Connect with us:   Subscribe to the paper  |   View the mobile edition  |   Get daily e-mail news  |   Get mobile alerts  |   Share your photos  |   Report news  |   Place an ad  |   Contact us


Angel Oak Village plan faces late opposition

The Post and Courier
Wednesday, August 6, 2008


Angel Oak/Angel Oak Village timeline

1991 – The city of Charleston buys what is now Angel Oak Park, a roughly two-acre property on a dirt road surrounding what’s billed as the oldest living tree east of the Mississippi River.

2000 – Sea Island Comprehensive Health Care, a non-profit provider of services to low-income residents of the sea islands, proposes selling 42 acres of undeveloped land surrounding Angel Oak Park, due to the institution’s financial problems.

2001 – The state names Angel Oak South Carolina’s Millennium Tree. Charleston’s Planning Commission approves rezoning the Sea Island property to allow a grocery story, office buildings and apartments.

2004 – Sea Island seeks bankruptcy protection and continues to pursue land sale. In September, the city announces a plan to acquire 16 acres of the land around Angel Oak Park for $1 million, as part of a $3.5 million purchase of the entire property by Greenville developer Robert S. Small Jr. That deal falls by the wayside, and the land is purchased by a different developer.

2005 – With the sale of the Sea Island land pending, and the non-profit’s bankruptcy reorganization hanging in the balance, Charleston insists on greater protection for the Angel Oak than proposed by the buyers. The city threatens buy all of the land if the potential developers don’t agree to concessions. After several days of contentious public hearings, an agreement is reached calling for a 150-foot buffer around Angel Oak Park, a 75-foot natural buffer along unpaved Angel Oak Road, an extra level of city review as the development proceeds, a 7-acre conservation zone around the park, and the hiring of a hydrologist and a tree expert. The development plan would include a large grocery store, shops and 285 housing units.

2008 – Developers of what’s become known as “Angel Oak Village” return to the city with revised plans that eliminate the big-box grocery store and increase the number of housing units to 600. The Planning Commission endorses the new plan and City Council approves it, over the course of three public meetings in May and July. In late July, Samantha Siegel launches an online petition drive opposing the development.

A Johns Island woman has launched a petition drive opposing plans to build businesses and 600 homes on 42 acres next to Charleston's Angel Oak Park.

Plans to develop the land have been under discussion for at least eight years, and the current plan received city approval last month.

Using Internet resources like a petition-posting site and a "save the Angel Oak" page on the social networking site Facebook, Samantha Siegel has quickly gathered 1,400 signatures for her petition opposing the plan, many of them from out of state and quite a few from other nations.

Charleston city officials and the developer say a great deal of care has been taken to protect the Angel Oak tree and its surroundings, and the development mirrors the city's long-established planning goals for Johns Island, which call for village-like developments at several major intersections.

Plans for Angel Oak Village approved by City Council call for a densely built collection of shops, offices and multi-family homes at Maybank Highway and Bohicket Road.

Wednesday evening, the city's Zoning Board of Appeals was scheduled to hear a request from the developer, Angel Oak Village LLC, to cut down 34 grand trees on the property. The developer withdrew the request temporarily, however, because of the opposition created largely by the petition drive.

Read more in tomorrow's editions of The Post and Courier.




Article tools




Latest local stories





Sponsored Links


Notice about comments:
Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net 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 charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" 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.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.

Comments

This article has  0 comment(s)


(Requires free registration.)

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

Search Charleston.Net Archives for Latest News


Charleston.Net Customer Care | Subscribe to Paper, Register for email news updates, manage your online account, place a classified ad, or contact us




Charleston.net logo

Copyright 1997 - 2008 the Evening Post Publishing Co.

Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of service, Privacy policy and our Parental consent form. (Updated 2/9/2007)