[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6060436,"mediaKeyId","3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e","parentId",3290313,"title","Council approves second reading of Project Legacy fee-in-lieu ordinance after debate over defense work and disclosure","audioSeconds",203,"startMs",4450000,"endMs",4653000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e&start=4450&end=4653","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e/thumbnail_4450000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6060436/Charleston-County/South-Carolina/Council-approves-second-reading-of-Project-Legacy-fee-in-lieu-ordinance-after-debate-over-defense-work-and-disclosure","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060436-bb47f5d313ebcbdb7fcc6ddf28b9c8f6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146396&Signature=Rq8F~E4pk5-4TqVcHojY2xgB2~3iwnfiXWMhbGLwlUYHbs1DsVUYpaYJCfmMMsOj8QvSOn9oOvE3Grc7Q1i6OCn5dCD5qnk716z-td5Ltr5e-jpgiK0BKnh5~lR-ab9NDcA55jt-CUI-Vl6nPzCP4s4-qB8jD5wJXWjWcMiQGKfOTO5W8sc-4jNeL39Rrqs7zTfI5S5JWmg3daO2U0KqRRayWIo9N-7RBpXiXG8DC1dH9cAlmmjFwSjrdYyYLLoKgubILKSEplwG8PaEIrZM9Ahj~hkiPpnWvMcNz0c-aZHr0cHFcXzILBFHRq~5hsGWIMeFLeJE0AY36ACRQyengg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-12T18:58:26Z","article","Charleston County Council gave second reading May 13 to an ordinance authorizing a fee-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement with an entity currently identified in county documents as \"Project Legacy.\" The measure passed second reading by a recorded second-reading vote of six ayes and three nays.

Council members debated whether the county should commit tax incentives before the company's identity and full plans were publicly disclosed. One councilor said he could not authorize tax incentives without knowing the company's name and compared the requested incentives to preferential treatment of a single small employer. \"I can't vote for something for 14 new employees when there's hundreds of other companies and employers that would be in the exact same category,\" Council Member John Kubrowski said, referring to reporting that the project has about 14 employees.

Other members said the instrument being considered is a standard economic development tool that provides a structured fee-in-lieu arrangement to incentivize capital investment and job creation. During the roll call for second reading, the council recorded 6 ayes and 3 nays and moved the ordinance to a future third-reading vote.

One councilor voiced specific concern about wording in the ordinance describing the project as related to \"metal fabrication services for the aerospace and defense industries,\" saying the mention of defense-sector work left unresolved questions that merited a \"nay\" until details were clearer. The ordinance description on second reading references Project Legacy's intent to acquire, construct, furnish and equip a facility for metal fabrication and related activities.

County staff and the ordinance text noted that final participation in any fee-in-lieu agreement requires negotiation of terms, commitments on jobs and investments, and execution of a formal agreement; council members opposing the second reading said they sought further public disclosure and assurances before final adoption.

The ordinance advanced on second reading; a recorded third reading and final approval remain necessary before a fee-in-lieu agreement would be executed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","05/13/2025 - Charleston County County","oneSentenceSummary","Charleston County advanced an ordinance for a fee-in-lieu of taxes arrangement with an applicant identified as \"Project Legacy.\" Council passed second reading 6-3 amid questions about the company's identity, projected jobs and a reference to defense-sector work that prompted several \"nay\" votes.","taxTitle","Charleston County, South Carolina","taxId",3700,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6060441,"Charleston County council declines request to oppose mitigation plan for Tobin Boyd School; community and preservationists press for stronger protections",4675,1557000,6232000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e&start=1557&end=6232","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e/thumbnail_1557000.jpg","/articles/6060441/Charleston-County/South-Carolina/Charleston-County-council-declines-request-to-oppose-mitigation-plan-for-Tobin-Boyd-School-community-and-preservationists-press-for-stronger-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060441-42ff0672e5e4c77e10fb18a4b5e0dd9a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146396&Signature=KC2CQLTbjWE4T~E0BO5Yoki3tEaQp7RfFaUxTdNLzgkYwW6Ivxx-lNvPr7V7B14e2BQaLY9~i2WekWLx1C1rXb1knXf4X4nlthuQiwSHPQrJ2b9Gn~kBe9~5OT07mWnaNOvp5G1BO1wrHcuqc4OvYW6XL3vPNeW2SLSn7S9FYIs8U8wnSisU85aIEKqLhDSb1xiijyhg13lFZQ0rw9~DbKLtMp0ywvAfCJSWtoXfNK~hbPC6NZeMJD3cM802OXba0XvmQ5Ck69WYAXbGBE4~g9jkXn5~ajnQhnF5Xlglj1fuAez5WKFErfOhTA9HIQKylizRxh5Y-jrM8CCHoWLcWQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents and preservation advocates urged Charleston County Council on May 13 to act to save Tobin Boyd Elementary School, a former segregated school in the Red Top community that the county's 2016 cultural resource survey identified as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

