    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    U ~~3~a~~VOC1 ~OCALI

        GINFORMATION CENTER

    Comprehensive Pianning * Marketing Research - Economic Research  3501 North Main Street - Columbia. S C 29203  Ph 803 779 7690

    I

          E*               \~VISMOR, McGILL & BELL, INC.

    I
                                     CHARLESTON COUNTY
            |3~~~                  ~~MARINA IMPACT STUDY

    I
                                                    COASTAL ZONE
               3           ~~~~~~~IMNFORMATION CENTER

                     Property of CSC Library

    !
                               U. S - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                               COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                               2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                               CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413

    I
                   The preparation of this report was made possible by
                   funds provided  -., ._  National Oceanographic and
    i              Atmospheric Ad;::;,  ; irdtion, U. S. Department of
                   Commerce, through the Coastal Energy Impact Program
                    (Grant No. NA-83-AA-D-CZ024)   awarded through the
                   Division of Natural Resources, Governor's Office,
                   State of South Carolina.

    I
                                         June, 1984

    I

                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                         Page

    INTRODUCTION                                             1
         Purpose                                            1
         Permitting Requirements I

    CHAPTER I:  HOW ARE MARINAS BEING PERMITTED ELSEWHERE?  3
         Jacksonville, Florida                              3
         St. Petersburg, Florida                            3
         Clearwater, Florida                                4
         Largo, Florida                                     5
         Stuart, Florida                                    5
         Boca Raton, Florida                                5
         Pensacola, Florida                                 7
         Sarasota, Florida                                  7
         Manatee County, Florida                            9
         Indian River Couny, Florida                       11
         Sarasota County, Florida 12
         Sanibel, Florida                                  12
         Palm Beach County, Florida                        12
         Martin County, Florida                            12
         Summary Analysis of Findings and Conclusions      12

    CHAPTER II:  THE NEED FOR MARINAS IN CHARLESTON COUNTY 14
         Growth of the Boating Industry                    14
         The Demand For Marina Space in Charleston
          County                                           19
         Capacity of Existing Marinas to Meet the
          Demand for Dock Space                            20

    CHAPTER III: CONSTRAINTS TO MARINA DEVELOPMENT IN
         CHARLESTON COUNTY                                 27
         Water Quality                                     27
         Dredging                                          32
         Land Use and Zoning                               33
         Marshes and Wetlands                              37
         Bridges                                           38
          Shellfish Areas                                   45

    CHAPTER IV: CHARLESTON COUNTY SUB-AREA ANALYSIS         46'
         Methodology                                       46-
          Sub-Area #1:  McClellanville/Awendaw              47
          Sub-Area #2:  Mount Pleasant                      48
          Sub-Area #3:  Sullivan's Island/Isle of Palms    49
          Sub-Areas #4, #5 and #6:  Charleston and
          North Charleston                                 50
          Sub-Area #7:  St. Andrews/Bear Swamp              51
          Sub-Area #8, #9 and #10: Folly Island, James
           Island and Rural John's Island                   52
          Sub-Area #11: Johns Island/Bohicket/Kiawah/
           Seabrook                                         53
          Sub-Area #12:  Wadmalaw Island                    54
          Sub-Area #13: Ravenel/Hollywood/Meggett/
           St. Paul Area                                    55
          Sub-Area #14:  Edisto Island 56

    I       ~~Table of Contents (continued)

                                                                       Page

            CHAPTER V: RECOMMENDED CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING AND
                  PERMITTING MARINAS IN CHARLESTON COUNTY                58
                  What is a Marina?                                      59
     I            ~~~Recommended Definitions                              60
                  Recommended Objectives 6
                  Recommended Siting Standards                           62
     I           ~~~Recommended Use of Siting Standards Matrix            62
                  Recommended Steps To Implementation                    63

    *       ~~MARINA SITING STANDARDS (IMPACT MATRIX)                      64

            APPENDICES                                                    67

    I       ~~APPENDIX Ai  Ma~rtin County, Florida, Dock Standards
                  and Regulations

    3       ~~APPENDIX B:  Use Conditions For Siting Recreational
                  Marinas in Charleston County

            APPENDIX C: Population Distribution and Projections,
     I          ~~~Charleston County, 1980-2000

            APPENDIX D: Population Projection Methodology

                                    LIST OF TABLES

                                                                        Page

             Table I          Population, Boats, Income                    15

             Table II         Trends in Boat Ownership in S. C.            16

             Table III        Number and Ratio of Out-of-County Boat
                              Berths (Long-term) at Selected
        3                     ~~~~~~~Charleston County Marinas, 1984       17

             Table IV         Correlation of Population to Boat
                              Registration, S. C. and Charleston
        I                    ~~~~~~~County, 1970-2000                      18

             Table V          Number and Ratio of Boats Berthed at
                              Selected Marinas, By Place of Residence
                              of Boat Owners                              21
             Table VI         Geographic Distribution of Big Boat
                              Owners and Marina Slips, 1983               22
             Table VII        Geographic Distribution of "Planned"
                              Enlargements and New Facilities             23
             Table VIII       Marina Inventory                             25

    I        ~~Tabl6 IX       Water Quality Standards for All Streams,
                               Rivers and Water Bodies in Charleston
        *                     ~~~~~~~County                                28

             Table X          Water Quality Classifications and
                               Definitions of all Streams, Rivers
       .3                     ~~~~~~~and Water Bodies in Charleston County  30

             Table XI         Marina Zoning in Charleston County           35

    I      ~~Table XII        Charleston Co unty Bridge Opening             4
                               Schedule 4

             Table XIII       Bascule and Swing Bridges, Charleston
                               County                                      42

             Table XIV        Impact of Bridge Openings, Travel-
        U                     ~~~~~~~Time Delays                            44

                                      INTRODUCTION

             PURPOSE

      3           ~~~Marinas, unlike most other development, have the potential
             for impacting water use as well as land use. And, depending
             on size, function and location the impact could be detrimental
             to the use of both land and water, destructive of natural
              resources, and disruptive of transportation movement, among
             other negative consequences.

      3           ~~~Far these reasons, the permitting of marinas     rlyis
             contingent upon special review, not just in Char!--!- --"unty,
             b.ut elsewhere as well. The problem with this approach, however,
    21      ~~is that the criteria used for measuring potential impact of a
             marina on all the factors that stand to be impacted is too broad
             and vague to produce quantitative results. It is not enough to
             require special review and approval of marinas, if the criteria
              calls for subjective conclusions and is inadequate to measure
             the potential impact of the use.

      3           ~~~Therefore, it is the purpose of this study, among other
             things, to develop a criteria or matrix that will provide a
             true measure of the impact of a marina in any given area of
     3       ~~Charleston County.

     U       ~~PERM~ITTING REQUIREMENTS

                  Permitting of marinas in South Carolina is the subject
             of three recently released documents by the South Carolina
             Coastal Council, entitled:

                   (1) Manual For Preparation of Coastal Marina Report
                   (2) Guidelines For Development of Marina Operations.
        I               ~~~~~and Maintenance Plans
                   (3) Coastal Marina Permit Application Information

      I           ~~~One purpose of these documents is to clarify and synthesize
              permitting requirements. Another is to better define the
              environmental design criteria and performance standards necessary
              to secure a permit for coastal marinas.

                 In explaining the process, the "Manual" states that:

     I           ~~~"in addition to the South Carolina Coastal Council
                 program, marina development in South Carolina must
                 also receive Section 404 permits from the U. S. Army
     I          ~~~Corps of Engineers (COE) and 401 certification from
                 the South Carolina Department of Health and Environ-
                 mental Control (DHEC) . Although these three separate
                 approvals are required, the procedure has been
                 coordinated by the use of a joint permit process by
                 COE and SCCC. The starting point is the submission
                 of a joint permit to SCCC which then forwards a copy
     I          ~~~to COE.  A request for 401 water quality certification
                 then goes out from COE to DHEC. Should DHEC deny 401
                 certification, COE will, pursuant to their 404 regulations,
                 deny a dredge and fill permit. Should the 401 certifi-
                 cation be granted, it will pertain to both project
                 construction and subsequent facility operation.

     I           ~~~The joint program results in only one permit application
                 being required. A joint public notice is given and a
                 joint public hearing can be held when necessary. in all
     I          ~~~other respects, however, there are really two separate
                 permitting actions plus the 401 certification review.
                 Both state and federal agencies receive and review comments
                 and in the end, the process involves two separate approvals
                  (the SCCC and COE).

                 The South Carolina State Ports Authority also has regulatory
                 authority over marinas proposed in one or more of the
                 state's harbors or in a waterway used for commercial
                 navigation and shipping or in an area set aside for port
                 development in an approved management plan. A certificate
                 from the South Carolina State Ports Authority declaring
                 the proposed project would not unreasonably interfere with
                 commercial navigation and shipping must be obtained by SCCC
                 prior to issuing a permit."
                 In reviewing the above requirements, one is struck by the
            absence of a role by local government when, in fact, the p~ro-
            cedure is incomplete without a local building and zoning permit.
            And it is local governmental involvement in the permitting process
    I      ~~that is the thrust of this study.

                                         2

                                      CHAPTER I

                                 HOW ARE MARINAS BEING
                                  PERMITTED ELSEWHERE?

                   To help answer this question, we turned our attention
    I      ~~to Florida, with its accelerated growth, sensitive environment,
             and water orientation. How is marina permitting being handled
             there? Is it receiving special attention, if so, what is
             involved? If not, why not?

                   Certainly, we have the opportunity to learn from the
             experience of others. And what better place than Florida, a
    I      ~~state with much in common to South Carolina, including U--velop-
             ment pressure on its "critical areas" and waterways.

                   In our search for answers, we contacted 27 coastal cities
             and counties from the east and west coiast of Florida. Fourteen
             responded.
                   The experience, regulations and permitting requirements
             of each are summarized by the following paragraphs.

             Jacksonville, Florida

                   The City of Jacksonville has appointed a citizen's advisory
             group known as the Jacksonville Waterways Advisory Association
             to review and advise on all marina and waterfront development
             proposals. Additionally, the city specifies in its Comprehensive
             Plan proposed locations for public marinas.   The Plan also
             includes policies relating to suitable waterfront land uses.

                   The city's zoning code allows marinas in certain zoning
    .1     ~~districts, and as a use by right in two of its commercial districts,
             provided no major boat overhaul or repair is involved.

                   Dredge and fill permits axe required by the Corps of Engineers
    I      ~~and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.

                   The city imposes no other special regulations or review
    I      ~~procedures.

             St. Petersburg, Florida

                   St. Petersburg regulates marina siting �rimarily throaigh
             zoning. Commercial marinas are allowed in four zoning districts
             as Special Exceptions and must meet the specific requirements of
             each district.

                                          3

                  Private docks also are permitted as accessory uses
            to residential structures on a waterfront lot.

                  The City of St. Petersburg has the ability and authority
            to develop Municipal Marinas anywhere along its coast so long
    I     ~~as it owns or can lease the submerged lands and can provide
            public access to the facility. The city also has the authority
            to lease its submerged lands for five-year periods to individuals
            for private commercial marina development.
                  All marina facilities are subject to State of Florida
            review as well as review by the County Water Navigation Board.

            Clearwater, Florida

     I           ~~~Marinas are regulated iii Clearwater as special exceptions,
            subject to approval by the board of Adjustment. The Board may
            "prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity
            with the ordinance."

                  Essentially, marinas are grouped into three classifications
            and permitted as exceptions in certain defined zones, not all zones.
            The regulations center around the three classes of marina facilities,

                  A.   Description of marina facilities, Types A, B, C:

                       1. Type A - pleasure craft docking
                       2. Type B - launching ramp site, commercial
                       3. Type C - private marina
                  B.   Plan to be submitted and recommendation made by the
      I              ~~~~~harbormaster prior to submittal to the board of
                       adjustment and appeal on zoning. Where eight (8)
                       or more slips are proposed or where, in the discretion
      I              ~~~~~of the planning director, special circumstances exist
                       which warrant additional review, the application shall
                       be forwarded to the planning and zoning board in addition
                       to the harbormaster for their recommendation prior to
                       consideration by the board of adjustment and appeal.
                       1. Type A - Pleasure craft docking
       I                  ~~~~~~i. No commercial fishing, etc.
                          ii. No charter boats
                         iii. No boat rentals
                          iv. Small boat dock or mooring area
                           v. Floating docks as approved by appropriate
                              governing agencies
                          vi. Provision for docking maneuvering area
       I                ~~~~~vii. Boat slips (covered boat slips or dry storage
                              may be permitted if specifically requested and
                              approved by both the planning and zoning board
        I                    ~~~~~~of adjustment and appeal on zoning)
                        viii. Control of noise and lights
          1                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

              2.  Type B - Launching ramp site (commercial)

                   i. Access to noncongested traffic point (approval
                      of traffic division)
                  ii. Parking with adequate trailer maneuver area
                      (approval of office of city engineer)
                 iii. Fishing and boating items, retail sales (sign
                      control) when adjoining a "B" business zoned area

              3.  Type C - Private marina

                   i. Sales and service facilities
                  ii. Boat slips (covered boat slips or dry storage
                      may be permitted if specifically requested and
                      approved by both the planning and zoning board
                      and the board of adjustment and appeal on zoning)
                 iii. Boat handling equipment (nn repair or mainte-
                      nance shops)
                  iv. Boat and gear storage
                   v. Launching facilities
                  vi. Fuel station
                 vii. Lockers and sanitary facilities
                viii. Restaurant facilities (not advertised) operated
                      as part of club
                  ix. Club house
                   x. Motel or boatel

    Largo, Florida

          Under Largo development regulations, a marina is classified
    as a commercial recreational use, allowable in any commercially-
    designated area, with no special provisions.

    Stuart, Florida

          Among the 12 respondents, Martin County has under study
    one of the more direct approaches toward regulating marinas.
    Although not comprehensive by any means, and not yet adopted,
    it is noteworthy for its content and, as such is included as an
    appendix to this report.

    Boca Raton, Florida

          Boca Raton, too, has adopted a rather detailed set of'
    development regulations, contained in its building code, but
    has not addressed the problem comprehensively, leaving much of
    the decision making process to other agencies, not clearly defined.

          The areas covered by the city's building code center on
    dock development on intracoastal waterway, non-intracoastal
    waters, and selected canals, as follows:

          A.    Docks other than in Intracoastal Waterway or Boca Raton Inlet

    I           ~~~1.   A pier located or situated other than in the Intra-
                     coastal Waterway or Inlet may be permitted subject
     *               ~~~~~to the following conditions:

                     a. A pier, exclusive of dock pilings, shall not
                         project more than five (5) feet into a waterway
                         from the property line, seawall or bulkhead,
      I                 ~~~~~whichever is nearest to the waterway.
                     b. When the plot frontage along a body of water is
                         one hundred (100) feet or less, only one (1) pier
      I                 ~~~~~is permitted.  The pier shall not extend closer
                         than ten (10) feet to the property line of adjacent
                         property.
                      C. When the plot frontage along a body of water exceeds
                         one hundred (100) feet in length, a pier shall not
                         extend closer than twenty-five (25) feet to the
                         property line of adjacent property.
     I              ~~~~d.  At least one (1) ladder extending from the dock
                         surface to two (2) feet below the mean low water
      *                   ~~~~~line shall be provided for each pier.

