be expanded. gens and Allen map) to understand areas’ historical planning density  To maintain a diversity of uses, disallow the  Enforce density regulations, especially with regard automatic down-zoning of existing commercial or to rental housing around colleges mixed-use properties to residential use

 Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section 48 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

 Encourage reuse of historic neighborhood commercial buildings through rezoning incentives and public education about rehabilitation incentives for historic buildings

 Follow recommendations of the 2003 City of Charleston Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2012 for developing additional parks

Open Space

 Set public open space requirement for new development

3.20 Waterfront Park, 2007  Define and protect wetlands  Create additional opportunities for public water-  Change zoning to encourage traditionally mixed- front access, in part by requiring private riverside use buildings to be reused for neighborhood- developments to provide publicly accessible docks friendly commercial uses (Figure 3.21)

 Study adjustment of parking requirements in areas Illumination classified as transitional zones by the character map to encourage appropriate redevelopment  Establish appropriate lighting as a salient issue in Charleston, especially in historic districts and the  Publicize the MU-1/WH and MU-2/WH Districts, approaches to them which offer incentives for provision of affordable housing  Adopt lighting regulations for Charleston, with special attention to the historic districts L 3.21 Additional opportunities exist for public waterfront  Require developers to include a minimum of 20 development, as illustrated in the Charleston 2000 Plan. These percent below-market-rate units in all multifam- opportunities should be identified city-wide. ily residential projects of ten units or more (also known as inclusionary zoning)8 L STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 49

Design Review

Design review affects every person who cares about tion of its buildings, neighborhoods, and open space. Charleston’s built environment. This section provides a Located in Article II, Part 6 of the Zoning Ordinance, framework for reviewing minor rehabilitation projects, it sets forth the BAR’s mission: to preserve and protect large new developments, and everything in between. “the old historic or architecturally worthy structures Here are recommendations that help the Preservation and quaint neighborhoods.” It outlines the geographic Ordinance and protected areas to better reflect expanded purview and regulatory authority of the BAR, along city limits and fresh concepts of historic preservation. with the review process and application requirements. Here, too, is discussion of the Board of Architectural Re- view (BAR), the primary instrument of historic preserva- A Common Framework tion in the city. This Plan affirms the Preservation Ordinance and the The Design Review section straddles theory and prac- responsibility of the BAR to “prevent developments tice, principle and policy. It responds to changes in the which are not in harmony with the prevailing character real and political landscape of the city and recommends of Charleston.”9 However, since the Ordinance was first a forward-thinking vision and practical adjustments to written in 1931, Charleston has changed dramatically. 3.22 King Street, circa 1905 guide Charleston into the future. The Lower Peninsula remains the historic heart of the city, but the rapid development and annexation policies necessary for a growing, diverse place, but clear and de- As the Preservation Ordinance establishes the foundation of the last several decades have added more buildings, fensible standards will provide an invaluable framework for and extent of BAR authority, many of the recommenda- more people, and consequently more potential for for evaluating historic structures and landscapes. The tions in this section suggest alterations to this Ordinance. confusion over historic preservation processes and even Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of For readability, however, the Preservation Ordinance sub- what “harmony” means. Significant past and projected Historic Properties provide widely accepted guidelines section contains only major recommended changes. Other growth require continuing stewardship of existing his- for changes to historic buildings, with room for flex- subsections introduce more focused changes. toric areas—and a visionary growth plan to ensure that ibility on a case-by-case basis. The Secretary’s Standards new development contributes to Charleston’s unique should be included in staff, BAR, and public education history. and cited in relevant applications and BAR decisions. Preservation Ordinance Established standards, vision, and design principles are The Preservation Ordinance, the basis of the pioneer- needed so that the Board of Architectural Review can ing preservation movement in Charleston, articulates a effectively evaluate an unprecedented variety and num- commitment to strengthening the city through preserva- ber of projects. Some ambiguity allows the BAR and its staff to use their best judgment, ensuring the flexibility 50 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where (Standards) are set of guidelines for the appropriate management of historic the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, resources. The Standards are utilized by Federal agencies and many local the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where government bodies as a tool for understanding, describing, and evaluating possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated rehabilitative work on historic properties. The Standards provide guidelines for by documentary and physical evidence. four treatments of historic properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. Of these four treatments, the Standards for Rehabilitation 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using are the most widely used: the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and 8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such spatial relationships. resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as its environment. adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 1 0 . New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be right will be retained and preserved. unimpaired.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 51

Though younger resources may be less traditionally “historic” than the Lower Peninsula, they should be recognized and protected.

Just as the Secretary’s Standards establish a basic frame- the importance of preserving trees as sustainers of the Expanded Areas of Protection work for preservation decisions, the Charleston Vision city’s historic character. It should condemn inappro- The passage of time, additional research, and an assertive and urban design principles set forth in this Plan, along priate lighting in historic areas. (See Land Use and annexation policy have resulted in a greater number of with a Charleston-specific overlay to the Secretary’s Stan- Regulation.) Finally, it should establish a procedure for buildings recognized as potential historic resources. dards, should create a common foundation for preserva- creating, updating, and publicizing new BAR policies. The Mid-Peninsula, Upper Peninsula, West Ashley, and tion of place in Charleston. These vision statements and  Apply the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for James and Johns Islands contain built resources that also principles set a course for the BAR, City government, and the Treatment of Historic Properties as the formal speak to the city’s history. Though some of these resourc- residents to ensure that Charleston’s growth will reinforce basis for project evaluation, with a Charleston es may be less traditionally “historic” than the Lower its unique sense of place for decades to come. Standards Overlay Peninsula, they should be recognized and protected.

In most of the country, landmarks are lauded as out-  Establish urban design principles as citywide The Preservation Ordinance designates the Old and standing historic resources or paramount examples policy Historic District and the Old City District as local of architecture or culture. In Charleston, designated  Review all façades for Category 1 and 2 buildings historic districts and provides for BAR oversight of new landmarks are properties outside protected areas that are construction, alterations, and demolitions within them. recognized as worthy of protection. To better reflect the  Amend the Preservation Ordinance to clarify A major step was made in placing the Old and Historic status of these properties, the Landmark Overlay should enforcement procedures for the BAR District under BAR review in 1931, and this district has be renamed the Protected Resources Overlay, with its  Establish demolition by neglect as an issue under been expanded three times since then (Figure 3.23). Now components called Protected Resources. All properties BAR purview it is time for another major step. listed on the National Register of Historic Places should be added to the Protected Resources Overlay, and the  Redefine the Landmark Overlay as the Protected Three National Register Historic Districts within the Preservation Ordinance should establish a process open Resources Overlay city limits currently have little or no BAR oversight to the public for designating other local resources as  Establish and communicate a Protected Resources (Figures 3.23-3.25). These districts, the Hampton Park Protected Resources. designation process; establish means for public Terrace National Register Historic District, the Cain- input to promote designation and inform the City hoy National Register Historic District, and part of the Other smaller changes to the Preservation Ordinance in making designation decisions Ashley River National Register Historic District, deserve will address persistent issues. The Ordinance should local as well as national recognition. This recognition censure demolition by neglect, or the willful neglect of  Cross-reference the Tree Ordinance with the should come with protection: these areas should receive a deteriorating property in order to obtain permission Preservation Ordinance the same level of BAR oversight as properties in the Old for demolition, and create authority and procedures for BAR City staff to enforce this regulation. It should be cross-referenced with the Tree Ordinance to emphasize  Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section 52 City of Charleston — Preservation Plan

National Register of Historic Places

Listing in the National Register of Historic Places honors properties that are associated with significant events or people, or that embody distinctive construction or architecture. Listing in the National Register does not come with any obligations unless the Federal government is involved. The Incentives for Preservation section explains some of the benefits that come with National Register listing.

Existing Historic Districts Existing Old & Historic District Existing Old City District (National Register) (City of Charleston) (City of Charleston)

3.23-3.25 National Register Historic Districts within the city limits include the Old & Historic District, Hampton Park Terrace, Ashley River Historic District, and Cainhoy Historic District. These districts do not currently have uniform levels of BAR oversight. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 53

Register status raised alarm among residents about BAR boundaries, roughly to the Crosstown Expressway. The review, increased property values, higher property taxes, listing process must be preceded by extensive community rising rents, and displacement of long-term residents by outreach that considers residents’ concerns, addresses outside speculators. Outreach efforts did not effectively them effectively, and obtains neighborhood support address these concerns, and widespread public outcry led for the listing. National Register listing makes primary to the proposed expansion not being listed due to owner residences eligible for state tax credits, which benefits area objection. (Figure 3.26) homeowners tremendously. With support from property owners, the state’s Bailey Bill may be passed by the City, Changes to the Zoning Ordinance subsequently expand- enabling special assessments for rehabilitated historic ed the local Old and Historic District to cover the King properties—and low- to moderate-income rental proper- Street commercial corridor to the Crosstown Express- ties. Tax credits for the King Street commercial corridor way, enabling the same level of review as the National could help to revitalize the area. Coupled with the provi- Register Historic District without the benefits. The local sions for housing affordability in this plan, National Reg- Old City District, established south of Line Street to pro- ister listing can help all residents, not just homeowners. tect the numerous historic resources recognized by the Benefits of listing in a National Register Historic District survey, faces a similar situation. BAR jurisdiction was are substantial, but without clear communication and a expanded to this area, adding a layer of oversight similar thorough community process, they may never be realized. to that of the Old and Historic District. Like the King 3.26 The local Old & Historic District boundaries have Street addition to the Old and Historic District, the Old Prior to the consideration of the area as a National changed over time. City District is eligible for listing as a National Register Register Historic District, the Charleston National Historic District and thus is subject to historic resource Register Historic District was expanded on a building- and Historic District and Protected Resources (formerly regulations with none of the advantages that accom- by-building basis, using the tax credits to spur revitaliza- called Landmarks). pany National Register listing.10 The substantial federal tion projects, but the National Park Service now requires and state tax credits for rehabilitations and federal tax that the eligible district be listed in its entirety or not In 1985, the Geier-Brown-Renfrow Survey determined deductions for easements are linked to National Register at all. Though this Plan recommends National Register that the area north of the Charleston National Register status. (See Incentives for Preservation.) Historic District expansion to the 1985 survey boundar- Historic District and south of the Crosstown Express- ies, protection and revitalization of historic resources way was eligible for listing on the National Register, and This Plan maintains that properties in the 1985 survey in any measure should be encouraged. The possibility of State Historic Preservation Office staff completed a -nom are worthy of National Register listing and recommends renewing incremental additions to the National Register ination to expand the existing National Register Historic that the Charleston National Register Historic District Historic District should be explored with the State His- District. However, outreach efforts promoting National be expanded to the 1985 Geier-Brown-Renfrow Survey toric Preservation Office and the National Park Service. 54 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

The introduction of conservation districts provides an opportunity to protect areas important to the context of the City of Charleston. Based on Area Character Ap- praisals (ACAs), these locally designated districts hold resources that help make Charleston what it is: they make Charleston a city of history, tout ensemble, instead of just one or two isolated historic districts. While they may not meet national standards as places essential to Charleston as a whole, conservation districts should receive oversight of new construction and alterations to a lesser degree than the National Register Historic Districts, as well as demolition review. (See Conserva- tion Districts.)

The threshold for demolition review in all areas should be lowered to 50 years. This is especially important for the proposed Peninsula City District, the area bounded by Mt. Pleasant Street on the north and Fishburne and Jackson streets on the south. Upper Peninsula neighborhoods are notable for their cohesion, and oversight of these high concentrations of early to mid-twentieth-century resources should be continued and expanded. De- molition without input could cause widespread erosion of the historic character for which Charleston is famous.

Historic trees add shade, scenery, and a distinctive sense Existing Individual Landmarks Existing Historic Districts Existing Old & Historic District Existing Old City District (National Register) (National Register) (City of Charleston) (City of Charleston) of place to Charleston’s rural, urban, and suburban landscapes. Charleston has a Tree Ordinance protecting trees Proposed changes to Proposed Portion of Old City District and landscaping, with special attention to “grand trees,” existing Historic Districts Conservation Districts to be reassigned to CCDRB defined as 2 feet or more in diameter when measured 3.27 Map of proposed changes to protected areas, including expansion of historic districts and creation of conservation districts 3 feet from the ground.11 A public hearing must occur STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 55

before the removal of grand trees, and developers are view of new construction, alterations, and demoli- the CCDRB and expanding its jurisdiction outside des- required to survey existing trees and their sizes before tions of properties over 50 years old (review criteria ignated corridors to include the Neck and conservation beginning work. The Board of Zoning Appeals—Site should be less stringent than those for National districts off-peninsula (Figures 3.28-3.29). Design reviews requests for tree removal. Register Historic Districts)  Extend CCDRB review and jurisdiction to include  Create the Peninsula City District from the Cross-  Establish review criteria for conservation districts portions of the Neck not currently under review as town Expressway to Mt. Pleasant Street, with BAR well as new conservation districts off the peninsula  Seek to renew incremental additions to the Nation- demolition review of all properties over 50 years old (excepting Cainhoy) al Register Historic District, working in consulta-  Refine the boundary of the local Old and Historic tion with the State Historic Preservation Office and  Remove the streets between Calhoun and Mt. District to Fishburne and Jackson streets, includ- the National Park Service L Pleasant streets from CCDRB jurisdiction and ing the Sofia Wilson Tract generally bordered by place them under BAR review Rutledge Avenue and Sumter, King, and Fishburne Rethinking Board Responsibilities streets The recommended expansion of BAR jurisdiction and  Apply to expand the Charleston National Register the growing volume of BAR applications create a new Historic District to the 1985 Geier-Brown-Renfrow need. Realistically, as proposals for development north of Survey boundaries and the Sofia Wilson Tract Calhoun Street and off-peninsula increase and the Lower  Extend BAR oversight of new construction, Peninsula continues to require attention, the BAR will alterations, and demolitions to the Hampton Park not have the capacity to consider all project applications. Terrace National Register Historic District, the Increasing staff responsibilities, training, and resources Cainhoy National Register Historic District, the will help streamline the review process and enable the Ashley River National Register Historic District, BAR to focus more time on Major projects. the William Enston Home National Register His- toric District, and all Protected Resources However, the BAR may still not have sufficient time to review all projects. The Commercial Corridor Design  Identify concentrated areas of historic resources Review Board (CCDRB) currently reviews commercial outside the historic districts and create conserva- and multifamily development and significant changes tion districts under the purview of the Commercial along major commercial corridors outside the historic Corridor Design Review Board (CCDRB), BAR, districts. This Plan recommends amending the focus of and/or another established review board, with re- 56 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

M E TIDEWATER RD ETI 26 NG ST LN OAKLAND RD TOMEDJAN CIR TUXBURY

26 ON RAMP I SBURGH AVE - I -26 OFF PITT DORIS DR

RAMP SUMMERV 78 VE

DURKEE ST ILLE AVE CAINHOY JUNEAU A

RAZORBACK LN CHERRY HILL LN ELM RD Berkeley County TILL RD ROSEMONT BECKY RD COFFEY CT ANO ST PEACE ST DEL DISCHER ST CHARING CRO AUS PIERPONT AVE FOUR MILE LN CATTERTON DR 26 DELANO ST TIN AV TIBBETT CT HARMON ST LEICHE LEITH LN BULL CREEK LN DOSCHER AV

E M SS RD

LE PL E

BEVIS RD ETING ST RD STER RD

ANTHONY S NICO PEONIE ST DANIEL ISLAND MELODY LN HERBERT ST

HARMON ST E FOUR MILE HIBERNIAN

P O ST STON RD HAGOOD RD R 526 KING ST

N TRINITY DR

SETON PL INDSOR D MILFORD ST

EXT

D BERWICK CIR

SPINNAKER LN R R N HALL RD MARKHAM RD TE ST PO ARL CT E BRISBANE DR MILFORD RTSIDE WAY SANDHURST MERTON RD CAMPIO DOGWOOD RD S

AINT CHARLES CT

ESTMINS

ASHLEY RIVER RD W ETON RD BATTLESEA RD NLEAF ST KE S GREE USSE BLE RD BRASWELL ST SAM RITTENBERG BLVD TEA X RD BUCKINGHAM DR TRACHELLE LN 52 KWOOD RD CAPTIVA ROW

