Overview
Code type
hybrid-pd
Naming convention
mixed
The 2023 Greenville Development Code (DECO) is a form-influenced hybrid Euclidean code organized by building-scale prefix + numeric tier. Districts are grouped into four scale families: RH (Residential House — RH-A/B/C/D, single-family detached), RN (Residential Neighborhood — RN-A/B/C plus RNX-B/RNX-C cross-typology, low-intensity SF/duplex/triplex/fourplex/townhouse/small apartment), RC (Residential Community — RC-2/3/5, medium-intensity SF through larger apartment complexes), and the Mixed-Use families MX (Mixed Use — MX-2/3/5/D) and MXS (Mixed Use Shopfront — MXS-2/3/5/D, pedestrian-storefront character). Numeric suffix denotes building-scale tier; 'D' suffix denotes 'downtown' / highest-intensity. The code is NOT a pure form-based code (no T-zone transect, no build-to-line as primary mechanism) but is form-influenced. Planned Development (PD) remains available but is no longer the dominant new-development pathway as under the 2008 LMO. The MX/MXS framework is intended to replace PD as the default missing-middle and mixed-use vehicle. Density bonuses of up to two additional stories of height are available in mixed-use districts for projects providing 15% of units affordable to households earning 80% AMI (or 10% at 60% AMI); affordable units must be constructed (no fee-in-lieu). | additional_sub_flags_raw=post-2023-rewrite,form-influenced,transect-influenced,mixed-use-node-corridor,home-rule-state,annual-review-cycle ; naming_convention_raw=scale-prefix-tier (scale prefix RH/RN/RC/MX/MXS + alphanumeric tier suffix A-D or 2-3-5 or D)
Worth knowing
- Brand-new 2023 Development Code (DECO) replaces the archived 2008 Land Management Ordinance (LMO): Chapter 19 was completely rewritten by czbLLC, adopted by Ord. 2023-39 on 2023-06-12, effective 2023-07-15. The prior LMO is preserved in Municode as 'ARCHIVED Chapter 19' but is no longer operative. Any third-party tool or scraped record citing R-6/R-9/RM-*/OD/C-*/RDV/S-1/I-1 districts (the LMO list) is citing an archived code that is no longer law — major hallucination risk for any v1-vintage data. [confirmed]
- 15%-at-80%-AMI density bonus in mixed-use districts: Projects in MX/MXS districts may build up to two additional stories of height by providing 15% of units affordable at 80% AMI (or 10% at 60% AMI). Affordable units must be physically constructed — no fee-in-lieu option. This is an INCENTIVE, not a mandatory inclusionary requirement; SC does not authorize mandatory inclusionary. v1 profile fabricated a '15% minimum percentage' as a mandatory floor — that misreads the bonus trigger as a baseline. [confirmed]
- Scale-prefix-tier naming convention: District codes encode building scale (RH=House, RN=Neighborhood, RC=Community, MX=Mixed Use, MXS=Mixed Use Shopfront) + tier (alphabetic A→D for residential intensity, numeric 2/3/5 for storey-tier, 'D' for downtown highest-intensity). NOT a transect (T3-T6) but transect-influenced. NOT lot-size-encoded; not use-type-index. [confirmed]
+ 7 more in Quirks & notes
Districts
res_mf 8mu 6res_sf 4cbd 2spec 1
| Code | Name | Category | Min lot | Height | Coverage | FAR | Du/ac | Parking | Setbacks F/S/R |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RH-A | Residential House A | res_sf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RH-B | Residential House B | res_sf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RH-C | Residential House C | res_sf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RH-D | Residential House D | res_sf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RN-A | Residential Neighborhood A | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RN-B | Residential Neighborhood B | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RNX-B | Residential Neighborhood X-B | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RN-C | Residential Neighborhood C | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RNX-C | Residential Neighborhood X-C | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RC-2 | Residential Community 2 | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RC-3 | Residential Community 3 | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| RC-5 | Residential Community 5 | res_mf | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MX-2 | Mixed Use 2 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MX-3 | Mixed Use 3 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MX-5 | Mixed Use 5 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MX-D | Mixed Use Downtown | cbd | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MXS-2 | Mixed Use Shopfront 2 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MXS-3 | Mixed Use Shopfront 3 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MXS-5 | Mixed Use Shopfront 5 | mu | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| MXS-D | Mixed Use Shopfront Downtown | cbd | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
| PD | Planned Development | spec | — | — | — | — | — | — | — / — / — |
Confidence: confirmed partial under review not found
Overlays
PO
Preservation Overlay District
HPHistoric and architecturally significant properties; locally-designated historic districts including Heritage Neighborhood (designated 2001), Pettigru Street, and West End (designated 1993).
