Downtown Charleston has fewer old buildings than any other era of recent generations, but the ones that still exist are more prominent than ever.
So it’s probably not surprising that some of the members of the Charleston City Council appear to be motivated to do something about them.
It will be a hot topic at the council’s next Community Development Committee meeting. Controversial solutions include rewriting the authority of the Building Review Board and resurrecting a city committee that can work with the owners of the most devastated homes.
City council member Jason Sakuran raised the issue on Tuesday, and it’s no wonder why. In 2020, he sold his house on Maple Street. This house was next to a house damaged by a fire that hadn’t been repaired for many years.
Mr. Sakuran thanked the mayor, the former council, and the city’s habitability officer for working on this issue, and the number of dilapidated buildings in the city has grown from about 500 a few years ago to about 200 today. Said that it had decreased. But working on some of these last 200 can be frustrating, he said.
His colleague, councilor Robert Mitchell, turned to the city’s building review board, which only allowed historically appropriate repairs of real estate in certain areas of the city.
“Many of these other properties are privately owned and we can’t afford to repair them,” he said. “I don’t know what the remedy would be.”
Others are not convinced that BAR is the most negligent here. One of the lasting problems is homes owned by multiple heirs. Without a clear title, it is difficult for a particular heir to modify or sell it.
It was a matter of a house on 29 Henrietta Street. Recently, it was demolished after years of vacancy.
Councilor Ross Appel thanked Sakuran for raising this issue. “Every time I see one of these structures, I think of an affordable home that doesn’t exist where these structures are. Owning that structure and developing it for these regulations Think of the wealth of a generation that is locked out of being realized by those who have the property of heirs who cannot. ” “It’s a major, major city issue that we have to tackle.”
Mayor John Tecklenburg with such owners, even before they were called to court for devastated property, to make sure they knew the aid available. He said reviving a group of city officials with whom he could work might be the best solution.
He said the city may request repairs for public safety or if the house is at structural risk. “You can’t force someone to make a place completely habitable,” he said.
Engaging real estate owners in a better way would be a more promising solution than trying to undermine the BAR rules. Lowering the standard for repairing historic homes to solve some devastated real estate problems seems to be similar to buying big trousers to solve the problem of binge eating.
However, minor changes do not necessarily have to leave the table. Most people don’t appreciate it, but BAR already has different levels of reviews in four different sections of the peninsula (from the toughest in the southernmost historic district to the less harsh historic north. To the extent of material dismantling). These rules change frequently and often subtly, so it’s not a problem to subtly change them again.
“These are all things that need to be evaluated and evaluated on a regular basis, and if the council thinks the BAR has too much power, it can be rolled back. That’s our job,” Appeal said. Stated.
However, it is also the job of the city council to assess how this 91-year-old board has contributed to the vitality of the city, and one problem cannot be solved by creating another.
Comments
Post a Comment