FAMILY CIR LN RUGBY LN

WILSHIRE DR BOARDMAN RD

BRIGADIER DR ORANGE BRA ASHLEY HALL RD SIRI CT ASHEPOO HURTES ISLAND WINCHESTER DR CHARLYN DR R ST DR KE SEIGNIOUS DR BOO MIM AVE MANCHE S SEDGE LN HUNTINGTON WOODS OCEANIC ST BRABANT ST HREWS TRESCOTT ST BEECHWOOD RD PARKSHORE DR HUNTINGTON DR M BENT GRAND OAK GAMECOCK AVE UELL HOBONNY LN NCH RD WO N RD R CIR E ASHLEY HALL PLANTATION RD STER RD DINBUR BU E TWIG PETAL LN HAMPTON DR ODHAVEN DR R D ASHLEY CROSSING CASA BIANCA DR S SOUTHPORT DR BEDFORDBALFOURE DR DR RY RD R CEDAR LN SILVER HILL/MAGNOLIA SHORT ALY LAVINGTO NORVIE DORSET LN GH RD OLEANDER CT DARTMOO XETER CT NORTHBRIDGE DR E ALGONQUIN RD WESTBOROUGH 61 W DR FAIRFAX CT MONROVIA ST DR I JERVEY AVE CHELWOOD CIR - CECILIA DR ROYAL PALM BLVD 26 OFF

PONY LN RSET CIR PROSPER ST ASHLEY CROSSING LN I-26 ON RAMP SAINT HELENAS PT PADDY PL LEMON ST

RAMP SOME PERSHING ST BOONE HALL DR RD MARSH COVE SAINT JULIAN DR NORTHBRIDGE TERRACE ORANGE GROVE RD E HUGUENIN ST HUTTON PL AMBE NORVIEW CIR RIVER FRONT DR RICE HOLLOW N AV MECHANIC ST P A L ARABIAN DR P GIPPY LN ST SKURVIN OMINO CT ETTY ST WEDGEFIELD RD RL WESTON AVE DUNBARTON DR HERIOT ST

W SANDCROFT DR SANDCROFT W SUMAR ST CHARLIE HALL BLVDMAGWOOD HARON AVE ORANGE GROVE SHORES DR JOY AVE Y RD S AFTO SANDCROFT DR S PINEBARK LN S O OMERSET CIR CHRISTIAN RD UTHG S ST NEW CASTLE ST COURTLAND AVE MULMAR ST DRYDEN LN ATE DR N ROMNEY ST DICKENS ST N PINEBARK LN CHARLESTOWNE ESTATES III IR HUGUENIN ST DEBBENSHIRE DR COLERIDGE MONTFORD AVE FRONTAGE RD 7 E MA N I E AVALON CIR MEPKIN RD E MANOR BLVD GAULT PL UNNYSIDE AV WEAVER ST CLYDE ST S KIAWAH HOMES WESTCHASE DR CULPEPPER C CARTERETT AVE BAYSIDE MANOR FIRTH ST LOWNDES POINTE DR ASHLEY AVE WILLIAM KENNERTY DR MONTCLAIR ST N AVALON CIR OWNE RD JOSEPH FLOYD MANOR CIR MOUNT PLEASANT ST

INGRAM RD R AN ST CHARLESTOWNE DR D T VASSAR DR JO

N AVE W AVALON CIR I-526 ON RAMP CANTY LN BRIGADE ST

ON PL CULPEPPE PAUL CANTRELL BLVD DOWDEN DONAHUE DR ON ST CARTERETT AVE NSTO ICKWICK STHARROW ST S T HUGUENIN ST RIVERSIDE DR P LAUREL AVE CLEMSON ST RICHMOND ST BIRTHRIGHT ST HOLT SANS SOUCI ST N E NOX ST BRIGADE ST SALISBURY ST LE N ROMNEY ST PAUL CANTRELL BLVD RAMP WALLACE LN ASHLEY HALL MANOR CAMERT OR BLVD OLD T PENDLETON ST PAUL CANTRELL BLVD DOWNING ST LENOX ST DERBY ST MAN DUNNES LN E ST BRIGADE CT OWN P N WOODMERE DR PEACHTRE CCDRB Review PIEDMONT N S T IMA CHARLESTOWNE ESTATES II I NMORE DR - L BAINBRIDGE DR DARLING ILL IVY HALL GREERD S WOODMERE DR ANTATION RD 26 ON RAMP W HUGUENIN ST (current) TOBIAS GADSON BLVD RAOUL WALLENBERG BLVD TRAILEE DR OLD T CYPRESS ST ASHL LENEVAR OWN PL I-526 ON RAMP CEDARHURST AVE ISABELLA ST AUX AVE AVE RIKER ST JOSHUA DR E ABLE ST LOW DR TON AVE MAPLE ST W LENEVAR DR Y AVE SELORIS CT ANTAT DIAN ST CCDRB Review AR IN BOYER ROMNEY ST ARIE SULLIVAN ST M N HANOVER ST M ES DR 171 DEVERE OSHEE DR EAST CENTRAL FRANKGENEVA ST LAKES ION RD POPLAR ST (proposed) MIL US-17 N RAMP PO W POPLAR ST AGATHA ST CT ST FIELDS PL M HESTER ST N NAS ATHENS ORRISON DR ADELE ST VILLAGE RD CONROY TRAILMORE DR SAVAGE RD TARA RD N ST EXECUTIVE HALL RD SAM RITTENBERG BLVD NYE ST BAR Review ALBERTA AVE ALBERTA AVE MIDDLE SIMONS ST ADDISO SAU ST TRAM CT KY NORTHPAIG CENTRAL ALMA ST CARSON DR HAZEL RD KIKI WAY ELLIS ST CAMELOT DR M A R Y ELLEN DR RUTLE CT LE PL

SAVAGE RD AMBER LN POINSETT ST E CT SAN MIGUEL RD 526 STONEY ST T ST ON PL 17 PARNELL LN ASHLEY HALL RD WAGENER TERRACE CARRIE ST S LENEVAR DR DGE AVE POINSETT ST US-17 S ORLEANS RD BUTLER ST ANCRUM HILL RD DILLWAY 1 2TH AVE US-17 N GROVE ST 17 I-26 W RAMP HENRY TECKLENBURG DR MEMORY LN EDENWOOD CT MEMMINGERALTMAN ST AVE 1 RUNEY ST OLD T TABERWOOD CIR WENDY LN MARVIN AVE BRYJO 1TH AVE JO HAZELWOOD DR AKERS RD 1 BLAINE CT 0T OSW HNSON ST

W 9 GROVE ST WOODCREST AVE RE RD H AVE REGIS CT GILMO T YWOOD CIR ESP D AVE GORDON ST H AVE EGO PL 3 R JA CARVERWOOD LN OWNERD T ANEE DR 8 S WAPPOO DR HEATHWOOD DR T ST STUART ST N CASTLE LN H AVE HANOVER S DR TOWN CREE POINSETTA RD BAMBOO SAMUEL GRANT PL HEATHWOOD/OLD TOWNE EAST SIDE IMMIGRATION WALLACE SCHOOL RD JESSAMINE RD PLAINFIELD DR SPELL ST SAINT MARGARET ST HARRIS ST MAVERICK ST HNSON ST 171 JO CLEVELAND ST T FAIRFIELD AVE KING ST MEETING ST MANOR/COOPER RIVER COURT 6 BENSON ST GREAT HALL CT TH AVE N TRACY ST

MUR 7 PINECREST RD BRIAN RD K ADDLESTONE AVE AND DR 5 ASHL DR R WAPPOO RD T DEWEY ST N ST LISH DR C S O GARDENIA RD H AVE DUNNEMANN AVE CASTLEWOOD BL RAY HIL CKS N AVE DINGLE ST WINSTO T JA GARDNER RD WILSO E S T WALNUT ST

FUSE WISTERIA RD OLD ENG AV S ENATE ST CONNECTO

L DR WESPANEE LEE ST ERG BLVD F ST TOMO N S ENUE OF H S WS ALY KA DR LE ST IE T DRE

T 61 R RD GRIER AVE ER ST FORT ROYAL AVE WESSON AVE I ST ULTR COOP MO BLAKE ST I-526 VD JENKINS AVE RE EAST SIDE CRULL DR AIKE SAM RITTENB WESTOVER DR MARY MURRAY DR ST MEMBRANCE J RACE ARD ST SAN JUAN AVE ONES AVE HUGER ST W G N ST JENKINS RD LOW DR CASTLEGREEN CT P SHEPP ARKWOOD AVE ASHLEY TOWN C CARRIAGE LN N ALLANLAN PARK PARK

BEL KENILW T ROCHELLE AVE AL E TOWER CT HILLSIDE DR HAMPTON PARK TERRACES UMTER ST AM COLUMBUS ST OD CIR S DRAKE ST O M KW ERICA ST GRADE CT BROO E E AZY NDER ST E AVE MEADOW CT AV LE LMWOO EAST SIDE N WESTCHES HARMONY ST WOODLANDS HOBART O SS ST FISHBURNE S ORANG TE LITTLE JOHN DR BE RTH AVE COURT ST R DR C RE S DUPONT RD L MELROSE AW K ST CAROLINA ST AINT P N DR GUNN AVE M LARNES ST WOODLEAF HAMMOND AVE D AVE CONG FIALL ST IMS AVE PERRY S SUMTER ST 17 CARLSON CT E VE HAMPDEN CT CT ENTER RICE CT DIANA S LOCKSLEY DR TON AVE PINEVIE R FORBES AVE HWY HIL INGHAM DR MAMIE ST A NAS BURRIS R W RD WALLE LANGO AVE IN ORRS CT E MARYVILLE/ASHLEYVILLE IP ERST ST PRATT ST H AVE CASTLEHILL CT PLAYGROUND RD BATTERY AVE T ST 5 T AST ST 5 CHICKADEE AVE AS ST SAU ST TURN LANE BEL TH AVE HIGH ST R E G HWY 17 AMH D GRADE AVE NOTT WASHINGTON PARK LINE WRAGGBOROUGH HOMES T JUST HE ST COMING ST S PARK CIR STRAIGHT ST FALKIRK DR E SI T ID ST I-526 ON RAMP W ROBINHOOD DR DR CITADEL HAVEN DR RICE DR EXT IDSON AV TODD ST RE ENDO DAV ER R ST ME SOUTH ST E BROOKFIELD ST D OPHIR DR PRESIDE PERCY S ETING ST S ABBEY DR CARNEGIE AV S SPRING KIRKLEE AINT AS

ROSE VINE ST LULA ST BRODY AVE HE ST P OLFE ST CHANNING ST MINNIE ST NT ST T HILIP WESTSIDE WO LAMAR ST MILY DR LINE LASALLE ST IS DR E ST NUNAN ST ELSEY DR GRECH ST N WANTOOT BLVD L Y ST ALEXAND BOSS M HUMPHREY CT TRIPE MAIN ST SIRES S DULSEY RD RICE DR AGNOLIA RD SAINT ANDRE ST ARD ST N ST KENYON ST JUNIPER ST BURGER ST MAR W S ST LINE BOG E E BAY ST ASHINGT LOCUST ST YMMES DR PAYNE CT ELIZABETH ST R ST WHITE DR JERRY DR CANNONB/ELLIOTTB

17 I-526 ON RAMP T T FOREST N'HOOD COALITION G SQ ORLEANS RD TAMARACK ST ACACIA ST THREE NORMAN ST DELM TLE AVE D DR BURNE S RAG ON ST AR ST T KRACKE ST W AQUARIUM WHF HERWOO WHITMARSH DR WS ANN ST OAKS AVE N S FISH FLOOD ST KENNEDY ST SKYLARK BYRON RD T CAS ARD S F EL WANTOOT BLVD BLVD HORIZON ST TULLY ALY CHAPEL ST T TURN LANE ARDMORE/SHERWOOD FOREST BOG ULBERRY ST IX M SEQUOIA ST

ARGONNE ST RRIS ST 2 W SHERWOOD DR ST END DR N -I D DR BARRETT RD DEREEF CT MO CHARLOTTE ST N DALLERTO 526 ON RAMP ANITA DR CANNON S TAHOE ST SAINT CLAIR DR CALHOUN S LOCUST ST N CIR T CONCO DR MAZYCK-WRAGGBOROUGH HAGOOD AVE SMITH ST 17 JOHN ST T GADSDENALLWAY GREEN S JAS WHARFS S DALLERTON 1ST DR BROWNING DR BALSAM S LONG PEEKS PIKE ISLINGTON CT PER ST ARLINGTON DR OD DR ARCADIAN WAY PARKDALE DR S SHERWO ARCADIAN PARK OLIVER CT RD ST CIR CASHEW ST HTON ST E ST T ST YEW ST W OAK FOREST DR SHELLE SYCAMORE AVE AS A S HARLEM CT INSPECTION M RADCLIFF CK FELLO E PL LOCKWO E IDE ST E CT SAVANNA NRIETT EVERGREEN ST HUTSON ST HE H HWY WHITE OAK DR V THOMAS ST EASTOAK FO OAK FOREST OAKDAL DUNBAR ST AW DR AUG COOS DR Y RD 17 SAINT ANDRE OD BLVD VERNON ST W WARREN ST BRIARCLIFF DR CALHOUN ST R RAHN RD HAN ST GUERRY AV D PEBBLE RD RES CORNELL ST TTI ST W W TOVEY RD E WIMBEE ROSEDALE DR RADCLIFFEBOROUGHT ALL S ATEREE DR T DR MENO LAURENS ST CHE EXECUTIVE CIR S RST S SYLVAN SHORES EAST AVONDALE PRING ST N CT TRATFORD RD S E CT WS CANNON ST RAMP BEE ST PEARLOTT ST HRHARDT DR LN RR TALO VANDERHO LINDENDALE AVE HTY ST T KRUGER AVE APO BLVD AVO DOUG AK AVE Y ST BURNS UPPER CONCORD STREET TALL O COLONY DR ASHLE DUNCAN ST SARAH ST SAVANNA E O PHY CT LLO RD BRAVO OGIER ST UR LY RISHER ST PRYOR MAC LIV M CITADEL WOODS H HWY QUEEN NDALE AVE GEORGE ST LAMB ST PINCKNEY PARK DR ALLEGHENYWEST ST OAK FOREST NIS DR ST R NW AVE DE J TY MANSFIELD ST O CLAYTON D SAINT COURTENAY DR CIE AK AVE NATHAN LUCAS ST O OOD DR S WEDGEPARK RD N GOD Y AV ED ST RAV WOOD AVE ST LOCKHE ENEL DR E ANSON ST HICKORY ST BEE ST RAMP DOUG HARRIS LEINBACH DR ERDALE DR HWY 30 ON RAMP ANSONBOROUGH ON AVE LOLANDRA AVE RIV FREY SABIN ST E BARBOUR DR BEECHCRAFT ST BATTL LASS HELDON RD OGDEN RD OAK ST CANTERBURY RD S T OWEN ST W AVE LINDEN CIR BRE P PRITCHARD ST NNON ST PARK PL O 17 17 ITT S GLEBE ST ROTHERWOO ORE DR ODWARD RD CURTISS MIL SUNSET DR MO GOD HWY LIBERTY S S T CESSNA AVE NECREEK DR WEDGEWOOD ST MORTO FREY MITH PL T ELL STO MARKFIELD DR S ON DR LCREEK DR N AVE AVE PARK PL M HAS PINCKNEY ST PIPER DR HALSEY ST O FARMFIELD AVE ST NTAGU CT ARD ST COLYEN RD WESTWOODSAINT TERE GUIGN S CROSS ST CULVER AVE WIFT AVE SANFORD RD OAKLAND STINS RADIO RD SA DR OCKWOOD DR RAMP HAYNE ST D DR T TO L FOURT BENNETT AS HWY 17 UN S OPAL AVE COBURG RD ALYCIA ALY CONCO E SHORE LN E CALHO BUR ARISH RD LIZ TUCKER DR BOEING AVE ABETH LN W BULL ST P T HOFF AVE CHARLTON LN CRAV 30 T S Y EN AVE N MARKE S MARKET ST PL DANIEL ST N RD H ST GADSDEN ST ARLINGTON DR LAMPT LOCKWOOD DR RAMP ST MORELAND M A R KET T D S RD ST DR T 17 RAMP U ST LINGUAR P Y HWY KINNER AVE RT CASSINA RD EADO HARLESTON VILLAGE ARKWOOD ES ST S TIMM N AV LAMONT RD S ON RD LVE OTHEL AVE E SAVANNAH HWY ONTAG T PRINCESS FABER ST CAV S ARCHDALE ST GEDDES AVE TIMOTHY ST ALIE M H S AND ST BETS LOCKW MITH ST W T R AVE WEST S CHURCH ST HOLL DR ILSON ST CUMBERL CABE ERMAN DR LYT TLETO W HARRISO Y ALY LORD CA HUGUENOT AV N AVE DR ENTWORT ECK AL LODGE LANDS END HALSEY BLVD W HORLB DR Y RD ALLISON CT O O D GARDEN ST HUNTLEY DR ICK S LL ST YWOO TO SUSAN DR CKER DR S NICHOLSON S CAMPBELL DR MAGAZINE ST TA VENDUE RANGE JEAN ST PARKWOOD/FARMFIELD RIV T LUDWELBYRNES DOWNS CHADW TE ST ER BREEZE ATES L ST FENW ROBERT MILLS PRIOLEAU ST WESLEY DR BARRE D DR FORESTWOOD DR CULBERTSON DR I BE LL ALY MARSH OAKS CIR DOLMANE DR N OLD WINDEMERE S SHORE DR DIGO VERLY RD CROMWE FRENCH QUARTER LOGAN ST ICK DR FRANKLIN ST D WES DR LANTANA DR POINT DR E R CHALMERS ST KENSINGTON DR WINDERMERE BL ST MCCLAIN ST COLL TY INDIGO POINT DRUID RD N ST SALLYS ALY N QUEE LEY V TRAPMAN ST TE S D BEAUFAIN ST EY POINT DR E UE RD L TON DR CHARLESTOWNE RD V RIP CAPRI DR T P LEG BROAD ST LINING LN DR DR E ELLIOTT ST ALICE DR EMBROOKE DR BEL E HWY 30 ON RAMP T ST TRANSOM CT ELLIOT SHERIDAN RD ORANG CANAL ST ARE S BOYCES WHF Y POINT LINING CT N DR 61 61 ALBEMARLE RD ASHLE T ERS WHF NOTLE COLO E CHISOLM ST ADG E PL TARLETO EAMANS RD J S Y ST AMESTO ST Y DR