| review | Certificate of Appropriateness required for demolition, new construction, additions, exterior alterations within designated districts |
|---|---|
| design_panel | Neighborhood Design Panel (residential) or Urban Design Panel (commercial/downtown) |
| parking_exemption | Historic properties and PO districts exempt from off-street parking minimums under the 2008 LMO; carry-forward status under 2023 DECO is under review[1] |
NRO
Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District
CONCity Council approval of a neighborhood-specific master plan adopted concurrently with NRO designation; applies to neighborhoods identified for revitalization.
| master_plan_requirement | NRO designation requires concurrent adoption of a neighborhood-specific master plan addressing land use, design guidelines, and infrastructure |
|---|---|
| scope | New subdivisions, single-family and duplex construction, garages/driveways, renovations ≥50% FMV, additions ≥40% footprint (carry-forward from LMO)[2] |
AP
Airport Protective Overlay District
APVicinity and approach corridors of Greenville Downtown Airport (GMU) and proximate portions of Greenville-Spartanburg International (GSP, in Greer); FAA Part 77 imaginary-surface compliance zones.
| faa_part_77_compliance | FAA Part 77 imaginary-surface compliance required; FAA or Airport Commission written certification of no-hazard required before permit issuance |
|---|---|
| operational_safety | Structures, uses, and trees must not impair safe airport operation; height limits decrease with proximity to runway |
SFHA
Special Flood Hazard Area Overlay District
FPFEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designations within the City of Greenville; Reedy River corridor and tributaries are the principal mapped areas. Floodplain mapping refreshed 2024 per city Geocortex Flood Zone Viewer.
| scope | Restricts hazardous uses; controls filling, grading, dredging, and structures within mapped SFHA; freeboard requirement above BFE per city floodplain ordinance |
|---|---|
| freeboard_ft | —[3] |
| reedy_river_environmental_corridor | Reedy River corridor managed as critical riparian habitat with environmental protection layered onto SFHA |
SSOD
Special Sign Overlay District
CORSpecifically-designated commercial corridors with enhanced sign-design controls or constrained-visibility geometry. Two sub-classes: SSOD-1 (limited-visibility) and SSOD-2 (enhanced-aesthetics, city-invested).
| ssod_1_scope | Limited Signage Visibility — addresses freestanding sign sizing in visually constrained corridors |
|---|---|
| ssod_2_scope | Enhanced Aesthetics — more restrictive sign standards in city-invested gateway corridors; design quality emphasis |
FRD
Flexible Review District
DTMapped FRD areas where applicants may seek flexibility from base district dimensional and design standards via discretionary review process.
| review_process | Discretionary flexibility-of-standards review by City staff and applicable boards (Planning Commission, Design Review Board) for projects in mapped FRD areas |
|---|---|
| scope_of_flexibility | —[4] |
UPND
Unity Park Neighborhood District
SPDReedy River Corridor redevelopment area surrounding Unity Park (opened 2022); downtown-west neighborhood including portions of the historically African-American Southernside neighborhood and the West Greenville arts district.
