Due to the fact that everyone responding to this thread has gotten off-topic, the original posting has been moved to a new thread.

Let me once again take this opportunity to remind users to keep their posts on-topic or start new threads when appropriate. Failure to respect these requests may result in the removal of your posting privileges or the cancellation of your account.

- admin

[EXCERPTED FROM THE WINTER, 2005, ISSUE OF "UP AND DOWN THE VALLEY" – THE NEWSLETTER OF THE KANAWHA VALLEY HISTORICAL & PRESERVATION SOCIETY]

In July of 2003, when KVH&PS released its "List of Threatened Historic Places," it was the subject of much discussion in the press and elsewhere. At the time, it was an up-to-date roster of those properties the Society felt were most in danger of being lost. At least one artifact that was not even considered for the 2003 List has lately caused significant discussion among the public and at Society Board meetings, due to the recent emergence of various schemes to alter its historic character – the 1940 Kanawha Boulevard. One of the problems involved is convincing some people that the Boulevard is, in fact, an architectural landmark worthy of preservation – and not just "some road."

Before the Kanawha Boulevard was built, two-lane Kanawha Street meandered along the riverbank from the Elk River, through downtown Charleston, and thence through the East End. Downtown, commercial buildings lined not only the north side of the street – as now – but also the river side of the road. By the 1930s, the riverfront properties had become rundown waterfront "slums" – as a look at the familiar picture taken from the South Side at the time will attest. In addition, city visionaries, led by three-term mayor D. Boone Dawson, worried about riverbank erosion and whether Charleston would ever become a "main line town" without an uninterrupted route through the city.

In 1936 and 1938, Charleston voters approved bond issues totalling $2.3 million to build the Boulevard. This was combined with approximately $2.2 million from FDR's Works Progress Administration for a total cost of about $4.5 million – a staggering sum in today's dollars for what amounts to five miles of roadway. But the Boulevard is more than just "some road" – it consists of four distinct components:  the four-lane thorofare, the upper and lower walkways, the "green space" along the riverbank, and the Elk River bridge – an engineering marvel at the time that still performs its intended function.

The details of construction have been compared to "the building of the Egyptian pyramids" and are fascinating – but too numerous to mention here except in summary. Waterfront properties were purchased from their owners and demolished; tens of thousands of tons of pavement were removed and disposed of; hundreds of thousands of tons of materials were dredged or quarried from the Elk and Kanawha valleys and laid in place; about 100,000 yards of ground were sodded or seeded; 25,800 cubic yards of new concrete were poured.

When the project was finished in 1940, Mayor Dawson commented that what had once been Charleston's "back yard" had now become "the front yard of the city – an engineering and civic achievement known throughout the nation." On Sept. 1, 1973, the Boulevard was paid for when the city made its last payment on the bonds.

The first inkling that the historic character of the Boulevard could be tampered with came in April of 1999, when the WV Department of Highways arbitrarily dug up the grass median, from California Avenue to the 35^th Street Bridge, and paved it over with blacktop. The public outcry was such that the very next day, Gov. Underwood ordered the DOH to replace the grass. This fiasco cost the taxpayers $106,000.

Then in August of 2001, the city began to discuss renovation of the walkways – which have deteriorated badly – and the lighting. It was suggested that the concrete sidewalks be replaced with a different material, both to save money and to make them more "jogger-friendly." Everything from blacktop to crushed stone to mulch was considered. KVH&PS president Henry Battle and then-vice president Richard Andre sent a letter to the city and the newspapers, stating that the Society was opposed to "any significant modification of the original 1940 design." In the end, the city agreed with their recommendation of gray, concrete-colored asphalt.

But things really started to heat up early last year, when a private developer approached the city and attempted to lease the entire downtown Kanawha riverbank – from Haddad Riverfront Park to the Elk River – in order to fill it with a marina and commercial buildings. In response, at its August meeting the Society's Board of Directors passed a resolution to support preserving the Kanawha Boulevard "as originally designed." On November 9, President Battle and Directors Richard Andre, Allan Tweddle and Russ Young attended a "planning meeting" – hosted by the Capital Area Development Corporation and the Riverfront Committee of City Council – at which these and other ideas were discussed. The Society's representatives presented a "position paper" elaborating on the Society's stand on the matter.

A follow-up meeting of the Riverfront Committee was held on January 11, 2005, during which it was further suggested that the riverbank be redesigned to give it a more gentle slope, in order to make access to the river easier. In addition, the committee decided to write a request-for-proposal to solicit bids from architects and designers for a "master plan."

