Historians Worry South Main Plan Would Doom Mid-Century Architecture

City of Columbia and University of South Carolina officials have backed a university plan that imagines drastic changes in a four-block area anchored by Main Street, just south of the State House.

However, some with interests in history and architecture are concerned that the plan doesn’t include some buildings they believe are architecturally significant, including the 18-story Cornell Arms apartment building on Pendleton Street and the seven-story James F. Byrnes building along Sumter Street.

In June, the city’s Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for the South Main Capital District Plan. If adopted by Columbia City Council, the South Main plan would be added to the city’s comprehensive plan. City planning administrator John Fellows says City Council will likely have a public hearing on the plan later in July, with a final vote in August.

​According to planning board documents, the city, county, state and USC all have a desire to “invest in infrastructure improvement” south of the State House. The university paid noted design and consulting firm Sasaki $145,000 for the plan.

The plan calls for a number of developmental shifts along and near Main Street, from Pendleton Street to Blossom Street. It calls for the planting of more trees, height restrictions for newly constructed buildings that would limit them to six stories, the construction of parking decks and the subsequent elimination of a seeming glut of surface parking in that area, an increase in residential units in the corridor, and an increase in pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.

“Surface parking lots occupy much of the district’s land, particularly near the State House,” city documents note. “The district has significant, as-of-yet untapped potential to be one of Columbia’s most dynamic commercial and residential districts in the heart of downtown. This plan offers a vision to achieve this potential.” 

A number of city and USC leaders have stumped for the South Main redevelopment idea, with Mayor Steve Benjamin telling The Post and Courier that the plan is “crucial” and USC Vice President for Facilities Derrick Huggins writing to the planning board that the school “fully support[s]” the plan. State Rep. James Smith also wrote to the planning board, saying that the blocks south of the State House, “have long been ignored from a land use planning perspective.”

Despite the glowing support from those elected and bureaucratic officials, some in the city’s historic and architectural communities are more guarded, specifically because — as it has been drawn — the plan wipes out Cornell Arms and the Byrnes building. The drawings show a shorter building that would theoretically be where Cornell Arms now stands, and an expanse of greenspace is depicted as taking up much of the spot where the Byrnes building currently rests.

Lydia Brandt, an assistant professor at the University of South Carolina School of Visual Art and Design and a member of Historic Columbia’s Preservation Committee, says she’s worried that the South Main plan limits the use of the words “authentic” and “unique” to the 19th century construction on USC’s historic Horseshoe and some shorter commercial structures along Main Street, and that it ignores certain structures from the mid-20th century, which she says is a significant construction period for Columbia.

“This is when Columbia finally became a modern capital city and USC became a modern university, and these blocks are packed with examples of architecture from the 1940s through the 1970s,” read a statement by Brandt that was presented to the planning board in June. “They include the Byrnes building, slated for demolition in the [South Main] plan as we see it, and the Cornell Arms, also called for demolition in this plan. Both of these are designed by the same firm — Lyles, Bissett, Carlisle and Wolff — and they are most likely eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.” 

Historic Columbia executive director Robin Waites told Free Times she is generally in favor of a redevelopment and facelift for the Main Street area south of the State House. But she is concerned about the fate of certain buildings constructed in the middle of the last century.

“The 1950s, broadly, and the two decades surrounding that, really kind of made us into a modern city, through that architectural aesthetic,” Waites says. “If you remove that, you are kind of taking away the opportunity to visually tell that story of that critical period.”

Cornell Arms opened in 1949 and was the tallest building in South Carolina at the time. Construction was sponsored by the Federal Housing Authority. It remains a privately rented apartment building with retail space on the bottom floor. A message left for Cornell Arms management was not returned before the paper went to press.

The Byrnes building opened in 1957 and was once used by the Internal Revenue Service and the FBI. It currently houses various USC student services. Fellows notes that USC owns the Byrnes building and was OK with the depiction in the South Main plan in which the building is gone, at least as a concept.

Fellows was quick to point out that the images in the South Main plan are “illustrative” and that any buildings in the corridor owned privately or by USC could remain in the future. No component of the conceptual plan requires demolition of any buildings.

“The consultant took artistic license,” Fellows says of the Sasaki plan. “Think of an artist painting a maple tree, but chooses to paint it with pink or purple leaves.”

Columbia attorney Dan D’Alberto, who helped organize stakeholders in advance of the South Main plan, echoes Fellows’ assertion that the idea is conceptual in nature, and there is no imminent demolition of buildings on tap.

“This is an area plan that essentially discusses a long-range vision, but no plan, in particular, for any particular building,” D’Alberto told the planning board in June. 

“Any particular building that is discussed or shown or otherwise absent included in these long-range visions, there is no [specific] plan for them by any stretch of the imagination. This is just a general vision for the area.”

City documents say the South Main plan “will serve as guidance for elected and appointed officials and city staff when making decisions about infrastructure improvements, amendments to local ordinances, and development reviews where applicable.”