DOCSLIB.ORG

Dominion Energy Southeast Services, Inc. 400 Otarre Parkway Cayce, SC 29033

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dominion Energy Southeast Services, Inc. 400 Otarre Parkway Cayce, SC 29033 Dominion Energy Southeast Services, Inc. 400 Otarre Parkway Cayce, SC 29033 September 18, 2020 Mr. Greg Cassidy State Voluntary Cleanup Program Bureau of Land and Waste Management South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 Re: Congaree River Project Attachment L – Historic and Archaeological Properties Identification, and Attachment M - Cultural Resource Identification Survey, Archaeological Data Recovery Plan, Updated Data Recovery License, and Draft MOA Columbia, South Carolina Dear Mr. Cassidy: In support of the Dominion Energy South Carolina (DESC) Congaree River Project, the following Attachments will be included in the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit application that will be submitted by September 30, 2020: Attachment L – Historic and Archaeological Properties Identification; and Attachment M - Cultural Resource Identification Survey, Archaeological Data Recovery Plan, Updated Date Recovery License, and a draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). Attachment L identifies the historic and archaeological properties located in the vicinity of the project area. Attachment M addresses the proper management of the Cultural Resources that may be encountered during implementation of the Congaree River Project. The original Plans (developed for the full-scale removal) have been updated to reflect the Stakeholder-Developed Modified Removal Action (MRA) activities. The Department’s written approval/concurrence of these Attachments is an important component of the permit application submittal to the USACE. If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Paul Biery of DESC at 803-217-5016. Sincerely, Thomas N. Effinger, P.E. Director, Environmental Services Enclosures cc: P. Biery – DESC R. Contrael – ACE W. Zeli – Apex CULTURAL RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION SURVEY FOR THE CONGAREE RIVER SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT RICHLAND COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA Final Report October 2014 CULTURAL RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION SURVEY FOR THE CONGAREE RIVER SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT RICHLAND COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA FINAL REPORT Submitted to: SCANA COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA Submitted by: TRC 621 CHATHAM AVENUE COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA 29205 Sean Norris, Principal Investigator, Author October 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ ii TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... iv I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .............................................................................................. 8 Project Setting ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Paleoenvironment ................................................................................................................................... 8 Historic Environment ............................................................................................................................. 9 Clinate ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Physiography and Hydrology ................................................................................................................ 9 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 III. CULTURAL OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 11 PRECONTACT AND CONTACT PERIOD OVERVIEWS ........................................................... 11 Paleoindian Period (ca. 12,500–10,000 B.P.) ................................................................................................... 11 Archaic Period (ca. 10,000–3000 B.P.)............................................................................................................. 11 Woodland Period (ca. 3000–900 B.P.) ............................................................................................................. 13 Mississippian Period (ca. A.D. 900–1670) ....................................................................................................... 13 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT VICINITY ........................................................ 14 Early Settlement in the South Carolina Midlands ........................................................................................ 14 The American Revolution ................................................................................................................................ 15 Antebellum Agriculture in the Midlands ....................................................................................................... 16 Civil War ........................................................................................................................................................... 18 Postbellum Agricultural Practices .................................................................................................................. 20 Industrialization and Expansion in the Postbellum Era ............................................................................... 21 An Agricultural Depression and a National Depression ............................................................................... 21 A New Era in a Diversified Economy ............................................................................................................. 22 Previous Investigations in the Project Area ................................................................................................... 22 IV. METHODS AND RESULTS ................................................................................................ 23 Methods ................................................................................................................................................. 23 Results .................................................................................................................................................... 23 Background and Literature Search ..................................................................................................................... 23 Field Survey ....................................................................................................................................................... 