Jamal Wright, vice president of the Red Top Community, told council the neighborhood \"would like the opportunity to save Tobin Boys School and preserve that school for our community so we can tell our history.\" Wright and other speakers said they were not given notice or an opportunity to purchase or otherwise secure the school when ownership changed.

Sam Spence of the Preservation Society of Charleston said the county's own 2016 survey documented Tobin Boyd as eligible for the National Register and recommended nomination. \"The county has documented Tobin Boyd School as significant, and it's currently threatened by development,\" Spence said. He told council preservation staff and planning staff should be empowered to participate in mitigation conversations so that information needed to weigh preservation options is available earlier in review processes.

Dr. Melody Dover, president of the Red Top Improvement Association, described the building's emotional and historic importance to residents who attended the school and their descendants. \"That school helped to shape my life,\" she said, speaking of the segregated school's role in community history.

Council discussion centered on what role the county government should play after a private owner submitted a mitigation plan tied to a coastal-zone/stormwater/subdivision permitting process. County staff and others explained that the current issue involved a developer's subdivision application and an associated mitigation proposal that the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and coastal-zone consistency reviewers were evaluating. Staff said the owner's subdivision application otherwise met county requirements and that stormwater approval and coastal-zone consistency determinations are part of the permitting sequence.

Sam Spence and Red Top speakers said the mitigation plan proposed by the owner was inadequate to preserve the school's history; the owner's representatives had offered mitigation options such as an on-site kiosk or historical marker, Spence said, but advocates sought stronger measures. Spence and others asked council to let the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) request that the county send a letter opposing the current mitigation plan to state reviewers.

Councilors debated whether a county-level letter was appropriate where the owner is exercising by-right property rights and where state review (SHPO/coastal-zone consistency) governs mitigation. Several council members said the developer had legal rights and that the county's direct authority over an owner's privately held property rights is limited; others said the council should show recognition of the building's historical importance.

The Historic Preservation Commission had asked the council to send a letter objecting to the developer's current mitigation proposal. After public comment and deliberation, Councilor Jim Boykin moved to deny the HPC's request for a county letter; the motion passed in roll call with seven ayes and two nays. The roll call recorded the decision as a majority vote to deny the HPC request (yes: Boykin, Honeycutt, Moody, Pryor, Sass, Wurman, Middleton; no: Darby, Kubrowski).

Council members asked staff and the developer to continue conversations with SHPO and with community representatives. County staff said the property was offered in various ways over time and that the county's historic preservation ordinance protects properties already listed on the National Register but does not automatically protect properties merely identified as eligible. Advocates said Tobin Boyd has documented significance and is threatened by the pending subdivision and permitting process; they emphasized urgency because, advocates said, the property sale and the owner's current plans had only recently prompted community action.

The council's formal denial of the HPC request does not prevent the HPC, SHPO, the developer, or community organizations from continuing negotiations about mitigation or preservation options. Advocates said they will continue to press for stronger mitigation and possible preservation outcomes through SHPO and other state and local processes.","Red Top community members and preservation advocates urged council to oppose a developer's mitigation plan for Tobin Boyd Elementary School, a building identified in the county's cultural resources survey as eligible for the National Register. Council voted to deny a request that it send an opposing letter to the mitigation plan (7-2).",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6060446,"Residents oppose rezoning request for Orange Grove Road parcel, citing traffic and safety concerns",1238,142000,1380000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e&start=142&end=1380","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3290313-92fe6e9eba8d55182735925de1d1df2e/thumbnail_142000.jpg","/articles/6060446/Charleston-County/South-Carolina/Residents-oppose-rezoning-request-for-Orange-Grove-Road-parcel-citing-traffic-and-safety-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060446-14dff508f02b22ba8edac9b30f93f825/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146396&Signature=gUTtNTarAxqYLtomYjXjwRDnoTPB7Yaj9lJQxQ0CSxSDMIUvKEI7ea3XkwhZMrGOw2bCUKkH~n3Mo3sdjen3VFAiIrg83atEriD4zGHgNeAngxamSr-6XUYGiWbc-zU-aSuL8A~743dDJSZMPJPahheiY-OHjyiFa6aU~d~CpGgZ417xI3Mhps5ztq9epw4npqG3S72XE6zB9HdKAnRfb7yRKzKT8U~iWRXZzE7piskClhsZNkO4-w0sK~9yBtWD6dWS4vMQh03LtQrWMEGvelze731pVvBRjNpd2myM9VAwYwMfEXIVAJpnzQxXzMGL-cFukk9hXrulQ8kS87V3pw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Charleston County Council held a public hearing May 13 on a request to rezone 1488 Orange Grove Road (TMS 352-13-069) from the R4 zoning district to UR, a change staff said would allow greater housing density and a broader mix of housing types.