LOCKE LN E HWY

DR NIAL ST LONGITUDE LN NEW ST TRADD ST SHADY LN SHADY AICA SAYLE RD WN RD SAVAGE FORD CT CYNTHIA LN M ATE CIR R 30 ON RAM WAPPOO RD LORD ASHLJA NFEDE LE CO LE W LIME COUNCIL JOHNSON RD GREENHILL ST ALY N PRICES ALY STOLLS G VD WO NEMOURS ARE ST DR HOUSE ST WATER ST SOUTH WINDEMERE OD BL GIBBES WEIMS CT Y BL

CRESCENT COCHRAN CT ST LADSON ST S BATTERY ST

P A DR FOLLY RDBLVD V SASANQUA LN D S NE S CONFEDERATE CIR ST W TOWN L GUERARD RD ASHLE CHARLESTOWNELOWNDES ST FORMO LAMBOLL ST

NORRIS AVE NORRIS N EDGEWATER DR

DSENT AVE TERY ST CHURCH ST CHURCH

DADE RD METTO HTON RD E EDGEWATER DR BROUG

L AL

DR P RY DR E BAT E M O OOD RD ISLAND DR RE REBELLION RD WAPPOO HEIGHTS MURRAY BLVD BELLION RD TRANQ

ALLG UIL DR

BATTERY P BOWE

R L N 30 HWY S EDGEWATER DR

MNS

BERNIER CO COUNT

OLD POINT RD PALMCREST DR

FOLLY RD BLVD ALL RD WAPPOO H COUNTRYRY CLUB I

RY CLUB DR CL P 171 LYMO UB LN

W PARKWAY DR COUNT APPOO

UTH AVE

RIVERLAND DR COKER AVE

C HE REEK DR ADQUARTERS PLANTATION DR REEK PL MINOTT ST AINT JAMES DR CATALINA DR S SAINT LUKES CLARK AVE

FRAMPTON AVE WAPPOOC P

R DR RIVERLAND TERRACE DR ICARD WAY RUSHLAND LANDING RD COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES WESTRIVERS RD OLD FOLL

HINSO N GEVERT RD GEVERT N

KOGE

T HEADQUARTERS PLANTATION LN WAPPOO DR DR S AVE CAP

N AVE

NE NO Y

ERS S REGIME RD ICK FERRY RD TY TO

EVERT DR LUMBER S NT S RD AL LN MEDWAY TOWN PARK LN FENW AUBREY DR T S G E EDISTO AV TATUM ST Y AVE ATES AVE EDISTO

P FREMONT ST AGE CONIFER DR HEADQUARTERS ISLAND LAKESIDE GREEN WELCH AVE L AND RD FOLLY RD DR E MEANSMAR ST FAIRWAY BRIAR LN OD DR EMERSON ST S RD TELLO CHEVES DR

HARBOR VIEW SEROY ST TONEWO W DR SAWGRAS HWY 30 ON RAMP S CROSSCREEK DR S DR FVIE CHERAW DR VERNES EK AVE W IN HOWLE AV DR GOL YECREEK AVE RE E RD

STEFAN DR RE CROSS CREEK BURNINGT EC RAMSAY DR

CIR

PADDL DR HTON HORES HOUG AXCY ST

ST M Y 30 ON RAMP T ND S W THERESA DR HILLCREEK BLVD CARLIN AVE HW ESTSI MP SWINTON S S CAROL

AINT PAULS OODLA WAMPLER DR W

W N RD IMBLEDO D ENRY AVE LFAIR WAY PARRISH LN E DR CH TE LINDBERG ST FLEMING RD M MPTO HARBOR VIEW RD RA KE BLVD PRIESTLY ST S CT WHITE POINT N DR YALE DR WAMBAW AVE HARBOR COVE LN PAUL RE PENNY LN MARTELLO DR WIDOW RIVERLAND DR VERE CT

E PAUL RE 700 WIMBLEDON DR CLEARVIEW DR MARLBOROUGH CABOT CARME STONO WATCH DR FLINT ST WAY CANAL ST VERE DR MOHAWK AVE L DR FENWICK PLANTATIONNA RD W WIMBLEDON DR D AVE LE EO MCL ST TRAVE RS DR BE Y DR AURE HORE DR E GARD ST WINSLOW DR ATION RD SANTA E

CARPENT N S FOREST LN R DR FE NW ICK HAL UMTE TEN RIS ARK RD RIP S NENT S LEY DR LE PINCKN T

L ALY PL L OLD PLANT

ER RD DR ES DR R ST FORT L ES DR I KEL CAST COLLET UP DANIEL ELLIS DR JAM TE DR WOODLAND SHORES RD INGS RD CENTRAL P GREGG D O R DR HITECHAPEL CIR N ST R E W HARRODS LN HOLL N THE H STILES POINT S PT FER DR SON CHAF Y RD AITES DR UMT S E W DAW BURGESS DR COMPAS ILL RD FORT S BANK HWY KE LAKE FRANCES USE RD DR AY IS OAK AVE Y CT ON HO EDMONDS M ST EMAHT DANIEL WHAL LL SHELL

S E COTT RDUST WAY STEBBINS ST

CONSTANT DR CONSTANT RD HAMROCK LN S STA S AND RD HARBOR PLA PAMLICO TER ARD ST EMANUAL LN M OAK POINT ONTG TON PL MARSH DR

PRENTISS S EG RING T OMERY LAW HISPE N DR RIVER N SHORE DR W

DILL LAKE FRANCES DR LONDO

AND CYRUS RD CE DR BEAUR FERRIS LN AVE BERMUDA ST RD JIM ISLE DR BROWN DR RD WELLINGTO GRACIE LEE HUNLEY S BL AYERS DR

RILEY

J FARNHAM RD ES DR O LAND AVE OATES LN DE RDAN ST CONDO T UFF RD IN N AVE N DR WATERLOO ST RD O WEIR ST STIL ENE ST CAPERS S LUCKY RD TERS PAT N DR

QUAIL DR QUAIL HARBOR VIEW RD BROOKBANK AVE

BRADHAM RD DARWIN ST QUAIL DR QUAIL Existing Commercial Corridor Design Existing Board of Architectural Review Board (CCDRB) jurisdiction Review (BAR) jurisdiction

3.28 Existing jurisdiction of the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) and the Commercial Corridor Design Review Board (CCDRB). STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 57

ME ETING ST TIDEW LN 26 ATER RD OAKLA TOMEDJAN CIR TUXBURY BURGH AVE 26 ON RAMP - I I - ND RD 26 OFF PITTS DORIS DR

RAMP SUMMERV ST 78 VE

DURKEE ILLE AV BACK LN CAINHOY UNEAU A J E RAZOR M RD CT CHERRY HILL LN EL EY Berkeley County TILL RD T T VE ROSEMONT T BECKY RD COFF PEACE S DELANO S CHER S DIS N CHARIN MILE L RPONT A T AUST PIE 26 FOUR CATTERTON DR DELANO S G CROSS R IN AV TIBBETT CT HARMON ST LEICHE LEITH LN BULL CREEK LN DOSCHER AV RD E ME LE PL

BEVIS ETING ST STER RD D ST NICO ONIE ST ANTHONY LODY LN S PE BERT DANIEL ISLAND ME HER

HARMON ST E

R FOUR MILE HIBERNIAN

P O S ST TON RD HAGOOD RD RD R 526 KING ST EXT

N TRINITY D ST

SETON PL INDSOR D MILFORD

D BE AKER LN RWICK CIR INN SP R R N HALL RD DR

TE MARKHAM RD IO ST D RD BANE PO ARL CT ILFORD WOO E BRIS M RTSIDE WAY SANDHURST MERTON RD CAMP DOG S

AINT CHARLES CT ESTMINS T ASHLEY RIVER RD N RD W ETO BATTLESEA RD NLEAF S KE S WELL ST GREE

R S USSE BLE RD BRA SAM RITTENBERG BLVD T EA X RD BUCKINGHAM DR TRACHELLE LN 52 KWOOD RD CAP

FAMILY CIR LN T VAI RUGBY LN O WIL BOARDMAN RD

BRIGADIER D RD ORANG S HEPO AS ROW IRI CT AS D RD ION HL SHIRE DR E Y H HURTES WINCHESTER DR CHARLYN DR ALL ISLAND DR SEIGNIOUS NTATDR RD BOOKER ST MIM AVE COTT ST DGE LN P L A E B MANC S SE HUNTINGTON WOODS OCEANIC ST BEECHWOO BRABANT ST HREWSBU TRES PARKSHORE DR R HUNTINGTON DR RANCH RD M BENT HALL GAMECOCK AVE L N GRAND OAK EY N D UELL DR N RD HOBONNY HE WO E ASHL AMPTO STER RD DINBUR E TWIG H ODHAVEN DR R DR ASHLE CASA BIANCA DR S SOUTHPORT BEDFORDBALFO DR RY RD D CEDAR PETAL LN SILVER HILL/MAGNOLIA SHORT ALY Y C L N LAVINGTO NORVIE LN GH RD DORSET LN URE DR OLE RO DARTMOOR CIR XETER CT ANDE NORTHBRIDGE DR E ALGONQUIN R S S WESTBOROUGH 61 W DR R C IN T G FAIRFAX CT MONROVIA ST DR D I CHE - JE R ROYAL PALM BLVD 26 OFF SPER ST INT HELENAS PT CECILIA DR E R P O N RSET CIR PRO ASHLEY CROSSING L W O I-26 ON RAMP Y LN SA VEY PADDY PL OD CIR LEMON ST OME

AVE RAMP FT DR FT W CIR S N DR PERSHING ST BOONE HALL DR NT DR NGE GROV MARSH COVE S A RA NORTHBRIDGE TERRACE O E HUGUENIN ST IN HUTTON PL AM B N AVE NORVIE T RIVER FRO CHANIC ST T J U L E RICE HOLLOW N AV ME T S P A L ARABIAN DR P GIPPY LN E SET CIR ST SKURVIN OMINO CT AV ETTY ST W E IA RL WESTON AVE DUNBARTO HERIO

W SANDCRO W SUMAR ST CHA MAGWOOD RD JOY HARO N D ORANG Y RD RLIE HALL B DGEFIEL N S AFTO R S A S PINEBARK LN SO OMER LVD CHRISTIAN RD UTHG S NDCROFT DR ST E G NEW CASTLE ST E COURTLAND AVE D RD DRYDEN LN ATE DR N ROMNEY M U ROVE S DICKE D LM CHARLESTOWNE ESTATES III HUGUENIN ST DR N PINEBARK L IR ST DE B AR ST COLERIDG C FRONTAGE RD MONTFORD AVE T HORES DR NS ST 7 E MA BENSHIRE E NI A STCHASE M E E MANOR BLV GA N CIR VALO UNNYSIDE AV WEAVER ST WE CLYDE ST S KIAWAH HOMES PKIN R CULPEPPER CARTERETT AVE BAYSIDE MANOR ULT FIR LOWNDES POINTE DR ASHLEY AVE N CIR DR ONTCLAIR S OWNE RD W PL M N AVALO TH ST MOUNT PLEASANT ST JOSEPH FLOYD MANOR ILLIAM KENNERT D GRAM RD CIR

IN R ASSAR DR AN ST CHARLESTOWNE D D T V

JO T AVE DR R Y D R OL N AVE W AVALON CIR I-526 ON RAMP CANTY LN BRIGADE ST T ST TO ON PL CULPEPPE PAUL CANTRELL BLV DO DON RIGH WDE NS BURY ST ON ST N CARTERET ICKWICK STHARROW ST S T AHUE HUGUENIN ST RIVERSIDE RT P LAUREL AVE CLEMSON ST HOLT OUCI ST N E RICHMONDLLACE ST LN BIRTH SANS S BRIGADE ST SALIS DR LENOX ST N ROMNEY ST PAUL CANTRELL BLVD RAMP WA ASHLEY HALL MANOR CAME T ENBERG BLVD X S OLD TOWN PL P NO DOWNING ST NOR BLVD ENDLE LE D PAUL CANTRELL BLV RE DR MA LN TO ALL DERBY ST DUNNES N ST EE ST BRIGADE CT N W DME PEACHTR T CCDRB Review PIEDMONT N S OO AVE A T I OO CHARLESTOWNE ESTATES II - BAINBRIDGE DR DARLING ILLIM IVY HALL GREENMORERD DR S W ANTATION RD 26 ON RAMP W T HUGUENIN ST (current) TOBIAS GADSON BLVD TRAILEE DR OLD T RAOUL W DMERE CYPRESS ST A S R ASHL D T LENEVAR OWN P R ST -5I- CEDARHURS E ISABELL VD AUX AVE AV RIK ST 26 ON RAMP ENEVARJOSHUA DRD E SULLIVAN ST ABLE S LOW DR TON AVE MAPLE ST T Y AVE DR IE W L L E SELORIS CT ANTATION RD DIAN S CCDRB Review AR IN BOYE ROMNEY S DR M 171 T N HANOVER ST MAR RE DR DEVERE LAR S OSHEE DR OP EAST CENTRAL FRANKGENEVA ST LAKES P (proposed) HALL RD MILE US-17 N RAMP R PO W POPLA DS PL AGATHA ST TENBERG BL CT Y ST R ST FIEL M HESTER ST N NAS ATHENS CT ORRISON DR E RD ADE V LI CONRO TRAILMO SAVAG TARA RD ON ST LAGE RD EXECUTIVE L E S SAM RIT NYE ST BAR Review ALBERTA ALBERTA AVE MID IMONS ST ADDIS SAU ST AVE S TRAM CT KY NORTHPAIG CENTRAL T ALMA S CARSON DR HAZEL RD T KIKI WAY EL CAMELOT DR M A RY ELLEN DR DL RUTLE L INSETT S