                2.   A pier or two or more piers serving the same property
                     and exceeding 50 feet in aggregate length shall be
     *               ~~~~provided with the following facilities:

                     a. At least one sewage pumpout connected to the city
                         sanitary sewer system.
     I              ~~~~b.  One potable water hose bib and one electrical
                         outlet for each 25 feet of pier length or major
                         fraction thereof or for each boat where the design
      I                 ~~~~~of the pier, finger piers or dolphins clearly
                         indicates a specific number of boats to be moored.
                     C. Adequate water supply for fire protection as
                         approved by the city manager, or his or her designee.
                     d. At least one ladder for each 50 feet of dock length
                         or major fraction thereof extending from the dock
                         surface to 2 feet below the mean low waterldine.
                         Where two or more docks serve the same property,
                         at least one ladder shall be provided for each dock.

                3.   A dock located or situated other than in the Intra-
                     coastal Waterway or Inlet shall be prohibited if any
                     of the following conditions are present:

     I               ~~~~a.  The lo-cation or design is such that it creates
                         hazard to navigation.
                     b. The location abuts a marsh, swamp, or mangrove area.
     I              ~~~~C.  The location or design creates a safety hazard.

         I                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6

    I      ~~B.    Docks in the Hillsboro Canal and the C-15 Canal

                 1.   Docks shall be permitted in the Hillsboro Canal and
                       the C-15 Canal subject to the review and approval
                      of the city engineer and the chief code administrator.

     *           ~~~2.   No approval shall be granted unless approval is granted
                      by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of
                      Environmental Regulation, the South Florida Water
                      Management District or other governmental bodies with
                      applicable jurisdiction.
           C.    Docks in Intracoastal Waterway and Boca Raton Inlet

                 1.   Piers shall be permitted in the Intracoastal Waterway
                      where the width of the waterway is 300 feet or greater,
                       subject to approval by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
                      Piers shall be prohibited in the! TinLracoastal Waterway
                      where the width of the waterway is less than 300 feet.

     I           ~~~2.   A pier located or situated in the Intracoastal Water-
                      way shall be prohibited if any of the following
      *               ~~~~conditions are present:

                      a. The location or design is such that it creates
                          a hazard to navigation.
                      b. The location abuts a marsh, swamp, or mangrove area.
                      C. The location or design creates a safety hazard.
                 3.   Docks shall be prohibited in the Inlet, except that a
      I             ~~~~dock for passenger loading and unloading may be permitted
                      subject to the approval of the U. S. Army Corps of
      *               ~~~~Engineers and the city council.

           Pensacola, Florida

                 The City of Pensacola has minimal regulations governing
           the permitting of marinas. It addresses development from a zoning
           perspective (ie. permitted uses, parking requirements, set backs,
            etc.) and leaves environmentally oriented issues to applicable
           sae   and federal agencies.
           Sarasota, Florida
     I         ~~~The City of Sarasota classifies all water bodies into a
           single zoning district: the MP-Marina Park District. The
           regulations for this district are summarized below:

           A.    Intent and Purpose

                                         7

                  Water orientation is of major importance to the city and
                  its citizens. The economy of the city depends in considerable
     I          ~~~measure upon the water, and it is intended that the MP District
                  be used for the purposes of protecting and preserving water
                  areas within the jurisdiction of the city. All waters,
     I          ~~~including, but not limited to, all basins, bays, bayous,
                  canals, lakes, rivers, streams, waterways and waters of the
                  Gulf of Mexico, and all publicly and privately owned sub-
                  merged lands thereunder extending from high tide or bulkhead
                  line are included in this zoning district.
    3       ~~B.    Permitted principal uses and structures

                  Permitted uses shall include noncommercial, water-oriented
                  uses such as boating, swimming, fishing, diving, waterskiing,
                  surfboarding, wading and similar usqes. In addition, all uses
                  of any waters and submerged lands sa

                  1.   Protect the right of the public to the use and enjoyment
                       for recreational purposes of any of the waters or sub-
                       merged lands affected.

     *            ~~~2.   Preserve grass flats and flats for breeding and spawning
                       grounds for fish.

     *            ~~~3.   Not cause or contribute to erosion of waterfront
                       properties.

                  4.   Not create any alteration of water flow, accumulation
                        of debris or creation of water pockets for incubation
                       of "red tide."

     3            ~~~5.   Demonstrate that adequate precautions are taken to
                       prevent saltwater intrusions into surface water tables.

     1            ~~~6.   Display that there are proper provisions to be taken
      *                ~~~~~for protection of an access to existing or proposed
                       navigable channels or basins.

            C.    Special exceptions

                  Special exceptions in the MP District shall be commercial
                   uses which relate directly and immediately to permitted
                  uses and which show a clear public convenience and necessity
                  and will provide for the enhancement of public health,
                  recreation and enjoyment. in addition, all uses of any
                  waters and submerged lands shall:
                  1.   Protect the right of the public to the use and enjoy-
      I               ~~~~~ment for recreational purposes of any of the waters
                       or submerged lands affected.

                  2.   Preserve grass flats and mud flats for breeding and
                       spawning grounds for fish.

                  3.   Not cause or contribute to erosion of waterfront
                       properties.

     I           ~~~4.   Not create any alteration of water flow, accumulation
                       of debris or creation of water pockets for incubation
      *               ~~~~~of "red tide."

                  5.   Demonstrate that adequate precautions are taken to
      *               ~~~~prevent saltwater intrusions into surface water tables.

                  6.   Display that there are proper provisions to be taken
                       for protection of an access to existing or proposed
      *               ~~~~navigable channels or basins.

                  7.   Provide parking for such commercial uses at a location
                       appropriately zoned and reasonably convenient to the
      I              ~~~~place of business, or principal mooring site in the
                       case of a boat or vessel when there is finding of need
                       in the particular case. The requirement for parking
                       may be waived where the planning board determines that
                       adequate public parking exists.

           Manatee County, Florida

                 Manatee County, like Charleston County, is studying
           alternatives for a more comprehensive and less subjective manner
    I     ~~of evaluating marina impact on the environment.  But even in its
           present state, the county's marina development regulations are
           among the more comprehensive, tackling some of the environmental
    1 ~~issues untouched by most other communities.

                 For example, the Manatee Comprehensive Plan and Land
            Development Code includes policies directed at vegetative resources,
    I      ~~as follows:

    *      ~~A.    Marine Grass Beds

                  1.   Preservation.  Marine grass beds shall be preserved
                       to the fullest extent possible. Modification should
                      be considered only in the case of overriding public
                       interest.
                 2.   Control of Induced Turbidity.  Marine grass beds are
      I              ~~~~particularly sensitive to increased turbidity that may
                       result from development activities in adjacent areas.
                       Special attention should be given to control of runoff
                       in order to prevent increased water turbidity. Dredge
                      and fill activities in or adjacent to these areas should
                      be closely monitored and controlled to prevent increased
      *               ~~~~~turbidity.

                                         9

     U           ~~~3.   Control of Nutrients.  Marine grass beds can in-
                       directly be affected by the introduction of nutrients
                       and the resulting increased phytoplankton and algal
                       growth. Special attention should therefore be given
                       to control of nutrients in runoff.

     1           ~~~4.   Monitoring.  Marine grass beds should be monitored
                       periodically by the appropriate governmental agencies
      *               ~~~~~to determine their health and productivity.

                  !D. Management. The preservation and restoration of marine
                       grass beds should be encouraged wherever possible. In
                       cases where damage to marine grass beds occurs from a
                       specific activity, the burden of restoration of the
                       grass bed shall rest on the person or persons responsible.

     I           ~~~6.   Access Considerations.  Access to coastal navigable
                       waters is a littoral right and should be recognized to
                       the extent that some system of access should be allowed.
      I              ~~~~Therefore, marinas should be encouraged to serve large
                       geographic areas as an alternative to a series of access
                       channels for individual docking facilities.

    I       ~~B.    Mangrove

                  1.   Preservation.  Mangrove forests shall be preserved to
      N              ~~~~the fullest extent possible.  Modification should be
                       considered only in the case of overriding public interest.

     1           ~~~2.   Management.  The preservation and restoration of man-
                       grove forests should be encouraged wherever possible.
                       In cases where damage to mangrove forests occur from a
                       specific activity, the burden of restoration of the
                       mangrove forest shall rest on the person or persons
                       responsible.

    *      ~~C.    Tidal Marshes

                  1.   Preservation.  Tidal marsh systems shall be preserved
                       to the fullest extent possible. Modification shoulId
                       be considered only in the case of overriding public
                       interest.

     I           ~~~2.   Management.  The preservation and restoration of tidal
                       marshes should be encouraged wherever possible. In
                       cases where damage to tidal marshes occurs from a
      I              ~~~~specific activity, the burden of restoration of the
                       tidal marsh shall rest on the person or persons
                       responsible.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~10

    N      ~~D.    Review of Development.  Review for all development
                  proposals in or adjacent to such ecologically sensitive
                  areas as marine grass bends, mangrove and tidal marshes
     I          ~~~shall include specific consideration of anticipated water
                  quality and quantity changes, vegetative removal or
                  restoration after development, and the consideration of
     I          ~~~cumulative affects of prior development in the area.

                  The Land Development Code addresses marinas more specifically.
            Marinas are conditional uses requiring special permits in all
            residential zoning districts and are permitted uses in all com-
            mercial zoning districts, unless the dock is in excess of eighty
            (80) feet, then a special permit is required.

                  The following criteria is used to evaluate special permit
    *      ~~requests for marinas:

                     *possible conflict with surrounding residential develop-
                           men t
                     *height and mass of structures
                     * length of docks with regard to aesthetics and conflict
                           with navigation or marine grass beds, and
                     *general intensity of use for the particular neighbor-
                           hoods (automobile traffic, boat traffic, repair
                           work, restaurant use, boat sales, etc.)

                  Additionally, docks and piers should not:

                  a)   hinder navigation or unnecessarily restrict public
      *               ~~~~~use of waters,

                  b)   be located in a manner which degrades area appearance
      3               ~~~~and interferes with the use of surrounding property, and

                  c)   be constructed in a manner restricting water circulation.

     3           ~~~If a marina survives the above rather subjective review,
            various mitigating measures are imposed to ensure minimal impact.
            These may include perimeter landscape buffering, direct collector
    *     ~     ~oad access, sufficient parking (1 parking space/2 boat slips or
            equivalency based upon best experience) controlled outdoor lighting,
            limiting repair activity, and limiting dock length(s) , where
    *       ~~necessary.

            Indian River County, Florida

                  In Indian River County, marinas are permitted in four
    I     ~~zoning districts.  All are commercial districts or have a tourist-
            commercial orientation. However, the county also allows yacht
    3 ~~clubs and beach clubs in four multiple-family zoning districts,
            as special exceptions. Traditionally, marinas have been considered
            commercial uses and yacht clubs as private clubs, compatible with
    *       ~~residential developments.

            Sarasota County, Florida

     I           ~~~Sarasota County has adopted the more conventional
            approach to regulating marinas through its zoning ordinance,
            with little in the way of an innovative response to the situation.

            Sanibel, Florida

                  The City of Sanibel does not permit the dredging or filling
    I     ~~of lands to create marinas or new tidal water bodies.

    I      ~~Palm Beach County, Florida

                  Palm Beach County, like so many others, permits marinas
            as special exceptions. The permitting process allows the Planning
    I     ~~Commission to impose discretionary controls.  "In recommending
            approval of any special exception the Planning Commission may
            prescribe reasonable conditions, restrictions and limitations as
    *     ~     ~ontained herein or as it deems necessary or desirable, in order
            to maintain the plan or land use trend of the area and in com-
            patability therewith."

                  Specific requirements set forth by the ordinance deal with
            dimensons, off-street parking and on-site water and sewer require-
            ments. Dock length is limited to 200 feet.

     I           ~~~Again, the criteria for granting a special exception leaves
            much to the discretion of the Planning Commission, with little
    *       ~~in the way of "definitive guidelines."

            Martin County, Florida

     I           ~~~one of the more comprehensive efforts to mitigate the effects
            of marina development on existing land use is contained in a set
            of proposed Dock Standards and Regulations for Martin County,
            Florida. These standards are presented as Appendix A of this study.

            Summary Analysis of Findings and Conclusions

     I           ~~~For the most part those cities and counties investigated
            by this report have concentrated on traditional land use issues,
            ie. permitting marinas in certain zoning districts, regulating
            off-street parking and imposing dimensional requirements.
                  Regulating or measuring the overall impact of a marina
            has been attempted by only a few. And this few has yet to
            adequately address the issue, according to some of the commentary
            received.

     I           ~~~Where not permitted as a use by right, much of the regulatory
            language is subjective, employing such phrases as "to the fullest
            extent possible," "special attention," and "should be encouraged."
    I     ~~This type of language leaves much to interpretation by the
            reviewing body or agency, resulting in subjective conclusions.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~12

                   More often than not, marinas are treated as -spaeil
             exceptions. But again, the language setting forth what is
             acceptable is generally too vague and broad to give a quanitative
             measure of the impact. The net result is that they are subject
             to special review, without adequate quantifiable criteria to
             judge their impact.
                   Most natural environmental issues are viewed as the res-
             ponsibility of the state and Corps of Engineers. This is probably
             the result of (1) reluctance on the part of cities and counties
             to tackle such complex issues, because of difficulty in measuring
             environmental impact, and (2) the need for broader regulatory
             powers when dealing with water issues, as they are not confined
             to local jurisdictions.

      3            ~~~~Probably the most significant finding of this exer(:_Ls~ is
             that none of the 14 respondents indicated satisfaction 'vil-A t-heir
             present permitting system. The concensus favors a more quantifiable
    'I     ~~means of measuring impact and siting marinas.  In fact, the East
             Coast Regional Planning Commission, faced with the responsibility
             of reviewing and commenting on Corps dredge and fill permit
             applications, and the numerous issues related to the siting of
             docks and marinas, has commissioned a similar study--one designed
             to provide more specific development criteria.

                   It appears from our research that communities in Florida
             are no further along in addressing the issues of marina develop-
             ment than we here in South Carolina. But they do recognize the
             need for a "better way," and many are in the process of doing
             something about it.

            I~~~~~~~~~~~~1

                                     CHAPTER II

                                THlE NEED FOR MARINAiS
                                         I N
                                 CHARLESTON COUNTY

           Growth of the boating Industry

     I          ~~~The need for marinas is directly related to the boating
           industry. In 1983, 61.7 million Americans participated in
           recreational boating, having used the waterways more than
    I    ~once or twice during the year.  The total number of pleasure
           craft making their way through the waters reached an estimated
           13.3 million.1

     I          ~~~Growth of the industry has not by-p_-L-7-_ 7-th Carolina.
           Boat ownership in the state is among the highest on the East
           Coast. Only Maine has more boats per person. South Carolina
    I      ~has one registered boat for every 16 persons, compared with
           one per 21.9 people in Florida, per 27.5 in neighboring Georgia
           and per 31.8 in neighboring North Carolina.

                 In fact, the total number of boats registered in South
           Carolina exceeds the number in all but three other states on
           the East Coast: Florida, Georgia and New York (Table I).
           And each of these states is considerably larqer in terms of
           population. Two point two percent of all registered boats in the
           country are located in South Carolina, compared with 2.1 per-
           cent in North Carolina, a state approximately twice the size.
                 In analyzing ownership characteristics, one logically
           would assume a correlation between boat ownership and income.
           This does not appear to be the case however, as per capita
           effective buying income in the state is the lowest of any of
           the 12 East Coast states, but the number of boats per person
    I    ~is second only to Maine.  Where there is water, apparently there
           is a way. And South Carolina has abundant water resources and
          boating opportunities.

                 over the past 10 years (from 1972 to 1983) , the number
           of registered boats in South Carolina has increased by 47 per-
           cent, adding 67,278 boats to the state's waterways (Table II)
           The largest increase was in boats ranging in size from 16 to
           25 feet, where there was a 79 percent gain resulting in 25,389
          additional boats. Of more significance to this study was the
    I    ~recorded increase in large boats,26 feet and over.  Here, there
          was an increase of 1,238 boats, for an average 138 a year. This

           'Boating Industry, The Boating Business, 1983.