County planning staff told council the property is 0.5 acres inside the county's urban growth boundary and that the comprehensive plan designates the site for the urban/suburban mixed-use category. Staff said R4 allows approximately 4 dwelling units per acre while the requested UR zoning allows up to 16 units per acre, and concluded that criteria A and B \"may have been met\" and recommended approval. The presentation noted site constraints and development standards would likely limit how many units could actually be built.

The matter drew multiple speakers from the adjacent Mulmar Street neighborhood, who opposed the rezoning on traffic and safety grounds. \"Mulmar is a small residential street that already shoulders more traffic than normal because of the large apartment complex,\" said Catherine Redd, a Mulmar Street resident. \"Adding a new townhouse development with a driveway accessing it on Mulmar will only worsen an already problematic situation.\" Kathleen Duncan, another nearby resident, said it was hard to find clear information about the proposal: \"I did not find out about this until the zoning sign went up,\" and described difficulty locating ordinance text and staffing to answer questions.

Several neighbors described daily congestion at the intersection of Orange Grove and Sam Rittenberg and said a bus stop and school bus activity near the corner make additional curb cuts and vehicle traffic unsafe. \"There are kids waiting at the bus stop at the corner and school buses coming and going. It's already a dangerous situation,\" Redd said. Multiple speakers also reported speeding on adjacent streets and asked for more enforcement before additional development.

The applicant, who identified himself as a residential builder working in West Ashley, said the proposal would add a small number of townhome units and argued the project responds to local affordability pressure. He told council the median income for ZIP code 29407 supports a mortgage roughly half of current average sale prices and that the block is underrepresented for for-sale townhome options. He said his conceptual plan assumed six new units and estimated the added traffic would amount to well under 1% of current daily volumes on Orange Grove, which he cited as about 10,800 vehicles per day.

County planning staff noted the subject property currently contains a single-family residence and a storage structure; parcels across Malmar/Mulmar Street and Orange Grove include apartment complexes and single-family houses in both city and unincorporated county jurisdiction. Staff also pointed out that the parcel's small size, setbacks, buffers, parking requirements and stormwater rules would likely reduce the theoretical maximum number of units that UR zoning would allow.

No formal council vote on the rezoning was recorded during the public hearing segment. The staff presentation and the public comments were entered into the record, and council members asked staff and the applicant questions about access, curb cuts, and coordination with the South Carolina Department of Transportation.

Counseling members encouraged neighbors to track subsequent procedural steps. Chairman Kylon Jerome Middleton and staff reminded speakers that further permit-level reviews and any required state reviews (for example, DOT access approvals) would follow the county's land-development and stormwater processes.

The public hearing segment concluded with the case noticed as required and the applicant and neighbors advised about subsequent administrative steps and any future council or board actions.

Local residents asked for additional traffic enforcement and clearer communication about permit or access requests. Planning staff said typical constraints and permitting requirements would apply to any future development under the requested zoning.","Charleston County held a public hearing on a request to rezone 1488 Orange Grove Road from R4 to UR. County staff recommended approval; nearby residents urged denial over traffic, safety and neighborhood character. The applicant argued the change would enable modest, more-affordable housing.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council approves second reading of Project Legacy fee-in-lieu ordinance after debate over defense work and disclosure

Charleston County council declines request to oppose mitigation plan for Tobin Boyd School; community and preservationists press for stronger protections

Residents oppose rezoning request for Orange Grove Road parcel, citing traffic and safety concerns