W. Ashley development wins initial approval

Charleston City Council sets smoking fine

The Post and Courier
Wednesday, April 9, 2008


Charleston City Council gave its initial approval Tuesday to a town-sized development of 1,600 homes, plus shops and offices, on a 287-acre West Ashley tract behind Village Green, which would be connected to a much larger development called Long Savannah.

Also Tuesday, City Council revised Charleston's smoking ordinance in response to a recent court decision, making violations of the smoking ban a civil fine of no more than $25, rather than a criminal offense with the potential for up to 30 days in jail.

Master plan

See the proposed Long Savannah development master plan -large file

The West Ashley development plan revises the second phase of Village Green and incorporates it into Long Savannah, forming a combination of more than 1,500 acres with potentially 5,000 homes and a new commercial hub on the city's western edge.

By most accounts, it could take 20 years or more to fully develop what is planned there.

Mayor Joe Riley, city planners and the Coastal Conservation League are among those who support the plans. They say roughly 1,700 acres of planned city and county park land around the developments will form a permanent edge to the suburbs, and including shops and offices in the plans will reduce the amount of traffic leaving the communities.

"We believe the community will actually enhance the West Ashley area," said Megan Desrosiers of the Coastal Conservation League.

John Ungaro of the Hickory Farms subdivision near the proposed developments told City Council members more development could make traffic unbearable.

"The Glenn McConnell (Parkway) cannot handle the traffic that is on it now, from Bees Ferry Road to (Interstate) 526," he said. "The Glenn McConnell cannot handle the traffic from Long Savannah."

The plan for the land behind Village Green, owned by HPH Properties, now goes to the city's Planning Commission, where it will be considered with the Long Savannah plan, which already has initial approval from City Council.

Both plans will return to City Council together later this year.

Councilman James Lewis voted against the HPH Properties plan, and Councilman Louis Waring was absent from the meeting Tuesday.

The changes to the city's smoking ordinance were opposed by three council members — Lewis, Tim Mallard and Deb Morinelli. Lewis and Morinelli opposed the original smoking ban, which prohibits indoor smoking in businesses with limited exceptions.

"I think it's the most ridiculous thing we've ever done," Morinelli said.

Some opponents of the ban, like council members Larry Shirley and Aubry Alexander, were pleased to see the penalties significantly reduced. Businesses that repeatedly violate the ordinance could lose their business licenses, but City Council would have the final say.

Charleston's smoking ordinance is being challenged in court. The changes are meant to make the city's ordinance more similar to a Greenville ordinance upheld by the S.C. Supreme Court.

Reach David Slade at 937-5552 or dslade@postandcourier.com.

Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story  Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version  

Copy and paste the link:

Comments

pithy (anonymous) says...

Does the initial approval place the responsibility of building new schools and roadways to handle this "town sized" development on the developers shoulders? It should. These developers build these new sub-divisions without regard to the already over crowded schools and roadways. Do we really need more new houses?

April 9, 2008 at 1:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

losangeles (anonymous) says...

In Los Angeles County, developers are required to build schools and roads when such large developments are proposed. The City of Santa Clarita is a good example of this. And it has some of the only decent schools in the area. What developers don't have to do is improve capacity on the freeways systems which are ground to a halt as people try to get from the suburbs to their jobs in the City of Los Angeles. If you don't include jobs in this "new" city people will continue ot have to travel to Charleston for work and the roads between Long Savannah and downtown will be gridlocked. Learn from others mistakes. Require developers to contribute to mass transit solutions before they overwhelm the exiting infrastructure.

April 9, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Notice about comments:

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.

Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!

Full terms and conditions can be read here.




.Link.