Meetings Regarding "the Lively" Proposal for more than 300 Apartments on Folly Road

The developer of "the Lively" must hold at least one public meeting about the project.  The time and place of the required meeting has not been determined.

The final decision on the project will be made by Charleston County Council and that meeting will be held at the County Office building at Bridgeview Drive in North Charleston.   While County Council meets on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 6:30 PM, the date when this matter comes before County Council has not been determined.   Most likely it will take at least several months.

The developer of "the Lively" on Folly Road is seeking a rezoning of the 10 acre parcel to planned development.   Under its current zoning, community commercial, a variety of stores and shops can be put there, but also up to 120 apartments.   The proposal is to add to this an additional 210 to 220 apartments, making this an ultra-dense project--330 to 340 apartments along with a variety of shops and artist studios.   An existing small business and the parking lot of the Brickhouse Restaurant will be displaced.

This project is in unincorporated Charleston County, so any rezoning requires a vote by County Council.   Before that happens, the Charleston County Planning Commission will be making a recommendation to County Council.  

As part of  the County's PD's process, the developer must hold at least one public meeting about the project.  The developer has told the Town's Planning Director that he plans to hold four public meetings.   He said that he would hold two before the meeting with the County Planning Commission and then after the Planning Commission makes its recommendation, two more before County Council makes the final decision at its regular meeting.

The exact dates and places for the developer's promised meetings have yet to be determined.   I was told some months ago that County Councilwoman Anna Johnson wanted all public meetings to be held at James Island Elementary School on Grimball Road.   County Councilman Joe Qualey said that some of the meetings should be held at James Island Town Hall.

When we asked the developer where he planned to hold the meetings, he said that he probably would hold the them at a local public school.  (James Island Elementary is very close to the project.)    Our Planning Director told him that he could also hold one or more of the meetings at James Island Town Hall.

While the Town is very happy to host any such meeting, I would encourage everyone to attend any meeting held at James Island Elementary.   It is easy to find, has plenty of parking, and is a great facility.

The Charleston County Planning Commission meeting will have a time for public comment and will be held at the County Office building at Bridgeview Drive in North Charleston.    The Planning Commissioners will make a recommendation to Council Council on whether or not to go forward.  These recommendations are not binding on County Council.   If the Planning Commission recommends in favor, County Council may still vote against the rezoning.  And if the Planning Commission recommends against, County Council may still choose to rezone the parcel.

There will also be a public hearing and public comment before the rezoning is considered by County Council.   The Public Hearing is actually the time specifically set aside to get input from the general public.  County Council meets at the County Office building at Bridgeview Drive at North Charleston on the second and third Tuesday of each month at 6:30.

That is the key vote.  It is County Council that makes the decision.     If County Council votes against the rezoning, then the developer will be limited to 120 apartments.

Late Friday afternoon, I was told that County Councilwoman Anna Johnson was having a meeting on Monday, March 28 at the Elijah Lodge on Folly Road regarding the Lively project.     I thought it was important that everyone on James Island know about it.    Sunday, I received a text that the meeting was with the developer of the Lively and that it was to be limited to residents of district 8.   That is people that live in County Councilwoman Johnson's district.

Monday, we got in contact with the developer.   He said that he was aware of the meeting and that the Lively was on the agenda, but that he was not invited and did not plan to go.   Apparently, the only member of County Council participating would be Councilwoman Anna Johnson and she planned the meeting solely for her constituents in District 8.   She postponed the meeting Monday afternoon.   Some speculate it is because people from James Island and Folly Beach who are concerned and skeptical about the project were planning to attend the meeting to tell her what they thought about it.

Regardless, there will be future meetings and hopefully none them will be cancelled at the last minute.  As explained above, the developer must hold at least one and he has promised four.   I am sure these meetings will be on James Island.  However, the point of the meeting will be to inform people about the project, and, obviously, to convince people that it will be a good thing.  

The actual decision for the rezoning will be made by County Council.   And it is their meeting in North Charleston where those opposed to this ultra-dense development will need to make their voices heard.