LIS ST AMBER EP SAVAGE RD E PO E CT SAN MIG 526 S T T TO ON PL ST L S 17 T PARNELL LN ASHLEY HALL RD ETT T NEY ST WAGENER TERRACE CARRIE ST S LENEVAR DR DGE AVE POINS US-17 S ORLEANS RD LN BUTLER S T UEL RD ANCRUM HILL RD DILLWAY 1 VE S D CIR 2TH AVE D DR GRO I-26 W RAMP US-17 N OO EMORY LN D CT 17 HENRY TECKL M ED ENWOO MEMMINGERALTMAN ST AVE AVE 1 RUNEY ST OLD T V IN BRYJO TABERW WENDY LN M A R 1TH AV JO HAZELWOO AKERS RD 1 E N BLAINE CT 0T OSWEGO HNSON ST

BUR OOD CIR OODCREST AVE D W 9T GROVE ST W ORE R H AV REGIS GILM ESP GORDON ST G DR YW D AVE H AVE

PL 3 R D LN JA E CARVERWOO OWNE E T D R ANEE DR 8 TUART ST PPOO HEATHWOOD DR T S N S W A CT ST N CAS H AVE HANOVER S O DR TOWN CREE RATIO TLE LN BAMBO P O NI SETTA R GARET ST LLACE SCHOOL RD S T ST IMMIG S A MUEL GRANT PL D HEATHWOOD/OLD TOWNE T D RD EASTPELL STSIDE WA PLAINFIELD DR S R JESSAMINE RD SAINT MAR HARRIS MAVERICK ST HNSON S 171 JO NE AVE CLEVELAND T FAIRFIELD AVE E TO KING MEETING ST MANOR/COOPER RIVER COURT 6 BENSON S GREAT HALL CT PPOO T N TRACY S

MU 7 P NI K ECRES BRIAN RD H AVE ANN AV ADDLES T R ASHLAND DR DR 5 ST R WA D T DE R LISH DR E C S ON ST GARDENIA RD H AVE DUNNEM CASTLEW RAY HIL WEY ST CKS N AV DINGLE ST WINSTO JA TERIA RD T T GARDNER RD WILSO E S T T WALN

FUSE WIS OLD ENG AV S ENATE ST CONNECTO

L DR WESPANEE LEE ST ERG BLVD F S T OO TOMOK N S ENUE OF H S UT ST WS ALY A D LE ST R VE IE T DRE T D BL T 61 R RD GRIER AVE ER ST FORT ROYAL A WESSON AVE I ST P ULTR COO URRAYMO DR BLAKE S I ESTOVER DR VD ENKINS AVE RE Y M EAST SIDE -5 J W CRULL DR ST T AIKE 26 SAM RITTENB MAR MEM J RACE ARD S SAN JUAN AVE ONES HUGER ST W G N ST JENKINS RD LOW DR CASTLEGREEN CT BRANCE P LLAN PARK SHEPP ARKWOOD AVE T ASHL CARRIAGE LN N A LAN PARK

BEL AVE KENIL T ROCHELLE AVE AL E T O WER CT HILLSIDE DR HAMPTON PARK TERRACES UMTER S AM COLUMBUS ST OD CIR S DRAKE ST O M KW ERICA ST EY GRADE CT BROO E URNE S AZY NDER ST W T EAST SIDE M E CT AVE LEE AVE LMWOO A S HB N WESTCHES TOW ADOW HARMONY S WOODLANDS E JOHN DR HOBART O SS ST IN FIS ORANG TE LITTL BE RTH AVE COURT R DR C T T S DUP L MELROSE AW K ST CAROL AINT P M N C N DR GUNN AVE LARNES ST WOODLEAF HAMMOND AVE D AVE CONGRE FIALL ST IMS AVE PERRY ST E E ON VE SUMTER ST CARLSON C EHILL CT V ST Y 17 HAMPDEN CT CT ENTER RICE CT N A DIANA S LOCKSLEY DR TO PINEV EI W R FORBES AVE HW HIL MAMIE ST A T TL T RD INGHAM DR NASSAU ST BURRIS WALLE LANGO AVE RD IN ORRS CT VE E MARYVILLE/ASHLEYVILLE IP ERST S PRATT ST H A T CAS PLAYGR BATTERY AV ST 5 T AST ST 5 CHICKADEE AVE AS ST R TURN LANE BEL TH AVE HIGH ST REG HWY 17 AMH D GRADE AVE NOTT WASHINGTON PARK LINE WRAGGBOROUGH HOMES T JUS HE COMING ST SP STRAIGHT ST BINHOOD DR FALKIRK DR E SI T ID ST I-526 ON RAMP W RO DR ST CITADEL HAVE RICE DR EXT ER R TODD ST ME RE UTH ST ARK CIR DAVIDSON AV ST ENDO G SO BLVD E BROO D OPHIR DR PRESIDE PERCY S ETING ST OUND RD CARNEGIE AV KFIELD ST S S ABBEY DR NING ST AIN SPRIN KIRKLEE E ST AS E

ROSE T VINE ST LULA ST BRODY AVE HE ST P OLF CHAN MINNIE ST NT T HILIP N DR WESTSIDE E ST HREY CT WO LAMAR ST LIN T T LASALLE ST IS DR EMILY DR ST NUNAN ST ELSEY DR NYON ST GRECH ST N WANTOOT L Y S ALEXAND BOSS M T HUMP ER ST TRIPE ST MAIN ST SIR DULSEY RD RICE DR AGNO SAINT ANDRE ARD S N S KE JUNIP BURGER ST MAR W T S LINE S BOG E E BAY ASHINGT LOCUST ST ITE DR YMMES DR ES S PAYNE CT ELIZABETH ST R ST WH JERRY DR CANNONB/ELLIOTTB

L I T 17 -5 T T FOREST N'HOOD COALITION IA RD G SQ 26 ON RAMP ORLEANS RD TAMARACK ST ACACIA S T THREE NORMAN ST DE D DR BURNE S RAG ST ON ST LMA H KRACKE S W AQUARIUM WHF R S HERWOO WHITMARSH DR WS ANN S EL ST T OAKS AV N S FIS FLO KENNEDY ST ALY SKYLARK BYRON RD T CASTLE AVE FELIX WANTOOT BLVD BLVD HORIZON TULLY T CHAP OD ST BOGARD ST T TURN LANE ARDMORE/SHERWOODE ULBERRY ST FOREST M SEQUOIA ST ARGONNE ST R RRIS S 2 WS IR D ST END DR N MO -I D DR CLA BARRETT RD T DEREEF CT CHARLOTTE ST N DALLERTO 526 ON RAMP T ANITA DR CANNON S TAHOE ST SAIN ST CALHOUN S LOCUST ST CONCO N CIR HERW N PARK T DR MAZYCK-WRAGGBOROUGH HAGO S HN ST 17 MITH ST JO T GADSDENALLWAY GREEN S JAS W 1ST DR BROWNING DR T S DALLERTON HARF BALSAM S OO LONG PEEKSP ISLING PER ST ARLINGTON DR OOD DR ARCADIAN WAY PARKDALE DR S S HERW ARCADIA OD AVE OLIVER CT ST RD ST CIR CASHEW ST HTON ST E T ST YEW ST D DR W OAK FOREST DR SHELLE SYCAMORE AVE AS HARLEM C INSPECTION M T RADCLIFF TTA S S CKE FELLO E PL LOCKWO ON ST E CT SAVA TON CT NRIE IDE ST NNAH HW EVERGREEN S IKE HUTS HE W EASTOAK FO OAK FOREST OAKDAL V THOMAS ST DUNBAR ST SAW DR AUG T Y HITE OAK DR COO DR Y RD 17 SAINT ANDRE OD BLVD RREN ST VERNON S W RD WA BRIARCLIFF CALHOUN ST R RAHN R HAN ST GUERRY AV D TI ST ST PEBBLE RD RES CORNELL ST W W TOVEY E WIMBEE ROSEDALE DR RADCLIFFEBOROUGHT T DR ALL S ATEREE DR D MENOT LAURENS

EXECUTIVE CIR CHE SYLVAN SHORES EAST S T N CT RST S ST AVONDALE TRATFORD RD ST SPRING ST T E CT WS CANNON ST RAMP BEE S PEARLO DR HRHA ANDERHO RR TALO V LINDENDALE AVE TT ST E T KRUGER AVE APO BLVD NY DR AVONDALE AVE DOUGHTY S AK AV Y BURNS LN E ST UPPER CONCORD STREET TALL O ASHLE COLO ST DUNCAN ST SARAH SAVA HY CT E O RDT DR P LLO RD BRAVO OGIER ST UR LY RISHER ST NNAH PRYOR M T CITADEL WOODS ACQUEE LIV M GEORG LAMB S PINCKNEY PARK DR HWY ALLEGHENYWEST ST OAK FORESTN NIS DR ST R NW AVE DE J TY T ST MANSFIELD O CLAYTON D SAINT COURT CIE AK AVE MP NATHAN LUCAS ST O OOD DR N GOD Y AV S ED ST WEDGEPARK RD ST RAV WOOD AVE N RD LOCKHE ENEL DR E ANSON ST HICKORY ST BEE ST RA DOUGLASS HARRIS ERDALE DR HWY 30 ON RAMP LEINBACH DR ENAY DR BIN ST ANSONBOROUGH ON AVE LOLANDRA AVE RIV FREY SA E BARBOUR DR BEECHCRAF BATTL HELDO

OGDEN RD S OWEN S OAK ST CANTERBURY RD W AVE LINDEN CIR BRE P PRITCHARD ST T NNON ST PARK PL O 17 17 ITT S GLEBE S ROTHERWOOD DR ORE DR ODWARD RD K DR MILL CURTISS SUNSET D MO GOD HWY LIBERTY ST DR CES NECREE WEDGEWOOD ST R MO FREY PAR MITH PL T STO MARKFIELD DR RTO S T ON N AV MO HASELL ST CKNEY S AVE CREE E PIN PIPER DR SNA AVE K PL HALSEY ST T T T FARMFIELD AVE S NTAGU CT NARD S COLYEN RD WESTWOODSAIN GUIG S CROSS ST T CULVE WIFT AVE SANFORD RD TERE STINS RADIO RD SA D OCKWOOD DR RAMP OAKLAND K DR HAYNE ST R T TO L FOURT BENNETT AS HWY 17 OPAL AVE COBURG ALYCIA ALY CONCORD ST E SHORE E CALHOUN S BUR ARISH RD LIZ TUCKER DR BOEIN ABETH LN W BULL ST R AVE P T T HOFF AVE CHARLTO CRAVEN AVE T S Y 30 N MARKE S MARKET S G A PL DANIEL ST N RD H ST GADSDEN S ARLINGTON DR VE LAMP MORELAND LOCKWO RKET ST OD D T M A T DR T LN LINGUARD S RD R RAMP U S P Y HWY 17 RAMP KINNER AVE RT CAS EADO HARLESTON VILLAGE T ARKWOOD ES ST S N LN TIMM N AV T LAMONT S AVANNAH HWY ON RD LVE OTHEL AVE E S ONTAG T PRINCESS T FABER S CAV S ARCHDALE ST GEDDES AVE TIMOTHY ST ALIE M H S AND S MITH ST W BETS SINA RD LOCKWOO R A WEST ST CHURCH ST HOLL VE DR T ILSON ST CUMBERL CABEL L ERMAN DR LY T TLETO W HARRISO LY ALY LORD CA HUGUENOT N AVE DR ENTWORT CK A LODGE LAND HALSEY BLVD W HORLBE S END DR Y RD ALLISON CT HUNTLEY DR ICK GARDEN ST RD S YWOO TO R SU CKER DR D DR T S NICHOLSON S E S ST CAMPBELL MAGAZIN TA VENDUE RANGE JEAN ST SAN DR PARKWOOD/FARMFIELD RIV T LUDWELBYRNES DOWNS CHADW TE S ER BREEZE D Y ATES L S FENW ROBERT MILLS PR WESLEY DR BARRE D DR FORESTWOOD DR T CULBERTSON DR LY I BE LL A MARSH OAKS CIR AV OLD WINDEMERE S SHORE DR DOLMANE DR N VERLY RD DIGO CROMWE FRENCH QUARTERIOLEAU ST LOGAN ST T ICK DR FRANKLIN ST R D WESLEY R LANTANA D POINT DR GTON D E ST R CHALMERS KENSIN WINDERMERE BL ST MCCLAIN ST COLL TY INDIGO POINT DRUID RD D N ST SALLYS AL N QUEE V TRAPMAN S TE S D BEAUFAIN ST EY POINT DR N E UE R L TON DR CHARLESTO V RIP CAPRI DR T P LEG BROAD ST LINING L WNE RD DR DR T E ELLIOTT ST ALIC EMBROOKE DR BEL E D HWY 30 ON RAMP T ST R TRANSOM CT NAL S ELLIOT SHERIDAN RD ORANG CA ARE ST BOYCES WHF Y POINTE LINING CT N DR 61 61 T ALBEMARLE RD ASHLE GERS WHF NOTLEE PL COLO E CHISOLM ST AD TARLETO EAMANS RD J S Y ST AM ST E

LOCKE LN ESTO HWY

DR NIAL ST NEW ST LONGITUDE LN AVAG TRADD ST SHADY LN SHADY AICA SAYLE RD WN RD S FORD CT CYNTHIA LN M ATE CIR R 30 ON RAM WAPPO LORD ASHLEYJA DR NFEDE LE CO LE W LIME COUNCIL O R JOHNSON RD GREENHILL ST ES ALY ALY N PRIC STOLLS D G VD WO NE M OURS T ARE ST DR HOUSE ST WATER ST SOUTH WINDEMERE OD BLV T GIBBES WEIMS C Y BL T FEDERATE CIR CRESCENT COCHRAN C S BAT ST ST LADSON S

P A DR FOLLY RDBLVD TERY SASANQUA LN D S NE S CON D ST W TOWN L GUERARD R ASHLE LOWNDES ST CHARLESTOWNEL ST ST FORMO LAMBOL

NORRIS AVE NORRIS N EDGEWATER DR

EDSENT AVE CHURCH ST CHURCH

N N RD

DADE RD METTO HTO E EDGEWATER DR BROUG

L AL

R DR P E M ORY D E BATTERY I SLAND DR RE REBEL WAPPOO HEIGHTS MURRAY BL BELL TRANQUIL DR VD

ALLGOOD RD

L 30 ION RD ION RD BATTERY P BOWER LN

R DR HWY S EDGEWATE

BERNIER COMNS COUNT

OLD POIN PALMCREST DR

FOLLY RD BLVD ALL RD WAPPOO H COUNTRYRY CLUB LN CLUB I RY CLUB DR P 171 LYMOU T RD

W PARKWAY DR COUNT APPOO

RIVERLAND TH AVE RD COKER AVE

C HE REEK DR ADQUARTERS PLANTATION DR ION LN REEK PL MINOTT ST AINT JAMES DR CATALINA DR S DR SAINT ND LANDING CLARK AVE LUKES DR FRAMPTON AVE WAPPOOC HLA P R DR RIVERLAND TERRACE ICARD WAY RS RD RUS UARTERS PLANTAT E COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES WESTRIV OLD F

HINSO N GEVERT RD GEVERT N

KOGE

HEADQ DR WAPPOO OLLY DR S AVE CAP

N AVE

ERS ST REG RD ICK FERRY RD TY

EVERT DR IME LUMBER S STONO NW NT RD AL LN MEDWAY TOWN PARK LN FE AUBREY DR S G E EDISTO AV TATUM ST Y AVE NT ST ATES AVE EDISTO O

P FREM AGE CONIFER DR HEADQUARTERS ISLAND LAKESIDE GREEN ELCH AVE W L AND RD FOLLY RD EANS ST DR E M M FAIRWAY BRIAR LN DR OD DR AR EMERSON ST R S RD S TEL EK D CHEV

HARBOR VIEW SEROY ST STONEWO W DR N DR SAWGRA HWY 30 ON RAMP CROSSCRE LO S DR FVIE CHERAW VERNES W ES IN HOWLE AV DR EFA GOL YECREEK AVE DR REEK AVE E RD

ST RE CROSS CREEK BURNINGT EC RAMSAY DR

CIR

PADDL DR T HTON HORES HOUG AXCY S

ST M Y 30 ON RAMP T ND S W THERESA DR HILLCREEK BLVD CARLIN AVE HW ESTSI MP SWINTON S S CAROL D AINT PAUL OODLA W A W

W N R IMBLEDO D NRY AVE LFAIR WAY MPLER DR S PARRISH LN E DR TE LINDBERG ST FLEMING RD MCHE MPTO HARBOR VIEW RD RA BLVD KE OINT PRIESTLY ST S CT WHITE P W N DR Y AMBAW AVE HARBOR COVE PAUL RE NNY LN AL W

