Tree Servicein Johns Island, SC

A new elementary school planned for Johns Island is making its way through the approval process with the City of Charleston.

CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCSC) - A new elementary school planned for Johns Island is making its way through the approval process with the City of Charleston.

The construction plan went before the design review board for the second of its three times, on Monday. It’s a standard, but lengthy, process any builders go through with big projects in the city.

Executive Director of Capital Programs Jasmeen Shaw explains the school is going to be state of the art and offer STEAM – science, technology, engineering, arts and math – education.

“The island truly deserves a brand-new school and we’re able to bring them a brand-new school which as well as alleviates some of the overcrowding that’s been caused by growth in the area – which is a great thing,” Shaw says.

The elementary school will be off of River Road. It is planned to be two stories and serve 700 2nd through 5th graders.

During community meetings last year – some people expressed concern about traffic. Part of the construction also includes building a roundabout on River Road to enter the school property. The project also includes adding a left turn lane from River Road to Brownswood Road and adding a right turn lane from Brownswood Road onto River Road.

“We’re going to bring several road improvements to the area, which is not only going to benefit the school which operates Monday through Friday for the most part, but even on weekends and as a whole, this particular school is going to be an asset to the entire community,” Shaw says.

Stephanie Yesil and her husband live in a neighborhood off River Road.

“Maybe it will help with the development of River Road and turning it into a safer place. Maybe adding some sidewalks, maybe adding some additional controls, maybe some new lights, maybe some new signs to make it even more family friendly. So, this could be a really good thing if it’s done well,” Yesil says.

She is a former education who says she doesn’t have kids yet, but supports investing in education.

“My husband and I hopefully one day will be parents but for now, I mean, we love our neighbors and almost every single one of them have new children and it would be really nice to make sure that this is more of a community-oriented place rather than having a bus kids all over the place,” Yesil says.

The elementary school is meant to help with the crowding at the Angel Oak Elementary, which is operating at 129% capacity over operating ability. The $53.5 million dollar brand new school will offer STEAM programs. Then, the Angel Oak Elementary building will be converted to serve as a head start and 1st grade center, so all levels are included. The goal open date for the school is the start of the 2024-2025 school year.

“I think education is always a great idea. I think there’s always going to be a need for it. I can’t speak to other city planning. I can’t necessarily speak to any other kinds of businesses that we should have over here. But you’ll always get a yes vote for me when it comes to bringing in good teachers, good people and giving more and more space for kids to go to places to learn,” Yesil says.

Monday, the design review board approved the conceptual plans and submitted the information to staff for a further focused review. The board made some aesthetic suggestions to the plans like more fencing around the back of the building, but overall supported the designs. Charleston County Schools says the project is on track and they expect to start site prep work in March.

Copyright 2023 WCSC. All rights reserved.

The $75 million in funding that Charleston County Council approved for the Mark Clark extension project last week has the potential to be transformative for Charleston County and Johns Island in three ways, but not in ways council members or residents may think.

First, the project could be financially transformative in the short-term because it could be the largest county financial debacle since the millions “invested” in the former Naval Hospital.

Why? Because council is betting taxpayer money that a slew of low-probability events take place that make this $75 million bet a sure winner.

These events include betting that:

These bets don’t even include the bet that the state Joint Bond Review Committee will shirk its fiduciary responsibility and approve the infrastructure bank’s request for matching funds. This despite Charleston County having no real plan to raise the additional funds needed for the project.

If this low-probability bet is lost, county taxpayers will not only be out $75 million, but they also would have to reimburse the infrastructure bank for 50% of all funds it provided. And we would have lost $75 million that could have been spent on making much-needed improvements to our roads now.

Second, the project could be financially transformative for Charleston County in the long-term since the true cost of the project will likely be much greater than $2.2 billion.

Why? Because of the intergovernmental agreement Charleston County signed with the infrastructure bank and the state Department of Transportation, the county is solely responsible for all additional costs. These costs include any cost overruns and lawsuits; funds for bond servicing; and the cost to upgrade River Road to accommodate the traffic from this project.

These costs could easily add up to an additional several hundred million more dollars. Just imagine how the bond rating agencies will assess the county’s creditworthiness with this unbounded financial obligation.

Third, the project could be transformative to Johns Island because the Lowcountry character of the island would be lost forever.

Why? Because large road projects like these attract large “Anywhere USA” residential developments with their multitude of cars, big box stores and national franchises that push out local businesses. They also dislocate long-time residents. All of this would greatly and adversely impact our quality of life and worsen traffic congestion.

If you need some examples of this, just look to Mount Pleasant and the Cainhoy Peninsula.

Once the Ravenel Bridge was completed, growth in Mount Pleasant exploded. The town is now grappling with its growth and congestion at nearly every Town Council meeting. For example, the town recently announced it will perform an in-depth study to see what can be done to reduce the number of vehicles traveling on roads throughout the town. The study is not about building new roads but managing traffic on existing ones.