                                         14

                                   TABLE I

                          POPULATION, BOATS, INCOME:
                         EAST COAST - MAINE TO FLORIDA
                                     1982
                                           1982I~ ~One                 Effective
                                     Total       % Total      Boat     Per Capita
                        Population Registered  Registered   Per ( )  Buying
    States               (1,000)      Boats      Boats U.S.   Persons   Income

    Maine                1,148.3   117,213           1.3         10.0    $7,770
    New Hampshire          970.1      6,801           .07      142.7      9,222
    Massachusetts        5,765.0   181,699           2.0         31.7     9,946
    New York            17,509.6   321,881           3.5        54.4    10,214
    New Jersey           7,431.3   130,922           1.4        56.8    10,900
    Delaware               607.0    34,861            .4         17.4     9,539
    Maryland             4,278.1   137,719           1.5         31.1    10,198
    Virginia             5,541.7   139,694           1.5         39.7     9,156
    North Carolina       6,073.8   191,037           2.1         31.8     7,603
    SOUTH CAROLINA       3,244.3   203,121           2.2        16.0      7,216
    Georgia              5,693.0   207,254           2.3         27.5     7,876
    Florida             10,573.5   483,749           5.3         21.9     9,150

    Source:  National Marine Manufacturers Association  (NMMA) Boating
    Registration Statistics, 1982, Copyright 1983.

                                                                                      TABLE I1I

                                                                 TIREND)S  IN Ik()A'I O)WNERSHIP 1' N SO)UTHI  CAROL INA

                                                                                                                                                              Chanqe' 74-'83

      tiOA1P SIZE                   1_974      1 97i       197 6        19 7-7      1 97 8       1 97 9      1 9-80        1-9-81        1 9-82      1 98 3        N-o.

      Undeur  16'                10 7 ,9 33  1 1,5,20(9   1 21, 8 83   1 2 0 ,209   125,124   130,779   13 6 , 064      14 1, 3 27    145),449   148,584        40,651       387,

      1 6 - Lss  than  26'        3 2 ,2 25   34 ,066     36 ,1I03    38 ,3 51    4 1 ,89 6    4 4 ,2 38    4 8, 83 2    31., 63 4     5)4 ,384    5 7 ,6 14    25), 3 8')    79

      26 -I,ess  than 40'           1 ,9 17    1 ,97-8     2 ,0 79     2,1 88       2 ,3 52      2,4 57      2,684         2 , 825       2 ,9 48     3 , 066      1 ,1 4 )    60

      40'-65'                          26()1      2719        2 79        2 68         2 92        2 97         3 12          3 18          3 35        3 47          86     3 1

      over 61.'                           2          2           4           4            4           5            5             6            5            5           3   150

      Tota            I          1 4 2, 338  1 51I, 534   1 6 0,34 8   161,0 20   16 9 ,66 8   17 7,7 76   1 87 , 897   19)6 ,11I0    2 03 , 121   209 ,6 1)6   67 ,2 78    4/2

    W Iboard                        5 ,91I0   -3,0/ 4       4 ,7 70     4 , 842     5 ,1I04      5 ,339      5 ,8R14       6 , 035       6 ,2 74     654             59)4    10O

      ()Ltbtlo~id                13 2 , 145  1 39,268   1 4 3 ,638   14 1, 3 10   14 7 ,0 80   1 53 , 026   1 6 0 ,231  1 66 ,5'51    17 1 ,6 81   1 76 ,58)7   4 4 ,4 42    34

      I ni/()uL                     3 ,9 41    6,685       5 ,9 01     6 ,59 8      7 ,4 11     7 ,9 03      8 ,7 80(     9, 330        9 ,8137  I10 ,4 41       6,50 0   165"

      Aux ila ry  Sa il                3 42        f 7 7        4 0       8 47         9 43      1 , 044     1 ,280        1,4 39        1,5)65   I1,6 72         1 , Im  3189

      Oilher                           -        -          5.2 99       7 ,4 23     9,1 30     10 , 464     1 1 ,792      12'5          1 3,164     1 4, 4 1 2 - -

      To La I                    14 2 ,338  151,5l)34,  160,348   1601 , 020   16 9 ,6 68   17 7 ,7 76   1 87 , 897     1 9.1, 2      2013, 121   2 ()9, 6 16C    6-7, 2/)   47'.1

      ,oul Ce    D.C.leparti-louLt  of Wi Idl i t  and Marne no  esources,  Division  of  ll(t'(,Cast  (;oard  l<lot   , 1 '74-1 98-3.

        Inclu1 des  al I Isa i I boats wi thi aux iiary  pow  r , i riboa rd a ndlot O hea rd.

    was an increase of 57 percent in large boats over a 10 year
    period.

          In terms of boat types, the largest rate of increase
    was in auxiliary sailboats, nearly 400 percent. The significance
    of this increase is in the "height" and size of these boats---
    generally too large to trailer and too tall for many of the
    bascule and swing bridges, requiring opening for passage.

          Turning from the state to Charleston County, we find
    boat ownership to be even higher. While in 1982 the ratio of
    persons-to-boats was 16 to 1 in South Carolina, it was 14.2 to
    1 in Charleston County. Moreover, it is projected to be 12.3
    to 1 by 1990, and 10.3 to 1 by the year 2000.

          The ratio of boat ownership to population in the state is
    expected to climb to 14.7 to 1 by 1990 and 13.4 to 1 by the
    year 2000 (Table IV). This translates into a projected increase of
    approximately 5,000 more boats in Charleston County by 1990, and
    over 12,000 more by the year 2000.

          The number of registered boats in Charleston County is
    not a true reflection of the actual number, however. Excluding
    transients (overnights and other short term dockings), approxi-
    mately 20 percent of all long-term marina spaces are occupied by
    out of county registered boats. So Charleston County, because
    of its water resources, must accommodate not only its resident
    boat owners, but a substantial number of "outsiders" as well.

                               Table III
                           Number and Ratio
                           Of Out-Of-County
                       Boat Berths (Long-Term)
                At Selected Charleston County Marinas,
                                 1984

                                         Charleston
    Place of Residence   Mt. Pleasant    Municipal        Stono
    of Boat Owners           Marina         Marina        Marina    Total
                         No.            No.       %   No.    %    No.   %

    Charleston County    158        83    234      85   74      63   466   80

    Outside Charleston
     County                33       17     42      15   43      37   118   20

    Total                 191      100    276    100  117    100   584  100

    Source:  Registers of selected marinas, 1984.

                                   17

                                               TABLE IV

                           CORRELATION OF POPULATION TO BOAT REGISTRATION,
                          SOUTH CAROLINA AND CHARLESTON COUNTY, 1970 - 2000

                   Population1               Registered Boats2           One Boat Per ( ) Persons
                           Charleston                    Charleston                          Charleston
           South Carolina    County   South Carolina         County      South Carolina         County

    1970     2,603,800       248,400       73,521           7,890           (35.4)               (31.5)

    1978     2,897,800       271,600      169,668          17,958           (17.1)               (15.1)
    1979     3,013,000       274,500      177,776          18,329           (16.9)               (14.9)
    1980     3,129,500       277,400      187,897          18,974           (16.7)               (14.6)
    1981     3,207,100       285,900      196,110          19,678           (16.4)               (14.5)
    1982     3,244,300       288,100      203,121          20,320           (16.0)              (14.2)

    1990     3,770,000       313,300      256,700          25,500           (14.7)               (12.3)

    2000     4,328,500       332,600      323,700          32,200           (13.4)               (10.3)

    Note:  Boat Registrations for 1970 are misleading in that they are incomplete.  Prior to 1972,
    only motor boats with 10 hp or greater had to be registered. And it was not until 1974 that
    all new boats and motors had to be registered at the time of purchase. As a result, it was 1977
    before all boats and motors were actually recorded, due to the three year registration cycle.

    Sources: (1) Population - U. S . Census, with estimates and projections by the South Carolina
    Division of Research and Statistical Services.
              (2) Boat Registrations - South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department;
    projections to 1990 and 2000 by Vismor, McGill & Bell, Inc.
              (3) Correlation - Vismor, McGill & Bell, Inc., and NAEBM, Boating Registration Statis-
    tics, 1978-1982.

    U      ~The Demand For Marina Space In Charleston County

     *          ~~~One of the most reliable indications of the need for space
           is the amount that is available or unoccupied. When all of the
           marinas are filled, and back-logged with entrance applications,
           there exists a "tight" market and a need for additional space.
    I    ~And in reviewing the situation at Lockwood Municipal Marina,with
           its two-year waiting list of 290 applicants, one would assume
           there is a substantial unmet demand. There is also a waiting
    I     ~list of three to six months at Buzzard's Roost, Ashley Marina
           and the Naval Base Yacht Club. And until the sale of the Mount
           Pleasant Marina, there was a waiting list of equal time.

     U           ~~~But not all marinas are backed up with waiting lists, as
           there are 128 vacant slips in the county. So there is something
           to be said for the product --- principally location and price.
    I     ~The municipal marina, as an example, is centrally located to
           serve the Charleston market and is priced at considerably less
           than most other marinas,at $2.00 as opposed to $3.00 a foot.

                 Of the more than 20,000 registered boats in Charleston
           County in 1983, 545 were 26' in length or longer. This represents
            16 percent of all "large" boats registered in the state, compared
           with only 10 percent of all boat registrations. This is signifi-
           cant in that these boats generally require marina docking space.
           Also, add to this number 486 registered boats between 23 and 25
    I     ~~feet, and approximately 270 out-of-county boats tied up in
           Charleston. This produced in 1983 a potential demand for approxi-
           mately 1,300 boat slips.

                                                          Increase
                                    1983       1990   Aggregate  Annual Average

    *      ~~Number boats generally
           requiring marina slips
           (23' and larger)          1,300       1,730     430          60

           Source:  Vismor, McGill & Bell, Inc.

                 Projected through 1990, there will be a demand fnr approxi-
           mately 60 boat slips a year, or a total of 430 additional slips.
           This is based on trends in "big boat" ownership over the past 10
            years, increasing from 1.2 percent of the total to 1.6 percent
           carried through to 1990.
                 In Charleston County, the estimated number of registered
            boats requiring marina space is five percent of the total; it
           is projected to reach 5.4 percent by 1990, in keeping with state
           trends.

                                          19

                 The demand will not be uniform throughout the county,
           however. All things being equal, boat owners will patronize
    I     ~the marina which is most convenient and accessible to their
           place of residence. In support of this statement, we checked
           the registers of three selected marinas in different parts
    *      ~of the county to determine the geographic market area of each.

                 East of the Cooper, we looked at Mount Pleasant Marina
           and found that 65 percent of all boats are owned by people
    I     ~living east of the Cooper.  Discounting out-of-county boats,
           the ratio of East Cooper to Charleston County boats increased
    *      ~~to 78 percent.

                 Seventy-six percent of the boats from Charleston County
           docked at Stono are from west of the Ashley. Only at Lockwood
           Municipal is the ratio less. Here 50 percent of the boats from
           the county are from the Charleston-North Charleston area. The
           balance comes from across both rivers.

     I           ~~~What this is saying is that if you live in Mount Pleasant,
           you prefer to keep your boat in Mount Pleasant, if comparably
    *      ~priced space is available.

           Capacity of Existing Marinas To Meet The Demand For Dock Space

                 There is available within the county, marina space for
    I     ~approximately 1,361 boats. Not all of this space can accommodate
           larger boats (23' plus) , however. Shem Creek Marina is a dry
           stack operation, limited in capacity to boats no larger than
    I     ~22 feet.  Average size is between 18 and 20 feet.  Discounting
           the 80 spaces at Shem Creek, we have an adjusted capacity of
           1,281. Of this number, 114 are vacant, for a vacancy rate of
           nine percent.
                 With so many vacant slips, the market would seem to be
    3 ~rather "soft" at this time, but then we have several marinas
    *      ~with lengthy waiting lists.  So, why the contradiction.  In
           addition to price, which can be a major factor in choosing a
           marina, providing marina space convenient to the boat owner
           probably is of even greater importance.
                 The three major marinas in the Charleston peninsula area
           are filled and have waiting lists--Lockwood Municipal, Ashley
           and the Naval Yacht Club. And while rates are less at Lockwood
           Municipal and the Naval Yacht Club, Ashley's rates are among
           the highest in the county. So why is it too filled, while
    I     ~~Bohicket, which is comparably priced, is only 50 percent occupied?
           The answer may be found in Table VI.

                                         20

                                TABLE V

                 NUMBER AND RATIO OF BOATS BERTHED AT
                      SELECTED MARINAS, BY PLACE
                     OF RESIDENCE OF BOAT OWNERS

                                                 Charleston
    Place of Residence        Mount Pleasant    Municipal         Stono
    of Boat Owners               Marina            Marina         Marina
                              No.           %    No.       %     No.   %
    Charleston County

     East Cooper Area:
    #1 McClellanville/
       Awendaw                  1          --
    #2 Mt. Pleasant           87           46    18         07     1    01
    #3 Sullivan's Island/
       Isle of Palms          36           19    10        04
     Between The Rivers:
    #4, #5, #6 Charleston/
       North Charleston       22           12   117         42    17    15
    West Ashley Area:
    #7 St. Andrews/Bear Swamp 9            05    59         21    19    16
    #8, #9, #11 Folly Island/
      James Island/rural
      John's Island             3          02    28         10    36    31
    #10 Kiawah/Seabrook
    #12 Wadmalaw Island
    #13 Ravenel/Hollywood/                         2        01     1    01
      Meggett
    #14 Edisto Island

    Dorchester County           7           03    14        05     7    06

    Berkeley County             8           04     4        01     8    06

    Other S. C. Counties       15           08    19        07    13    11

    Other States                3           01     5        02    15    13

    Totals                    191          100   276       100   117   100

    Source: Ibid., Table

                                    21

           3                           ~~~~~~~~Table VI

                         Geographic Distribution of Big Boat
                            owners and Marina Slips, 1983

                                           Between
                             East of       the Cooper     West of        Total
                             Cooper         & Ashley       Ashley       Number
                           NO.    __       No.      %     No.   __

            Registered
    I     ~~Boats 23'
            in length,3
            plus           284      28    616       60   131      12      1,031~

            Boat slips         1              2
            available       268     21    498       39   515      40      1,281

            Number
            vacancies         6     05       0       0   108      95        114

    I       ~~Vacancy Rate           02               0            21         09%

    3       ~~1Does not include 80 dry-stack spaces at Shem Creek Marina
            because of size limitation.

            2Includes 78 moorings at the Naval Base Yacht Club.
             3Does not include estimated 270 boats registered out-of-county.
            Source: Marina Survey, 1984, Vismor, McGill & Bell, Inc.,
            Boat Registrations, S. C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department,
            1983.

                  From the table, it is obvious that the marinas are not
            where the boat owners are. Sixty percent of the large boat owners
            reside in the Charleston-North Charleston peninsula area,
            but only 39 percent of the marina slips are in this area.
            Conversely, west of the Ashley there are 515 slips, but only
            131 large boat owners.  Here, we find registered 12 percent
            of all large boats in the county, and 40 percent of all available
    *       ~~boat slips.