26 Previously Recorded Resources ......................................................................................................................... 26 National Register Listed Resources ................................................................................................................... 37 V. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 44 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 45 Cultural Resources Identification Survey for the Congaree Sediment Removal Project i FIGURES Figure 1. Project Area and 0.5-mile Search Radius ..................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of the Project Area ......................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Conceptual construction plan for proposed access roads and improvements. ........... 5 Figure 4. Conceptual drawing showing height and style of proposed coffer dam. .................... 6 Figure 5. Project Area and 0.5-mile Search Radius ..................................................................... 8 Figure 6. Saxe-Gotha in 1757 (DeBrahms 1757). ...................................................................... 15 Figure 7. Mills’ 1825 map of the Richland District depicting the approximate location of the project area. ......................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 8. Union Troop locations February 15, 16 and 17, 1865 ............................................... 19 Figure 9. Aerial view of site 38RD223 ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 10. Aerial View of sites 38RD224 and 38RD286 ............................................................ 27 Figure 11. Conditions at 38RD224. ........................................................................................... 29 Figure 12. Historic granite blocks used as river walk border. .................................................. 29 Figure 13. Aerial view of sites 38RD234 and 278 ...................................................................... 31 Figure 14. Aerial vie of site 38RD286 ......................................................................................... 32 Figure 15. Inventory of ordnance caputured during the occupation of of Columbia. ............. 34 Figure 16. Locations of potential ordnance base on side magenetic anomolies. ..................... 36 Figure 17. From the project area to the New Brookland
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Technical Assistance Panel
    TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PANEL CO L UMB ia CO nnecti V it Y : Lin K in G Main ST R eet an D the Vista CO L UMB ia , SC 09.26.11 - 09.27.11 Columbia Connectivity ULI – THE URBAN LAND INS titut E The Urban Land Institute (ULI) was established in 1936 and has over 30,000 members from more than 95 countries. It is one of America’s most respected sources of information and knowledge on urban planning, growth and development. ULI is a nonprofit research and education organization. Its mission is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide. To encourage an open exchange of ideas and sharing of experiences, ULI membership represents the entire spectrum of land use and real estate development disciplines, working in private enterprise and public service. Among its members there are developers, builders, property owners, investors, architects, planners, public officials, brokers, appraisers, attorneys, engineers, financiers, academics, students and librarians. ULI SO ut H CARO li NA In local communities, ULI District Councils bring together a variety of stakeholders to find solutions and build consensus around land use and development challenges. The ULI South Carolina District Council was formed in 2005 to encourage dialogue on land use and planning throughout this state and with each of the three main regions (Upstate, Midlands, Coastal), and to provide tools and resources, leadership development, and a forum through which the state can become better connected. The District Council is led by an Executive Committee with statewide and regional representation, as well as steering committees within each region that focus on the development of membership, sponsorship, programs and Young Leader initiatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Flow Characteristics of Streams in South Carolina
    Prepared in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Low-Flow Characteristics of Streams in South Carolina Open-File Report 2017–1110 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. South Carolina Botanical Garden, Clemson, South Carolina. Photograph by Toby D. Feaster. Low-Flow Characteristics of Streams in South Carolina By Toby D. Feaster and Wladmir B. Guimaraes Prepared in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Open-File Report 2017–1110 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey William H. Werkheiser, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2017 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Feaster, T.D., and Guimaraes, W.B., 2017, Low-flow characteristics of streams in South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2017–1110, 161 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171110.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia Downtown Historic Resources Survey National Register Evaluations
    COLUMBIA Downtown Historic Resource Survey Final Survey Report September 28, 2020 Staci Richey, Access Preservation with Dr. Lydia Brandt Intentionally Left Blank Columbia Downtown Historic Resource Survey City of Columbia, Richland County, S.C. FINAL Report September 28, 2020 Report Submitted to: City of Columbia, Planning and Development Services, 1136 Washington Street, Columbia, S.C. 29201 Report Prepared By: Access Preservation, 7238 Holloway Road, Columbia, S.C. 29209 Staci Richey – Historian and Co-Author, Access Preservation Lydia Mattice Brandt, PhD – Architectural Historian and Co-Author, Independent Contractor Intentionally Left Blank This program receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability or age in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office for Equal Opportunity National Park Service 1849 C Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Lists of Figures, Tables, and Maps Abbreviations Used in Notes and Text 1. Project Summary 1 2. Survey Methodology 4 3. Historic Context of Columbia 6 Colonial and Antebellum Columbia 6 Columbia from the Civil War through World War I 16 Columbia between the Wars: 1920s through World War II 35 Mid-Century Columbia: 1945-1975 44 Conclusion 76 4.