Without Interstate 526, the Cainhoy Peninsula was not attractive to developers. Now, there are plans to build 9,000 homes there and to fill vast stretches of wetlands — not to mention the eventual dislocation of long-time residents.

Even without the 9,000 Cainhoy houses, I-526 is currently so congested that the state and federal governments (not Charleston County) are looking to spend billions of dollars to try to relieve this congestion.

This is not the future Johns Islanders want.

There will be those who say that this is a much-needed project. This despite effective lower-cost alternatives that do not alter our island forever.

There will be those who say that residents are overwhelmingly in support of this project. This despite the latest DOT survey showing that fewer than half of them support the project.

There will be those who say that we need a third way on and off the island. This despite, in comparison, that we have only 10% more daily traffic than Hilton Head on our bridges. Yet we have two bridges with eight available lanes, while Hilton Head is about to spend millions to expand its single bridge from four to only six lanes.

Do we need to improve safety and reduce congestion on our roads to improve our quality of life? Yes.

Is betting the county’s short-term and long-term financial future, losing the soul of what makes Johns Island who we are, ignoring effective lower-cost alternatives and ignoring the desires of the majority of the residents the way to do it? No.

So what will happen?

The county could be saved from itself if the Joint Bond Review Committee votes against authorizing the matching funds. Then we can get back to the business of improving safety and reducing congestion on our roads.

John Zlogar is a cofounder of Rational Roads for Johns Island.

A Johns Island-based company that makes a foldable, portable pocket dog bowl and matching carrying pouch will soon land on one of the nation’s largest e-commerce websites.

Lowcountry Pet Specialties was among the companies chosen through Walmart's “Open Call” initiative to promote locally made products on the retailer’s marketplace website. The goal is to get it on Walmart’s physical shelves.

According to a press release from Walmart, more than 1,100 businesses from across the country pitched their products at the annual “Open Call” last year and just more than 330 were chosen to be sold in stores and online.

Lowcountry Pet Specialties was one of four suppliers in South Carolina chosen for products made, grown or assembled in the state.

The Mobowl (named for “mobile bowl”) is a $12.99 patented BPA-free foldable travel pet bowl that fits two cups of food or two cups of water and measures just four inches in diameter when open.

Launched nearly four years ago, the Mobowl is now sold at 120 pet specialty retailers worldwide and available on the Lowcountry Pet Specialties website.

“We have sold somewhere in the neighborhood of 80,000-100,000 units. We have shipped 30,000 units to Europe,” said Lowcountry Pet Specialties founder John Hagerman, a retired engineer. “Europeans love this product; they are very active with their pets. (This WalMart partnership) is the project that really puts us on the map. By being in Walmart, it opens new doors for us to other retailers.”

Hagerman started Lowcountry Pet Specialties specifically to manufacture and sell the Mobowl. He came up with the idea after outings with his border collie at the beach and the park where he would forget to bring a water bowl.

“I would either cobble something up out of aluminum foil or I’d even pour water into my hand,” Hagerman said. “I looked online for a portable pet bowl, but nothing impressed me. I said,’ You know what? I'm going to make my own.’”

Hagerman’s friend had a 3-D printer and the first prototype of the Mobowl was created. Hagerman spent years testing different materials that was both safe for dogs and foldable into just inches. Hagerman has a trademark and patent for the Mobowl in multiple countries.

“The business was going great, and then the pandemic hit. And the problem was everybody was working remotely, so we didn’t have an opportunity to present our product or meet major retailers face to face and let them experience the product and feel it,” Hagerman said.

He discovered the Open Call initiative and applied last summer. Hagerman is currently in the process of supplying photos and a product description to Walmart's corporate marketing team and hopes to be online in the next few months.

The Mobowl is currently manufactured in Indiana, but Hagerman said he has plans to move production closer to home, especially if orders increase from the Walmart partnership. Hagerman said he hopes to hire workers to fulfill orders for increased production.

“We are looking now for a manufacturing site here in Charleston County. We're also looking in Colleton County to be able to fulfill the orders — Colleton County is offering some great incentives — in being able to warehouse all the products and all the packaging,” Hagerman said. “The plan is to maintain (inventory) we have now. Right now, we have plenty of inventory, but we're hoping that we deplete this inventory and we get back into production and start increasing production.”

Hagerman said he is working on inventing new to-be-trademarked products through Lowcountry Pet Specialties. He hopes the Walmart connection will spur national retailers like PetSmart or Petco to carry the Mobowl on shelves.

“Now that Walmart has brought us on board, I hope it will happen that (national pet retailers) are going to look at us with a much more serious frame of mind,” Hagerman said. “Our goal is to get it on the shelf. Once it gets on the shelf, that's when we will really ramp up production.”