                  The situation east of the Cooper is very much influx at
            this time. Mount Pleasant Marina, with 191 slips, is being
    I      ~~replaced by a condominium/marina complex with 50 fewer slips.
            The situation will be eased somewhat with the soon to be
            completed expansion of the Isle of Palms Marina, which will add
            320 slips to the inventory, but only 163 will be available to
            the general public.   Also, 400 slips are tentatively planned
            for the Patriots Point Complex.

                                         22

     U           ~~~In addition to the two previously mentioned marina
            projects, there are a number of others on the drawing board
            at this time, including planned expansions at seven marinas
             (Table VIII,Part II). And if they all materialize, there
            will be an additional 856 slips available at existing marinas,
            including the 320 under construction at isle of Palms. Also,
            891 new spaces will be available from six new marina proposals

          3                           ~~~~~~~~~Table VII
                              Geographic Distribution of
                              "Planned'tEnlargements and
          *                         ~~~~~~~~New Facilities

                                             Charleston/
                                             N. Charleston    West
                                 East of     (Between the       of
                                 Cooper        Rivers)        Ashley     Total

    3       ~~Existing Marina1
            Slips (long-term)      217           498           515        1,231

            Planned Additions at
    I      ~~Existing Marinas       326           320           210          856

            Planned Additions by  402               30         46         ___
            New   Marinas  4   0  0   __    3   0  __    4 6 1   ___        891
            Total                  943 (32%)     848 (28%)  1,186 (40%) 2,977

            1Less 50 spaces that will be lost with conversion of Mt. Pleasant
            Marina.
    *       ~~2Planned for Patriots Point.
            3Planned for Festival Market Place.
    3       ~~4includes plans for 123 slips at Kiawah Island; 48 slips at Botany
            Bay island; 200 slips on the South Edisto River, just below the
            Intracoastal Waterway, and 90 slips at the Merritt Dredging Site,
    3 ~~on James Island.

                 Only one of the proposed six new marinas will be located
    I      ~~in the Charleston peninsula area, where the need is greatest.
            And this project (Festival Market Place) is designed principally
            for transient boats, not long-term occupancy. Too, it will have
            only 30 spaces.
                  Patriots Point could help meet the demand from this area
            however, as it will be readily accessible, and open to Charleston

            Harbor.

                                           23

                 The largest expansions are planned for the West Ashley
            area, where there is little evidence at this time of the need
    I     ~~for such expansions.  This area has the fewest number of big
            boat owners (12%) , the largest number of boat slips (429) , and
            the highest rate of vacancy (21%) . And nearly as many slips
    I     ~~as exists, are planned. Thus, the number is expected to increa__~
            from 515 to 1,186, but the distribution ratio will fall slightly,
            to 40 percent of the total.

     I          ~~~Here, marinas are being planned as adjuncts to resort-
            residential complexes, designed principally for residents of
            the project, ie. Mariner's Cay, Kiawah Island. But these pro-
            jects, because of their location, are not meeting the needs of
           boat owners in the Charleston/North Charleston area. To the
           contrary, these projects do more to generate usage than to
            satisfy needs. If all marina proposals materialize as planned,
            the ratio of slips in the Charleston/North Charleston area
           actually will be less than at present. And this is the area
           where 60 percent of the big boat owners reside and prefer marina
    I     ~~space.  This is also the area of the county best suited to
           marinas from the standpoint of water quality and shellfish
           harvesting. Water in this area is not of pristine quality and
    I     ~~shellfishing is prohibited.  This is not the case with many of
            the new proposals.
                 In summary, we have a projected demand for 430 additional
            slips by 1990, and plans on the board for 1,747 slips. If
            everything goes forward as planned, marina space in Charleston
           County should be plentiful in the future, but will it be where
            it is needed and in greatest demand?

           I~~~~~~~~~~~~2

                                                  TABLE VIII

                                        MARINA INVENTORY, PART I
                                       Facilities and Cost - 1984

                                                                       Facilities

                                                               W ' x m o 0       -             Rates
                                                               1--i  kU    0   fW   4cJ4cJ   1   1
    Marina                Location            Type                           J o  )  4 U) U) > m  L
                                                                 m)Q C)) ..   0 1  o 4   Long
                                                                        4-J,- - q)I    Md   W  Q)  10
                                                          4 4 -P >I -   U    3 4 4     r   Term    Over
                                                          E C) od o 1 o � o   E d   O C 5 0   0     Monthly  Night
                                                          Cd o 0 O~ 0 - O Cd  C) Co C rd
                                                         ~ X m m-     W  3 ~ ~ ~ ~ m     (Inr ftf  (Der ft)
    Ashley                Charleston -
                          hL okwood Dr.     Commercial  -    *          *   * -    *  *   $3.00   $ .60

    Bohicket              John's Island              C                             *  *    3.00       50
                                             Commercial     * *  *  *   *  *   *   *  *    3.00       .50
                          Andell Bluff Rd.

    Creekside             Isle of Palms                                                      .
                               Palm Blvd    Commercial  * * -  -  *   *  -   *         -    3.00    8.00
                          Palm Blvd                                      3.00  8.00

    Isle of Palms         Isle of Palms     Commercial
                                             Commercial  *  * - -    *
                          41st Street
                                                                                            65.00
    Shem Creek            Mt. Pleasant      Commercial  *     *  * * *  (1) -              -*     9000()

    Stono                 Maybank Hwy.      Commercial                  *  *  -   * -    1.75        .50

    Municipal             Charleston                    *  * *      *   *  *  2.00                   .50
                          Lockwood Dr.         y

    Buzzard's Roost       Maybank Hwy       Commercial  *  * *      *  *  *   *   *  *    2.15       .50

    Botany Bay            Wadmalaw Is.      Commercial  * *  *          *

    Hobcaw Yacht Club    Mt. Pleasant
                          Hiobcaw Subd.

    iariners Cay          Folly Beach       Commercial  *  * -  -  *   * -   *   -  -    3.00        .50

    Mt. Pleasant Marina   Mt. Pleasant      Commercial     *  *     *

    Naval Base Yacht Cl.  N. Charleston                          * -   -  -         *  *   20.062)  1.00(2
                          Naval Base

    (1) Dry Storage        (2) Per Boat

    - -- -- -- - -- - - - - - - - -
      'fable VIII (continued)
                                         MARINA INVENTORY, PART II
                                   Size and Space, Existing and Planned
                                                    1984                                            No. Off
                                                Boat Slips                            No. Dry        Street
               ~Marina         Si~ze        Long Over   Occupied        Slips         Storage Spaces  Parking
                           Acreage Total Term Night Sail Power Vacant Planned Occupied Vacant Spaces
     Ashley                   (3.4)  150   130    20                    0        0         0        0    268

      Bohicket                   -    140   130    10  33    36         61       60        55       45    339

      Creekside                        23    23       -   9      8       6        6         -        -      12

      Isle of Palms                    18                                       3204

      Shem Creek                (2)    90    80    10           66      14        0        80       14      20

      Stono                     (5)   105   100       5   40   50       15       50 2       0        0    145

     Municipal                 (8)   305   290    15  230   60          0      300                        525

      Buzzard's Roost           (3)   210   200    10  123   77          0        0         0        0    575

      Botany Bay                       20    20    --                    0        0

      Hobcaw Yacht Club         (3)    36    36    --   36               0        0         0        0      --

      Mariners Cay                     85    65    20   3251            33      100       yes               60

     Mt. Pleasant Marina |           191   Marina being converted to condo complex with fewer slips--
                              MlnrI       B90 to 140 Dpmpndina nn final annrova]
      Naval Base Yacht Cl.1  (5)    78    78 |  -  176  |  2  |              |   20  |          |       |   50

      (1) Approved by existing permit, will be added as demand increases
      (2) Application is pending
      (3)  Moorings
      (4) 157 for exclusive resident use; 163 will be available to general public.
      (5) Sail and power combined
     Note: A marina at Kiawah Island was approved by DHEC March 22, for 123 slips, pump-out facilities
     and related services, but not fuel, replacing the 15 to 18 slip floating dock.

                                     CHAPTER III

                               CONSTRAINTS TO M4ARINA
                                   DEVELOPMENT IN

                                 CHARLESTON COUNTY

                 This chapter offers a general overview of constraints
           to marina development in Charleston County. Specific or
           localized constraints are dealt with in the sub-area analysis
    *     ~which follows.

                 Constraints fall generally into seven categories:
                             Water Quality
                              Dredging
                              Land Use and Zoning
                             Marshes and Wetlands
                              Bridges
                              Shellfish Areas

           Water Quality

                 Under the Pollution Control Act [48-1-D (et. seq.) S. C.
           Code of Laws, 1976] the Department of Health and Environmental
           Control is vested with the responsibility of (1) protecting
           the public health and welfare and maintaining and enhancing the
           quality of the water; (2) specifying appropriate water uses to
           be achieved and protected (such as domestic water supply,
           swimming, fishing, propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife,
    I    ~or outstanding ecological resources); and (3) specifying appro-
           priate water quality criteria (such as, dissolved oxygen, fecal
           coliform bacteria or temperature) necessary to support those
           designated uses.
                 Toward this end, the Department has tested, evaluated,
           classified and established standards for-South Carolina's-waters.
           All streams, rivers and water bodies are classified in one of
           eight established classes, where practicable, ranging from
           AA (the highest) to SC (the lowest).

                 Five of the eight classes are present in Charleston County,
           including Class A, B, SA, SB and SC. The water quality standards
    I    ~for each are presented by the following table.  They serve as a
           basis for determining National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
           System (NPDES) effluent limitations for point source dischargers.
           They are intended to protect the classified use from degradation
           and are used for evaluating and modifying Best Management
           Practice (BMP) for control of nonpoint sources of pollution.

                                       2 7

                                                                    TABLE IX
                          WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR ALL STREAMS, RIVERS AND WATER BODIES IN CHARLESTON COUNTY

       ITEM                 CLASS A            CLASS B                     CLASS SA           CLASS SB          CLASS SC

    (a) Garbage, cinders,    None allowed       None allowed                None allowed       None allowed      None allowed
       ashes, sludge or
       other refuse

    (b) Treated wastes,      None alone or in  None alone or in combina- None alone or        None alone or    None alone or in combina-
       toxic wastes,        combination with  tion with other sub-         in combination    in combination   tion with other substan-
       deleterious           other substances  stances or wastes in        with other         with other        ces or wastes in suffi-
       substances, colored  in suffificent    sufficient amounts:  to   substances or         substances or    cient amounts:  to be
       or other wastes      amounts:  to       be harmful to the           wastes in          wastes in         harmful to the survival
       except in (a) above. make the waters   survival of freshwater    sufficient            sufficient        of marine fauna or flora
                             unsafe or un-      fauna and flora or the    amounts:  to        amounts:  to      or the culture or propag-
                             suitable for      culture or propagation    adversely affect  make the waters  ation thereof; to adverse-
                             primary contact   thereof; to adversely       the taste,         unsafe or un-    ly affect the taste, color,
                             recreation or to  affect the taste, color,  color, odor or    suitable for         odor or sanitary condition
                             impair the waters odor or sanitary condi-   sanitary             primary contact  of fish for human consump-
                             for any other      tion of fish for human    condition of        recreation; or   tion; to make the waters
                             usage.             consumption; to make the  clams, mussels,   to impair the    unsafe or unsuitable for
                                               waters unsafe or unsuit-  or oysters for    waters for any   secondary contact recrea-
                                               able for a source of       human consump-    other best         tion; to impair the waters
                                               drinking water supply      tion; or to        usage.            for any other best usage.
                                               after conventional         impair the
                                               treatment; to make the    waters for any
                                               waters unsafe or unsuit-  other best
                                               able for secondary         usage.
                                               contact recreation; or
                                               to impair the waters for
                                               any other best usage.

    (c) Dissolved oxygen     Daily average not less than 5 mg/I, with  a low of 4 mg/I, unless lowered          Not less than 4 mg/I.
                             by natural conditions.

    (d) Fccal coliform       Not to exceed a   Not to exceed a geometric Not to exceed an  Not to exceed a  Not to exceed a geometric
                             geometric mean of mean of 1000/100 ml         MPN total         geometric mc-an    ean of 1000/100 ml during
                             200/100 ml        during any    day period; coliform median   of 200/100 ml,   Any 30 day period; nor
                             during any 30     nor 2000/100 ml in more   of 70/100 ml,       during any 30    ~xceed 2000/100 ml in more
                             day period; nor   than 20% of the samples   nor shall more    day period; nor  than 20% of the samples
                             shall more than   examined during such        than 10% of the   shall more than  examined during such
                             10% of the total  period. samples exceed    10% of the                            period.
                             samples during                                an MPN of         samples in any
                             any 30 day period                             230/100 ml.        30 day period
                             exceed 400/100 ml.                                              exceed 400/100ml,

    (e) pH                   Range between 6.0 Not to vary from levels   Range between 6.5 Range between    Range between 6.5 and 8.5,
                             and 8.0, with a   existing under natural    and 8.5, but not  6.5 and 8.5, but but not vary more than
                             low of 5.0 due to conditions.                 vary more than    not vary more    1 pH per unit.
                             natural conditions 3/10 of a pH                                 than 1/2 of a
                                               condItions                 per unit.          pH per unit.

    (f) Temperature          As prescribed in C. (7) of the Water Classification Standards System Manual.

    Source: South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Water Classification Standards and Stream Classifications
    For The State of South Carolina, 1983.

           They also serve as a basis for judgement in other water
    I     ~~quality related programs, including dredge and fill activities.
           These standards publicly and officially define the state's
           water quality objective and hence form a basis for planning
    3 ~~and permitting marinas.

                 Charleston's more pristine waters generally are classified
           SA--tidal salt water suitable for harvesting shellfish and
    I     ~~primary contact recreation.  But the county does have some
           equally pristine Class A freshwaters beyond Penny Creek on the
           upper end of the Edisto River.

                 Moreover, the Department has under preliminary consideration
           the Edisto River, east of Penny Creek for SAA reclassification,
            as well as the Cape Romain Estuary. Such a classification would
           impose higher water quality standards, recognizing these waters
           as constituting outstanding recreational or ecological resources.

                 The upper end of the Ashley River, as well as the upper
           end of the South Santee, has been identified as Class B, a some-
           what lower freshwater classification.

     U           ~~~Charleston Harbor, the Ashley and Cooper Rivers, Clark
           Sound and Wappoo Creek are Class SC waters. The balance and
           majority of the county's waters are classified SA, indicating
            the pristine nature of most of its water resources.

                 The specific classification of all streams, rivers and
    I     ~~water bodies in the county is presented by the following table,
           together with a definition of each class.