Another idea proposed at the meeting is one that keeps turning up like a bad penny: that one or two lanes of the Boulevard (or all of them downtown) be closed to vehicular traffic. The current city administration seems to support it; in September of 2004, two architects speaking at a meeting of the Greater Kanawha Valley Foundation suggested it as part of yet another "master plan"; in 2001, the East End Neighborhood Association advocated lane-closure; in 1999, Charleston Renaissance pushed for a reduction from four lanes to three.

This idea almost always meets with great resistance, on three very well-founded counts:  Public safety, traffic flow, and aesthetics. When it was brought up in 1996 during the Melton administration, spokesman Chris Canfield remembers, "We got crucified."

Let's put this all together, shall we? We're going to: 1) line the riverbank with commercial buildings, thus spoiling the view; 2) undo the shoring-up by going back to a "more gentle slope" – prone to erosion; 3) reduce the four-lane Boulevard to a meandering road through the city.

Does this not sound like a reversal of the original vision for Charleston's waterfront?

JW, I appreciate your post, but please try to keep your posts on-topic. The first post on this thread was asking about people videotaping the upcoming public meetings and your response has nothing to do with that topic. In the future, please follow common forum courtesy and start a new thread if you want to start a new discussion.

If you know of articles you'd like to see added to this web site, please submit them to webmaster@CharlestonWaterfrontNow.org - there are more appropriate areas on this site where articles can be placed (such as the News section) and where appropriate credit can be given to the original author/publisher.

Thanks!

In response to J.W.

      I suggest that you take a long walk along the lower level walkway for the stretch of embankment between Haddad Park and the Elk River.

      It is evident that erosion is strong in this area, erosion which won't stop!

      When 2 rivers converge a swirling effect tends to happen and I have been down in the area during many high water and flood events and swirling is happening. Over the years this has eroded away at the embankment in this area and it is very evident.

      Personally, I cannot imagin this roadway to be an emergency route and I say this because Charleston really only has 2 major problems that could cause a mass evacuation. The leaking of a Chemical Plant and a City Wide Flood. With that being said, The last place I am going to go during either one of these events is along the river, I would head streight for Greenbriar St., Corridor G or North on 79 towards Elkview.

      Many Cities have roadways that were built years ago along the rivers in our country, our roadway is not unusual, you can find them everywhere. Our Interstate system has been put in place to aid in the movement of traffic and we have more than enough interstate running through our city. I agree that the blvd. is not blighted but our city is falling apart at the seams and we are loosing jobs and people left and right, something must be done to save our city and given the fact that Industry is slowly leaving our area we must look at other ways to generate revenue.

I am genuinly sorry that this roadway would be effected but something must change Sir and as soon as possible because we are down to 52,000 residents and if we go under 50,000 we could loose our Federal Funding - That is extreamly serious !!!!!!!

Exactly what year was the Boulevarde compared to the Pyramids? We live in 2005 friend, no longer 1945. Wake up and realize that a project like this could in fact bring a lot of money and popularity to our valley as well as a tremendous amount of pride and beauty. It would only serve to enhance what is already in place.

I'm not going to start an argument but I find the thought behind this posting as backward thinking. I will agree that this probably was an engineering marvel, that has turned, over the years, into a hang-out for thugs and homeless people.

I walk the upper level of the boulevarde a great deal, usually 3-4 times a week, and usually with friends. The one statement that commonly exists is that they would rather walk along the top, as it is too scary to walk on the bottom level. You never know what kind of character you will run into. On hotter evenings, many people wait until dusk to walk, run, bike, etc. but you find most of them up on top for the reason mentioned above.

There is a lot I like about the existing Boulevarde- views can be breathtaking at times, the smell of the blooming trees is magnificent, watching the boats- it's all a wonderful part of this place.

Sir, I respect your opinion in that this is a very historical and beautiful sight as is, but it won't be worth it when the population of this very valley is decreasing. Who will be here to use it? Your choice to remain stagnate will find you and your kind, as well as the City of Charleston going the way of the dinosaur and do-do bird much faster than any progressive thinking person.

Mayor Jones himself acknowledges that the population is decreasing. Frankly, I am surprised that our Mayor hasn't gotten behind Ms. Johnson with his full support due to the knowledge that this could/would help to bring new life and new dollars to this area. Maybe his addicitons in the past have clouded his judgement and his brain doesn't function like it normally would.