Electrician in Johns Island, SC

The South Carolina Environmental Law Project is urging people to request a public hearing for a potential bridge to be built over Pennys Creek.

JOHNS ISLAND, S.C. (WCSC) - The South Carolina Environmental Law Project is urging people to request a public hearing for a potential bridge to be built over Pennys Creek.

Pennys Creek separates a portion of land from Johns Island between the creek and the Stono River. The two-lane bridge would be 33-feet-wide by 570-feet-long.

Conservationists say that kind of construction work would affect the water quality and health of the salt marsh ecosystem. Betsy LaForce is with the Coastal Conservation League.

“We’re thinking about- runoff from cars and stormwater runoff that would go right into the marsh, but also just some of the shading and then the impacts from the piling,” she says.

The applicant is Mike Blanchard of Charles Blanchard Construction Corporation. The proposed name for the bridge is the Blanchard Family Bridge. The application is to build at Fenwick Plantation Road and St. Paul’s Parish Lane. That intersection sits inside a quiet Johns Island neighborhood. According to DHEC’s public notice, the purpose is to provide car access to private property where “access to public roadways is otherwise infeasible.”

South Carolina Environmental Law Project is concerned that the bridge will impact the estuarine ecosystem including some marsh habitat. The organization is also submitting a letter on behalf of the Coastal Conservation League. While the private bridge would access private property, the project argues that the negative impacts to the public waterway and ecosystem held entrust by the state are not worth it.

LaForce says there are a lot of questions about this bridge.

“There are kind of more questions than answers that have been provided in the application in the letter of intent as to why the applicant really needs this bridge to this island that’s already been under the same ownership for quite a long time and access via a separate bridge hasn’t been needed to date,” LaForce says. “So that’s part of the reason why this public hearing will be so important…to ask them to ask the applicant to provide a little bit more background on why this access is needed to the tip of this marsh island.”

The letter argues that there already is access to the land via Rushland Road. “The applicant does not appear to have detailed why this is an infeasible route for access” and that “their proposed access is not a necessity,” according to the letter. The applicant says he has been denied access through that avenue.

In a statement, the applicant explains his family has owned the land since the 40′s and sold off most of it reserving six remaining acres for their grandchildren to use. He says there used to be more bridges and causeways that fell into disrepair and have not been replaced. He says they have secured a permit in the past, but let it expire before being able to build.

Part of the statement reads:

“This property is landlocked and the only available access is by a bridge. We tried for 50 years to get access through the neighboring land between our property and Rushland Landing Road to no avail. We have met all of the regulations and were granted a bridge permit 3 times. If we can’t build a bridge, we cannot access our land.”

LaForce says they are also worried about development pressure.

“Some of the infrastructure that’s being proposed for such a sensitive ecosystem…so on our Sea Islands, we want to be really cognizant of these piecemeal kind of applications that are being considered whether it’s for new roadways, new bridges, and sort of the cumulative impacts that each of those individual budgets has on the bigger picture,” LaForce.

South Carolina Environmental Law Project urges people to submit a request for a public hearing to learn more about the reason for the bridge and potential impact to the environment. Neighbors say they are confident they will meet the 20-request requirement for a public hearing.

Public comments end on March 8th. For more information, click here.

Copyright 2023 WCSC. All rights reserved.

JOHNS ISLAND, S.C. (WCBD) – A new traffic light at the intersection of Maybank Highway and Fenwick Hall Allee has caused quite a stir amongst neighbors on Johns Island.

Some people like the addition of the light, but some wish it was never put here in the first place.

“That stop light is going to save lives,” said Johns Island resident Wayne Morris, while acknowledging that “it might be an inconvenience for some folks.”

Morris has lived in the Twelve Oaks Community on Fenwick Hall Allee for the last two years. He says the new light is needed because, without it, it’s nearly impossible, and extremely dangerous, to turn onto Maybank Highway.

“I don’t know whether people know this- there’s been five deaths out there, and numerous accidents, said Morris.

Other residents living in the Twelve Oaks Community like the new traffic light as well.