           I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                              TABLE X
                    WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS
                           AND DEFINITIONS
                   OF ALL STREA4S, RIVERS AND
                WATER BODIES IN CHARLESTON COUNTY

    NAME                   DESCRIPTION                       CLASSIFICATION

    Ashley River       That portion to salt water intrusion        B
                      Salt water intrusion to Charleston Harbor SC

    Bohicket Creek    From junction with North Edisto River
                      to its junction with Church Creek           SA

    Brickyard Creek   The entire stream tributary to Ashley
                      River                                       SC

    Cape Romain        The entire stream tributary to Atlantic
     Harbor           Ocean                                        SA

    Charleston         From Battery to Atlantic Ocean              SC
     Harbor

    Clark Sound        The entire sound tributary to Charleston
                      Harbor                                      SC

    Coastal Waters    From the land to the limits of State
                      jurisdiction                                SA

    Cooper River       That portion of the stream from U.S. 52
                      to a point approximately 30 miles above
                      the junction of the Ashley and Cooper
                      Rivers                                      B
                      That portion below that point to the
                      junction of the Ashley and Cooper Rivers  SC

    Copahee Sound      The entire sound                            SA

    Edisto River       The entire stream to the North Edisto
                      and South Edisto Rivers                     A

    Folly River        The entire stream tributary to Stono
                      River                                       SA

    Grays Sound        The entire sound                            SA

    Hamlin Sound       The entire sound                            SA

    Intracoastal       That portion of the waterway from South
     Waterway          Edisto River to SCL Railroad Bridge over'
                      Stono River                                 SA
                      From SCL Bridge to the confluence to
                      Elliott Cut and the Stono River             SA
                      From confluence of Elliott Cut and the
                      Stono River through Charleston Harbor to
                      Ben Sawyer Bridge                           SC
                      From Ben Sawyer Bridge to South Santee
                      River                                       SA

                                30

              NAMAE                   DESCRIPTION                CLASSIFICATION

     I        ~~North Edisto     The entire stream tributary to
                                Atlantic Ocean                       SA

              Shem Creek        The entire stream tributary to
         I                    ~~~~~~~Charleston Harbor                SC

              South Edisto      The entire stream tributary to
         I                     ~~~~~~~Atlantic Ocean                  SA

              South Santee      That fresh water portion              B
                                From U.S. 17 to 1000 feet below
                                the Intracoastal Waterway            SB
                                From that point to the Atlantic
         *                      ~~~~~~~Ocean                          SA

              Stono River       That portion extending eastward to
                                 SCL Railroad Bridge                  SA
                                From the SCL Railroad Bridge to
                                Abbapoola Creek                      SA
                                From Abbapoola Creek to Folly River SA
              Wadmalaw River    The entire stream tributary to
                                North Edisto River                   SA

     I        ~~Wadmalaw Sound    The entire sound tributary to
                                Wadmalaw River                        SA

              Wando River        The entire stream tributary to
                                 Cooper River at Charleston Harbor   SB

              Wappoo Creek       The entire stream tributary to
         I                     ~~~~~~~Stono River                     SC

     I        ~~Class A - freshwaters suitable for primary contact recreation.
              Also suitable for uses listed in Class B.

    .1        ~~Class B - freshwaters suitable for secondary contact recreation
              and as a source for drinking water supply after conventional treat-
              ment in accordance with requirements of the Department. Suitable
              for fishing, survival and propagation of fish, and other fauna
              and flora. Suitable also for industrial and agricultural uses.
              Class SA - tidal salt waters suitable for harvesting of clams,
     I      ~~mussels or oysters for market purposes or human consumption except
              within buffer zones designated by the Department. These buffer zones
              are consitent with this classification. Suitable also for uses
     *        ~~listed in Class SB and Class SC.

              Class SB - tidal salt waters suitable for primary contact recreation.
     *        ~~Suitable also for uses listed in Class SC with the same exception.
              Class SC - tidal salt waters suitable for secondary contact
              recreation, crabbing and fishing, except harvesting of clams,
     I      ~~mussels or oysters for market purposes or human consumption.
              Also suitable for the survival and propagation of marine fauna
              and flora.
            *                             ~~~~~~~~~~~31

           Dredging

                 Where dredging is prerequisite to marina siting and
           maintenance, a whole new series of constraints is introduced.
    I     ~~Generally, dredging is discouraged by the South Carolina
           Coastal Council. However, a dredging permit may be issued,
           pending the approval of a maintenance dredging schedule and a
           spoil-dispersal site.   The disposal of dredge spoil materials
           into wetlands generally is to be discouraged.
     3           ~~~SCCC Dredge and Spoil requirements are as follows:

              1. Dredging and filling in wetland areas should be undertaken
           only if the proposed activity is water-dependent and there are
           no feasible alternatives.

           2.    To the maximum extent feasible, dredging and filling
           activities should be restricted in nursery areas and shellfish
           grounds and during critical periods in the life of important
           sport and commercial species.

    *      ~~3.    Dredging and excavation shall not create stagnant water
           conditions, lethal fish entrapments, or deposit sumps, or other-
           wise contribute to water quality degradation.

           4.    Designs for dredging and excavation projects shall, where
           feasible, include protective measures such as silt curtains,
           diapers, and weirs to protect water quality in adjacent areas
           during construction by preventing the dispersal of silt materials.
    *       5~~.  Dredged materials shall be deposited and contained in such
           a manner so as to prevent dispersal into adjacent wetland areas.

           6.    Upland disposal of dredged materials is preferred; vegetated
           wetlands and mudflats shall not be utilized for disposal unless
           there are no feasible alternatives; any other wetlands should
           not be used for disposal when other alternatives exist.

    I      ~~7.    Open and deep water sites should be considered for disposal
           if highland alternatives are not feasible only after consultation
           with the Council and other relevant state and federal agencies.

           8.    Existing disposal sites should be utilized to the fullest
           extent possible (where feasible).

    I      ~~9.    Dredged materials containing hazardous levels of toxic
           materials shall never be disposed of in wetland areas.

    *      ~~10.   Dikes surrounding disposal areas should be shaped and
           vegetated immediately, with outfalls positioned to empty into
           nonwetland areas.

                                          32

    1      ~~11.   Attention must be given to possible adverse impacts of
           alternative deposition sites on public health and welfare.

    1      ~~12.   In all cases, dredging activities shall not be approved
           until satisfactory disposal sites have been acquired.
                  From the above, it is obvious that dredging is one of
            the more mitigating constraints. Generally, it is permissible
           when the above requirements are observed, but depending on
    3      ~~dministrative interpretation, one or more of the regulations
           coul be used to prohibit dredging altogether.

                  For example, the requirement that "dredging and filling
    I     ~~in wetland areas shall be undertaken only if the proposed
           activity is water-oriented and there are no feasible alternatives"
            leaves much to interpretation. The developer may not have an
           alternative site which would require no dredging, but there could
           be a more acceptable site within the vicinity --- one requiring
           no dredging.  Should Coastal Council hold out for the "no dredging"
            site or approve the one requiring dredging? The answer, of
           course, will depend on mitigating circumstances. As a result,
           most of the above "regulations" are not regulations at all, but
           guidelines, criteria and "preference alternatives," making
           enforcement a tenuous exercise--one rooted in mitigation.
                  But there are certain criteria that specify what shall and
            shall not be. They are not negotiable, and so stated in the
           proposed Impact Matrix. The result being that when such criteria
           cannot be met, permit denial is consenquential.

    I      ~~Land Use and Zoning

                 Marinas are restricted or prohibited by zoning from relatively
    I     ~~few areas of Charleston County.  Existing land use has a far
           greater impact on future siting than does zonir--, due largely,

                  (1) to extensive federal holdings of water access lands,
     I              ~~~~~particularly on the Cooper River, and

     3           ~~~(2) to established water oriented, residential subdivisions.

                  inasmuch as development is regulated throughout the county,
            zoning is a consideration wherever a marina is proposed. Unfor-
    I     ~~tunately, regulations pertaining to marina siting are not uniform.
           Generally, however, marinas are viewed as conditional uses,
           requiring special consideration relative to their potential impact
    *      ~~on existing development.

                 City of Charleston. The City of Charleston permits marinas
           as a use by right in the Conservation District only. But they
    I     ~~are also permitted (not prohibited) in the Limited and General
           Business Districts and the Limited and Heavy Industrial Districts.

           U                              ~~~~~~~~~~~33

          They are prohibited as commercial enterprises from all residential
          zones, but may be included as an accessory use, without limitation
          as to size, to a residential project or neighborhood. Thus,
          depending on how or by whom marinas are used, they may be located
          anywhere within the city limits, irrespective of zoning.

     I        ~~Charleston County.  Only in the OR, Office Restricted and
          P, Parking Districts of Charleston County are marinas prohibited.
          They are permitted in all residential and agricultural zones as
          "'conditional uses," as well as in the OP and OG Office Districts,
          the CN, Neighborhood Commercial District, and the PDD, Planned
          Development District. Elsewhere, they are permitted as "uses by
          right," provided they meet all applicable regulations of the district
          within which they are proposed.
               As conditional uses, they are required to meet the criteria
          setforth on the following table, in addition to all applicable
          district regulations.

               Folly Beach. The Folly Beach Ordinance is much more restrictive,
          limiting marina development to the Marine District only. And this
          district is established in but one relatively small place on the
          island, thus effectively excluding marinas elsewhere.

               Mount Pleasant. Mt. Pleasant, like Folly Beach, restricts
          marina development to but one district, as a use by right--the
    I   ~Marine District.  However, it may be approved as part of a Planned
          Development in a PDD District, subject to planned development
          requirements. But for the most part, marina development is tightly
          controlled in Mount Pleasant.
               North Charleston. North Charleston permits marinas in PUD
          projects only, denying use by right status in any other zoning
    I   ~district.  But because of limited access to the Ashley and control
          of the Cooper by the federal government, there are few potential
    *     ~sites within North Charleston.

               in fact, all areas of North Charleston fronting on the Ashley
          are west of the Seaboard Coastline Bridge, which is only nine feet
          high, thus reducing if not eliminating any potential for marina
          development, although it is a bascule bridge and may be opened.

               Isle of Palms. Marinas are permitted within the city's
          commercial district, but only two such areas are located with access
          to water, and both are developed with marinas.

               Sullivan's Island. Marinas are not permitted by the city's
          zoning ordinance.

            I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~~34

                                                    TABLE XI

                                      MARINA ZONING IN CHARLESTON COUNTY

                          Districts In Which Marinas Permitted          Districts In Which  Conditional Use
                          Use By Right          Conditional Use         Marinas. Prohibited   Requirements

    harleston              Commercial: LB, GC   None                     Residential          NA
                          Industrial: LI, HI                            Districts, except
                          Conservation                                  for non-commercial
                                                                        marinas (accessory
                                                                        use)

    harleston County       Office:  OD           Residential: RS,        Office:  OR          (1) Will not cause
                          Commercial:  CA,      RT, RM, RD              Parking: P           substantial injury
                          CC, CG,  CH, CR,      Office: OP, OG                               to value of pro-
                          Cs                    Commercial: CN                               perty in neighbor-
                          Industrial: MP,      Agricultural: AC,                             hood.
                          ML, MM, MH, MIHS      AG, AM & AR                                   (2) Will contri-
                                                PDD, Planned                                 bute to and pro-
                                                Development District                         mote welfare of
                                                                                            community and
                                                                                            general public.
                                                                                             (3) Will not
                                                                                            dominate neigh-
                                                                                            borhood so as to
                                                                                            prevent develop-
                                                                                            ment in accord
                                                                                            with regulations.
                                                                                             (4) Will provide
                                                                                            adequate utilities,
                                                                                            off-street park-
                                                                                             ing, drainage
                                                                                            and access roads.
                                                                                             (5) Other condi-
                                                                                             tions as may be
                                                                                             reasonable to
                                                                                            accomplish pur-
                                                                                            poses of ordinance
                                                                                             (specific use
                                                                                            conditions are
                                                                                            listed as Appen-
                                                                                            dix B of this
                                                                                            report).

    I  /  I  I -                  m -  -  -                I m  m  I  I  I  I  I m  l

     Table XI (continued)

                            Districts In Which Marinas Permitted           Districts In Which  Conditional Use
                            Use By Right          Conditional Use          Marinas Prohibited   Requirements

     Folly Beach             Marine Commercial:   None                      All residential       None
                            C-3                                            Districts, C-1
                                                                         and C-2 Commercial
                                                                         Districts, PUD
                                                                         Districts

     Mt. Pleasant            Marine District        Planned Develop-         All other            5 acres minimum,
                                                  ment District, PD       districts             site plan review
                                                                                              and approval.

     North Charleston                               PUD                      All other            Site plan review
                                                                         districts            and approval
                                                                                              prerequisite to
                                                                                              zoning amend-
                                                                                              ment to esta-
                                                                                              blish PUD on
                                                                                              map

     Isle of Palms           Commercial (how-       None                    All other             None
                            ever, only com-                                districts
                            mercial areas
                            with water access
                            are developed
                            with marinas
                            (Creekside and
                            Isle of Palms)

     Sullivan's Island                                                       Not allowed

     U            ~~~Conclusions.  Because of the conditional use status of
             marinas         imotdistricts of the county, zoning is not an
             absolute constraint. That is, there are few areas in which
    I      ~~marina siting is prohibited by zoning.  For the most part,
             marinas mapy be established in the county, if the standards and
             criteria for conditional use permitting can be satisfied.
    I      ~~Of course, zoning could become a much greater constraint, if
             the county elected to take a more prohibitive posture toward
             marina siting in certain areas and districts.

    I       ~~Marshes and Wetlands

                   Marshes and wetlands pose a major constraint to marina
    I      ~~siting in Charleston County, as they:

                   (1)   parallel nearly all navigable waterways, and

                   (2)   are tightly controlled by the South Carolina
                         Coastal Council, and the U. S. Corps of Engineers,
       *                 ~~~~~and to a lesser extent by local zoni~ng.

                   Development of wetlands often is considered synonymous
             with dredging and filling, which generally is discouraged by
    I      ~~the Coastal Council.  However, there are conditions under which
             the Council may approve such activity. They are:

                   (1)   where the proposed acitvity is water-dependent
                         (marina) and there are no feasible alternatives,

                   (2)   where dredging and excavation shall not create
                         stagnant water conditions, lethal fish entrapments,
                         or deposit sumps or otherwise contribute to water
                         quality degradation,

                   (3)   where dredged materials shall be deposited and
                         contained in such a manner so as to prevent dispersal
       *                 ~~~~~into adjacent wetland areas,

                   (4)   where an overriding public interest can be demonstrated.

     I            ~~~~However, the Council is emphatically opposed to the use
             of wetlands as depositories for dredged materials, unless there
             are no feasible alternatives, which quite often is the case.
    I      ~~Thus, the entire proposition must be mitigated, often hinging
             as much on the availability of a disposal site as on the original
             wetlands development request.

     I            ~~~~Clearly, some marsh an d wetlands are more productive and
             essential to aquatic life than others, particularly those which
             have been infringed upon by development.  The   more productive
    I      ~~areas deserve all out protection, not to be mitigated on the basis
             of "no feasible alternative," as some wetland constraints should
             be greater than others, as indicated by the Impact Matrix.

                                          37

    I      ~~Bridges

                 Bridge openings = Traffic delays = traffic congestion.
    I     ~~Probably no other impact directly affects so many people or
           is as apparent to the general public as a bridge opening,
           halting traffic. This is particularly true in urban areas
    I     ~and on heavily traveled roads.  Yet, not enough attention has
           been given this matter, as illustrated by the location of the
           Stono Marina.

                 The contamination of a single oyster bed is sufficient
           reason for DHEC to deny a marina request, but the inconvenience,
           delay and disruption to traffic from a bridge opening apparently
           is not given equal or adequate consideration.
                 The year after the Stono Marina opened (1978) , the number
           of bridge openings at the Stono River increased from 471 to
           1,503 --- an increase of 1,032 or 219 percent.

                 The Stono Marina situation is vividly illustrated by the
    I     ~following chart.  While the number of openings at most swing and
           bascule bridges increased gradually over the past 10 years, the
    3 ~~change at Stono was much more dramatic.