PE E DR MARTELLO DR WIDO RIVERLAND DR VERE CT

0 E E PAUL RE 70 WIMBLEDON DR CLE MARLBOROUGH CABOT CARM ARV STONO WATCH DR FLINT ST IEW D WAY R CANAL ST VERE DR MOHAWK AV EL L DR FENWICK PLANTATIONNA RD N W WIMBLEDON DR D AVE EO MCL ST TRAVE N RD A EL E RE DR RS DR BE Y DR AURE HO E GARD ST W NI ATIO SANT SLO

CARPENTE N S FOREST LN W D R R DR E FE NW INCKN ICK HA UMT TE N RIS ARK RD RIP S NENT S L LE LE P T

L ALY PL L Y DR L P OLD PLANT

ER RD DR ES DR R ST FORT L ES DR I KEL CAST COLLET UP DANIEL ELLIS DR JAM TE DR WOODLAND SHORES RD CENTRA GREGG D O R DR HITECHAPEL CIR N ST R E W HARRODS LN HOLLINGS RD N THE H STILES POINT S PT FER DR SON AITES DR SCHAF Y RD W DAW BURGESS DR COMPAS ILL RD FORT SUMT BANK HWY KE LAKE FRANCES DR AK AVE CK LN USE RD NDS AY O Y CT DMO IS DR ON HO E M ST EMAHT DANIEL WHALE LN LL SHELL

S E COTT ST

CONSTANT DR CONSTANT RD HAMRO S STARDUST WAY EBBINS ST S AND R ANUAL HARBOR PLA PAMLICO TER ARD ST EM M N PL D OAK POINT ONTGO TO MARSH DR

PRENTISS S EG RING T LAW HISPE N DR RIVER N SHORE MERY W

DILL LAKE FRANCES DR LONDO

ND CY R US RD CE DR BEAUR FERRIS A LN AVE BE R RD JIM ISLE DR BROWN DR RD MUDA ST WELL GRACIE LEE HUNLEY S BL AYERS RILEY INGTON DR J FARNHAM RD ES DR O DR OATES LN RDAN ST DE INLAND AVE N AVE CONDO UFF RD WATERLOO ST RD O W STIL ENE S CAPERS ST LUCKY RD TERS EIR ST PAT N DR T

QUAIL DR QUAIL IN S HARBOR V T BROOKBANK AVE IEW RD

BRADHAM RD DARW QUAIL DR QUAIL Proposed Commercial Corridor Design Proposed Board of Architectural Review Board (CCDRB) jurisdiction Review (BAR) jurisdiction

3.29 Proposed jurisdiction of the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) and the Commercial Corridor Design Review Board (CCDRB). 58 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

3.30 A clear, consistent review process must accompany changes in design review standards (right: BAR process flow chart). STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 59

Review Process In addition to providing more clarity around the review for historic property owned by low-income earners who process, continuing growth requires increased coordi- have been approved by the Department of Housing and Preservation is not sustainable unless it is accessible to nation and oversight by the BAR and the Department Community Development. everyone. Public involvement and investment in historic of Planning, Preservation and Economic Innovation. resources helps ensure that preserving and enhancing Potential development sites should be mapped to main- Project Process those resources remains a priority. To promote preserva- tain an ongoing record of major short- and long-term  At every stage of review, articulate findings that tion as a tool for the entire community, procedures must changes and enable a comprehensive approach to plan- lead to approval, deferral, or denial of a project be clarified and translated into language that citizens ning. To more fully protect historic resources, preserva- and developers alike can understand. tion review should expand beyond the Old City and Old  Establish three formal review tracks for Staff-Level, and Historic Districts (see Expanded Areas of Protec- Regular, and Major projects Consistent standards are key in the review process. The tion). A process should be established for BAR review of  Codify eligibility and procedures for all review Charleston Vision and urban design principles should suspected instances of demolition by neglect. tracks; make clear process charts available to public serve as overarching ideals for shaping the city, and employing the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Recommended changes to requirements give more  More formally define conceptual approval to the Treatment of Historic Properties (“Secretary’s Stan- responsibility—and more resources—to the applicant. ensure that projects approved for height, scale, and dards”) with a Charleston Standards Overlay will pro- An applicant statement of how the project complies mass will not be reevaluated on those aspects at a vide clear guidelines for the project applicant, City staff, with the Secretary’s Standards will provide a basis for later approval stage and BAR members. Area Character Appraisals (ACAs) evaluation that is understood by the applicant, staff,  Use ACAs to assess development proposals in the will tailor the review process to protect character-defin- and BAR members. Requiring a project model and his- neighborhood context ing features of particular neighborhoods. torical research on the property in some cases will help all involved parties to understand the visual impact and  Assess a project’s impact on archaeology as part of A clear procedure must accompany unambiguous the property’s history, respectively. the permitting and review process if it falls inside standards (Figure 3.30). Three formal review tracks based an Archaeology Zone (see Archaeology) on project size and complexity should be established for This Plan recommends charging an initial flat applica-  Formalize participation of preservation staff in Staff-Level, Regular, and Major projects, with well-de- tion fee for all project reviews, with a scaled bonus fee the Technical Review Committee project forum fined eligibility and procedures for each track. Neigh- (based on the construction contract) due upon issuance to review pre-applications for Major projects and borhood participation should continue to be promoted of the building permit. The bonus fee should be allocat- anticipate future difficulties as part of the review process, with applicants strongly ed to fund process improvements or incentive programs encouraged to meet with neighborhood associations related to historic preservation. For example, bonus fees prior to Board review. might cover review fees and/or rehabilitation grants 60 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

 Increase BAR support-staff capacity and training, Deadlines along with increased staff-level review; periodically  Extend review period for Major projects to allow analyze staff capacity and need for growth additional study by the public and BAR members  Publish staff-level approvals online for projects  Post a hearing notice on the affected property 7 within BAR purview or conservation districts days before the BAR meeting at which a project application will be heard Requirements and Fees  Provide the application packet in either hard copy  Require applicants to state how projects comply or electronic format to board members 7 days with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for before the meeting the Treatment of Historic Properties (“Secretary’s Standards”) and the Charleston Standards Overlay City Standards  Require historic background research as part of  Create methods for determining the impact of project applications for Regular and Major projects Major projects or projects in sensitive areas: a  Require models that show building context for all citywide 3-D digital model (for visual impact), a Major projects and Regular projects in sensitive Citywide Transportation Plan, and traffic studies areas for individual Major developments

 Charge flat application fee for project review, with a  On the City’s website, provide historic guidelines, scaled bonus fee due upon issuance of building per- survey area maps, and links to the State Historic mit; direct bonus fees to a fund to cover review fees Preservation Office website and other relevant and/or rehabilitation grants for owner-occupied resources low- to moderate-income housing  Use BAR files of individual buildings when review-  Charge an archaeology fee for projects that fall ing neighboring properties or the same buildings at inside specified Archaeology Zones a later time  Consider a form-based approach to zoning A STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 61

Preservation is not sustainable unless it is accessible to everyone.

Public Participation Several of the measures recommended below are already done by the City; however, the procedures should be Public participation in the review process creates sup- codified in order to ensure consistency. port for and awareness of historic resources. A review process that includes a variety of community members Improve Access to Information can broaden the scope of the preservation movement  Develop a campaign to improve public perception to more fully incorporate the histories of traditionally of the BAR and to educate people on BAR underrepresented groups or areas of the city. Though procedures public comment should not determine Board decisions, it should inform them. Increase Public Participation

During the public process for this Preservation Plan,  Support formation of a Charleston African Ameri- efforts were made to include the African American com- can Preservation Alliance munity. The Charleston preservation community has  Encourage all neighborhood councils within the been primarily composed of white citizens, and it was dif- historic districts to create preservation subcommit- ficult to involve African American Charlestonians, even tees to monitor and respond to proposed projects with a concerted campaign. The proposed Charleston African American Preservation Alliance would optimally  Strongly encourage applicants to present Major continue the work of reaching out to African Americans projects to the neighborhood council before the and engaging them in the important work of preserving initial BAR hearing, in addition to public comment the buildings and communities of Charleston. The Alli- at the application hearing ance would research, document, and publicize African  Create volunteering and/or job training opportu- American built heritage and encourage more public nities for community members in the proposed participation in preserving it, in partnership with the salvage program (see Materials) state-level African American Heritage Commission. The planned International African American Museum and future Borough Houses projects should also help demonstrate that preservation is relevant to all communities. 3.31-3.32 Public participation is an essential component of the review process 62 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Enforcement Livability Court was created in 2002 to handle mi- Penalties nor disturbances and ordinance violations, including  Increase fines for repeat offenders and more sig- Like the review process, enforcement practices may seem preservation-related issues. A partnership of judges, code nificant violations, and channel penalty fines into a oblique to outsiders. Explaining timelines and penalties enforcement officers, and police officers operates- Liv grant program or revolving loan fund for repairing in publicly available materials will raise awareness and ability Court, which heard over 1,300 cases in 2006.12 The low-income historic houses L reduce the need for penalties, while codifying enforce- issues it addresses seem minor in comparison with larger ment responsibilities in the Preservation Ordinance will crimes heard in Municipal Court but can be central to  Institute penalties for buildings demolished with- establish clear authority and responsibility. Expanded quality of life. Great potential exists for continuing coop- out approval educational programs should preclude enforcement as a eration between the preservation community, the City,  Revoke business and contractor licenses as the response to ignorance or misunderstanding. and Livability Court. penalty for repeated or significant violations L

Direct improvements in the enforcement system will Process  Set firmer deadlines for Livability Court–mandated increase both confidence in ordinances and motivation actions  Amend the Preservation Ordinance to clarify to act in compliance with them. Ensuring consistent in- enforcement procedures for the BAR terpretation and enforcement of ordinances throughout the city and between cases should be a priority. Address-  Budget to allow for more staff to enforce BAR regu- ing demolition by neglect, tracking work after permit lations issuance, and penalizing work without permits are other  Work with the Building Inspections Division to salient issues. explore ways to better link the two departments and streamline code violation enforcement Current practice does not reflect stated procedures. While the zoning code states that the building inspector  Provide a website and dedicated phone line to allow will monitor the project, it is the Department of Plan- the public to report any violations or unauthorized ning, Preservation and Economic Innovation that tracks construction activity violations and brings the case to Livability Court if un-  Incorporate enforcement procedures—including resolved. Thus, lack of staff hours reduces enforcement of timelines and fines—in handouts explaining the BAR decisions. Responsibility for addressing violations BAR process and on the City’s website must be delegated more clearly. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 63

3.33 Demolition by neglect should be penalized. 64 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Materials

All buildings should employ high-quality materials in keeping with Charleston’s rich heritage. Charleston can and should expect materials and designs on the same level with its architectural fabric. No exceptions should be made: the real estate market, the booming economy, and Charleston’s reputation allow the city to demand more.

The BAR currently reviews new and replacement materials. In-kind replacements go through staff-level review, and the BAR reviews changes in materials unless an equivalent substitute is used. This process should remain 3.34-3.35 Interesting historic details are in place, with the addition of the Secretary of the Inte- part of the city's building fabric. rior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties for evaluating replacement materials.

Materials on new buildings should meet standards for quality, longevity, context, and scale. Materials should have stood the test of time. Furthermore, materials should show the quality of the design and craftsmanship; spray-on stucco will not do justice to a building’s fine design. New materials and methods proposed for historic buildings—e.g., liquid vinyl, elastomeric paint, and ma- sonry sealers—should be reviewed with extreme caution, with applicants required to demonstrate the need for use and that the methods will not damage the historic fabric. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 65

The Secretary’s Standards require that deteriorated ate, well-installed repair and replacement materials materials on historic buildings be repaired rather than for historic houses may be more expensive than cheap replaced whenever possible. The presence of local con- siding and windows. The investment will pay off in the tractors accustomed to working on historic buildings, long term due to the higher durability and quality of as well as preservation education programs, should be the materials, but initial costs still may be prohibitive capitalized on through creative partnerships to ensure for lower-income building owners. that historic buildings receive appropriate repairs. Work- shops and educational programs could provide low-cost Standards should not be compromised, but they must consultations to homeowners of all income levels and be flexible enough to ensure that historic preserva- promote the inherent benefits and sustainability of tion can be supported by the entire community. High, retaining existing materials. inflexible standards may make repairs financially impossible for some building owners, increase the pos- Replacement should be the last option considered, as sibility of demolition by neglect, and drive up the cost it has the very real potential to damage the building’s of affordable housing. Thresholds can help determine 13 3.36 Ideally, weathered materials should be repaired, or integrity. When replacement is necessary, replacing where less-expensive replacement materials are accept- replaced in kind if repair is not possible. deteriorated items with matching salvaged historical able. A tiered threshold that considers owner income, materials (in-kind replacement) is preferable. In-kind level of building deterioration, and historic significance allow long-term retention of the following: very low- to replacement helps protect the building’s architectural should be established by the BAR, the Building Inspec- low-income homeowners, historic building form and integrity, or the authenticity of its historical identity. tions Division, and the Department of Housing and function, housing stock for very low- to low-income New elements crafted to match may be acceptable if no Community Development and specifically referenced earners, or the social and cultural heritage of the district matching historical materials are available or if the his- in BAR decisions. The development review/affordable or area. However, even in affordable housing projects, torical materials have demonstrated inherent flaws. New housing liaison would serve as an advocate for afford- where lower-cost materials may be permissible to allow nonmatching materials should be avoided. able housing and adviser to the BAR. He or she would project feasibility, obviously cheap materials or shoddy set a threshold for a collection of properties and make workmanship should not be tolerated. Gap financing The BAR can and should make judgments on how re- recommendations to the BAR on the appropriateness of and low-interest loans from a revolving loan fund could placement materials affect a building’s integrity. In some nonhistoric replacement materials. enable necessary repairs when cheaper replacement cases, a deteriorated building is not repaired because materials are not appropriate. of perceived costs of materials and/or misconceptions Flexibility should be used in circumstances in which around the BAR review process. Public education about the benefit to the public good outweighs or is compa- the review process can help demystify the review pro- rable to the benefits of preservation by the letter of the cess, but the first concern remains: historically appropri- law. A public good might include circumstances that 66 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Recommendations Interiors  Include historic interiors in the survey rating system  Require the use of quality materials that have A strong history of preservation is evident in the historic proven themselves over time  Increase education for prospective property buy- resources of the city’s local historic districts. However, ers, real estate agents, contractors, architects, and  Conduct public education about the inherent ben- some resources are still not addressed by current pres- current owners on the value of retaining historic efits of older, historic materials ervation policies. Protecting historic interiors requires interior materials and finishes thoughtful discussion and well-crafted strategies. Many  Publish a Preservation Manual for Charleston that of the interiors of Charleston buildings are world-class  Require that demolition plans and existing condi- details types of buildings and materials, as well as examples of design and craftsmanship (Figure 3.37). tions photographs be part of the design review an explanation of the Secretary’s Standards and submittal for Category 1 and 2 building projects recommendations for conserving and adapting The desire to adapt historic buildings to modern prefer- buildings for modern use14 A  Require Historic American Building Survey ences such as large kitchens, spacious bathrooms, and (HABS) Level II extensive photo documentation of  Articulate circumstances in which the Secretary open floor plans threatens many of Charleston’s historic interiors in historic district and landmark build- of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of interiors. Refitting historic interiors can involve indis- ings that will be drastically altered L Historic Properties might allow more cost-efficient criminate gutting of irreplaceable historic components: materials to be used in affordable housing rehabili- wood floors, wood- and plasterwork, and even entire  Encourage donations of easements on privately tation projects15 floor plans.16 Property rights issues make landmark- owned interiors through better publicity and more ing private interiors difficult, but public education and incentives from the easement-holding organization  Organize a salvage program, such as the warehouse incentives can encourage interior preservation through (Figure 3.39) run by the Historic Charleston Foundation other means.  Set a precedent by encouraging the donation of  Provide rehabilitation consultation sessions and easements on publicly accessible interiors of public- workshops to homeowners and tenants through a Recommendations ly owned historic buildings nonprofit-run educational program  Adopt an ordinance enabling interiors of publicly  Encourage property owners who remove historic owned Category 1 and 2 buildings to be protected elements to salvage and store them on-site in through BAR review L basements or attics, or to donate them to a salvage program STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 67

Many of Charleston's building interiors are world-class examples of design and craftsmanship.