Yes, if this site were still in the Town of James Island, this project would be a nonstarter.  It would require a revision of the Town's comprehensive plan.    Further, the "baseline" would be 40 apartments rather than 120.

More importantly, the key meetings would be here at James Island Town Hall--not up in North Charleston.  Every member of the Planning Commission would live on James Island as would the Mayor and members of Town Council.   More importantly, all the voters for the Mayor and members of Town Council would live here on James Island.

Sadly, only two  of the nine members of County Council live on James Island.   Worse,  James Island voters have no say in the election of seven out of the nine members of County Council.   Their districts are elsewhere.   Only a small portion of County Councilwoman Anna Johnson's district is on James Island.   Her district runs out to Johns, Edisto , and Wadmalaw Islands as well as Red Top and other rural areas of West Ashley.   And even County Councilman Joe Qualey's district extends a bit into West Ashley and Johns Island, as well as  Folly, Kiawah and Seabrook Islands.

Fortunately, everyone in Charleston County is aware of the traffic gridlock on Folly Road.  I certainly hope that when the time comes, we can find at least five votes on County Council to oppose this unreasonable rezoning to allow for this ultra-dense project that will add to the traffic gridlock on  Folly Road.

The Lively is Back: 300 More Apartments Proposed for Folly

The developer is now proposing that the 300 unit apartment complex on Folly Rd. near the intersection with South Grimball be approved as a "planned development."   A planned development is a rezoning and so existing zoning rules do not apply.   It must be approved by Charleston County Council.

These parcels are currently in unincorporated Charleston County.    The larger parcel is vacant and mostly behind the Brickhouse Restaurant.   The smaller parcel is the large parking lot of the Brickhouse Restaurant. They used to be in the Town of James Island before 2011, but they were cut off from the rest of the Town by areas incorporated in the City of Charleston, so they were not included in 2012.   The Town continues to seek legislation in Columbia that will allow the Town to be reunited, including these parcels.

The parcels have long been zoned community commercial.  In the Town, that would allow 40 apartments on the 10 acre site along with shops and stores.   In unincorporated Charleston County, it allows for 120 apartments, along with shops and stores.   However, the County has a "mixed use overlay" that the developer sought to use to allow nearly three times as many apartments.   This requires that a small portion (14%) of the apartments be for those with moderate incomes.   After a careful review of their ordinances, County staff determined that the proposal was not permitted unless there was a change in the County's Comprehensive Plan.   However, with a rezoning to a "PD" or planned development, it would be possible.   Changing the Comprehensive Plan or an rezoning, including to a "planned development," requires a vote of County Council.

Because of the serious traffic problems on Folly Road, I think that such a rezoning would be a mistake.  I think the idea of a market and artist studios is wonderful.   And the 40 or so apartments that would be permitted under Town zoning would be fine.   The 120 that would be allowed under the County zoning is a bit much, but 300 is way too many.   The infrastructure on James Island, particularly the roads, cannot support ultra-dense development.

I will be asking members of County Council to please vote against this rezoning.   I would recommend you do the same.  There will be a public hearing and three readings before it can pass County Council.     I will be sure to share the information.

There are two members of County Council who represent portions of James Island--Councilman Joe Qualey and Councilwoman Anna Johnson.   Councilman Qualey strongly opposes this rezoning and will lead the opposition on County Council.

Joseph K. Qualey

Joseph K. Qualey

23 Broad Street

Charleston, SC 29401

(843)693-3434

jqualey@charlestoncounty.org

Anna B. Johnson

Anna B. Johnson
Post Office Box 13975
James Island, SC 29422
(843)795-3970
ajohnson@charlestoncounty.org

Camp and Folly Improvement Project

PDF File

The Camp and Folly Improvement project is slated to begin sometime in the next few weeks.   The first portion of the project will be repaving.   Finally!   This will be done at night.

After that, there will be a long, 18 month project that mostly involves drainage improvements--larger storm water pipes under Folly Road.  This should help with the occasional flooding of this intersection.  