                 Had the Stono located across the street, on the waterway
           side of the bridge, this would not have occurred. And at the
    I     ~~time, Buzzard's Roost was not there.  With the opening of
           Buzzard's Roost, the number of bridge openings has declined
           slightly. This trend may be explained, in part, by the unobstructed
           accessibility of Buzzard's Roost. Here, larger power and sail
           boats have direct access to the waterway, Charleston Harbor and
           the ocean, without the inconvenience and delay associated with
           opening the Stono River Bridge.

                 In support of this contention, we surveyed each marina
    m ~and found that 67 percent of the ships at Stono were occupied
           by sail and power boats exceeding 8 feet in height, compared with
           86 percent at Buzzard's Roost. This finding suggests that the
           accessibility of Buzzard's Roost does, indeed, influence docking
    3      ~~decisions of large boat owners.

                 There are seven bascule and/or swing bridges in Charleston
           County. All have round-the-clock operators on duty, except for
    I     ~Wando, where 24-hour notice is required for opening.  Four of the
           bridges may be opened for boat traffic at anytime --- Ashley, Dawho,
           Limehouse and the Stono. The Ben Sawyer and Wappoo Creek bridges
           have scheduled operating times to minimize the disruption of
           vehicular traffic movement (Table XII).

           I                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~38

              Drawbridge Openings, Charleston County 1973-1982

    7,000 -

             61000                         ~~~~~~~LIMEHOUSE BRIDGE lWaterwayi

    4,000 -
                                           WA PPOO CREEK BRI DGE IMaterwayl

    2,000 -

                                       STONO RIVER BRIDGE
    1,000 -

                                                               ASHLEY RIVER BRIDGE

             1973~~* 1~ ~~ *** 1             75ee i                               1980 9~  69JC  19b1  19'82

                                                   TABLE XII

                                  CHARLESTON COUNTY BRIDGE OPENING SCHEDULES

       Bridge                             Scheduled Openings                       Comments

       Ashley River                       24 hours daily (No Schedule)             Operator on duty, can
                                                                                 be opened anytime

       Ben Sawyer                         Cannot be opened from 7-9 a.m.           Operator on duty, can
                                         and 4-6 p.m. Monday through Friday.    be opened anytime other
                                         Sat., Sun. and holidays can be           than during scheduled
                                         opened on hour and half hour between   periods.
                                         2-6 p.m.

       Dawho River                        24 hours daily (No Schedule)             Operator on duty, can
                                                                                 be opened anytime
    D
       Limehouse                          24 hours daily (No Schedule)             Operator on duty, can
                                                                                 be opened anytime

       $tono River                        24 hours daily (No Schedule)             Operator on duty, can
                                                                                 be opened anytime

       Wando River                        Requires 24 hour notice to open

       Wappoo Creek                      Cannot be opened from 6:30-9 a.m.         Operator on duty, can
                                         and 4-6 p.m. Monday through Friday.    be opened anytime other
                                         Sat., Sun. and holidays can be           than during scheduled
                                         opened on hour and half hour between   periods.
                                         2-6 p.m.

       Source: Information furnished by the South Carolina Highway Department, per U. S. Coast Guard
       Regulations.

     U          ~~~Generally, bridges are placed on schedule by the
           U. S. Coast Guard, in cooperation with the S. C. Highway
            Department. Scheduling is initiated when traffic volumes
           are such that bridge openings unduly delay and congest
           traffic during peak periods.

     *          ~~~The case for scheduling is compounded when vehicular
           traffic increases are accompanied by increases in boat traffic,
           pushing up the number of requests for bridge openings. Since
            1973 vehicular traffic over the Ashley River Bridge, for example,
           has increased by 20,300 vehicles per day. Boat traffic under the
           bridge increased 400 percent. The actual increase was only 297,
           but any increase is cause for concern under these circumstances--
           the Ashley River Bridge carries 86,400 vpd.
                An average of five minutes is required to open and close
             abridge for passage of a single boat, according to the South
           Carolina Highway Department. Where more boats are involved, the
           time delay is longer, of course.

     I          ~~~The South Carolina Highway Department has evaluated traffic
           count data for several selected bridge crossings, and found that
           80 percent of the average daily traffic occurs between the hours
    I     ~~of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.  This means that of the 86,400 vpd
           crossing the Ashley River Bridge in 1983, approximately 69,000
           did so between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.

                Researching bridge logs, we found that on the average 90
           percent of the bridge openings occur between these same hours.
           Obviously then, the greatest impact on vehicular traffic movement
           is during this period.
                To better dimension the impact, we converted bridge open-
            ings into lost or delayed time to the motoring public, with the
           results, presented on Table XIV.

                From the table, we are able to measure the impact of bridge
    I     ~~openings in terms of time-travel delays.  The Ashley River Bridges,
           for example, were opened only 335 times between the hours of
            7a.m. and 7 p.m. in 1982, but the number of vehicles effected
    I        ~at each opening (480) was so high that the aggregate travel delay
           time was 40 hours, at 5 minutes per vehicle. For the year, travel
           delay time amounted to 13,400 hours.

                The impact is not nearly as severe at other bridge crossings,
           except for the Wappoo, which due to the frequency of openings,
           has the greatest impact on aggregate travel time of any of the
           seven opening bridges in the county, 77,500 hours in 1982.
                The table does more than measure the impact of bridge
    I     ~~openings based on the present situation, it may be used to gauge
           the future impact, based on marina siting in the county.

                                        41

                                                                                   TABLE XIII

                                           BASCMLE A1l) SWING; BRIDGLS, CIIARLE-.STON  COUNTY-  HIGHI(IT, OPENING;S, CROSSIN(-S

                                                                                                                                Number
                                                             Numnber B~ridge                                                  hr idqe Cross ings
                                     vertical                  Open ings,                     Change                        Veh i cis Pei  Day  (VIID)           Chornge
        Isr i_(Ie                     ClIea rance             19 73      19112           Number       P    'ercenit          197 3              19 83        Numibe r    Pe rcen1t

        Ash Iey River, 1<1 . 17            14'                    75        3 72            i-297          3. 96             66, 1 00           8 6 ,4 00     +20, 301        31
          (41  & 1(2)
        ilen bawyvr, Rt. 703              31'                 2 ,4 12    3, 1635            +74 9         0. 31        I O , 4(10         I     11,900          1,50(1        1 4
         (Wa CerIway)

        Dlawho River, Ilt. 174              8'                5 ,2 73    4 ,7 29            -1544         0.10          I5 (10              I      ,050          -410         (0
         (Waterway)

        Lllj,,elollsr 101. 20             1 2'                5 ,2 14    5,5-6 0            i-346         0.0 7                 ,6 00            6 ,0(      I 1, .300         2.3
    to    (Waterway)

        S;tono ,veI.708'245    1, 3810                                                  1 1 ,083          4 .42               14(1(1           11),4 (1)(     f , 00)        4 1

        Waindo River, Rt 4 41               6'3                                4               4 1         0l. 13              4,(1              4,4o)         I I , 1) 1)l   /6

        Wappoo Cteek , lUt . 7 00         3 3'                2 ,340    4 ,3 06          4 1 ,958          0 .8R3             3 7 ,tO(          44 ,1)00    I41,1)131        2(
         (Wa) ( orwaiy)

        Sources:    (1) South Carolina  Department  of fliqhways  an'] Public  TPransportation, TrafficF7low Mars    )4    9(   rl18

        (unpub I i Shod) ; Draw  bridge  ReL~pits , 1973, 1982.   (2) Li.  S.  D)epa rtmen t of Commerce, National O)ceanic and Al mosphor i(
          Adinjs tration,  'laut ica I Chart-s frChar) eston Coui1 y.

                This application of the table is discussed in greater
    *     ~detail in the sub-section analysis of this report.

                In view of the extent to which bridge openings effect
          the traveling public and the amount of time delay and inconvenience
    I    ~associated with such openings, it appears that considerably more
          weight should be given this factor. Surely there are enough
          potential marina sites in Charleston County, unobstructed by
    I    ~low level bridges, without developing those areas which will
          adversely impact traffic conditions. Traffic volumes on most
          bridge routes increased rather significantly over the past 10
          years and, in all probability, will continue to do so. Therefore
          any increase in the number of bridge openings will have a negative
          impact on the transportation system.

     3          ~~~The situation may be alleviated somewhat by going to a
          schedule, as with Ben Sawyer and Wappoo Creek. But outside of
          the waterway bridges, which accommodate the bulk of the county's
          boat traffic, schedules will have little impact on the situation.
          Most pleasure craft is operated in late afternoons and on week-
          ends, when vehicular traffic is at its lowest.

     I          ~~~A case in point is the Stono River Bridge.  In 1983, the
          bridge was opened 1,645 times, but only 27 times during the
          hours of 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., Monday through Friday, and 83 times
    I    ~during the hours from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.  This is less than seven
          percent of all openings. This is an average of just over twice
          a month during the morning rush hour and seven times a month
    *     ~during the evening rush hour.

                Certainly, scheduled closings during these periods will
          help, particularly during the evening hours, but the overall
          effect will be minimal as the number of "post-poned" openings
           is quite small in relation to the total.

                 Here, the only effective resolve is a replacement bridge.
          And one is in the planning stage. Additionally, replacement
          bridges are planned for the Ben Sawyer and the Dawho River Bridges.

     I          ~~~The Ben Sawyer and Dawho River cross the'inlet waterway
           and will be replaced with 65' fixed span structures, thus
           alleviating traffic delays in these areas. The proposed Stono
     I    Bridge will be less in height, according to highway sources,
           but will have considerably more room for passage than is permitted
          by the existing 8' bridge. The final design is not yet complete.
     I         ~~~The Dawho Bridge is scheduled for construction within the
           next one to two years. However, neither the Stono nor the Ben
           Sawyer has been scheduled for construction, the latter being
           held up by local opposition to the eventual placement of the
           new structure. The Stono is still in the engineering stage.

           I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 43

    - --- -- - -- - -- - -- -- - m

                                                     TABLE XIV

                                            IMPACT OF BRIDGE OPENINGS,
                                                TRAVEL-TIME DELAYS

                                                               Average             5
                                                               Number       Annual                         6
                                                              Vehicles   Aggregate             Time-Travel
                                 Total                 Average  Delayed        Number             Delay (Hours)
                               Number    Number2    Number         Per        Vehicles          Per          Yearly
        Bridge                    Openings  Openings        VPD    Opening       Delayed          Opening   Aggregate
                                                   7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.

       Ashley                       372         335       69,000       480    160,800                40.0     13,400
       Ben Sawyer                 3,165      2,850         9,500        66    188,100                 5.5    15,675
       Dawho River                4,729      4,260           840         6      25,560                 .5      2,130
       Limehouse Road             5,560      5,000         5,500        30      15,000                2.5    12,500
       Stono River                1,380      1,240         8,300        58      71,920                4.8        595
       Wando River                    4          --        3,500         24          --               --
       Wappoo Creek               4,306      3,875        35,200       244    945,500                20.0    77,500

       2Recorded openings by the S. C. Highway Department, 1982.
       3S. C. Highway Department logs; average 90% of all openings between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
        S. C. Highway Department, calculations for selected bridges; average 80 percent crossings
       between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
        Average opening time 5 minutes divided into 12 hour period = 144 five minute intervals divided
       into the average number vehicles crossing in a 12 hour period = average number delayed vehicles.
        Aggregate is calculated by multiplying number of bridge openings by number vehicles delayed
       during 5 minute interval.
        Number vehicles converted to time lost per vehicle.

       Source: Vismor, McGill & Bell, Inc.

           Shellfish Areas

     I           ~~~The South Carolina Department of Wildlife and Marine
           Resources is in the process of mapping all shellfish areas
           in Charleston County. This program includes identifying
           all oyster beds according to size, productivity and pollution.
           At this point in time, the department has completed inventoring
           all oyster beds in "polluted" waters, as determined by the
           South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.
    I     ~~The results are presented on an accompanying map, entitled
            "Constraints to Marina Development." More detailed maps are
    *      ~~available from the Marine Resources Division.
                  The maps are subject to change as waters are reclassified
           by DHEC, but as of now approximately one-third of the county' s
    I     ~~waterways have been classified as polluted and unsuitable for
            shellfish harvesting.

                  The total number of "polluted" oyster beds in the county
    I     ~~is 2,464, according to the S. C. Wildlife and Marine Resources
            Department. While it is not possible to relate the number of
           polluted to non-polluted, harvestable oyster beds, due to
    I     ~~incomplete survey data, it is sufficient to know the extent
            of shellfish pollution in the county. Further pollution and
            degradation of SA waters and subsequent closing of shellfish
    I     ~~areas, as a result of any action, including marina siting,
            should be discouraged if not prohibited in light of the present
            situation --- 2,464 polluted oyster beds.

     ~~~~iInformation relative to the location and productivity of
            non-polluted oyster beds is available on request for any area
            of the county, by contacting the Marine Resources Division.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~45

                                     CHAPTER IV

                                  CHARLESTON COUNTY
         *                        ~~~~~~~SUB-AREA ANALYSIS

                 As established earlier by this report, there is a positive
            correlation between population and boat ownership, and the
            ratio is higher in water oriented areas such as Charleston
            County. Consequently, there is a need to know where, within
            the county, and at what rate future growth is expected to occur,
            in order to anticipate the market demand and subsequent pressure
            for new marina development.

     I          ~~~All things being equal in a marina, proximity is the single
            most important factor in determining the demand for space and
            the overall market potential, as indicated by the results of our
            resident-docking survey. People living in Mount Pleasant, for
            example, want to use a marina in the Mount Pleasant area; not
            one on Johns Island.

     I          ~~~This chapter, therefore, will focus on sub-areas of the
            county: (1) to determine the potential demand for marinas in
               ecand (2) to inventory and assess conditions bearing on such

    *      ~~METHODOLOGY

                 Charleston County, with its many waterways, providing
            natural barriers to development and creating island communities,
            lends itself to sub-area analysis. Because of natural boundaries,
            most of these areas previously have been recognized for demo-
            graphic study by the Bureau of Census and the BCD Council of
    I     ~~Governments.  Recognition of these same areas by this study,
            therefore, is important from the standpoint of developing
    *      ~~statistical data that may be easily updated over time (Appendix C)

                 Toward this end, we divided the county into 14 study areas,
            starting with sub-area #1 east of the Cooper and-concluding with
            414, Edisto Island, as identified by the accompanying sub-area map.

                 A development profile is constructed for each, beginning
            with an assessment of current and projected population, boat
            ownership and available docking facilities. This is followed
            by a comprehensive inventory and assessment of the conditions,
            ie. water quality, transportation, etc. which may be impacted
    * ~~by future marina development.

           I                             ~~~~~~~~~~~46

                                      I                                                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Constraints To Marina Siting and Sub-Are   eiiin

            I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~%%olot

                 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                                                                                                                                              Areas~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4 -5  6.--
                   I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~e                                            T
                     I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~%ALSO
    I~~~~~~~~~A

                                    I  I  Scale. linch   3 milesArea
                                             VISMOR, McGILL & BELL, INC. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Wnd

                                  I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]D

    Sub Area #1: McClellanville/Awendaw

         Description

         The McClellanville-Awendaw area occupies much of the northern
    portion of the county, extending from the Santee River to Price
    Creek and the upper reaches of the Wando River.

         Potential Demand

         Demand for marina space is predicated principally on three
    factors: (1) population, (2) registered boats, and (3) marina
    facilities.

                               Existing               Projected
                                1980            1990       2000

         Population             4,200            4,250       4,300
         Boats                    285              350         420

         As this area is predominantly rural, and is projected to
    remain so through the year 2000, the demand for additional
    marina facilities will be minimal. Although, the number of
    registered boats is expected to increase by over 300.