Nearly 200 historic trees on Johns Island were on the chopping block at a Charleston Board of Zoning Appeals meeting Dec. 7, and the debate surrounding their removal is stirring up questions about preserving the island’s natural habitat while planning for booming population growth at the city’s outer edges.

Developers requested permission to cut down 193 “grand” trees across two developments in cases heard before the board, which reviews projects that need special exceptions to city ordinances.

The grand classification means the trees are more than 24 inches in diameter, likely indicating that they are well over 100 years old. As a result, they are protected by city ordinance. Not only are the trees considered an aesthetic trademark of the once entirely rural island but they are also a key component of the area’s ecosystem and a natural flood prevention tool.

“The trees help us for resilience, absorbing water, supplying shade and wildlife habitat,” John Zlogar, chair of the community group Johns Island Task Force, told The Post and Courier. He is one of nearly 30 residents who submitted comments to the zoning board in favor of saving as many trees as possible amid development.

Final decisions

The board ultimately approved both tree removal plans with some caveats.

Developers of the first project, a 71-home planned community near Fenwick Hall Plantation, requested permission to cut down 21 trees. The zoning appeals board reduced that to 15. They also stipulated that the developers of the property must hire an arborist to create a protection plan for the remaining trees and plant 151 new native trees with at least a 2½-inch diameter.

The developers argued that after having an arborist evaluate the trees on the property, the ones slated for removal were already in poor health.

“We designed the proposed concept plan which ultimately preserves 36 grand trees and impacts grand trees only with a health grade ‘D’ or lower,” wrote Jenna Nelson in a letter to the zoning board. Nelson leads the development’s engineering team, Bowman Consulting Group.

If those trees fell naturally, however, they would have returned organic matter to the ecosystem, promoting other forms of plant life that provide food for animals and insects, said Philip Dustan, an ecology professor at the College of Charleston.

“When (the tree) falls down. it slowly rots and releases its nutrients,” he said.

Tree removals at the second project on Johns Island, called Wooddale, were also approved by the board. Instead of removing 172 trees as originally requested, the developers revised the plan to remove 124. They must also develop a protection plan for the remaining trees and plant about 500 native 2½-inch or wider trees. They also have plans to establish a conservation easement along the southern portion of the property, meaning it will be protected from development moving forward.

“Multiple layout alternatives have been explored by following the natural contours of the site by placing most of the density in the highest area to minimize the cut and fill needed as well as minimize the tree and environmental impacts,” wrote Jason Hutchinson, an engineer for the development with firm Thomas & Hutton.

The Wooddale project has been in the works since 2013 because of a lawsuit that hinged on disagreements between the city and the developer about how to zone the development. As proposed, it includes single-family homes, offices, an assisted-living facility and other amenities, according to site plans. Because it is south of the island’s urban growth boundary, it is subject to stricter limitations than the northern tip of the island. The boundary was established decades ago as a way to preserve the island’s rural origins.

The Woodale tract sits not too far away from Charleston Executive Airport where conservationists secured a win earlier this year. The Charleston County Aviation Authority signed off on a deal to place just under 100 acres in a legally binding conservation easement. An agreement with Lowcountry Land Trust will keep 94 acres from ever being developed there.

As growth continues within the boundary’s limits, some residents are trying to advocate for developments with as little ecological impact as possible on the southern side of the boundary line.

Dustan, who lives near Wooddale, is not pleased with the upcoming development. The most ecologically sensitive solution, he said, would be to build elevated homes on pilings and keep all the existing trees intact.

By removing the native trees, the surrounding area is robbed of parts of a centuries-old root network, which can affect the health of surrounding trees.

“A lot of the trees that you see are actually related to each other,” he said.

Although the development follows the city’s storm water standards, Dustan is concerned that runoff created by the new development will overflow nearby Burden Creek during major ran events.

After hurricane Ian came through in September, water was about a foot below breaching the banks of the creek, he said.

“The curious thing is ... if we keep building like this, we might start flooding the new communities, too,” he said.

Procedural changes

Johns Island is seeing a massive influx of growth in ways that is not possible in more developed areas of the city. As a result, the island is seeing a patchwork of new developments separated by stretches of farmland and forests. Longtime residents want to see the city use modern planning tools to lessen the impact of new development on the environment and flooding.

“The area inside the urban growth boundary is only 20 percent of the island, let’s contain the growth in that 20 percent to make sure it’s smart,” Zlogar said.

A citywide water plan, which is currently in the works, will look at the city as a whole to see what types of flood mitigation are needed most and where they would have the most impact. Instead of tackling flood concerns on a project-by-project basis, the city is looking at ways to stop development that increases flooding and identify which flood projects need to be prioritized first.