“Before I would just probably take a right,” Ryan Tomlinson said. “Go up River and go around up Savannah Highway rather than try to take a left out of here. So, it’s a lot better now.”

However, many neighbors who don’t live in the Fenwick Plantation subdivision have a different opinion.

Andrew Trego, who grew up on Johns Island, said the light is “causing a lot of mayhem on the road.” He went on to say, “Johns Island is just not what it used to be.”

Trego says the new light, along with several new developments popping up, is the reason for much of the congestion across the island.

“It’s not helpful for the roads around here,” Trego said. “It’s not helpful for our culture. This is a quaint community; now it’s not, and we just don’t like it.”

Trego says he would like to see some changes to alleviate the congestion made soon.

“The city really needs to do something about it,” he said. “We as a community need to stand up and tell the city what we think and how we feel.”

Now, neighbors who support the new traffic light are asking those who are against it to take into account how they feel as well.

“How would you like one of your children or one of your loved ones to be one of those five?” Morris said. “And is it not worth the safety of your family, yourself to put up with an inconvenience of a small stop light?”

The new traffic light on Maybank Highway started operating at the beginning of April.

Charleston County has received a reduced cost estimate for the long-planned and controversial Mark Clark Extension project, but it’s a price tag that would still leave the county responsible for paying $1.78 billion.

That’s about five times the county’s yearly general fund budget.

Several council members who support finishing the Interstate 526 loop said the most likely path toward paying for it would be another half-percent sale tax increase that would require local voter approval.

“We just have to be willing to move forward and do it,” Councilwoman Jenny Honeycutt said. “Every day I get more and more calls.”

The project would create a 9½-mile, four-lane road from the current end of I-526 in West Ashley, to Johns Island and then onto James Island with a connection to the end of the James Island connector at Folly Road.

Most of the road would be elevated, with a proposed speed limit between 35 and 45 mph.

The marginally better cost estimate was delivered by S.C. Department of Transportation Secretary Christy Hall in a letter to the county. The previous price tag was estimated at $2.35 billion, while the new estimate that followed a consultant’s study came in at $2.2 billion.

“I think initially there was some thought that maybe we have overinflated the numbers,” Hall said.

When the higher cost estimate came out in May, Bradly Taggart, co-founder of Charlestonians for I-526, told County Council members that a temporary spike in commodity prices was likely to blame. He predicted that “we could be looking at a project that costs half as much in six months’ time as the market rebalances.”

Instead, the estimate dropped by less than 7 percent.

Hall said the estimated $150 million reduction came mainly from reducing the cost of potential “risk elements” — surprises during construction, such as unplanned conflicts with utilities or unexpected poor soil conditions — and partly from reducing expected cost inflation.

“This estimate has built into it every possible contingency for things that could go wrong,” said Honeycutt, who said she thinks the actual cost will be lower.

Hall asked the county to develop “a financial plan that is rational and realistic” for the entire road project, which would be required in order to get final approval for an environmental review from the federal government. She also asked the county to approve $150 million in preliminary work, with the county paying half that cost, to keep the plan moving forward.

Honeycutt and Council Chairman Teddie Pryor both said they favor a new half-percent sales tax referendum as the best way to pay the cost. County voters previously approved two such sales tax increases, mostly to fund road projects.

Pryor said if there were another referendum, it could be entirely dedicated to funding the Mark Clark Extension. The most recent sales tax increase, following a 2016 referendum, was expected to raise $1.89 billion for specified road projects in the county, over 25 years.

The county received the new cost estimate for the Mark Clark Extension on Dec. 2, a spokesperson said, and has not had time to discuss it. The earlier higher estimate was delivered to the county in May.

“I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry,” Councilman Henry Darby said at the time. “I would never, ever go with this.”

The Mark Clark Extension has lots of support, including the Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce, the city of Charleston and the Charleston Trident Association of Realtors, but also lots of opposition. The Coastal Conservation League said in May that the multibillion-dollar price tag “is a perfect opportunity for Charleston County Council to walk away from this project.”

A community organization called Nix 526 has also been fighting the extension, and Charleston Waterkeeper and the S.C. Wildlife Federation have raised objections.