The project will also involve a widening of Folly Road and two turn lanes going east on Camp.  This should allow for improved traffic flow on Folly.   There will also be a dedicated left turn land on the west side of Camp going south on Folly.   You know, the place where the giant potholes have developed for years.

Finally, the project will extend sidewalks along Folly Road.    They will go up to Chick-fil-A and to Bi-Lo and down to the vacant Burger King and past Goodwill.   There will still be much to do regarding sidewalks on Folly Road, but it will be an important step forward.

Hospitality Tax

I have asked Town Council to consider adopting the hospitality tax in the Town.  This would be a 2% tax on on restaurant meals served in the Town.   This tax is already applied to restaurants on James Island that are in areas annexed to the City of Charleston.

Nearly all the restaurants in the Town are located in our Folly Road commercial district.   While I sometimes go out to those restaurants, and so will pay an added tax, many of those eating in the restaurants do not live in the Town.  Some are tourists traveling to Folly Beach.   When a Town resident eats in a restaurant here on James Island that is under City jurisdiction, you pay that tax and it goes to the City of Charleston.

The monies from this tax can only be used in very limited ways, but improving roadways important to tourism is one such way.   The Rethink Folly Road project is likely to be very expensive, and the Town will almost certainly be required to pay our share.   At least some portions of the project are aimed at improving traffic flow on Folly Road, and much of the problem with that flow is "beach traffic."    Other portions of the plan involve improving the quality of the corridor, something that will very much benefit the businesses along Folly Road.   For example, the most important element of the plan to me is to fix the traffic signals.   Another element of the plan that I think is very important is sidewalks along Folly Road in the Town's commercial district.

Please let me and the other members of Council know whether you think this is a reasonable and fair way to fund these needed improvements.

More on the Storm Water Utility

I met with County Council Chair Elliott Summey, along with some other Mayors the other day.   The issue of the Storm Water Utility came up.   Staff from the County's Stormwater Utility came by Town Hall later that same day to provide a more detailed explanation.    There will likely be a special meeting at Town Hall for a presentation for Council.

The reason for the proposed increase in the storm water utility fee is two-fold.   The first is new regulations that require additional testing of the outfalls of storm water pipes and ditches into the marsh.   While this sort of testing is usually done by DHEC and associated with determining whether oyster beds are safe for harvest, a new mandate is coming down on local government to require us to regularly check the pollution in runoff.   The "pollutant" of greatest concern is coliform bacteria from animal or human waste.   The human waste would be from failed septic systems or else leakages in the sewer system.    It will all need to be checked some time, but more frequent checks will be needed if there are problem areas.  We already have problem areas around James Island.   Ignoring this mandate could result in massive fines--like a million dollars.   The added testing is going to take up about half of the increase.  For us on James Island, this will be about $50,000 per year in total.

The other half of the increase is to pay for drainage improvements.   The flood last fall showed that there are weaknesses in the drainage system throughout Charleston County.   We found problems here on James Island.   Most troubling is that much of our drainage infrastructure (pipes not our ditches) is about 50 years old.   That is getting to the end of its useful life.   We will need to replace this.   The failure of the drainage at Highwood Circle during the flood, was fundamentally caused by aging infrastructure.   Further, some work is needed for our ditch system too.   For us in the Town of James Island, the added revenue would be about $50,000 per year.   This can only be used for drainage projects.    I anticipate that the Town will spend more than that each year, using other sources of funds for drainage projects as well.   We can use this funding for regular ditch maintenance if we want, tough I anticipate that we will continue to have other sources of funds for that purpose.

The Town will determine what drainage projects in the Town will be funded.   The County will use the funds raised from the unincorporated area to fund drainage projects in the unincorporated area.    The Chairman of County Council explained that the County needs these additional funds to improve drainage in the unincorporated area, including on James Island.   He had two problems with increasing the County tax millage to pay for it.   One was that he feared that some of the money would end up being spent on other things.  That is the nature of politics.  The other is that property taxpayers in the City of Charleston and the Town of Mount Pleasant, who manage their own storm water, would be rightly upset that their taxes are being increased to pay for something that provides no benefit to them.