3.38 Historic interior materials and finishes are important examples of architectural craftsmanship, but can be threatened by remodels.

3.39 Easements on privately-owned interiors protect them from inappropriate alterations. Historic Charleston Foundation owns an easement on this home in the Old & Historic District.

3.37 Drawing room of the Aiken-Rhett House (built 1818). 68 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Preservation Education

No one can argue that Charlestonians aren’t aware of A comprehensive education process for BAR members their surroundings. Buildings are hot topics at social and staff will increase the efficiency and consistency gatherings, and citizens often align historic preservation of application review. Mandatory orientation for new with quality of life. Despite this, many real estate agents, members and staff should cover general preservation contractors, homeowners, and other community mem- topics such as the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards bers lack basic knowledge about what preservation is, for the Treatment of Historic Properties, urban design how it is practiced responsibly, and how decisions about principles, National Park Service preservation briefs, preservation are made in Charleston. the sustainability-preservation juncture, and affordable housing challenges; as well as Charleston-specific issues Applicants and prospective applicants should know such as Area Character Appraisals (ACAs), piazzas and what to expect in review processes, as well as the basic gardens, the single-house style, and how FEMA regula- when, how, and why involved in BAR and staff decisions. tions affect preservation. Mandatory continuing educa- Beyond familiarity with the procedural nuts and bolts, tion should review orientation material and explore more every Charlestonian should have the opportunity to nuanced issues (Figure 3.40). learn what makes the city’s fabric unique, from the urban Lower Peninsula and Mid-Peninsula areas to the suburbs A “recent projects” review/critique will allow identifica- of West Ashley to the landscapes and archaeology of tion of successes and failures. rural Johns Island. Educate the Public Existing educational and informational resources for the public should be expanded to increase awareness of  Encourage local preservation organizations to staff design principles and project review processes, neigh- an educational program, with community educa- borhood histories, and historic resources from the late tion seminars and presentations that reach out to 3.40 National Park Service preservation briefs and similar publications should be widely available for city staff members, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A regular and engage all areas or neighborhoods preservation bulletin series might explore issues in depth BAR members, and the general public.  Publish a Preservation Manual for Charleston that and be made available to members of the public as well details types of buildings and materials, as well as as the BAR. Improving the accessibility and publicity of an explanation of the Secretary’s Standards and such materials should be a priority, with unconventional recommendations for conserving and adapting forums such as churches used to reach traditionally buildings for modern use17 A underrepresented groups. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 69

 The following materials should be widely publi- cized and made available to community members: relevant ordinances, processes and procedures, public notices of BAR meetings and decisions, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treat- ment of Historic Properties, preservation bulletins, 3.41-3.42 The websites of local Sanborn maps, best practices of preservation, and preservation and government guidelines on how to conduct research on historic organizations offer information properties about preservation-related issues and events.  Use the Civic Design Center as a forum to educate and engage the community on important preservation topics and relevant design issues

 Provide web links to related organizations and programs: historic preservation, affordable housing, award-winning projects, etc.

 Provide welcome packets at real estate agents’ offices which illustrate spaces that have been rehabilitated according to the Secretary’s Standards  Increase education for prospective property buy- ers and current owners on the value of retaining historic interior materials and finishes  Partner with schools, contractors, and artisans to do energy-efficient retrofits, training in sensitive rehabilitation and traditional building trades, and window repair18

 Educate the public about archaeology 70 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

 Work with congregations that own significant his-  Continue and strengthen annual review of BAR- toric buildings and cemeteries to educate the public approved projects to identify and learn from suc- and preserve the historic fabric cesses and failures

 Expand home tour programs to include historic Educate Professionals homes of a variety of styles and scales, or those that have won preservation awards in the past  Offer preservation seminars and workshops to real estate agents and contractors  Encourage the Historic Charleston Foundation and the Preservation Society of Charleston to reassess  Introduce contractor accreditation/continuing the financial value of easements as associated with education unit program through local historic their donation fee requirements, increase the fees, preservation organizations and colleges and use the additional revenue to staff education  Consider ways to educate banks and insurance programs agencies about historic preservation Educate BAR, CCDRB, and Staff

 Expand Board orientation and continuing education program to provide all members with common understanding of standards, different types of projects, and vernacular Charleston architecture and twentieth-century architecture

 Provide continuing education for staff members to ensure common background on preservation issues and improve speed and consistency of review process

 Budget for preservation/Board staff to allow for continuing education opportunities through con- ferences, seminars, etc. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 71

Benefits of historic preservation include identity and pride, economic stimulators, and property values.

Incentives for Preservation

Providing incentives for historic preservation acknowl- edges its benefits for the whole community: identity Tools and Incentives for Preservation and pride, economic stimulators such as tourism, and property values. When private property is involved, in-  Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits centives help establish common ground between private  Low-Income Housing Tax Credits property rights and the public good.  Easements

Existing Incentives  Covenants

A number of programs encourage preservation and re-  Tax Abatement habilitation of historic buildings and property. However,  Grants these programs often operate under the radar of public awareness.  Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)

Tax Credits: The federal 20 percent Historic Rehabilita- tion Tax Credit allows 20 percent of rehabilitation costs of historic income-producing properties to be counted as A combination of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit a tax credit.19 (In this case, “historic” is judged by a prop- (LIHTC) and the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit erty’s listing on the National Register of Historic Places, (HRTC) can be used to rehabilitate buildings for afford- either individually or as contributing to the character of able housing units. New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC) a listed Historic District.) The federal 10 percent Historic encourage private investors to lend money to smaller Rehabilitation Tax Credit allows a 10 percent tax credit projects in low-income areas through Community De- to be taken for a substantial rehabilitation of nonresi- velopment Entities (CDEs) in exchange for tax credits. dential buildings built before 1936 and not listed on the National Register or in a National Register Historic Easements and Covenants: Easements are a partial District. At the state level, the Historic Rehabilitation interest in property that allows the easement holder to Tax Credit allows 25 percent of the rehabilitation costs of regulate the uses of and changes to historic property a historic primary residence to be subtracted from state without owning the property; this program has tax ben- 3.43 Historic Charleston Foundation holds an easement on the income taxes. South Carolina allows state and federal tax efits. Historic Charleston Foundation and the Preserva- Cleland-Wells House at 58 Tradd Street (built 1760). credits to be combined. tion Society of Charleston both accept easements from 72 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

owners of historic properties, and the Lowcountry Open The Charleston County Comprehensive Greenbelt  Support state and national legislation that encour- Land Trust accepts conservation easements throughout Plan includes a Conservation Toolbox appendix that ages use of historic resources through tax credits the Lowcountry. Covenants are restrictions attached to lists a number of other useful tools for conserving and other measures the deed of a historic property that protect the integrity green space, along with the benefits and drawbacks  Focus a portion of Tax Increment Financing and of the property; these also have tax benefits (Figure 3.43). of each. It should be referenced as part of incentive Community Development Block Grant funds on development programs. reuse and rehabilitation projects in target areas Legislation: The Bailey Bill places a temporary ceil- ing on a historic building’s assessed value to encour- Recommendations  Creatively use transportation funds to support age rehabilitation; it prevents taxes from rising due to preservation and rehabilitation of historic road-  Apply to expand the National Register Historic capital improvements for up to 20 years. It also includes ways and commercial corridors District to the 1985 Geier-Brown-Renfrow provisions for tax ceilings on low- to moderate-income Survey boundaries and the Sofia Wilson Tract  Create and publicize an information clearinghouse rental properties. It is a state law (Code of Laws Sections for preservation-related incentives 4-9-195 and 5-21-140) that must be adopted by the mu-  Campaign for state legislation to explicitly nicipality. Charleston has not yet adopted it. enable Transfer Development Rights (TDRs) to  Encourage existing nonprofit organizations to be used from designated historic properties or work in partnership with the City’s Redevelopment Transfer Development Rights (TDRs): Transfer Devel- historic rural/cultural landscapes to other areas and Preservation Commission to take advantage of opment Rights benefit owners of rural landscapes and of the city targeted for dense development L New Markets Tax Credits;21 the Commission might historic buildings by allowing developable space—either act as a funding clearinghouse for renovations and  Reduce fees and expedite reviews of designated the land or the airspace above the building that is al- maintenance of resident-owned buildings in the historic buildings and properties that have lowed for development under zoning—to be sold and Renewal Community easements or covenants20 applied to another building. As the name suggests, TDRs  Offer support to property owners who may be allow development rights to be transferred from one  Create local incentives, including adopting lo- interested in incentives through “office hours” at designated area or property to another. “Sending areas” cal property tax incentives (like the Bailey Bill) local preservation organizations or the City, where and “receiving areas” are often designated in conjunction for historic preservation citizens can obtain guidance on qualifying and ap- with TDRs, where areas of targeted development (such as  Encourage Charleston and Berkeley counties to plying for incentives the Neck) “receive” TDRs “sent” from historic districts partner with the City of Charleston in enabling or specified cultural/rural areas. South Carolina state law and offering TDRs does not currently enable TDRs. STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 73

Economic Impact

Historic preservation produces direct effects and multi- A vital city must maintain a diverse economic base. That plier effects.22 A direct effect would be money spent on said, revenue from sustainable tourism will help safe- rehabilitating a historic building, while multiplier effects guard Charleston’s unique character and cultural iden- would include jobs, income, wealth generated, and taxes. tity, from precolonial times to today.26 Tourism should In Missouri, an estimated $346 million spent in one year reflect Charleston’s ongoing story, including the years on historic rehabilitation projects produced significant during the World Wars, the Cold War, the beginning of economic impacts: nearly 14,000 new jobs, $459 million the preservation movement, and events like the Spoleto in income, $678 million in wealth generated, and $144 Festival that celebrate the life and energy in local culture. million in taxes. Recommendations Preservation plays a similarly important place in  Encourage sustainable tourism through high stan- Charleston’s economy. Rehabilitation projects create dards for tour companies and showcasing educa- construction jobs. Tourism generates service and retail tional attractions jobs.23 The resulting income and tax revenues add much more economic activity than can be easily quantified. A  Promote exhibits and tours that include Charles- 3.44 Rehabilitation of historic properties plays an important portion of the tax revenue should benefit employees of ton’s evolution to the present role in Charleston's economy, and many businesses have taken the tourism industry through affordable housing.  Petition the Accommodations Tax Advisory Com- advantage of the city's historic building stock. mittee to direct Accommodations Tax revenue Heritage tourism especially is an important multiplier ef- to support housing for employees of the tourism fect of historic preservation and a significant contributor industry L to the Charleston economy. The Charleston area hosted 4.21 million visitors in 2006, each spending an average of $235 per day.24 Lodging sales for 2006 were calculated at over $465 million, and 12 percent of total sales were attributed to tourism. Direct and indirect jobs created by tourism numbered 50,000, with the earnings of those jobs totaling $1.1 billion; total economic impact of tourism in Charleston was figured at $3.06 million for the year. History, architecture, and culture rated as the top three assets of the area.25 3.45 Heritage tourism is a major contributor to the Charleston economy. 74 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Charleston’s commitment to universal access should be explicitly set forth in City policy.

Accessibility

The American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards man- Recommendations date that alterations to historic buildings must comply  Continue the ADA Compliance Office task force with accessibility regulations, unless compliance that assesses properties’ level of accessibility; in- would threaten or destroy the historic integrity of the clude preservation representatives building. The National Park Service echoes this, stating that historic properties should be accessible insofar as  In the proposed Preservation Manual, include ex- possible without compromising the historic significance amples of sensitively designed accessibility features of the building. that are well integrated into the historic fabric A

 Make ADA Standards available through the City Difficult decisions arise around when and how to make and preservation organizations, along with an historic buildings accessible to everyone. Public accom- explanation of what they might mean for owners of modations such as shops, restaurants, and theaters are historic properties required by law to make “readily achievable” changes. For changes not deemed readily achievable and for 3.46 Sensitively-designed accessibility features help make other historic properties open to the public, the options historic buildings accessible to everyone. should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, with the expectation of providing a high level of access without compromising significant features or the overall character of the property.

Charleston’s commitment to universal access should be explicitly set forth in City policy. The National Park Ser- vice publication “Making Historic Properties Accessible” provides guidance to owners of historic properties.27 STEWARDSHIP PRINCIPLES 75

Charleston’s Expanding Horizon

CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 79

he expansion of city limits and unprecedented population growth call for a visionary approach to planning. Indeed, with develop- mentT prospects placing the future shape and nature of the Charleston metropolitan area on the drawing board, the city cannot afford not to learn from its rich past.

Each of the sections in Charleston’s Expanding Hori- zon offers one piece of the vision based on preservation tenets and the deep-rooted history of the Lowcountry. Growth and Sprawl incorporates smart growth tactics and cultural landscape values with rural preservation. Built heritage is considered in Transportation and Infrastructure. Institutional Stewardship recognizes the importance of institutions in planning for and around historic resources. 80 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Growth and Sprawl

If growth continues at the current pace, the Charleston metropolitan area is projected to cover over 550,000 acres by 2030, ten times its size in 1973 (Figure 4.1).1 Land is not unlimited, and the ecological, economic, and social disadvantages of sprawl should not be underesti- mated. Growth must be controlled and assimilated into appropriate areas, rather than sprawling into the historic countryside. Just because there is land available does not necessarily mean it should be developed.

Indeed, metropolitan regions are finite, with natural edges created by geographic features like topography, watersheds, coastlines, and farmlands. Within a region, a variety of landscapes exists, from the very rural to the very urban. The City of Charleston sits in a metropolitan region that includes other villages, towns, and cities, along with undeveloped natural areas. Each area is an important part of the region, and each has its own center and natural edge. Smart growth on the local and regional level reinforces these natural urban/rural boundaries with policies and regulations that direct development back into already urbanized areas.

4.1 Growth of Urban Areas, 1973-2030. This recent growth projection study completed by the Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments (BCDCOG), the University of South Carolina, and the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources projects the future urban growth in the Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester area. CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 81

Smart growth reinforces natural urban/rural boundaries.