Instead of trying to drain water as quickly as possible, the city’s main strategy is shifting toward effectively storing floodwater, such as in detention basins, and letting it slowly disperse. One advantage of this approach is that it helps prevent a sinking effect called subsidence. Shifting ground levels due to the movement of groundwater threaten buildings’ foundations and worsen flood risk. Forrest are a natural asset in this type of flood prevention, Dustan said.

“The best way to solve a problem is preventing it from happening in the first place,” he said.

The water plan will be worked into a new citywide zoning ordinance that Charleston officials are also currently drafting.

In the new version, officials want the zoning maps — the guide for what can get built where — to be based on elevation. High ground near major roadways will be fair game for high-density development, in most cases. Low-lying areas and wetlands will be restricted to little or no use at all. The ground rules for development will vary in each area of town. It’s an opportunity to set the framework for how Johns Island can grow in a sustainable way.

As these changes come down the pipeline, Johns Island residents will also have a new advocate in City Hall.

From 2010 to 2020, census data shows the island’s population within Charleston city limits doubled from nearly 5,300 residents to almost 12,000. As a result, in recently approved City Council redistricting maps, Johns Island will get its own council member for the first time in 2024.

How the city approaches tree preservation will need to be tailored to Johns Island, too, Zlogar said. The existing tree ordinance was designed with more developed areas of the city, such as the peninsula, in mind. There, developers are typically requesting to remove one or two trees in an already built-out neighborhood. But on Johns Island, developers are purchasing lots with upwards of 100 acres of land.

“We have a tree ordinance but to my knowledge there is no forest ordinance and that is the problem,” Zlogar said.

Every tree removed affects the overall ecosystem of a forest. And replanting smaller trees, even of the same variety, doesn’t have the same ecological benefit.

“It’s the equivalent of tearing down an apartment building and putting up a woodshed,” he said.

The other concern from Dustan and other community members is that the tree ordinance does not take a holistic view of the island. Saving contiguous swaths of forest is more effective strategy than saving groups of trees on a lot-by-lot basis. Having interrupted clusters of forest reduces storm water absorption and splits up wildlife habitats as well.

“We’re not seeing the forest for the trees,” Dustan said.

Editorials and other Opinion content offer perspectives on issues important to our community and are independent from the work of our newsroom reporters.

Note: The writer is co-leader of the Charleston Chapter Citizens Climate Lobby.

U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy, R-LA, and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI, recently reintroduced the RISEE act.

The proposed legislation would establish dedicated funding streams from offshore wind leases to pay for coastal infrastructure resiliency and conservation. In other words, a portion of the revenue raised by the leases would be directed to adjacent states rather than the U.S. Treasury.

South Carolina is blessed with the second largest wind resource on the East Coast, but is also among the states most threatened by rising sea levels and worsening coastal storms. Recognizing the importance of this bipartisan bill to South Carolinians, Rep. Nancy Mace, R-SC, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, have reached across the aisle and pledged their support.

If you are tired of gridlock and appreciate bipartisan actions, please let our legislators know.

Ronald Malcom M.D., Johns Island

Well, I got to hand it to whoever picks the halftime shows at the Super Bowl.

They managed to far surpass the wardrobe mishap from years past which was so offensive to viewers at the time. I just couldn’t believe the entertainer Rihanna, a bad example of family-oriented entertainment.

Shame on the NFL.

Take a look at the long list of proposals in South Carolina laws that are being considered this year. Some are sensible, meant to attract and retain teachers and protect our youngsters.

Some are strange. Bill H-3439 abolishes the State Board of Education and the Education Oversight Committee. An Office of School Districts Administration in the Governor’s Office would select district superintendents. Local communities and school boards would likely find this an unpleasant usurpation of local autonomy.

Another bill would require that racial disparity in academic testing be posted on the front door of schools. This proposal seems to be aimed at embarrassing the school or embarrassing the students within the school. Which is it?

Another proposal seeks to use tax money to fund private education, something prohibited by the state constitution. If a church wants a school, they should fund it, and the same for anyone wanting an education with exclusive appeals for social beliefs, class exclusions, or other qualifiers. The state constitution forbids it for good reason.

Frankly, if lawmakers think citizens should obey the law, why do they spend so much time trying to figure out ways to get around it?

Ann Bowles, Columbia

I am 89 and am writing this letter to reflect upon 10 years of work in a clinic where abortions were performed.

I worked in a New York women’s clinic for the three years before abortion was legalized nationwide. Parents of females, one as young as seven, teenagers and mature women would call in tears hoping for an appointment.

Patients were met by me, the receptionist, a counselor, an anesthesiologist, and the doctor. Some women left crying, and some left relieved, but they knew that the choice was theirs, and that they would be safe.

Too strict abortion laws will send South Carolina back to the dark day of illegal abortions for women, children and mothers.

How much more can be taken away from our supposedly democratic state?