I don't think setting up our own storm water program is sensible at this time.    If we do not, we must apply the storm water fee at least as high as that set by the County.   We have no choice but to pay for the added monitoring of storm water runoff into the waterways that surround us.   And we can certainly use the added revenue to fund drainage improvements in the Town.   And I can understand why Charleston County needs these funds to pay for drainage improvements in the unincorporated area, including here on James Island.  

Let's Return the Grand Tree Definition to Normal

When I was elected Mayor in 2010, the Town's Tree Ordinance defined "grand tree" as any oak tree with a diameter of 24 inches or more.    This is at "breast height" which means 4 feet up.  Stand in front of the tree, and if it is 2 feet or more wide, it counted as a "grand tree."  

This ordinance had been adopted by the Town in 2007, when it adopted its zoning ordinance.   The same size had applied in the area of the Town between 2004 and 2006, when it was under the jurisdiction of Charleston County.   The 24 inch size for "grand tree" still applies in the unincorporated areas of James Island under Charleston County jurisdiction.   The City of Charleston also defines "grand tree" as 24" or more in diameter.

When the Town was closed in 2011, all of the Town reverted to Charleston County jurisdiction.   The 24 inch definition continued to apply.    When the Town opened again for its fourth and final incorporation in 2012, the Town's previous zoning ordinance was adopted and the 24 inch definition continued.

In 2013, Town Council changed the definition of "grand tree" on a  3 to 2 vote from 24 inches to 18 inches.   Councilman Blank and I voted against the change.

I believe that change was a mistake, and I favor returning to the 24 inch rule that has applied to James Island for decades.   The only other time that a different definition applied on James Island was in Town 2 for two years between 2002 and 2004.   During that short period, the definition of "grand tree" was 12 inches.   I was on Town Council at the time and voted against that change as well.    When that Town was closed down, it reverted to 24 inches under  Charleston County jurisdiction.   When the Town was formed in 2006, I didn't run for Council and the former Chair of the Town's Planning Commission, Leonard Blank took my place.   He, along with the Mayor and the rest of Council, who had voted for the 12 inch definition in 2002, voted to continue with the County definition of 24 inches rather than return to the 12 inch definition that had existed for two years, two years earlier.   Councilman Blank was well aware of the application of the definition when he was Chairman of the Planning Commission.  He believed it was unworkable.

There were two other changes made by Town Council in 2007 that made the Town's tree regulations out of line with those of other jurisdictions.   The Town's tree regulation only applied to oak trees.   Further, all other tree regulations that applied to new development were removed, leaving only a prohibition on removing grand trees.   While the first change was intentional on the part of that Council, I believe the second change was unintentional and implemented by the Town's planning consultant.

In 2013, the Town's rules were adjusted so that trees 8 inches or greater are protected in new development.  These rules limit how many trees may be removed in a new development.  Further, all trees other than pines, sweet gums, or invasive species, such as Chinese Tallow (popcorn trees,) are protected.

In the Town of James Island, the "grand tree" ordinance is almost entirely enforced against individual homeowners who want to remove a tree from their own yard.   This is because there is little vacant land in the Town of James Island.   Nearly all of James Island in the Town is already "built out" in single family homes.   Nearly all of the new development on James Island is in areas annexed to the City of Charleston.  No Town regulation, including for trees, applies to new developments in the City of Charleston.

Fortunately, if a "grand tree" is dead or dying or an immediate safety hazard, the Town's Planning Director can issue a permit for a homeowner to remove it with a modest fee of $25.  However, if there is some doubt about the health of the tree, the homeowner must hire an arborist which is more costly.   Worse, any other reason  for removing a tree from your own yard requires that a substantial fee be paid--$250  for one tree and $50 for each additional tree.   This is because the Town must post signs and put an ad in the paper.   Then the homeowner must appear at a meeting of the Town's Board of Zoning Appeals and ask permission to cut down the tree.   If the BZA decides to permit the removal (which it might not,) mitigation must be paid, which is even more money.  And, of course, cutting down a tree is expensive anyway.   Failure to follow this procedure results in a hefty fine and much more mitigation, generally costing thousands of dollars.