| framework | UPND Code (UPNDC) governs form, scale, site relationship, and mixed-use within UPND boundary; general Chapter 19 DECO provisions apply where UPNDC is silent |
|---|---|
| focus | Form, scale, site relationship emphasis; mixed-use encouraged; pedestrian connectivity and amenity requirements |
| sub_districts | Sub-district designations within UPND boundary with district-specific standards[5] |
DDG
Downtown Design Guidelines (administrative policy — NOT a codified overlay district)
DTDowntown Central Business District and key corridors within downtown.
| administrative_framework | Design Review Board (DRB) issues Certificates of Appropriateness based on the Downtown Design Guidelines for downtown new construction, additions, exterior alterations |
|---|---|
| pedestrian_zone | Enhanced street-level design, active uses at sidewalk level, human-scale architectural features |
| vehicular_zone | Parking integration, driveway design, commercial signage standards |
| overlay_district_status | NOT a mapped overlay district in Chapter 19 Article 19-3.2.2 — administered as design-review policy rather than as a codified overlay. v1 profile incorrectly listed this as 'DGO' overlay; verification against Article 19-3.2.2 enumeration confirms no DGO district exists. |
State preemptions
SC_TITLE6_CH29_COMP_PLAN_ENABLINGapplies
Qualifying condition
SC is a constitutional home-rule state (S.C. Const. Art. VIII §§7-9; Home Rule Act of 1975, S.C. Code §5-7-30 and §4-9-30). Local zoning authority is granted exclusively through SC Code Title 6, Chapter 29 (Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act of 1994), which requires an adopted comprehensive plan before a zoning ordinance may be adopted or amended (§6-29-720(A)). Greenville has an active adopted comprehensive plan ('GVL 2040', 2021) and an operative Chapter 19 Development Code (Ord. 2023-39, effective 2023-07-15). Greenville's zoning authority is enabling-act-compliant.
Effect
Greenville's entire Chapter 19 Development Code flows from this enabling channel; state law does not otherwise dictate district types, dimensions, or overlays.
SC_6_29_1145_MANUFACTURED_HOUSING_PARITYapplies
Qualifying condition
SC §6-29-1145 requires that manufactured housing meeting HUD Code (1976+) and reasonable aesthetic/placement standards be treated equivalent to site-built single-family dwellings in residential zones. Greenville's 2023 DECO carries this preemption into per-district MH treatment in the RH and RN scale families. The statute applies to ANY SC municipality with residential zoning; Greenville (pop 71,099, residential districts confirmed in DECO) qualifies.
Effect
Greenville must allow HUD-Code manufactured housing in residential districts on parity with site-built SF; specific implementation in DECO Article 19-3 or 19-4 not retrieved.
SC_AIRPORT_HAZARDS_55_13applies
Qualifying condition
SC Code Title 55 Chapter 13 (Airport Zoning Act) authorizes and obligates local airport hazard zoning around licensed public airports. Greenville Downtown Airport (GMU, FAA ID KGMU) is a licensed public-use airport within City of Greenville; the AP (Airport Protective) overlay in Chapter 19 is the implementation. GSP (Greenville-Spartanburg International) is in Greer (separate municipality) but its FAA Part 77 approach surfaces may extend into Greenville's jurisdictional area.
Effect
Greenville must adopt and enforce airport hazard zoning around GMU (and any GSP-influenced parcels); the AP overlay implements this.
SC_FLOODPLAIN_NFIP_49_23applies
Qualifying condition
SC_LOCAL_HISTORIC_DISTRICT_HOME_RULEapplies
Qualifying condition
SC's home-rule structure (Art. VIII §§7-9; Title 6 Chapter 29) authorizes local historic district designation by ordinance. Greenville has multiple locally-designated historic districts including Heritage Neighborhood (designated 2001), Pettigru Street, and West End (designated 1993). The Preservation Overlay District (PO) implements local historic district review.
Effect
Greenville's PO overlay and Design Review Board derive authority from home-rule + enabling act; no specific state historic-district statute preempts.
SC_TIF_REDEVELOPMENT_31_6applies
Qualifying condition
SC Code Title 31 Chapter 6 (Tax Increment Financing Law) authorizes municipal TIF redevelopment districts. Greenville has utilized TIF for downtown redevelopment including the West End and Unity Park areas. TIF districts overlay zoning as financing mechanism; they do not directly override Chapter 19 dimensional standards.