Charleston’s rural vicinity forms an important part of Rising property values often decrease the stock of afford- the city’s historic character. Countryside interlaced with able housing and displace long-term residents of rural the edges of the city reinforces Charleston’s historic and areas. One especially vulnerable group in the Lowcoun- cultural identity. Johns Island is an increasingly rare sea try is heirs’ property owners. An estimated one-third of island with only scattered development; its rural land- all property owned by African Americans in the rural scapes comprise an area of great natural beauty and South is owned as heirs’ property, with 2,000 tracts of environmental importance and contain an enclave of heirs’ property in Charleston County and 1,300 tracts affordable housing. Cainhoy Village and West Ashley’s comprising 17,000 acres in Berkeley County.3,4 This is a former plantation lands also deserve the attention of crucial issue for preservation of both traditional com- preservationists. munities and rural land, since heirs’ property makes up so much of the Lowcountry. Historic preservationists increasingly seek to protect these rural landscapes of cultural, environmental, and As shown by successful preservation-of-place efforts 4.2 Sprawling development is detrimental to social, economic, historical significance. Called “rural preservation” or around the United States, sprawling development is and environmental sustainability. “preservation of place,” this type of protection involves not inevitable. Rural preservation would and can be an working with land conservation organizations, local aesthetic, cultural and economic asset to the community. zoning, and regional governments. Restricting develop- Proposals for smart growth developments, such as those ment in sensitive locations preserves traditional commu- laid out in the 2007 Johns Island Community Plan, rep- nities and culturally significant landscapes and directs resent one approach to developing culturally important development to infill areas that already support an urban landscapes that would preserve more land than other growth pattern and infrastructure. development patterns (Figure 4.3). Local or regional land trusts preserve significant natural areas by enabling con- Sprawling development is detrimental to social, eco- servation easements or directly purchasing land. South nomic, and environmental sustainability. Ecologically Carolina is home to some of the oldest and most active important marshlands are destroyed and scenic byways land trusts in the nation. impacted by growth in formerly rural areas. Development leads to urban heat islands, or expanses of paved surfaces, that intensify heat waves and cause smog.2 Transporta- tion projects such as the proposed I-526 and Highway 4.3 A walkability diagram laid out in the 2007 Johns Island 61 Expressway extensions change land use patterns by Community Plan represents one approach to responsible facilitating access to formerly hard-to-reach areas. development of outlying areas. 82 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Case Studies The result would have been the destruction of much of the island’s natural state, and Georgia’s last autonomous Johns Island’s neighbor Wadmalaw Island is well Gullah community would likely have been dispersed by protected from development, and rural preservation rising land values. At the urging of Reynolds’ widow, the efforts on Johns Island should follow in a similar vein. State purchased the island and made it into a state park. The Charleston County Council established a special Drawing from this example, it is possible that areas of Wadmalaw Island Land Planning Committee in 1987 in Johns Island could become a national or state recreation response to a petition from residents of the island who area, given sufficient support. were concerned by proposals for an 800-acre development. The committee is charged with preserving Perhaps the most dramatic success story for preservation Wadmalaw’s rural character by studying and drafting of place comes from Marin County, California, a semiru- planning policies. On the island, the historic community ral area in the San Francisco Bay Area (Figure 4.5). In the 4.4 Sapelo Island, formerly the private reserve of R.J. Reynolds, of Rockville has established a Design Review Board to mid-1960s and early 1970s, Marin residents successfully is currently owned by the State of Georgia and operated as ensure new construction is in keeping with the character resisted the construction of a transportation corridor a state park. of the community. One tactic that has proved effective through their community and passed zoning regulations for preserving rural character is the pursuit of conserva- to promote agricultural use. To facilitate development tion easements. The Lowcountry Open Land Trust holds in the area, the district supervisor announced that a easements on a large portion of the historic Rosebank freeway, not unlike the I-526 extension, would be routed Estates and part of the Rosebank cotton plantation, in through their county. Concerned citizens organized a addition to over 3,700 acres, or 20 percent of the upland campaign to visit every house in the affected area, find- area.5 Overall, over 25 percent of Wadmalaw Island is ing that few residents knew about the issues surrounding under easements. Zoning restricts lot size on some parts the proposed freeway. The resulting public concern led to of the island. Additionally, municipal water and sewer a major change of direction by district politicians, who services will not be extended to the island, thus dampen- scrapped plans for the highway and began to support the ing development potential. land preservation efforts that have made Marin famous. Restrictive rural preservation measures have had both The State of Georgia has worked to protect Sapelo Island positive and negative effects on Marin County. The coun- 4.5 Marin County, California, successfully resisted the construction of a freeway in the 1960s and 1970s; the area’s in a natural state (Figure 4.4). Formerly the private ty is renowned for its natural beauty; however, property rolling hills have been preserved as protected open space. reserve of R. J. Reynolds, Reynolds’ widow recognized prices have skyrocketed to be among the highest in the that after her death the island was likely to pass into the nation because of the high demand for land in the area. public market and thus become open to development. CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 83

The Bay Area’s mix of protected open space and urban Mitigation of Existing Sprawl development is unique in the nation, with almost 25 percent of land protected from development.6 The While considering future actions for rural preservation Charleston area, like the cities and counties around the and smart growth is essential, it is also important to re- San Francisco Bay, should work to maintain the balance duce the negative impacts of existing sprawl. One crucial of green space and urban development within its borders step is the delineation of suburban edges. Landscape that helps to make it such an attractive city. It is rare elements such as street trees, generous setbacks, and buf- to have natural settings available within a short drive fers of open space should be employed to create distinct of an important city, and Charleston should recognize development edges and mitigate some of the negative the recreational, economic, and ecological benefits this aesthetic effects of sprawl. Such improvements are rela- proximity affords. tively inexpensive to institute. Careful attention should be paid to the reinforcement of landscape character to Several other places should be mentioned for their suc- create a comfortable transition from rural to urban. New cessful rural preservation efforts. Eaton County, Michi- Urbanism’s transect model, in which mixed-use develop- gan, succeeded in resisting a highway development in the ments decrease in density and height as they move away early 1970s that would have destroyed its rural character from the urban center, presents one example of how to by bringing a corridor of suburban development from create this transition. nearby Lansing. Rural Connecticut and the villages around Boston have staved off large-scale developments The transition from rural surroundings to the historic that threatened the rural landscape. Boulder, Colorado, city center becomes a critical issue as the city continues has restricted development through an urban growth to expand. Residents, visitors, and tourists should pass boundary to protect its mountain setting, despite incred- through unique entry corridors instead of the current ible pressure for growth. sprawl, which vastly undersells Charleston as a historical and cultural resource. In the Lower Peninsula, tree- lined “grand spines” have been proposed for Calhoun Street, Meeting Street, and King Street to create a more attractive entrance to the historic district. Such concepts should be applied to the city’s outer approaches. A vision for appropriately scaled, well-designed commercial cor- 4.6 The transition from rural surroundings to the historic ridors and prominent streetscapes should be articulated city center should be achieved with well-designed commercial as part of this process and ACA studies. corridors. 84 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Strategies for Rural Preservation and Smart Growth

Many residents of rural Charleston communities support the idea of preserving rural character. Johns Island stakeholders have expressed overwhelming support for rural preservation measures.7 Residents of Cainhoy have stressed in community workshops that preserving the village character of their settlement is a top priority.8 Regardless of the ultimate level of development in West Ashley, Johns Island, and Cainhoy, there are several ways rural conservation practices and smart growth policies can be encouraged.

Creating a unified vision of the Tri-County area is essential to curbing sprawl and controlling inappropriate infrastructure changes. There are currently dozens of municipal and county governments, as well as numerous water and sewer agencies, operating independently in the region. The Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments is a good step in this direction, though broadening of regional planning authority may be needed. Reinforcing the natural urban/rural edge with a regulatory tool like the Urban Growth Boundary and maintaining it in the face of development pressures is of utmost importance. The Mark Clark Impact Assessment, local land trusts, and preservation organizations support this policy. Transect zoning’s “transition areas,” which limit density and public services between urban and rural areas, could strengthen the Urban Growth Boundary 4.7 A snapshot of known development proposals within the city limits, 2007 and help preserve the urban/rural edge. CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 85

Change will inevitably come to the rural areas of Charleston. The question is what the nature of that change will be.

The I-526/Mark Clark Expressway extension is repre- On the community preservation front, several measures sentative of a much bigger issue. Traffic and transpor- can be taken to address heirs’ property issues. Zoning tation problems will not disappear, nor will the need that allows clustered dwellings in a “family compound” to balance solutions with potential side effects and provides for the continuance of traditional land use cultural and historic preservation. The thorough evalu- patterns. (Beaufort County has implemented this type ation conducted for the Mark Clark extension should of zoning.)9 The Gullah Culture Preservation Exemp- be combined with an alternatives study; this approach tion proposed by Faith R. Rivers proposes limiting the should be used for all major transportation and devel- assessment ratio to a percentage of the current use value. opment projects in the future. This has the potential to preserve traditional owner- ship and use of rural lands without restricting property The most successful rural preservation programs come rights. Tied to the land rather than the owners’ income from public involvement and enthusiasm. Members of tax liabilities, the exemption would simplify paperwork, the public, working in concert with City staff and policy lower implementation costs, and avoid the title clearance makers, can effect smart growth in their community requirement involved in conservation easements. This 4.8 Johns Island and Cainhoy both have distinctive rural while preserving the cultural landscapes and communi- exemption, if enacted at the state and local level, could characters that should be retained through a strong rural ties that make it attractive. Local preservation and con- help safeguard traditional African American culture. preservation program. servation movements must work with the City to ensure that all possible policy tools are utilized and that the Over the coming decades, change will inevitably come larger community is aware of the issues surrounding ru- to the rural areas of Charleston. The question is what the ral preservation. Organizing a group of interested people nature of that change will be. There is a range of ways to attend public meetings and making sure members of to deal with sprawl, from public activism that brings the public are aware of any relevant issues in upcoming growth to a halt to allowing unchecked sprawl. The elections is the best way for members of the public to best path for Charleston lies somewhere in the middle. influence the decision-making process. Land trusts and Charleston needs to actively work to maintain its urban/ preservation groups can help preserve large areas or even rural edge, direct growth into targeted areas, reinforce jump-start a movement to bring an area under state or its streetscapes and entry corridors, and strategically national protection. mitigate existing sprawl. 86 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Recommendations  Campaign for state legislation to explicitly enable Transfer Development Rights (TDRs) to be used  Support and participate in integrated regional from designated historic properties or historic planning rural/cultural landscapes to other areas of the city  Reinforce Charleston’s natural urban/rural edge targeted for dense development L by formalizing the Urban Growth Boundary in the  Encourage Charleston and Berkeley counties to City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations; partner with the City of Charleston in enabling and strictly maintain the boundary offering TDRs  Use zoning to encourage compact development  Consciously plan for the scale, form, and landscape patterns that minimize land consumption of roadways, with special attention to entry cor-  Develop strategies to encourage infill development ridors from outlying areas into the historic center of Charleston  Restrict the provision of public water and sewers to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary, as was  Evaluate the land use and transportation issues done on Johns Island in 2007 that the I-526 extension is intended to address, and engage in a thorough analysis of alternative proj-  Work with the Center for Heirs’ Property Preser- ects that could also solve the problems and avoid vation to publicize heirs’ property assistance and sprawl implement policies conducive to preserving tra- 4.9 West Ashley Urban Growth Boundary, 2007. A regulatory ditional communities, such as the Gullah Culture  Explore the possibility of creating state or national tool like the Urban Growth Boundary can help preserve the city’s Preservation Exemption recreation areas natural urban/rural edge in the face of development pressure.  Work closely with land trusts and encourage their work outside the Urban Growth Boundary

 Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 87

Transportation and Infrastructure

Transportation and infrastructure shape how people Large trucks and buses can damage historic sidewalks experience the historic fabric of Charleston. The street and narrow streets. Vibrations caused by large vehicles grid reinforces or dismisses historic development also may directly damage buildings built on sand foun- patterns in defining residential and commercial dations, as the vibrations cause minuscule shifts in the areas with major roads that serve as neighborhood sand. Vibrations may also contribute to deterioration boundaries. Smaller blocks echo the street grid of and residual strain from soil movement, moisture and historic neighborhoods and play a part in discouraging temperature cycles, poor maintenance, or past repairs.10 crime, slowing traffic, and creating livelier pedestrian environments. Traffic directs use patterns: high traffic To reduce wear and tear on streets, several measures volume through traditional residential areas discourages should be taken. Charleston’s current restriction on the people from living there, especially the elderly and number of tour buses in the city at any time, accom- families with children. In rural areas, roads showcase or plished by issuing limited trip-specific permits and de-emphasize historic land uses. limiting large buses to perimeter routes and designated streets, should be continued.11 Public transportation can As a regional issue, transportation should be addressed reduce traffic downtown and around the region, reducing 4.10 Development like the I-526/Mark Clark extension collaboratively. Existing plans should be starting points the need for new or widened roads. The public transpor- impacts natural and cultural resources. for a Citywide Transportation Plan, with county and tation system should be improved in conjunction with regional agencies as ongoing partners in transportation efforts to raise awareness about traffic congestion, smart planning and improvement efforts. planning, pollution, and global warming. Locating housing and commercial centers near transportation hubs Transportation also facilitates public transportation and reduces traffic.

Though transportation does not directly fall under the The I-26 linear park has been noted as an ideal oppor- auspices of this Plan, it is closely tied to quality of life tunity for light rail. The corridor, which developed as and thus to historic preservation. This section offers brief a rail line, could reduce commuter and visitor traffic recommendations on aspects of transportation closely between North Charleston and Charleston and along the related to preservation. It is not meant to be a compre- peninsula. hensive offering of transportation solutions for Charleston. 4.11 King Street, circa 1905. Public transportation has always been an important part of Charleston’s infrastructure and should continue to be improved. 88 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Maintaining existing streetscapes helps to sustain historic character.

The City of Charleston Century V City Plan and the Transportation Recommendations Charleston Downtown Plan both have traffic and transportation components, and the Century V City  Develop a phased Citywide Transportation Plan, Plan recommends developing a Citywide Traffic Plan including pedestrian and bicycle routes, and pro- and Off-Street Connector Plan. This recommendation is vide for regular updates supported by significant public concern and the recent  Develop a traffic flow model and require develop- release of several countywide and regional transporta- ers to evaluate large new developments using the tion plans: clearly, it is time for an improved, sustainable model transportation system.  Divert heavy traffic flow away from residential The Citywide Transportation Plan must address preser- areas vation-related challenges. The topics discussed here—  Improve mass transit throughout the city 4.12 Encouraging bicycle transportation will reduce the impact maintenance of historic infrastructure, reducing traffic’s of automobile traffic on historic buildings and landscapes and impacts on historic buildings and landscapes, and devel-  Reduce traffic flow south of Calhoun Street will reinforce transit-oriented development. opment around transportation hubs—require further at- through free downtown shuttles and more traffic- tention. Seemingly straightforward traffic solutions such calming measures as building or widening roads through rural landscapes  Further restrict large trucks and allow only smaller pose serious challenges to preservation of place in Johns buses south of Calhoun Street to reduce potential Island, West Ashley, and Cainhoy, while the widespread damage from heavy vehicle vibrations assumption that newer roads are better could damage the historic fabric on the peninsula. Thoughtfully addressing  Begin and implement Park and Ride programs to preservation-related transportation and infrastructure downtown; incorporate Park and Ride areas into concerns will make Charleston a stronger, healthier city large new residential developments like Magnolia without compromising its essential cultural resources.  Reduce speed limits south of Calhoun Street to reduce vehicle vibrations

 Levy a traffic impact fee on new developments 4.13 Historic streets should be properly maintained, and (scaled by size) to fund the Citywide Transporta- historic paving materials should be repaired and retained. tion Plan and traffic flow model L CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 89

Infrastructure ments affect long-term investment in a place and thus the integrity of an area. More immediately, streetscaping Charleston likely received its first permanently paved helps safeguard historic character. Street trees emphasize streets in the late 1870s, when important commercial neighborhoods’ historic nature, framing views of indi- roads were paved with blocks of granite.12 At the time, vidual buildings and the block as a whole. With street only a third of Charleston’s 53.5-mile street network was furniture, street trees encourage people to walk around paved with wood and shells. Most wood-built streets an area and notice its unique qualities. (See Neighbor- had been laid with stone by 1882, but Meeting Street hoods for a discussion of trees in rural areas.) remained a shell-paved road.13 The 1910s saw extensive street improvements, including asphalt paving for major In the public forums, a number of Lower Peninsula and roads, as the automobile gained in popularity and state Mid-Peninsula residents expressed frustration about law allowed the City to charge property owners half the deteriorated sidewalks and roads, flooding, and the need cost of improvements.14 Asphalt paving projects contin- for more streetscape improvements. Driving or cycling ued into the 1920s. on cracked, potholed road surfaces is dangerous, dis- 4.14 Charleston’s streets contribute to the character of the city’s tracts from the surroundings, and lowers quality of life. historic areas. Charleston’s historic streets should be catalogued and Efforts to reduce car trips amplify the need for sidewalk improved as a component of ongoing streetscape im- and road maintenance; people are unlikely to walk and provement projects. Where original street materials have bicycle as a means of transportation if the infrastruc- been paved over, removing the asphalt should be consid- ture is in poor condition or nonexistent. Especially as ered, taking into account that historic paving materials sustainability moves into planning and public conscious- may pose difficulties for cyclists and disabled pedestri- ness, well-planned and well-maintained pedestrian and ans. The recommended City archaeology program and bicycle facilities should become widely available. advanced historic preservation students at local colleges could be excellent partners for this effort. On a citywide planning scale, the groundwork is laid for an influx of very large-scale development to occur in Maintaining existing streetscapes helps to sustain Charleston. Setting priorities and target growth areas— historic character and encourages private and public reinforced by the Urban Growth Boundary and sewer investment in surrounding areas. Historically appro- and water line limits—is a necessary method of directing priate streetscaping elements such as lampposts, street development to areas where infrastructure already exists. 4.15 Scenic roads and historic oak avenues are imporant furniture, and street trees enhance historic buildings and (See Growth and Sprawl.) components of Charleston’s rural infrastructure. the feeling of an area. Indirectly, streetscape improve- 90 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

The City must prepare for substantial growth now Infrastructure Recommendations  Set policies that require that road improvement in order to protect its built resources in the future. projects be sensitive to scenic and historic roads Introducing and maintaining sound financial policies  Reinforce the role of historic corridors as commer- and streets, respecting trees, materials, and other helps ensure that costly maintenance of new develop- cial or residential corridors with future develop- character-defining qualities ments does not drain funds from existing historic areas. ment projects  Apply for National Scenic Byway status for undes- Developers now pay an infrastructure impact fee to the  Create design standards for all streetscapes where ignated scenic roads City to contribute to the costs of roads and sewers, but they do not exist already larger planned developments will require coinvestment  Work with utility companies and private develop- in infrastructure. Coinvestment would help reduce the  Assess the health of mature trees that define and ers to maintain design standards; build standards financial burden of providing extensive infrastructure to enhance historic neighborhoods and scenic roads; into the project approval process new developments, a move especially important in the develop a maintenance and replacement program  Continue to implement stormwater capital context of very large developments. for them improvements; increase investment in drainage  Preserve street trees and plant more native trees efforts and update the Master Drainage and Flood- On the peninsula, changing one-way streets to two-way plain Management Plan as needed traffic flow can reduce traffic speed, increase pedestrian  Undertake a street survey to note paving materials safety, and help knit neighborhoods back together. Off- and conditions, with special attention to original or  Utilize railway rights-of-way as rail-to-trail bicycle peninsula, scenic roads such as Highway 61 should re- historic paving paths and commuter railways ceive new or continued protection. (See Neighborhoods  Maintain and restore historic paving where it exists  Create more bicycle and pedestrian facilities, for further discussion of specific streets.) including bike path networks, dedicated bike lanes,  Codify policy to make grounding utilities a prior- and bike/pedestrian crossings at major arteries ity when repairing streets and sidewalks

 Maintain road surfaces, especially south of Cal- houn Street, to reduce potential damage to buildings from vibrations

 Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 91

Several institutions oversee historic resources and land on a scale unmatched on a private level.