This is all true for trees greater than 24 inches.   Reducing that to 18 inches just adds to the burden on homeowners.    My personal view is that a homeowner should be able to make normal landscaping decisions in their own yard.   Government regulation should only be  for a very good reason.   I understand that there are special trees on James Island that most residents want to see protected.   However, I do not believe that treating average trees as "grand trees" is appropriate.  The change in the definition of "grand tree" from 24" to 18" created an unreasonable burden on homeowners by increasing the number of average trees on James Island that we pretend are "grand."   I think it is past time to reverse that change.

Why would anyone want to impose this unreasonable burden on average homeowners on James Island?   The advocates of pretending average trees are "grand" imagine that they can use this to stop development on James Island.   In 2013, a major residential subdivision was started in the City of Charleston off Secesionville Road.   The developers cut down most of the trees on the property.    A former member of the Town's planning commission actually said that she supported the change in the Town's definition of grand tree in response to something that happened in the City of Charleston.

I heard the same thing just a few weeks ago.   I asked a current member of the Town's Planning Commission, "How many new developments have we had in the Town," and that person said five or six.   I asked again, "in the Town?"   Oh, those were all in the City.  

Imposing especially strict regulations on homeowners in the Town cannot possibly limit development in the City of Charleston or in the unincorporated areas of James Island under County jurisdiction.    Reacting to excessive development in the City of Charleston by imposing an additional and excessive burden on homeowners in the Town of James Island is both unreasonable and unfair.

We have had two new residential developments in the Town since I have been Mayor.  The total number of houses is 43.    There is very little vacant land left under Town jurisdiction.   Focusing on new construction when considering the definition of "grand tree" just doesn't make sense in the Town of James Island.

I think we should have a definition of "grand tree" in the Town of James Island that is reasonably consistent with the definition of "grand tree" that applies to our neighbors in the unincorporated portions of James Island and in the City of Charleston.   Homeowners in the Town should not have to pay thousands of dollars because they try to do what their neighbors do in the City of Charleston or in the unincorporated area.

Storm Water Utility--Possible Increase in November

    All single family residences in the Town of James Island pay a Storm Water Utility of $36.    There  is a proposal going before County Council soon that will increase the fee to $58, which is a 60% increase.  This goes before the Finance Committee tonight and then County Council on Tuesday, March 8.

   The Town's stormwater fee is charged on the annual property tax bill.  The Town has an intergovernmental agreement with Charleston County to manage our storm water utility, and as a result, the money collected from Town property owners goes straight to Charleston County.   Most of this money is used to pay for County staff who enforce storm water regulations.  

    If County Council determines that it is necessary to raise the fee to $58, we will have to apply this fee in the Town as well in order to continue to participate in the County program.   (Residents in the unincorporated portions of James Island will pay the fee set by County Council.  In the City of Charleston, the fee is paid monthly on the water and sewer bills and adds up to $72 per year.)   Federal law requires all local governments to enforce such regulations in order to protect water quality in waterways like our rivers and marshes.   Having no storm water program is impossible, and having no storm water fee to pay for it is impractical.   Like most of the smaller municipalities in Charleston County, the Town participates in the County program.     Mount Pleasant has its own program and the cost is $60 per resident.

The storm water fee is not ordinarily used to pay for routine maintenance on drainage ditches.   That funding is from public works.   However,  the storm water utility does collect "extra" money which is accumulated in a special fund.   There is a special fund for the Town of James Island.  This money can be used for storm water projects.  

County staff has informed the Town of this possible increase, and so far, the best information I have as to why is "new regulations."   I hope to find out more.    Since the Town will have no option but to follow the County in this matter, I would suggest contacting your representative on County Council--Councilman Joe Qualey or Councilwoman Anna Johnson.  I contacted mine.