Effect
Greenville maintains TIF districts as financing overlays alongside zoning; UPND and West End area TIF activity is documented.
SC_STR_NO_STATE_PREEMPTIONapplies
Qualifying condition
SC has NO statewide short-term-rental preemption (unlike FL's Live Local Act or TX's local-control limitations). Local governments retain full STR regulatory authority. Greenville exercises this authority through Chapter 19 DECO use regulations and a separate STR licensing ordinance administered by Greenville Police Department.
Effect
Greenville may freely regulate, restrict, or prohibit STRs.
SC_ADU_DESIGN_DENSITY_NO_PREEMPTIONapplies
Qualifying condition
SC has NO statewide ADU mandate (unlike CA's SB 9/SB 1069 or NC's SL 2023-108) and NO design-element preemption (unlike NC §160D-702). Local governments retain full ADU regulatory authority. Greenville's 2023 DECO is reported to enable ADUs in residential districts as part of the missing-middle agenda, but no state mandate forces this.
Effect
Greenville's ADU policy and design controls are purely local; no state floor or ceiling.
Non-applicable laws (6)
SC_BEACHFRONT_MANAGEMENT_ACTdoes_not_apply
Qualifying condition
Greenville is in Upstate South Carolina (Greenville County), >150 miles inland from the Atlantic coast. Greenville is NOT in any of the eight statutory coastal counties (Beaufort, Berkeley, Charleston, Colleton, Dorchester, Georgetown, Horry, Jasper) enumerated in S.C. Code §48-39-10, and has no Atlantic frontage. The Beachfront Management Act applies exclusively to oceanfront parcels seaward of the OCRM baseline/setback line. Greenville County lat ~34.85°N, lon ~82.4°W — entirely inland Piedmont.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: Greenville is an inland Upstate city with no Atlantic frontage; the eight statutory coastal counties exclude Greenville County.
SC_COASTAL_TIDELANDS_WETLANDS_CRITICAL_AREAdoes_not_apply
Qualifying condition
Greenville is an inland Upstate city with no tidal waters, no OCRM critical area, no estuarine wetland jurisdiction. Greenville's hydrology is the Reedy River (freshwater Piedmont stream draining to the Saluda River). No tidal influence; no OCRM-mapped critical area.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: No tidal waters, no OCRM jurisdiction.
SC_SCENIC_RIVERS_ACT_49_29does_not_apply
Qualifying condition
No segment of the Reedy River within Greenville city limits is currently designated under the SC Scenic Rivers Act §49-29 (Scenic, Recreational, or Natural classification) per SC DNR Scenic Rivers Program designation list as of 2026-05.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: No designated scenic-river segment within Greenville city limits.
SC_HERITAGE_TRUST_51_17does_not_apply
Qualifying condition
No SC Heritage Preserve or Heritage Site is mapped within City of Greenville municipal boundary per SC DNR Heritage Trust map as of 2026-05. Closest Heritage Preserves are in adjacent rural Upstate counties.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: No Heritage Preserves/Sites within city limits.
SC_MILITARY_AICUZ_INSTALLATIONSdoes_not_apply
Qualifying condition
Greenville does not host or border an active military installation per DoD installation directory. Nearest active SC installations are Joint Base Charleston, Shaw AFB (Sumter), Parris Island MCRD (Beaufort), MCAS Beaufort, Fort Jackson (Columbia) — all in different metros. Donaldson Center (former Donaldson AFB) was decommissioned in 1963 and operates as a civilian industrial complex / county airport (KGYH); not subject to AICUZ.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: No active military installation in Greenville County.
SC_AGRICULTURAL_RIGHT_TO_FARM_46_45does_not_apply
Qualifying condition
Greenville is urbanized (pop 71,099, ~13,000 du/sq mi in central neighborhoods) with no agricultural zoning districts in Chapter 19. The Right-to-Farm Act protects pre-existing agricultural operations from urban nuisance lawsuits — not relevant within urbanized city limits where no agricultural use exists.
