Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Jedburgh Hope Berkeley Commerce Park topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission recommends rezoning for Jedburgh industrial park with conditions after resident concerns

5071058 · June 24, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Berkeley County Planning Commission on June 16 (meeting date not specified) recommended approval of a planned-development rezoning that would allow the Hope Berkeley Commerce Park, a proposed industrial commercial center on about 153.87 acres near Jedburgh Road.

The Berkeley County Planning Commission on June 16 (meeting date not specified in the record) recommended approval of a rezoning request to create the Hope Berkeley Commerce Park, a proposed industrial-commercial development on about 153.87 acres near Jedburgh Road.

Planning staff told commissioners the conceptual plan shows six buildings totaling about 1,044,560 square feet and that the project would convert parcels now zoned Agricultural Flex 1 to a planned development (PD) aimed at office/industrial uses. Staff said the applicant reduced the maximum building height from 80 feet to 45 feet and added lighting limits — exterior light poles shall not exceed 35 feet, and lighting must be arranged so that illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot-candles above background at the lot line of adjacent residential parcels.

The PD text also adds requirements for separated truck-loading areas, a Type D buffer to protect adjoining residences, and notes about coordination on Jedburgh Road improvements and connectivity to the Berkeley Charleston Tradeport. Staff reported the draft traffic impact analysis (TIA) is under review by SCDOT and that the TIA currently contemplates about 100,000 square feet less build-out than the PD under consideration, meaning engineering concurrence is not yet provided. As staff put it, “The TIA contemplates about a 100,000 square feet less than what is currently contemplated within the proposed PD.”

Applicant West Mooney, a civil engineer with Revere Group representing Eastport 40 LLC, told the commission the team held a June 16 town hall meeting with 26 attendees (15 residents) and said the applicant has made recent updates in response to community feedback. Mooney said the developer increased the buffer from 50 feet to 100 feet, moved Building 1’s loading dock away from adjacent residences, reduced building height and added lighting provisions. “We are committed to doing what we can,” Mooney said.

Residents who spoke urged stronger mitigation for truck traffic, noise and visual impacts. Resident Vince Dibble, who lives on Smith Creek Lane, asked the developer to consider earth berms or walls in addition to plantings to reduce noise and screening needs given the proximity of truck operations to private homes.

Staff emphasized that a major outstanding implementation issue is the Jedburgh Road widening and the final TIA. Staff recommended the PD include explicit text requiring periodic updates to the TIA, codified timing or triggers for cross-access and right-of-way preservation, and finalization of engineering details before county council action. The staff presentation also quantified a proposed cost-share: a “contribution” to Jedburgh Corridor improvements tied to peak-hour trips; staff cited a per-trip factor of $3,577 and an expected 529 new peak-hour trips, which the presentation equated with roughly $1,800,000 in total contribution (applicant and study coordination remain to finalize those numbers).

Commissioner discussion focused on whether staff recommendations should become conditions that must be satisfied before county council approval. Staff repeatedly said the Planning Commission and staff make recommendations and that county council has the final authority and would be responsible for tracking deliverables if it conditions approval. As staff explained, county council would decide whether to require completion of the listed deliverables before final rezoning approval.

A motion to recommend approval with the staff-recommended deliverables in place was made and seconded. The record shows the motion carried with one commissioner recorded as voting nay; the commission did not record a roll-call yes count in the transcript. The planning commission’s recommendation and the accompanying staff report will be forwarded to the Berkeley County Council land use committee; staff noted the land use committee meeting is scheduled for July 14.

Why it matters: The PD would allow more than one million square feet of industrial/commercial space adjacent to existing residences and to the Berkeley Charleston Tradeport. Outstanding traffic analysis and engineering concurrence, plus neighbors’ concerns about noise, light and truck routing, mean the county council will receive the commission’s recommendation alongside requested conditions and supporting materials for further review.

Next steps: The planning commission transmitted its recommendation to county council; county council (land use committee) will consider the rezoning request and any conditions staff and the commission have recommended.