Charleston Faces Challenges in Promoting Developers to Construct Affordable Housing
Efforts by the city council of Charleston, South Carolina, to entice developers towards the construction of more affordable residential property have been met with numerous challenges. A recent plan to encourage development in the Upper Peninsula District through additional height and density rewards for developers has seemingly failed in its intended purpose.
Upper Peninsula District Zoning Challenges
In 2015, the council introduced a new zoning designation for the Upper Peninsula District. The zoning was expected to motivate developers to build more efficiently, incorporating elements desired by the city such as less stormwater runoff, green roofs, energy-efficient buildings, high-quality outdoor public space, workforce housing, and alternative transportation options.
However, a recent project, initially proposed as a nine-story building featuring a 150-room hotel and 175 multifamily units, took a u-turn. Instead of developing the multifamily units as initially planned, the project transformed into a luxury hotel.
Local Perceptions on the Issue
Locals like Keith Woolley have expressed concerns that the Upper Peninsula District upzoning is frequently leading to projects other than those the city needs most: affordable housing. According to Mr. Woolley, the fundamental weakness of the zoning lies in its inability to provide adequate encouragement for residential housing, particularly when compared to commercial ventures like hotel developments.
Woolley argues that housing – encompassing apartments, condos, and single-family homes – is not problematic. He reasserts that the city desperately needs more home properties to diffuse the prevailing affordability issues affecting the local populace.
Woolley does not deny the need for development and construction. Instead, he believes that a more realistic approach involves encouraging the construction of apartments and promoting increased density in the upper peninsula. He particularly advocates focusing on sites formerly used for commercial and industrial activities, citing these areas’ proximity to major job centers and transport and avoiding clear-cutting forests and filling wetlands, which could intensify sprawl and traffic.
Striving for a Solution
Suggestions to halt construction and development, in Mr. Woolley’s opinion, represent short-sighted and unrealistic solutions to affordability issues. He underscores that turning a blind eye to the problem equates to burying one’s head in the sand. As the fourth-largest city recorded in the first United States census and remaining as such through the 1840 Census, Charleston’s housing dilemma requires innovative yet pragmatic solutions.
In conclusion, the city of Charleston must devise more enticing strategies to incentivize developers to construct affordable residential homes. As it stands, the present approach appears to be failing to meet its intended objectives, with the city’s urgent need for affordable housing becoming increasingly critical.