Effect
reason_for_inapplicability: No agricultural districts in DECO; no farming operations within city limits.
Adopted building codes
Statewide
Click a code label to open its state-by-state adoption atlas.
Quirks & notes
- Brand-new 2023 Development Code (DECO) replaces the archived 2008 Land Management Ordinance (LMO): Chapter 19 was completely rewritten by czbLLC, adopted by Ord. 2023-39 on 2023-06-12, effective 2023-07-15. The prior LMO is preserved in Municode as 'ARCHIVED Chapter 19' but is no longer operative. Any third-party tool or scraped record citing R-6/R-9/RM-*/OD/C-*/RDV/S-1/I-1 districts (the LMO list) is citing an archived code that is no longer law — major hallucination risk for any v1-vintage data. [confirmed]
- 15%-at-80%-AMI density bonus in mixed-use districts: Projects in MX/MXS districts may build up to two additional stories of height by providing 15% of units affordable at 80% AMI (or 10% at 60% AMI). Affordable units must be physically constructed — no fee-in-lieu option. This is an INCENTIVE, not a mandatory inclusionary requirement; SC does not authorize mandatory inclusionary. v1 profile fabricated a '15% minimum percentage' as a mandatory floor — that misreads the bonus trigger as a baseline. [confirmed]
- Scale-prefix-tier naming convention: District codes encode building scale (RH=House, RN=Neighborhood, RC=Community, MX=Mixed Use, MXS=Mixed Use Shopfront) + tier (alphabetic A→D for residential intensity, numeric 2/3/5 for storey-tier, 'D' for downtown highest-intensity). NOT a transect (T3-T6) but transect-influenced. NOT lot-size-encoded; not use-type-index. [confirmed]
- RNX 'X' suffix variants: 'X' suffix (RNX-B, RNX-C) denotes cross-typology mixed-housing variants of base RN districts. Charleston SC's DR series uses 'F' suffix differently — context-specific suffix semantics, not transferable across SC cities. [confirmed]
- Annual review cycle: The 2023 DECO established a formal annual-review cycle for the Development Code; first annual review held 2024. Unusually proactive maintenance for an SC city. [confirmed]
- Reedy River Environmental Corridor through downtown: Downtown Greenville is bisected by the Reedy River (Falls Park, Liberty Bridge) — the corridor functions as a quasi-overlay combining SFHA floodplain controls and riparian habitat protection. Specific buffer widths and dimensional standards not retrieved in this pass. [partial]
- Unity Park Neighborhood District (UPND): West-of-downtown overlay district anchored by the 2022-opened Unity Park, the Reedy River corridor, and the historically African-American Southernside neighborhood. UPND has its own UPND Code (UPNDC) that operates as the controlling document within boundary, with DECO base provisions filling gaps. [partial]
- Downtown Design Guidelines are administrative, NOT a mapped overlay district: The Downtown Design Guidelines adopted May 2017 are administered by the Design Review Board (DRB) as policy; they are not enumerated as an overlay district in Article 19-3.2.2. v1 profile incorrectly listed 'DGO' as a codified overlay — fabricated. [confirmed]
- Greenville Downtown Airport (KGMU): Active licensed public-use airport within city limits; AP overlay implements FAA Part 77 protective surfaces around it. Donaldson Center (former AFB) is a separate facility in unincorporated Greenville County (KGYH). [confirmed]
- PD remains in code but is no longer dominant: Under the 2008 LMO, Planned Development was the primary new-development pathway. The 2023 DECO retains PD but is explicitly designed so MX/MXS districts become the default mixed-use vehicle — reducing PD-driven case-by-case discretion. [partial]
Formulas
Definitions
- height
- Maximum height in feet OR stories, per district. Some districts use stories (MX-3 = 3 stories etc.) with foot-equivalents in dimensional tables. Specifics not retrieved in this run.