Institutional Stewardship

Charleston is home to a number of academic and com- These issues can be alleviated by coordinated planning mercial institutions and agencies that influence preserva- efforts between the City and each institution. Cam- tion. The South Carolina State Ports Authority, the Medi- pus boundaries should be unambiguously delineated cal University of South Carolina (MUSC), the College through zoning, in consultation with institutional of Charleston, The Citadel, and the American College of administrators and master plans. New buildings will the Building Arts (ACBA) oversee many of Charleston’s most likely be larger than historic buildings, as dictated historic resources and establish the city as a major center by program needs and the desire to increase density, but of medicine, commerce, and education (Figure 4.16). As context-sensitive architectural design should not be com- active members of the peninsular city, they also engage promised. Publishing design guidelines with relevant in a give-and-take with surrounding historic residential examples of large-scale institutional buildings that have and commercial areas. contextual height, scale, and mass is a critical step to ensure design quality. Creating Area Character Apprais- Several of these institutions oversee historic resources als for each institution can help work toward a consistent and land on a scale unmatched on a private level. The approach to design. American College of the Building Arts owns McLeod Plantation, a major part of local history. The College Although specific guidelines are important, long-term of Charleston holds three National Register–listed needs should also be recognized. Both the City and state- structures and many more buildings of significant local owned institutions should lobby for increased funding importance; it also has adapted a number of historic for deferred maintenance at the state level, lengthen- residences for use as administrative buildings. These ing building life. Similarly, an institutional impact fee colleges’ abilities to focus funds and priorities in an inte- should be levied on new development and invested in grated master plan can benefit preservation greatly. infrastructure to improve facilities, reduce the need for deferred maintenance, contribute to transportation The size and momentum of some institutions also pres- studies, and make more City funds available for other ent challenges to preservation, especially with regard purposes. An alternative might be to require institutions to new buildings. For example, the growth of MUSC to construct or improve infrastructure to City standards demands large new buildings that will probably be out of in affected areas. American College The Citadel College of scale with nearby historic neighborhoods. Expansion of of the Building Arts Charleston an institution’s physical plant into residential areas is, to Medical University of Port of South Carolina (MUSC) Charleston many neighbors, a threatening change. 4.16 Charleston’s major academic and commercial  Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section institutions, 2007 92 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

The Charleston Independent School District, churches  Encourage institutions to take responsibility for that own historic buildings, and smaller institutions student housing and develop workforce housing such as Trident Technical College and the Law School programs of Charleston are not addressed in this plan. It is worth  Request state acknowledgement of historic campus noting that they should be engaged in partnerships to buildings as a factor in state-level planning and combine preservation and planning in the future. budgeting Recommendations for the City of Charleston American College of the Building Arts  Levy institutional impact fees on new construction for infrastructure investment, or require institu- The American College of the Building Arts (ACBA) is the tions to build infrastructure to City standards L first national college dedicated solely to teaching craft- based building practices (Figure 4.17). ACBA focuses on  Use zoning to clearly establish institutional bound- educating craftspeople with a background in preserva- aries 4.17 American College of the Building Arts (ACBA) tion tenets and quality contemporary and traditional teaches craft-based building practices.  Encourage all institutions to implement aggres- building practice, maintaining that quality craftsman- sive transportation demand management (TDM) ship and preservation skills are necessary to save built programs heritage and build excellent new buildings for the future.  Work with MUSC and the College of Charleston This small college is developing a program split between to produce design guidelines for larger buildings, McLeod Plantation on James Island and the Navy Yard with examples of recent buildings that successfully in North Charleston. ACBA also owns the Old City Jail transition from larger-scale institutions to smaller- in downtown Charleston, which is slated for use as a scale residential neighborhoods preservation center and living laboratory for preserva-  Lobby for increased deferred maintenance budgets tion and craft-based building practice. Enrollment will at the state level peak between 160 and 200 students.

 Request that institutions complete housing master plans as part of any major increase in student or 4.18 ACBA has campuses at the Old City Jail (above, circa faculty numbers 1893), the Navy Yard in North Charleston, and McLeod Plantation on James Island. CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 93

The adaptive reuse of McLeod Plantation is a priority. The Citadel The college intends to renovate, conserve, and develop the property for use as its main campus in a process that The Citadel sits in the Upper Peninsula near Hampton will evolve over the next thirty years. Most recommen- Park Terrace. The military college was established in dations for McLeod appear in the James Island section of 1842 adjacent to Marion Square; construction on the Neighborhoods. current campus began in 1920. The Citadel currently has 3,000 students, with potential for growth in the graduate Numerous opportunities exist for partnerships between program and evening classes. It is not currently under ACBA and other local organizations and agencies, such BAR jurisdiction, except for demolitions of buildings as the City, the Department of Housing and Community over 75 years old (Figure 4.19). Development, Historic Charleston Foundation, the Pres- ervation Society of Charleston, the South Carolina Heri- Preservation should be a component of The Citadel’s tage Corridor, the National Park Service, the National plans for growth and campus maintenance. The Citadel Trust for Historic Preservation, and Charleston County contains the Summerall Field and surrounding build- 4.19 The Citadel is a military academy established in 1842. Schools. Examples of these partnerships in action can al- ings, many of which are valuable elements of campus and ready be seen in many locations in the Charleston region. city history that should be consciously preserved. Cur- rently, historic preservation is not mentioned in publicly Recommendations for ACBA available materials.

 Develop master plans for the McLeod Plantation The Citadel and MUSC both may be planning for expan- campus and the Navy Yard campus sion on the land that lies between the two schools. These  Develop a public access plan and interpretive plan institutions should engage in joint planning. for McLeod Plantation (see Neighborhoods, James Island section)

 Continue with plans to develop the Old City Jail into a preservation center and laboratory

4.20 The current Citadel campus in the Upper Peninsula was established in 1920.

 Recommendation  Repeated recommendation L Legal issues A See Resources section 94 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Recommendations for The Citadel Over 10,000 students now use the campus redesigned in the 1970s to accommodate 5,000. Meeting program  Develop a growth and resources management mas- needs while preserving historic character is a challenge ter plan with a historic preservation component that the College of Charleston committed to in its 2004  Establish a growth boundary and parking plan Campus Master Plan. The College aims to continue expanding north of Calhoun Street to Vanderhorst Street;  Engage in joint planning with MUSC the southern boundary is projected to remain fairly  Implement an aggressive transportation demand stable at Wentworth Street. Clear boundaries between management (TDM) program the College and neighborhoods should be established, an idea that the Campus Master Plan supports.  Lobby for a deferred maintenance budget at the state level Deliberate transition spaces should be created between 4.21 The heart of the College of Charleston (above, 1883) is  located in Harleston Village and contains a wealth of Request state acknowledgement of historic campus the historic district of the campus and new development. historic resources. buildings as a factor in state-level planning and College administrators and the BAR should demand new budgeting and renovated buildings that contribute positively to their surroundings and demonstrate contextual sensitiv- College of Charleston ity, while acknowledging that programmatic needs may require larger facilities. The College of Charleston main campus sits at the border of the Lower Peninsula and the Mid-Peninsula, within Currently, 40 percent of students live on campus in Harleston Village and bounded by Radcliffeborough and student residences. Six hundred fifty new residential Ansonborough. The College of Charleston contains his- units are under construction, with additional residences toric houses adapted for academic use and larger historic planned in the campus core and north of Calhoun Street. academic buildings, but many of the campus buildings Constructing additional student housing or partnering were constructed after 1970, when a major expansion with the private sector to provide housing can reduce program spurred construction of larger residential and the number of students living off campus and meet both academic buildings. The College of Charleston is located institutional and neighborhood goals, as well as reduce 4.22 Many of the buildings on the College of Charleston’s within a National Register Historic District, in addition neighborhood density and make headway towards solv- campus were constructed after 1970. With plans to further to the local historic district; it is subject to BAR jurisdic- ing parking problems. develop the campus, the college should be sure to protect tion (Figure 4.21). surrounding historic resources. CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 95

In addition to its main Lower Peninsula campus, the  Follow the Campus Master Plan recommenda- Medical University College of Charleston has a satellite campus in North tions to continue remote parking arrangements of South Carolina (MUSC) Charleston and owns athletic facilities at Patriot’s Point with CARTA shuttles, and seriously consider more in Mount Pleasant, a marine laboratory on James Island, satellite parking locations, possibly partnering with The main campus of the Medical University of South and Dixie Plantation near Hollywood, South Carolina. MUSC or The Citadel Carolina is located at the southwest edge of the Mid- Development in these areas should be respectful of the Peninsula. MUSC was incorporated in 1823 as a small  Aim to strike a balance between high-density natural environment and the rural or suburban charac- private physicians’ college; it is now a state university buildings that will satisfy growth needs and ter of the setting. with a medical center, six colleges, and over 3,000 full- smaller-scale designs that fit the historic character time students and faculty. The Waring Historic Library, of the campus and surrounding neighborhoods Recommendations for the College of Charleston St. Luke’s Chapel, and Colcock Hall are listed on the  Implement an aggressive transportation demand National Register of Historic Places (Figure 4.23).  Add a historic preservation component to the management (TDM) program MUSC’s piecemeal physical expansion has resulted in a Campus Master Plan campus without a common architectural style. The Vi-  Develop a workforce housing program to help  Follow the Campus Master Plan recommendation sion 2020: Site and Facilities Master Plan sets as its goals faculty and staff live nearby to create deliberate campus edges, especially in the beautifying the campus through more deliberate open northern part of campus  Lobby for increased deferred maintenance budgets spaces, gateways, and campus edges; renovating current at the state level facilities to meet modern research standards; and creat-  Restrict parking for freshmen ing new facilities within the existing MUSC area, thus  Request state acknowledgement of historic campus  Work with the City to produce design guidelines increasing density almost twofold. The Master Plan states buildings as a factor in state-level planning and for larger buildings, with examples of recent build- that new buildings should be designed sensitively with budgeting ings that successfully transition from larger-scale regard to historic buildings and recommends preserving institutions to smaller-scale residential neighbor-  Continue to construct student housing on campus the old Charleston High School façade (completed); it hoods does not otherwise mention historic preservation.  Expand Charleston urban design and architectural Maintaining a consistent architectural aesthetic for principles by showing examples of good execution MUSC—one that relates to Charleston’s exceptional in recent buildings historical character—should be a priority. Large research  Limit total enrollment to the number of students facilities are necessary, but new buildings on sites bor- the College can physically accommodate dering historic neighborhoods should be designed with special regard to height, massing, scale, and rhythm. Vision 2020 recognizes the importance of scale in its 96 A Preservation Plan for Charleston, south carolina

Campus Design Guidelines, which should be followed  Follow recommendations of Campus Design thoughtfully to achieve a more coherent campus with Guidelines to create a similar scale, proportions, context-sensitive edges. The recent planning and update materials, form, and hierarchy in all new construc- process should be viewed as an opportunity to create a tion and renovation projects cohesive built environment.  Direct any campus growth and growth of associated facilities to the west and northwest, away from In the past, MUSC has not taken responsibility for hous- historic neighborhoods ing its students, faculty, and staff. As long-term planning continues, housing should be added as an important factor  Work with the City to produce design guidelines in campus expansion. Integrated housing and research for larger buildings, with examples of recent build- facilities can relieve housing pressure in nearby neighbor- ings that successfully transition from larger-scale hoods and reduce the need for parking facilities. Mixed- institutions to smaller-scale residential neighbor- use developments that include housing, academic, and hoods research functions can help provide a physical and social  Follow through to set guidelines for landscapes and connection with surrounding residential areas and estab- streetscapes lish a 24/7 community rather than an institutional zone.  Create deliberate edges and gateways to the 4.23 The Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) was es- The Citadel and MUSC may both be planning to expand campus, as well as connections to the adjacent tablished in 1823. Its as-needed expansion over time has resulted on the land that lies between the two schools. These neighborhoods in a lack of common architectural style. institutions should engage in joint planning. MUSC also  Use major corridors as dividing lines, with build- has several off-peninsula facilities. Development in these ings of different heights but similar architectural areas should be respectful of the natural environment styles and rhythms and congruous with the character of the setting.  Develop mass transit/carpool/satellite parking Recommendations for MUSC systems to reduce congestion

 Identify historic buildings on campus and integrate  Implement an aggressive transportation demand maintenance and preservation into the Master management (TDM) program Plan, along with appropriate smaller-scale uses  Engage in joint planning efforts with The Citadel 4.24 The MUSC’s Vision 2020: Site and Facilities Master Plan  Add a historic preservation component to the includes goals of beautifying and expanding the campus but does not extensively address historic preservation. Master Plan CHARLESTON’S EXPANDING HORIZON 97

 Request state acknowledgement of historic campus Recommendations for the Port  Continue the street grid and respect viewsheds to buildings as a factor in state-level planning and the water when redeveloping the property budgeting  Evaluate and update the Union Pier Concept Mas-  Include affordable units in the housing component ter Plan when redevelopment is again considered,  Lobby for a deferred maintenance budget at the for the Union Pier redevelopmen working closely with the City (Figure 4.26) state level  Engage the City of Charleston in redevelopment  Develop a workforce housing program to help planning efforts faculty and staff live nearby

 Partner with the City of Charleston to enact the Gateway District recommendations in the Spring and Cannon Corridor Plan as appropriate

Port of Charleston

Charleston contains two ports owned by the South Caro- lina State Ports Authority, the Union Pier Terminal and the Columbus Street Terminal. In 1996, a Concept Mas- ter Plan explored redevelopment of the Union Pier Ter- minal as a 65-acre mixed-use project (Figure 4.25). The plan included housing, offices, shops, parks, waterfront restoration, and varied harbor activities. The street network was extended east from Ansonborough, though the plan breaks the street grid at Hasell and Society streets. The Union Pier redevelopment was put on hold several years ago when plans for a Port replacement/expansion site were hindered. It is uncertain when the expansion plans will proceed, if at all; the Union Pier Terminal is 4.25 The Union Pier Terminal is owned by the Port of Charles- 4.26 Redevelopment of the Union Pier Terminal, presented in a presently needed as an active shipping facility. ton and is currently used as an active shipping facility. 1996 Concept Master Plan (above), should respect the existing street grid, surrounding historic resources, and viewsheds to the water.