    [Show full text]
  • A Context for Common Historic Bridge Types
    A Context For Common Historic Bridge Types NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 15 Prepared for The National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Council National Research Council Prepared By Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage October 2005 NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 15 A Context For Common Historic Bridge Types TRANSPORATION RESEARCH BOARD NAS-NRC PRIVILEGED DOCUMENT This report, not released for publication, is furnished for review to members or participants in the work of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). It is to be regarded as fully privileged, and dissemination of the information included herein must be approved by the NCHRP. Prepared for The National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Council National Research Council Prepared By Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage October 2005 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SPONSORSHIP This work was sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, and was conducted in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in the report are those of the research team. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 15, by Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage. Margaret Slater, AICP, of Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) was principal investigator for this project and led the preparation of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Sandhills/Midlands Region
    SECTION 4 SANDHILLS / MIDLANDS REGION Index Map to Study Sites 2A Table Rock (Mountains) 5B Santee Cooper Project (Engineering & Canals) 2B Lake Jocassee Region (Energy Production) 6A Congaree Swamp (Pristine Forest) 3A Forty Acre Rock (Granite Outcropping) 7A Lake Marion (Limestone Outcropping) 3B Silverstreet (Agriculture) 8A Woods Bay (Preserved Carolina Bay) 3C Kings Mountain (Historical Battleground) 9A Charleston (Historic Port) 4A Columbia (Metropolitan Area) 9B Myrtle Beach (Tourist Area) 4B Graniteville (Mining Area) 9C The ACE Basin (Wildlife & Sea Island Culture) 4C Sugarloaf Mountain (Wildlife Refuge) 10A Winyah Bay (Rice Culture) 5A Savannah River Site (Habitat Restoration) 10B North Inlet (Hurricanes) TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR SECTION 4 SANDHILLS / MIDLANDS REGION - Index Map to Sandhills / Midlands Study Sites - Table of Contents for Section 4 - Power Thinking Activity - "Traffic Troubles" - Performance Objectives - Background Information - Description of Landforms, Drainage Patterns, and Geologic Processes p. 4-2 . - Characteristic Landforms of the Sandhills / Midlands p. 4-2 . - Geographic Features of Special Interest p. 4-3 . - Fall Line Zone p. 4-3 . - figure 4-1 - "Map of Fall Line Zone" p. 4-4 . - Sandhills Soils - Influence of Topography on Historical Events and Cultural Trends p. 4-5 . - Landforms Influenced the Development of Cities p. 4-5 . - Choosing a Site for the New Capital p. 4-6 . - Laying Out the City of Columbia p. 4-7 . - The Columbia Canal and Water Transportation p. 4-7 . - story - "The Cotton Boat" p. 4-8 . - The Secession Convention and the Onset of the Civil War p. 4-8 . - Columbia's Importance to the Confederacy p. 4-8 . - Sherman's March Through South Carolina p.
    [Show full text]
  • Suggested Citation
    Suggested Citation Glover, J.B. 2017. An investigation into the potential impacts of coal tar contamination on the invertebrate community of the Congaree River near the City of Columbia, Richland County, SC. The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Technical Report No. 0804-17. Bureau of Water, Columbia, SC. Summary On 15 June 2017, staff of the Aquatic Biology Section within the Bureau of Water of DHEC conducted an aquatic macroinvertebrate bioassessment of the Congaree River near Columbia, SC. The goal of the study was to determine if sediment contaminated with coal tar in the Congaree River was having an adverse impact to the indigenous invertebrate fauna near the sediment plume. The contamination was a waste by-product of a former manufactured gas plant, which was in operation during the first half of the 20th century. The extent of contaminated sediment had been well characterized previously by South Carolina Electric and Gas (SCE&G) through a voluntary cleanup agreement with DHEC. Much of the contaminated sediment had been covered with tons of sediment in 2015, after severe flooding resulted in a breach of a canal. This sediment also covered much of the natural invertebrate habitat in this section of river. Two stations were established to evaluate the potential effects of the contamination of the biotic health of the river. A control site was located immediately upstream of the Gervais Street Bridge and a test site was established at the Blossom Street Bridge, directly downriver from the region with the highest levels of coal tar contamination. The results of the June 2017 study indicated that the aquatic macroinvertebrate community at the Blossom Street Bridge was comparable to the upriver control, both receiving a bioclassification score of 4.5 (Excellent) on the Carolina Biocondition Scale.