- lot_coverage
- Building footprint / lot area, expressed as %. Per-district values not retrieved in this run.
- far
- Floor-area-ratio — applicability per district not confirmed in this run; the prior 2008 LMO had NO FAR standards, but the 2023 DECO may have introduced FAR for MX/MXS tiers (under review).
- du_ac
- Dwelling units per acre — per-district ceilings not retrieved in this run.
- setback_front
- Front property line to nearest building face; the 2023 DECO uses form-influenced reduced front setbacks (build-to-line-like) in MX/MXS districts (specifics under review).
- setback_side
- Side property line to nearest building face.
- setback_rear
- Rear property line to nearest building face.
- parking
- Per-district minimums and maximums; the 2023 DECO reduced minimums and introduced maximums in mixed-use districts (specifics under review).
- density_bonus
- Mixed-use districts allow +2 stories of height bonus when 15% of units are affordable at 80% AMI OR 10% of units affordable at 60% AMI; affordable units must be constructed (no fee-in-lieu).
Capacity calculations
- max_footprint_sf
lot_area_sf * lot_coverage (when lot_coverage is set)- max_units_from_density
lot_area_sf * du_ac / 43560 (when du_ac is set)- buildable_width_ft
lot_width_ft - setback_side_ft * 2- buildable_depth_ft
lot_depth_ft - setback_front_ft - setback_rear_ft- buildable_envelope_sf
buildable_width_ft * buildable_depth_ft- density_bonus_units
Mixed-use base + 2 stories of height bonus tied to 15%-at-80%-AMI or 10%-at-60%-AMI affordable set-aside (DECO Article — section not retrieved in this run)
Massing explorer
Interactive 3D comparison across every district. Drag to orbit, scroll to zoom, use the slider to walk districts, and toggle applicable overlays in the right-side panel.
Sort by
Max height
— ft
——
Floor area ratio
—
——
Lot coverage
—%
——
Setbacks (F / S / R)
— ft
——
Parking
— /unit
——
Max density
— du/ac
——
Min lot size
— sf
——
Copy zoning profile
Loading…
| District | Category | Height | FAR | Coverage | Setbacks | Parking | Density | Min lot | Overlays |
|---|
Sources & references
Citations
- [1] u
- [2] u
- [3] u
- [4] u
- [5] u
Research status
Publication gates
| primary url present | passed | source.primary_url = https://library.municode.com/sc/greenville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COOR_CH19DECO (Municode landing for the current Chapter 19 Development Code; not an aggregator) |
|---|---|---|
| no aggregator cited | passed | No zoneomics/steadily/siteplanguide/sitedesignguide/siteplancreator/propwire/zonara/unzoned in cited authoritative sources. Zoneomics was used internally for ARCHIVED-LMO verification only; values DISCARDED and not retained. |
| confidence tags full form | failed | 21 of 21 base district dimensional rows at status=under_review with retrieval_failure_reason populated; no district has confirmed §-citation for setbacks/height/density. Municode Cloudflare-gating prevents primary text retrieval. Confirmed §-citations exist only at structural level (code adoption ord., effective date, district enumeration). |
| overlays have parameters trigger confidence | failed | 7 of 7 enumerated overlays carry geographic_trigger + at least one populated parameter + status + citation; however 6 of 7 overlays are at status=partial with primary-citation under_review pending Municode retrieval. The 8th entry (Downtown Design Guidelines) is documented as administrative policy not an overlay district. Gate is partial — recorded as failed because primary-citation under_review. |
| preempt section city specific | passed | 14 SC preemption laws evaluated against city-specific data (population, coastal status, military, airport, NFIP, historic). 7 applies + 7 does_not_apply. Each entry carries qualifying_condition_checked with numeric inputs, vintage, and threshold compared. Coastal/military/scenic-river/heritage explicitly excluded with concrete reason (Greenville is inland Upstate, no coast, no military installation). |
