The only binding documents for this proposed development would be the County's Zoning and Land Use Regulations (ZLDR) and the applicant's Planned Development (PD) document. All verbal discussions, emails, artist renderings, presentations, marketing material, etc. fall by the wayside once a PD is approved.
With that in mind, an email has been circulating from the developer which has some errors and omissions. We would like to correct just a few of these errors and omissions.
Number of Houses
The email states that "a minimum of 72 new residences could be built" on the property.
The current zoning is R-4, which allows for up to 4 houses per acre of highland. According to the PD, there are 13.36 acres of highland which would result in 53.44 houses. Since you can't have a fraction of a house, a maximum of 53 (not a minimum of 72) new residences could be built.
Medical Facility
The email states that the rezoning "would allow for medical office and medical / health related retail space". That is correct. But what isn't stated is that there is no PD requirement that the development actually include medical facilities. The development could by-right consist of multifamily dwellings, health clubs, professional offices, restaurants, retail sales, and general services.
Remember that the rezoning stays with the land, not the developer. It only matters what the PD document states, not what a current marketing plan might says.
Impact
The email states the development will have "an organic master plan, meaning low impact". To provide this "low impact design" 2.5 acres of wetlands would have to be filled in, 12 grand or protected trees would need to be cut down, and a large septic system that must handle medical waste would need to be installed. This is not our idea of a low impact design. Is it yours?
Smart Growth
The email refers to this development as "smart growth inside the UGB". Smart growth occurs where there is septic to support it. Where there is access to public transportation for workers. Where there are roads that can safely handle the traffic. Where there is nearby Affordable housing. This development does not meet any of these criteria. Would you call that smart growth?
Trails and Paths
The email states that the development will have "natural walking trails and bike paths". There is nothing in the PD document that requires these trails and paths. They do not have to be built. The PD document does state that "all lots shall have access to sidewalks or walking paths". Sidewalks are not natural walking trails and bike paths.
Site Plan
The email states there are "manipulated plans being circulated by the John's Island Advocate, Kiawah Conservancy and other groups".
To stress this point, the email includes the graphic shown in Figure 1 below. They refer to this as the "Actual Proposed Master Land Plan & Highlights". It is actually just an artist's rendering of the site plan. It is not binding. Note that in this graphic that much of the artist's concept of tree cover is actually on adjacent properties.
Figure 1: Artist's Rendering of the Site Plan
If one takes out the artist's concept of the tree cover over the adjacent property, then Figure 2 results. Some might call removing this tree cover a "manipulation". Others might call it "truth in advertising".
Figure 2: Artist's Rendering of the Site Plan with Adjacent Property Tree Cover Removed
The previous two graphics are marketing material. The only site plan that is binding is the one shown in the PD document. This is replicated in Figure 3. This one is the real deal.
In this graphic one gets a much better sense of the large amount of impervious surfaces, the location of the septic system (in the lower right ) which will likely need to be clearcut, and the actual location of the existing trees on their property.
Figure 3: Binding Site Plan
Finally, the "manipulated plans being circulated by the John's Island Advocate" is shown in Figure 4. This is simply a color coded version of Figure 3, the actual site plan. It was color coded simply to make the actual site plan more readable.
Figure 4: Binding Site Plan, Color Coded
Please join us in telling County Council that they should not approve this development.
|