    [Show full text]
  • INNOVISTA MASTER PLAN Columbia, South Carolina Preliminary Report July 2007
    INNOVISTA MASTER PLAN Columbia, South Carolina Preliminary Report July 2007 INNOVISTA MASTER PLAN Columbia, South Carolina Prepared by Sasaki Associates, Inc. July 2007 Greetings: On April 21, 2006 the University of South Carolina, Guignard Associates, The City of Columbia and business and community leaders unveiled a vision for the City’s waterfront that featured a sweeping plan for the expansion of Innovista to include 500 acres from the current campus to the Congaree River. This vision was a result of a decision by the University of South Carolina and Guignard Associates to join together in coordinating their urban planning efforts. Both were already using internationally recognized planning fi rm Sasaki Associates. The plan featured a large waterfront park that would complete the Columbia side of the Three Rivers Greenway. The park, the project’s “crown jewel,” would feature two footpaths, amphitheater, freshwater marsh and a recreation of part of the original Columbia canal. A mixture of urban density development with retail, residential and commercial space would help to create the live, work, play and learn environment that would assist in serving as a magnet to attract the brightest researchers and world-class research companies to Columbia and the region, as well as helping to grow companies and create knowledge-based jobs and opportunities within the region. With over half of the acreage within the new planning area belonging to private owners, a Waterfront Steering Team was created to serve as stewards for the master planning and funding of necessary infrastructure. The Waterfront Steering Team, of which I chair, is made up of regional business, community and environmental leaders including representatives of the University, Guignard Associates and private land owners within the district.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Winter NL (Jan-Mar).Indd
    www.friendsofcongaree.org Winter 2007 Researchers Search for Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in Congaree National Park After the 2004 rediscovery of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Arkansas, reassessments of his- toric occupied areas throughout the Southeast have begun. In an effort to document the Ivory- billed Woodpecker’s presence in South Carolina, the South Carolina Ivory-billed Woodpecker Working Group was created. This partnership includes several nonprofi t organizations and agencies, including The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, South Carolina Depart- ment of Natural Resources, and the South Caro- lina Forestry Commission. These agencies have contributed more than $180,000 to look for and document the presence of the Ivory-billed Wood- pecker in South Carolina. Matthew holds a M.S. in biology from Eastern Washington University, and has extensive fi eld Congaree National Park contains almost 11,000 experience in the United States, Costa Rica, and acres of old-growth bottomland forest, which is Sierra Leone. After hiring Matthew, The Nature thought to be the preferred habitat of the Ivory- Conservancy also hired a four person fi eld crew. billed Woodpecker. Nowhere else in the South- Members of this fi eld crew include: Zach Nelson, east can such a contiguous tract be found, thus Amy Leist, Brett Hubbard, and Katie Martin. All the Ivory-billed Woodpecker Working Group have strong backgrounds in fi eld research and decided to concentrate their search efforts in have traveled to South Carolina from as far Congaree National Park in early 2006. From away as California.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Electric & Gas Company
    APPENDIX A-6 SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT STURGEON PROTECTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC NO. 516) STURGEON PROTECTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FINAL JULY 2009 Prepared by: SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC NO. 516) STURGEON PROTECTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FINAL JULY 2009 Prepared by: SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC NO. 516) STURGEON PROTECTION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 Shortnose Sturgeon Life History and Status ......................................................... 3 2.2 Atlantic Sturgeon Life History and Status.............................................................. 4 2.3 Project Effects on Sturgeon and Other Diadromous Species................................ 5 2.4 Relevant Studies Performed in Support of Relicensing......................................... 5 2.5 Santee River Basin Cooperative Diadromous Fish Accord................................... 6 3.0 PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES ........................................................ 8 3.1 Downstream Dissolved Oxygen Enhancements
    [Show full text]
  • NOMINATION FORM £Oru Jjhjai: Ion SM§I ______Item Number______Page ___ "" H£$2