         At present, Leland Marina, in McClellanville, is the only
    one in the area, and it is not a full service marina.  But it
    does provide such essential services as fuel.  It also offers
    a few berths.

         One reason the demand is not expected to increase in pro-
    portion to the number of boats, is that most new boats are
    expected to be in the smaller, fishing and recreation class,
    capable of trailering.

         Constraints

         In the absence of "market demand" it matters little what
    the constraints to marina development might be. However, in
    this area, there are many.

         The greatest constraint to development is in the area
    of water quality. The Department of Health and Environmental
    Control has classified all water bodies in this area SA, which
    is the highest salt water quality rating in the state at this
    time. Moreover, the Department is considering the reclassification
    of the Cape Romain Area, which essentially includes the entire
    Study Area #1, to class SAA. The Department estimates that
    less than 10 percent of South Carolina's waters could meet this
    higher quality classification, Cape Romain being one of the few.
    Discharge of any kind is prohibited in such waters.

                                 47

                  Secondly, this area has limited passage to the Atlantic,
            Five Fathom Creek being the only marked channel.

            Sub Area #2: Mount Pleasant

     *            ~~~Description

                  This includes all the urbanized area east of the Cooper,
            except Sullivan's Island and Isle of Palms. It extends from
            the Cooper River to the boundary of Sub-Area #1, along Price
            Creek and the Wando.

     *           ~~~Potential Demand

                  Based on its water orientation, income status, and projected
    U      ~~growth, an additional 1,200 registered boats are estimated for
            the Mount Pleasant community by 1990, an increase of approximately
            150 percent over the current estimate.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~Existing  Projected
                                           1980         1990       2000

                  Population              23,476          33,000    41,700
                  Boats                    1,600           2,800      4,100

                  Increase                               + 1,200   + 2,500

                  With the loss of 50 spaces at Mount Pleasant Marina, the
            potential demand for marina space is expected to be quite strong.
    I     ~~At present, this area, in conjunction with Sullivan's island,
            and the Isle of Palms has by far the highest ratio of big boat
            owners in the county. On the average, one out of every 100 persons
    I     ~~in this area owns a big boat (23' plus) , compared with one out of
            every 268 persons countywide.

                  If this ratio holds through 1990, we will have an additional
    I     ~~100 big boat owners in this area, accounting for nearly one-fourth
            of the projected demand for the county over the next six years.
            This will produce a need for approximately 470 spaces by 1990,
    I     ~~including space for the out-of-county demand.  Already planned
            and/or existing at this time is space for 943 boats, excluding
            the 80 dry stack slips at Shem Creek Marina.

                                  Isle of Palms          338
                                  Creekside               29
                                  Hobcaw                  36
                                  Mt. Pleasant           140
                                  Patriots Point         400

           U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 48

                  Constraints

                  Perhaps the greatest constraint to marina development in
           this area is zoning. Within the constantly expanding boundaries
           of the Town of Mount Pleasant, marinas are restricted to a single
           zoning district. And this district is established in but two
           areas of the  town:   at the site of the Mount Pleasant Marina
           and on Shem Creek. However, they may also be included as part
           of a PUD project.

     *           ~~~Much of the area outside of town is in marsh and wetlands,
           posing major natural constraints to marina development. Also
           SA waters and non-polluted shellfish grounds are located east of
    3 ~the town and above the Ben Sawyer Bridge.

    3      ~Sub Area #3:  Sullivan's Island/Isle of Palms

                 Description

     3          ~~~This study area includes basically the two island
           communities of Sullivan's Island and Isle of Palms, and is
           entirely incorporated.

                 Potential Demand
                 Boat ownership is expected to be somewhat higher in this
    I    ~area than in the county as a whole.  But the limited land area
           will restrict the growth potential and the demand for future
           marina space.
                                        Existing          Projected
                                          1980        1990         2000

                 Population               5,288         6,000        6,600
     I         ~~~Boats                     400           600          700

     I          ~~~Increase                             + 200        + 300

                 The number of registered boats by island residents is pro-
           jected to increase by 300. But the demand for future marina
           space is expected to come largely from second home owners in the
           Wild Dunes section of the Isle of Palms.

                 With the planned expansion of Isle ot Palms Marina
           (320 slips) , and an additional pier at Creekside, the demand
           for dock space should be satisfied through 1990, and perhaps
           beyond, but price may dictate otherwise.

                 Constraints

                 Natural constraints identified by the previous discussion
    I    ~on Mt. Pleasant, also are present here, ie. marsh lands, SA waters,
           non-polluted oyster beds. Moreover, zoning by both towns is very
           restrictive, making further marina development unlikely, barring
           any ordinance changes.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~49

           Sub-Areas #4, 45 and #6: Charleston and North Charleston

     *          ~~~Description

                 This area includes everything in Charleston County between
           the Cooper and Ashley Rivers. The reason for grouping these
    I    ~areas, as opposed to evaluating them singularly,  is the market
           implication, brought about by constraints of both rivers--the
           Cooper being flanked principally by the military and commercial
    I    ~docking, and the Ashley being denied unlimited access by the
           two low level, high volume river bridges. This forces the
           market into the peninsula area--the only logical place for marinas
    *      ~in the three sub-areas.

                 Potential Demand

           I                             ~~~~~~~~~Existing  Projected
                                         1980         1990         2000
                 Population              142,836        147,000      150,500
                 Boats                     9,800         12,100       14,600

                 Increase                              +  2,300    +  4,800

                 Already sixty percent of the big boat owners reside in this
    I    ~area.  And each of the three marinas located here--Lockwood
           Municipal, Ashley and the Naval Base Yacht Club--has a substantial
           waiting list. So, the demand for space here is far greater than
    *      ~the supply at this time.

                 There are 498 boat slips in this area and 616 big boat owners.
    U ~Taking into account 20 percent occupancy by out-of-county boats,
    *      ~the number of spaces is effectively reduced by nearly 100, making
           available only 398 spaces for 616 big boat owners. The future
           demand will be even greater, as the total number of boats is
           projected to increase by 2,300 over the next six years. Of this
           number, 130 will be big boats, giving us a projected deficit of
           approximately 350 slips. Much of this deficit will be met by the
           city, which has plans for 300 additional slips at Lockwood Marina,
           and an additional 30 slips at the Festival Market Place. Although,
           the latter will be reserved principally for transient boats.

     I          ~~~Constraints

                 Zoning does not appear to be much of a constraint, nor are
           the issues of water quality or shellfish harvesting of particular
           concern. The waters of the Cooper and Ashley Rivers, and Charleston
           Harbor are already off-limits to oyster harvesting. As a result,
           another marina would have little or no impact on the present
           situation.

           *                              ~~~~~~~~~~~50

     U          ~~~What then are the constraints?  Actually, there are several,
           not the least of which are the low level Ashley River Bridges,
           limiting usage of the Ashley River. This is a major constraint
    I     ~and one which should not be compromised because of the potential
           impact on traffic, discussed in Chapter  III.   Moreover, this
           river is flanked by numerous marshes and wetlands, which would
    I     ~have to be mitigated in order to properly site a marina.  But
           the major constraint to the use of the Ashley is the bridges.

                 Much of the Cooper River is inaccessible because of large
    I    ~land holdings by the U. S. Navy.  And a large part of the harbor
           is occupied by the S. C. Ports Authority, making available space
           a premium commodity.

           Sub-Area #7: St. Andrews/Bear Swamp

                 Description

                 This area, too, is bounded by water, forming a peninsula
    I    ~in much the same fashion as Charleston.  And the situation is
           quite similar in that the potential on the Ashley is restricted
           by the low level bridges, and access to the Stono is somewhat
           restricted by the Seaboard Coastline and expansive marsh areas.
     *           ~~~Potential Demand

                 The projected growth of this area will be accompanied by

                                         Existing             Projected
                                           1980           1990         2000

                 Population               49,425            57,000       63,200
     I         ~~~~Boating                  3,400             4,700        6,100

                 Increase                                  + 1,300      + 2,700

           an increase in ownership of approximately 1,300 boats by 1990.
           Of this number, approximately 70 will be large boat owners,
    *      ~generally requiring marina space.

                 Constraints

                 This area is flanked by the Stono and Ashley Rivers. And
           in the area of the Ashley, the constraints are the same as those
           listed previously: the Ashley River Bridges. This one obstacle
           is so great as to preclude marina siting on the Ashley.

          In the opposite direction lies the Stono and Wappoo Creek,
    both of which are virtually inaccessible because of existing
    development or marsh.

          Water quality and shellfish beds are of little concern
    here, as the oyster beds have been declared "polluted" by DHEC,
    although some of the upper reaches of the Stono carry an SA
    classification.

          One final constraint to marina siting beyond the Limehouse
    Bridge is the bridge itself, with a clearance of only 12 feet.
    At present, the bridge is carrying only 6,900 vehicles per day,
    but because of its limited height and position on the waterway,
    it is opened more than any other bridge in the county--5,560
    times during 1982. As a result, any future siting on this river
    should be east of the bridge.

    Sub-Areas #8, #9 and #10: Folly Island, James Island and Rural
    John's Island

          Description

          These areas are grouped together because of their proximity
    to Stono and Buzzard's Roost Marinas, the Stono River and Wappoo
    Creek. They comprise a combined market area for existing and
    potential marinas in this vicinity.

          Potential Demand

          Boat ownership is expected to increase by 1,700 at the end
    of this century. It should be relatively consistent, based on
    population growth, but it will fluctuate with the economy.

                                  Existing               Projected
                                    1980               1990     2000

          Population               30,159               34,000    38,400
          Boats                      2,100               3,000     3,800

          Increase                                    +   900   � 1,700

          The number of resident big boat owners is projected to
    increase by 50 during the next six years, to 1990.  Planned for
    the area is a 50 slip expansion by Stono Marina (application
    pending) and 100 slip  addition  by Mariner's Cay.  Interestingly,
    neither marina is currently filled. Also, in the preliminary
    planning stages is a residential docking facility for a complex
    at the Merritt Dredging site, on James Island.

                                  52

          Constraints

          Constraints to marina development in this area are many,
    although most shellfish areas have been classified as polluted
    by DHEC and would have little bearing on future siting. The
    principal constraint, as with the Ashley River, is the low-level
    bridge crossing the Stono.  Its impact on traffic previously has
    been documented and discussed, but it bears restating in view
    of the severity of the problem. Until such time as this bridge
    is replaced, further marina expansion east of this location should
    be prohibited, as the problem will escalate in direct proportion
    to the number of slips added. And this includes slips on the
    Kiawah and Folly Rivers, as principal destinations for recreational
    vehicles are the ICWW and Charleston Harbor, both of which are
    more easily accessible via the Stono as opposed to the Atlantic
    Ocean. Thus, any marina siting down the Stono is apt to increase
    the number of bridge openings.

          Mr. Harry Brunson of Buzzard's Roost Marina estimates that
    90 percent of the traffic from his marina is directed toward
    Charleston Harbor, with only 10 percent headed down the Stono.
    This ratio most likely applies to the Stono Marina, as well.
    For boats docked further down river, at Mariner's Cay or Kiawah,
    the ratios probably would be less, but the number using this route
    would still exceed the number heading toward the Atlantic, in
    all probability. As a result, any sitings in this area will impact
    the bridge, causing additional openings and traffic delays.

          Additionally, there are SA waters and harvestable shellfish
    beds to contend with in much of this area. Marsh and wetlands
    also are in great supply.  But part of the Stono, down to Abbapoola
    Creek, has been closed to shellfishing, although the water carries
    an SA classification.

    Sub-Area #11: Johns Island/Bohicket/Kiawah/Seabrook

          This area, rual and sparsely developed in parts, is
    developing as a major resort complex. It is quite removed
    from the Charleston peninsula and its marina facilities;
    thus making it a market unto itself.

          Potential Demand

          Boat ownership is estimated to be quite low, at 380.  It
    is projected to reach 800 by the year 2000, however, this may
    be artificially low.

                                 Existing          Projected
                                  1980         1990         2000

          Population              3,380          5,700        8,000
          Boats                     380            650          800

         Increase                              +  270       +  420

                                  53

                 The demand for slip space in this area may be much higher
           than projected by this study because of the second home markets
           at Kiawah and Seabrook Islands. The demand projections are
           based on growth of the resident population, plus 20 percent for
           non-residents. But here, the ratio of out-of-county residents
    I     ~is apt to be much higher, and the subsequent demand for marina
           space greater. Although this has not proven to be the case
           thus far. Bohicket Marina, with 130 long-term slips, is just
           over one-half filled. And it is positioned to serve both
           complexes, located at the entrance to each. Moreover, there
           are plans to expand Bohicket by another 60 slips if and when
    *      ~~the need arises.

                 Constraints

                 With few exceptions, the water in this area is of pristine
           quality, SA classification, and shellfish areas are not polluted.
           Unspoiled marsh and wetlands are in abundance. These natural
           constraints to marina siting are further compounded by the Stono
           River Bridge. It, too, will be impacted by marina development
           on the Kiawah River, as indicated previously. So, add to the
           list of natural constraints, and they are many, one man-made
           constraint--the Stono River Bridge.

           Sub-Area #12: Wadmalaw Island

                 Description

     I           ~~~Wadmalaw Island is clearly defined by its water boundaries.
           It is characteristically rural, but because of its access to the
           North Edisto River, a deep water marked channel to the Atlantic
    I     ~Ocean, it has great appeal for the boating enthusiast.  However,
           it is remote and quite removed from the growth center of the
           county.

     I           ~~~Potential Demand

                 Because of its remote location, little growth is projected
           for this area. Likewise, boat ownership and the demand for
           marina space is minimal as well.

                                         Existing              Projected
                                          -1980               1990     2000

                 Population               2,440               2,600     2,800
     I          ~~~Boats                     170                 200       270

                 Increase                                   +   30    +  100

                                         54

     3          ~~~Constraints

                 Surrounded as it is by pristine waters, one would think
           that any marina siting would degrade water quality. But due
           to the flushing action on the Wadmalaw and Edisto Rivers, and
           hohicket Creek, this is not necessarily the case. Therefore,
           unless oyster beds are involved, the natural constraints in
           this area may be mitigated. Any mitigating action also would
    I    ~have to take into account the projected impact on the Limehouse
           Bridge, as a marina siting in this general area would be felt
    *      ~~at the bridge.

                 Unless a residential resort complex is planned for this
           area, these constraints may never have to be mitigated, as
           projected growth is quite low and the area is too far removed
           from the urban fabric of the county to attract much attention
           as a marina site.

           Sub-Area #13: Ravenel/Hollywood/Meggett/St. Paul Area
     *           ~~~Description

                 This area of the county is rural and sparsely developed.
           As a result, it is outside the boundaries of the Charleston Area
           Transportation Study (CHATS) . It includes everything in the
           county west of the Wadmalaw River and south of Rantowles Creek.

     3           ~~~Potential Demand

                 As this area is not projected to grow at the accelerated
    3 ~rate of some of the more urbanized areas of the county, growth
           in the number of boat owners also is expected to be modest.
           And the demand for marina facilities limited.

           I                             ~~~~~~~~~~Existing  Projected__
                                           1980        1990         2000

                 Population              10,950         12,100       13,300
                 Boats                      750          1,000        1,290

     3          ~~~Increase                              +  250      +  540

                 Like Wadmalaw Island, there is little potential for marina
           development here, unless a major residential resort complex is
           proposed. At present, the market is insufficient to support a
           marina, and is not projected to expand enough over the next 16

           years to do so, unless something out of the ordinary occurs.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~55

    U     ~This is not to rule out the possibility that one will not be
           proposed, however. But market indications would tend to rule
           out such a proposal for some time.