Supporters say it’s necessary for traffic relief and possible hurricane evacuations, while opponents say it will increase development on Johns Island and harm the environment while providing little traffic relief at great cost.

New roads tend to provide traffic relief for a time but also spur development. The existing portion of I-526 from North Charleston to Mount Pleasant initially provided traffic relief and a new hurricane evacuation option, but it also accelerated development in northern Mount Pleasant and on Daniel Island. The state is currently planning to spend about $4 billion to widen that part of the interstate.

Here are some numbers to put $1.78 billion in context:

The S.C. Department of Transportation assumes that if the Mark Clark Extension project goes forward, litigation could delay it by two or three years.

Pryor blamed opponents for the rising costs of the project, and said it could have been built for far less years or decades ago. In 2015, the cost estimate was $725 million.

Unlike the even-more-expensive plans to widen and improve the existing sections of I-526 — for about $7 billion — the state in 2019 limited its contribution to the Mark Clark Extension project to $420 million and the county agreed to finance the rest.

“Our interstate program is focused on upgrading our existing interstates,” said Hall, and those plans are focused on moving freight and aiding commerce. The state is pursuing plans to widen all or portions of interstates 526, 26 and 95, and to redesign multiple interchanges.

County Council is expected to discuss options for the Mark Clark Extension at a future meeting. Hall did not put a deadline on her request for action.

NORTH CHARLESTON — A man provided Charleston County deputies with a different name before he took off running across several lanes of a major road and jumping from an overpass.

Kelvin Cole, 56, died Oct. 28 after being struck by multiple cars on Interstate 26. Investigators later determined he had active arrest warrants from Charleston County’s Family Court and the S.C. Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services.

Cole, who lived and worked as a welder in Johns Island, was riding in the passenger seat of a car when a deputy stopped it for alleged traffic violations. The car’s 31-year-old driver was ultimately given a warning.

Attempts to reach Cole’s family Nov. 2 were unsuccessful.

The Charleston County Sheriff’s Office released an incident report Nov. 2, several days after Cole’s death. It provides new details on what preceded the moment he ran from the deputy.

Deputy Tanner Buller was patrolling around 10:30 p.m. near Stall and Mazyck roads in North Charleston when he noticed a white SUV swerve several times from its lane, the report states. The driver also failed to use a turn signal when changing lanes.

Buller, who has worked in law enforcement for five years, had a deputy-in-training with him during the stop. He flipped on his blue lights and the SUV pulled over onto the Ashley Phosphate Road overpass, which sits atop I-26.

Buller spoke with the car’s driver through the passenger-side window. The driver denied he had been drinking, but Buller wrote he could smell marijuana and alcohol coming from the vehicle’s passenger side. The car’s passenger, later identified as Cole, told the deputy his name was Raymond Brown.

Buller had both men get out of their car so he could search them. The driver admitted he’d smoked marijuana earlier in the day, the report states.

When Cole exited the car, Buller saw a beer can near the passenger seat. Buller found Cole’s driver’s license and noticed it did not match the name he’d provided the deputy.

Buller tried to detain Cole “but he pulled away and fled on foot” across Ashley Phosphate Road, the report states. The deputy chased Cole while trying to avoid traffic.

He repeatedly asked Cole to stop but the man “eventually jumped over the guardrail,” the report states. Buller saw Cole’s hands “grabbing the rail for a brief period” before he appeared to let go and fall onto I-26, the report states.

Buller never drew his weapon, said Andrew Knapp, a Sheriff’s Office spokesman. The deputy remains on duty. In addition to conducting its own internal review, the Sheriff’s Office also requested State Law Enforcement Division investigate the incident, Knapp said.

Investigators searched Cole’s name in a federal database and found he had an active warrant with the probation department, as well as three bench warrants with Charleston County’s Family Court.

Cole was the defendant in an ongoing child support case filed in 2016, court records show.

He was placed on a year of probation in February 2020 after pleading guilty in Charleston County to a forgery charge. Cole’s probation sentence would not be terminated until he paid all associated fees, said Anita Dantzler, a department spokeswoman.

Cole owed nearly $2,500 to the department, records show.