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Heritage Conservation and Recreacion Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY NOMINATION FORM £orU jjHJai: ion_SM§i ____________________________ Item Number ______Page ___ "" H£$2. Historic Gervais Street Bridge Location Gervais Street at the Congaree River Common Cl assi f i cati on Structure Owner State of South Carolina c/o Mr. Paul W. Cobb S.C. Department of Highways and Public Transportation P.O. Box 191 , Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Re p>" e s e n t a t ion In £ x ©, s 1 1 n g 5 u r v ey s . - i -/- , Description Begun in February 1926 and completed in Jure 1928, the 1415 foot reinforced concrete bridge was constructed by Hardaway Contracting Company of Columbus, Georgia. It cost $597,167 to construct. The bridge was designed by Joseph W. Barnwellof Charleston, SC, bridge engineer for the State Highway Department. The bridge has a closed spandrel rounded arch at each end with nine open spandrel seg mented arches between. Piers of reinforced concrete were founded in the rock in the Congaree River, located at the state©s "fall line". Thirty-six feet wide, the bridge has four lanes and two cantilevered sidewalks each six feet wide. Above the flanking balustrades are cast iron light fixtures. Decorative fixtures have the letter C and a palmetto on the bases, a vine pattern on the eight -sided post, and a acanthus leaf design on the necking. Mo alterations have been made to the bridge except for removal and repaying of asphalt. Significance One of four open spandrel arch bridges of reinforced concrete in South Carolina, the Gervais Street bridge spans the Congaree River and links Columbia to the western and southern parts of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • West Columbia Citywide Redevelopment Plan
    West Columbia Citywide Redevelopment Plan West Columbia Citywide Redevelopment Plan September 2018 Acknowledgements Prepared for the City of West Columbia, South Carolina WEST COLUMBIA CITYWIDE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Prepared by REDEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES 1 West Columbia Citywide Redevelopment Plan September 2018 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 3. Market Positioning for Redevelopment ......................................................................................................... 11 4. Recommendations and Strategies A. Opportunity Areas ................................................................................................................................... 15 1. River District ...................................................................................................................................... 16 2. Meeting Street Corridor .................................................................................................................... 40 3. Triangle City ...................................................................................................................................... 47 4. Former Colite Property ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WEST COLUMBIA, SC Citywide Redevelopment Plan TABLE of CONTENTS
    WEST COLUMBIA, SC Citywide Redevelopment Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 - 4 INTRODUCTION 5 - 6 MARKET POSITIONING FOR REDEVELOPMENT 7 - 10 OPPORTUNITY AREAS 11 - 65 RIVERFRONT DISTRICT 12 RIVERFRONT DISTRICT OPPORTUNITY SITE 22 RIVERFRONT DISTRICT OPPORTUNITY SITE 28 MEETING STREET CORRIDOR 36 TRIANGLE CITY 43 FORMER COLITE PROPERTY 49 DISTRICT 5 54 I-26 AND SUNSET BOULEVARD AREA 58 SUNSET BOULEVARD/HIGHWAY 378 CORRIDOR BETWEEN I-26 AND I-20 63 CONNECTIVITY 66 - 73 RECREATION, TOURISM & HOSPITALITY 74 - 78 ART & CULTURE 79 - 84 PLACE BRANDING & BUSINESS ATTRACTION 85 - 94 NEIGHBORHOODS & QUALITY OF LIFE 95 - 103 FUNDING 104 - 110 REDEVELOPMENT SUPPORT 111 - 112 CONCLUSION 113 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Prepared for the City of West Columbia, South Carolina WEST COLUMBIA CITYWIDE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Prepared by REDEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Redevelopment Plan should be a living, breathing document that incorporates specific recommendations and strategies. This Redevelopment Plan provides a clear road map to bring positive change to West Columbia for residents, property owners, businesses and visitors alike. The Plan is based on RMA’s market analysis, development assessment, and stakeholder and public input. Targeted areas are defined, including catalyst sites, pedestrian friendly areas of town, parking, community facilities, and residential sites. The Plan takes into consideration the cost of redevelopment and contains the first five-year projection of expenses. The Plan presents realistic Recommendations and Strategies developed to position West Columbia to compete for investment and increase its tax base, while maintaining and strengthening its community character. Implementation of this Plan is grounded in several key areas: Leadership and Empowerment; History; Connectivity; Activity and Vibrancy; Aesthetics; Quality of Life; and Private Investment.
    [Show full text]