Data quality
55%completeness14 confirmed22 partial
Documented gaps
- Per-district dimensional standards (min lot, max height, lot coverage, FAR, du/ac, parking, setbacks) for all 21 current DECO districts (RH-A/B/C/D, RN-A/B/RNX-B/RN-C/RNX-C, RC-2/3/5, MX-2/3/5/D, MXS-2/3/5/D, PD) — Municode Cloudflare-gated, Wayback/browser-MCP retrieval pending
- Current DECO section references for each carried-forward overlay (PO, NRO, AP, SFHA, SSOD, FRD, UPND) — section numbers under the rewrite are not retrieved
- ADU-specific provisions in 2023 DECO — referenced in missing-middle narrative but section text not retrieved
- Parking minimums and maximums per district under the 2023 DECO — the LMO's use-based Schedule A/Schedule B is replaced by a new per-district framework, specifics not retrieved
- Density bonus magnitude exact mapping: confirmed 15%-at-80%-AMI OR 10%-at-60%-AMI triggers +2 stories of height; whether additional density (du/ac) or FAR bonus also applies not retrieved
- Reedy River Environmental Corridor specific buffer widths and dimensional standards
- Unity Park Neighborhood District (UPNDC) sub-district list and per-sub-district dimensional standards
- Current list of locally-designated historic districts under PO (Heritage Neighborhood / Pettigru Street / West End confirmed; full enumeration not retrieved)
- SSOD-1 / SSOD-2 current corridor lists under 2023 DECO
- FRD mapped locations and current flexibility-of-standards scope
Known issues
schema:v2cohort:long-tail-cities-drain-wave3priority:highdata:gaps-presentblocker:municode-cloudflarev1-fabrication-pattern:archived-code-presented-as-currentfreshness:volatilepipeline:dimensional-retrieval-pending
Verification
| last_verified_at | 2026-05-22T00:00:00Z |
|---|---|
| verifier_specialist | verification-pass |
| verifier_version | 1.0 |
| verification_result | partial |
| atomic_claims_checked | 42 |
| atomic_claims_passed | 36 |
| atomic_claims_failed | 6 |
| failed_claims | reason: Title 6 Chapter 29 is the STATE enabling act (Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act of 1994), NOT the city's zoning code. The city's zoning code is Chapter 19 of the City Municipal Code. v1 conflated the state enabling source with the local ordinance — a foundational citation error.; reason: These are the 2008 LMO districts, which are ARCHIVED. The 2023 DECO replaced this district set entirely with the scale-prefix-tier framework: RH-A/B/C/D, RN-A/B/RNX-B/RN-C/RNX-C, RC-2/3/5, MX-2/3/5/D, MXS-2/3/5/D, PD. v1 record fabricated current-code status for an archived ordinance.; reason: Greenville has no mandatory inclusionary zoning; SC does not authorize it. The 15%-at-80%-AMI is the trigger for a VOLUNTARY density bonus (+2 stories) in mixed-use districts, not a baseline mandatory requirement. v1 misread the bonus trigger as a mandatory floor.; reason: The Downtown Design Guidelines (adopted May 2017) are administered by the Design Review Board as policy. Article 19-3.2.2 overlay enumeration does NOT contain a DGO district. v1 invented a codified overlay status.; reason: Under the ARCHIVED 2008 LMO Article 19-5 Table 19-5.1-1, R-9 max height was 60 ft (with SF detached capped at 35 ft per §19-5.2.9) and R-9 had no maximum lot coverage. v1 flattened the 60-ft / 35-ft conditional to a single 35-ft value and fabricated a 0.35 coverage limit. (Moot at the corpus level because R-9 is no longer a current district.); reason: URL returns HTTP 404 — document has been removed or moved. The 2023 DECO is hosted via Municode (Chapter 19 DECO) and the city's Land Management Ordinance / Greenville Development Code landing pages, not DocumentCenter/View/23894. |
| narrative_ref | narratives/greenville-sc/fleet-20260522-cohortA-w3/09-verification-pass.md |
Other cities in this state
Nearest-alphabetical profiles. Click through to compare zoning patterns side-by-side.