A 72-unit senior affordable housing development on Johns Island is running into funding hurdles due to recent changes in state tax-credit policies.

Developers are about $2 million short of the $22 million project budget because state legislators recently took action to limit spending on such projects.

In May, Gov. Henry McMaster signed House Bill 5075 into law, reforming the state-low income housing tax- credit system. It put a cap on the program, stating that South Carolina can’t allocate more than $20 million worth of tax credits to affordable housing developments each year.

Among other changes, it stated that the amount of tax credits that an individual project receives is based on whatever the anticipated cost of the project is when it is first proposed, not when it breaks ground. If, after going through months to years of approval processes, the estimated total cost of the project goes up, the amount of tax credits allocated to the project when construction begins will not increase.

That’s what caused the funding gap for the Johns Island complex, developer of the project Raymond Nix said.

“It can be 18 months between when you apply for tax credits and the time you are breaking ground,” he said.

The new method of calculating state tax credits is a departure from the previous process. Under the same program at the federal level and under the prior version of the state program, once a project broke ground, it would receive tax credits based on its most up-to-date cost estimate.

Inflation, increased construction costs and other factors meant that the developers had to recalculate the total cost of the Johns Island project before breaking ground. But the tax credits received from the state won’t reflect those cost increases.

“The (state law) adjustment resulted in a $1.7 million hole in the project immediately,” Nix said.

Nix, president of Nix Development Co., gave a presentation to the Charleston City Council’s Community Development Committee on Nov. 17, asking if the city is able to step in and fill the project’s funding gap.

The 72-unit development, called Esau Jenkins Village, is located at Maybank Highway and Bohicket Road. It will be run by Sea Island Comprehensive Health Care Corp. The nonprofit, which has an office in front of the 7-acre development site, operates programs for senior citizens and disabled people in parts of Charleston and Colleton counties.

The construction site abuts a nearly 19-acre undeveloped tract owned by Angel Oak Park LLC. The city of Charleston owns 6.5 acres around the Angel Oak Tree and nearly 8 acres are owned by St. Johns Church.

An existing 88-unit, single-story, subsidized housing complex affiliated with Sea Island Comprehensive is across the highway.

Nix and other leaders of the project are seeking funding from local governments and nonprofits to fill the $2 million shortfall.

The city of Charleston hasn’t taken any action yet. Officials indicated an interest in helping it get across the finish line if other funding avenues don’t pan out. But the Esau Jenkins Development isn’t the only one of its kind seeking more funding.

“Quite honestly, this has probably been the fifth request that we’ve had to help with gap financing as a result of state housing change in legislation,” said Geona Shaw Johnson, Charleston housing director.

Nix said he’s aware that he’s not the only developer seeking out assistance after facing unanticipated costs. Even projects that have already broken ground are having to adjust their funding sources, he said.

“I would argue that any affordable housing developer that you call right now is grappling with this same issue except for ones that were just recently awarded funding,” he said.

The tax-credit program, called Workforce and Senior Affordable Housing Act, was originally approved during the state’s 2019-20 legislative session. It was designed as a way to provide a first-of-its-kind, state-level affordable housing tax credit that would match federal housing tax credits to help get affordable housing proposals to viability.

Lawmakers saw it as a bargain. According to a fiscal impact statement associated with the bill, state analysts anticipated the credit would cost the state roughly $16 million in annual revenue by the 10th year of the program, all while filling a significant hole in the state’s housing stock.

Affordable housing advocates credit the program with spurring the development of nearly 9,600 units across the state in just two years. But it was also unsustainable, fiscal hawks argued, with the number of applicants far exceeding the anticipated number of credits lawmakers thought they were agreeing to.

The original cost estimates, based off of historical demands for state affordable housing credits, were well off the mark.

According to a 2021 memo from Frank Rainwater, executive director of the S.C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office, the state treasury was on pace to issue more than $50 million in tax credits in 2021 alone, with an anticipated impact of $5.16 billion to the state’s general fund over the next 20 years.

Tax-credit applications were put on hold at the beginning of 2022 while lawmakers hashed out the details of the reform bill that ultimately capped the program’s annual spending.