                 Constraints

                 While the demand appears to be small, the constraints are
           large. Prestine waters, shellfish beds and marsh areas are in
           abundance. But where the water may be reached without disturbing
           wetlands or oyster beds, marina siting may be mitigated due to
           the flushing action on the major waterways.
                 In addition to the Limehouse Bridge, the Dawho also must
    I    ~be considered, as it has an even lower clearance (8').  This
           situation may be only temporary, however, as the Dawho is scheduled
    *      ~to be replaced within the next few years.

                 An area of particular concern is the South Edisto basin.
           Its waters are of the highest quality in the state, and could
           support an SA-A classification, according to DHEC. This could
           essentially disallow future marina siting. But due to the nature
           of these waterways, shouldn't they be protected? Shouldn't DHEC
           be requested to make such a classification official, before the
           quality is compromised?

           Sub-Area #14: Edisto Island

                 Description

     *           ~~~Because of the many waterways separating it from the rest
           of the county, Edisto Island is perhaps the most inaccessible
           area of the county. Its remote position already has resulted in
           the loss of Edisto Beach, when in 1975, it annexed to neighboring
           Colleton County.
     i           ~~~Potential Demand

                 The population on Edisto Island, outside of Edisto Beach,
           is quite sparse,numbering only 1,345 in 1980. And in contrast
           to most other areas in the county, it is projected to decline
    ~~sighl  npplto.Tettli xetdt eaon ,0
           by the year 2000. Boat ownership also is expected to be lower,
    *      ~generating no demand from within for marina facilities.

                                         Existing          Projected
                                          1980          1990         2000

                 Population               1,345          1,330        1,300
                 Boats                       90            100          120
                  Increase                              +   10       +   30

                 The above demand projections belie the present situation.
           There are two marina proposals pending for this area. Both are
    I     ~adjuncts to planned residential resort complexes.  One includes
           slips for 200 boats and the other will have space for 48 boats
    *      ~~(previously discussed).

                 Constraints

     H           ~~~The 200 slip marina proposed for the South Edisto River
           would jeopardize any hopes of securing an SAA classification
           for these waters. The flushing action of the Edisto probably
           is sufficient to accommodate the project, but not sufficient
           for an SAA classification.

                 Again, we are dealing with some of the more pristine
           waters in the state, flanked heavily by marsh and wetlands.
           Additional constraints posed by shellfish areas, if any,will
           have to be considered separately, as the data are not available
           for the entire county at this time.
                 But this entire area is extremely critical from the stand-
    I     ~point of its natural qualities--qualities that have not as yet
           been compromised. The question arising in face of the two
           marina proposals is, should they be approved in light of the fact
           that they would compromise the water quality to such an extent
           that an SAA classification would be unattainable?

           I~~~~~~~~~~~~5

                                     CHAPTER V

                                RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
                                 FOR EVALUATING AND
                                 PERMITTING MARINAS
                                IN CHARLESTON COUNTY

     I           ~~~Any attempt to quantify and make uniform marina siting
            criteria will be met by the cry "that each situation is
            different and therefore, should be evaluated individually."
    I      ~~And to an extent, this is true.  But there are degrees to
            which any marina will impact the environment, ranging from
            acceptable to unacceptable.

     I           ~~~The thrust of this study is to discern between the two.
            If everything is left to mitigation, then there are no absolute
            constraints. This is not the case, however. There are
    I      ~~conditions which should not be compromised or mitigated.  But,
            also there are conditions where mitigation is necessary; and
            conditions where it is not required.

     I           ~~~Therefore, we have structured an evaluation process, or
            matrix of "siting standards", which establishes conditions as:

     I           ~~~(1)  Generally acceptable to marina siting

                  (2) Generally marginal to marina siting, requiring
      I              ~~~~mitigation, and

                  (3) Generally unacceptable to marina siting.

    I       ~~(1)  Generally Acceptable:  The project shows a positive or
            neutral impact on all major environment elements. Normally
            there would be no objection to marina siting.

             (2) Generally Marginal, Requiring Mitigation: The project
            shows negative impacts, but may be acceptable with mitigation,
    I      ~~of the type prescribed by the siting standards matrix.

             (3) Generally Unacceptable: The project exceeds the limits
            of acceptability, posing sufficient negative impacts to warrant

            permit denial.

           U                              ~~~~~~~~~~~~58

            What Is A Marina?

                  Before we go any further, we need to establish just what
            is a marina. According to Charleston County's Zoning Ordinance,
     I     ~~a marina is:

                   "A basin or marine terminal that provides space, docks,
                  moorings and related facilities/services for 5 or more
                  pleasure boats.
                   "This does not include the sale and repair of recreational
                  marine craft nor ship and boat building and repairing."
                  The South Carolina Coastal Council has a somewhat different
            definition. it describes marinas as:

                   "facilities that provide boat launchings, storage, moorage,
                   supplies, and services. There are three basic types of

      I           ~~~(a)   the open structure type where open pile work
                        and/or floating breakwaters are used;

                   (b)   the solid construction type where bulkhead and
                        landfill are used to provide moorings and shelters;

                   (c)   the dry storage type where boats are stored in
                         specially designed warehouses placed entirely on

                  Commercial docks are also considered a marina type facility."

      -           ~~~The Council adopted a revised definition May 18, 1984,
            classifying any docking facility with six or more slips as a marina.

                  The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
    -;      ~Control has not adopted an official definition of a marina, but
            generally considers a marina to be a docking facility, where
            marine services are available. Herein lies a problem which
            surfaced during the Kiawah Marina hearings. DHEC has a policy
            of closing all shellfish areas within 1,000 feet of a marina.
            Therefore, to permit the proposed facility at Kiawah would result
            in such a closing. However, there exists at Kiawah a "community
     I     ~docking facility" with a capacity for up to 18 boats.  But because
            this facility is not recognized by DHEC as a marina, there has
            been no such closing. By its own admission, DHEC has permitted
            marinas smaller in size. And where permitted, shellfish areas
            are routinely closed as a precautionary measure.

                  The applicant argued that the 18 slip community docking
     I     ~~facility was, in fact, an existing marina and as such should
            have caused the closing of shellfish areas within 1,000 feet.

            I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 59

    3      ~~That it was not called a marina nor permitted as such had no
            bearing on the impact it had on water quality. The distinction
            was made principally on the basis of operation: because it was
            not operated as a marina, it was not a marina. And because
            it was not considered a marina, shellfish areas within 1,000
            feet were not closed. But according to the county's definition,
    *      ~~it was a marina.

            Recommended Definitions

     3           ~~~For purposes of this study and for regulating marinas in
            Charleston County, four classifications are recommended:

     *           ~~~Proposed Definitions

                  (1) Marina, Non-commercial Multiple Docking Facility

      *               ~~~~A basin or marine terminal that provides space,
                       docks, moorings for five (5) or more boats on a
                       private or non-commercial basis. This includes
      I              ~~~~multiple docking facilities such as for condo-
                       miniums or other residential uses or subdivisions,
                       and includes non-profit "yacht clubs." It does
                       not include service generally associated with
      I              ~~~~commercial marinas, such as fuel, over-night docking,
                       ship's store, etc. Dry storage and/or dry stack
      3               ~~~~~is permitted.

                  (2) Marina, Commercial

                       A basin or marine terminal that provides space,
      I              ~~~~docks, moorings and related facilities and services
                       for five (5) or more pleasure boats. This includes
                       the sale and repair of recreational marine craft
      I              ~~~~and the sale of fuel, food, beverage, supplies,
                       hardware and other accessory uses. Dry storage
                       and/or dry stack is permitted. It does not include
     I               ~~~~~boat building and boat yards.
                  (3) Marina/Boat Yard

      I               ~~~~A basin or marine terminal that provides space,
                       docks, moorings and related facilities and services
                       for five (5) or more boats, including pleasure and
      I              ~~~~commercial craft.  This includes the sale, repair,
                       and building of boats, dry storage, and/or dry stack,
                       fueling operations, and other uses permitted by the
      I              ~~~~marine commercial definition..
                  (4) Marina, Dry Stack

      *               ~~~~A facility for storing and keeping boats out of water.
                       This is principally a land operation, where boats are
                       dry stored or "stacked" until such time as they are
                       transferred to the water for use. Because of the
           3                              ~~~~~~~~~~~60

                       mechanics involved in this operation, dry stack
                       marinas seldom accommodate boats in excess of
                       25 feet. A dry stack marina shall provide dock
                       space for no more than four (4) pleasure craft,
                       which space shall be used principally for "temporary
                       docking" during the loading and unloading operation.
                       A dry stack marina may include the sale of fuel,
                       supplies, hardware and other accessories, but not
                       boat building, boat yards, or facilities for over-
                       night docking.

     I           ~~~The above definitions make clear what constitutes a marina
            and distinguishes among such uses on the basis of functional
            characteristics. Dry stack marinas are defined principally as
    I     ~~"ln marinas " and, as such, may be developed individually
           where no more than four dock spaces are provided,or as part of
            one of the previously defined marinas, where five or more "wet"
    *       ~~slips are provided.

                  In the above context, non-commercial marinas are viewed
              ascomplementary or accessory uses to residential development,
            siia r   to golf courses, and tennis clubs.

                  Commercial marinas are designed to fit into selected
            commercial districts; while marina-boat yards are intended for
            industrial or heavy commercial zoning districts. Dry stack
           marina operations may qualify for any given zoning district or
            area of the county, depending on how they are developed, ie.
            as a non-commercial accessory use, commercial use, or in tandem
           with boat yard operations.

    *      ~~Recommended Objectives

                  Before we recommend the adoption of a criteria for evaluating
            the impact of marinas, we need first to determine what we hope
            to accomplish. Toward this end, the various state and federal
            agencies involved in the permitting process already have enunciated
            their objectives, most of which are contained in their respective
    I           ~enbing legislation.  But what are the county's objectives?
            What does Charleston County hope to accomplish as a result of
    *      ~~this study?

                  The county's objectives are not unlike those of the various
            state and federal agencies involved in the permitting process,
           but primary consideration. shall be given:-

                  (1) To maintain the applicable water quality standards
                       and to cause such standards to be upgraded as they
      I              ~~~~apply to the South Edisto River Basin and the Cape
                       Romain Estuary, from SA to SAA.

           I                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~61

                   (2) To preserve the integrity of the natural shoreline,
                       including marsh areas and wetlands.

                   (3) To minimize the impact of marina siting on traffic
                       flow, and the operation of low level bascule and
                       swing bridges.

                   (4) To preserve marsh and wetlands.

     1            ~~~~(5)  To prevent further pollution and closing of oyster
                       beds and shellfish areas.

                   (6) To encourage marina siting in response to market
                       demands, as demonstrated by Chapter II.

                   (7) To site and maintain marinas, including dry stack
                       marinas, so as to minimize any detrimental impact
                       on adjacent residential uses or environmentally
      *                ~~~~~sensitive areas.

                   (8) To insure through site plan review, adequate
                       consideration of storm water runoff, erosion, service
                       utilities, and bufferyards.

                   (9) To discourage marina siting in areas where dredging
                       is required or "flushing" is inadequate.

            Recommended Siting Standards

     *            ~~~Siting standards for marina development in Charleston
            County are recommended by the following Impact Matrix. it
            addresses each of the key elements which may be impacted by
            such development, setting forth "conditions of acceptance."

            Recommended Use of Siting Standards Matrix

     I            ~~~The matrix includes development criteria and standards
            used by the various permitting agencies, ie. S. C. Coastal
            Council, S. C. Department of Health and Environmental Control,
    I      ~~U. S. Corps of Engineers, and local governments.  As such, it
            represents a comprehensive approach to marina siting in'the
            county.

     I            ~~~Much of the detailed information required by the various
            permitting agencies is absent from the matrix, and must be
            secured directly from such agencies. But the conditions that
            generally constitute acceptance, mitigation or unacceptance are
            there. And if the matrix, including the definitions and objectives
            are adopted for use by each of the local governments in Charleston
            County, it will provide for the first time, a uniform criteria
            and reference for marina siting, irrespective of the local
            jurisdiction within which such siting is proposed.

                                           6 2

                  But in order for the siting standards to have uniform
            applicability, marinas cannot be permitted as "uses by right."
             Instead, they must be re-established in all local zoning
            ordinances as "conditional uses." in this way, it will be
            possible for local planning commissions and councils to review
    3       ~~marina applications with the siting standards contained in the

    3       ~~Recommended Steps To Implementation

                  The use and implementation of the recommendations contained
            in this document may be facilitated by the following schedule
    3       ~~of action by Charleston County Council:

                  Step I

     I           ~~~Adopt the study for use in reviewing all future marina
            applications in the county.
     *           ~~~Step II

                  Instruct the planning staff to prepare the necessary
    *       ~~language to amend the zoning ordinance:

                   (1) to include the proposed marina definitions;

     3            ~~~(2)  to make marinas "conditional uses" in each district
                       in which they are presently permitted--to remove
                       them as uses by right where they are presently
      *               ~~~~~permitted as such;

                   (3) to adopt by reference the Siting Standards contained
      3               ~~~~~in the Impact Matrix.

                  Step III

    .3           ~~~To forward copies of this document to all municipal
            governments in the county, with a request that each consider
            taking the same action outlined in Step II. if complied with,
            this will establish uniform standards for siting marinas,

            throughout the county, irrespective of political jurisdiction.

           I                              ~~~~~~~~~~~63

                                                              MARINA SITING STANDARDS

                                                                  (IMPACT MATRIX)

    E  .LEME~NTS IMPACTED             CONDITIONS GENERALLY                CONDITIONS GENERALLY MARGINAL TO         CONDITIONS GENERALLY
       BY MARINA SITING            ACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING         MARINA SITING, REQUIRING MITIGATION   UNACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING

    I  Water Quality
        (classification)          SC--Marina siting is                 SB, B and SA--Marina siting may         SAA and A--Marina siting is
                                  generally acceptable in             be acceptable in SB, B and SA           generally unacceptable in
                                   SC waters.                          waters, provided such siting            SAA and A waters, including
                  I                                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~will not result in the lowering  waters of pristine quality,
                                                                       of water quality; the closing of       ie. South Edisto River basin
                                                                       existing shellfish areas open to       and Cape Romain Estuary.  A
                  I                                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~harvesting; or otherwise interfere    marina siting on these waters
                                                                       with existing uses of such waters,    would jeopardize the upgrading
                                                                       as determined by the S. C. Depart-    and reclassification of such
                                                                       ment of Health and Environmental       areas in the future.
                                                                       Control (DHEC).

       Water Depth                 Adequate for all recrea-             inadequate for recreational            Inadequate for recreational
                                   tional boats--no dredging           boats--no alternative to dredging;    boats--required dredging:
                                   required.                           however, required dredging:             (1) will destroy existing
                                                                       (1) will have no measurable impact    harvestable shellfish grounds,
                                                                       on existing shellfish grounds,         nursery areas, submerged
                                                                       nursery areas or submerged             aquatic vegetation of value
                                                                       aquatic vegetation of value to         to fish, shellfish and wildlife,
                                                                       fish, shellfish and wildlife, and      or (2) will produce stagnant
                                                                       (2) deposits may be disposed of        water conditions, fish entrap-
                                                                       in a manner acceptable to the          ments or degrade water quality.
                                                                       U. S. Corps of Engineers.

       Bridges                    Marina siting will have no           Marina siting will have an impact       Marina siting will have an
                                   direct impact on existing           on bridge traffic, but because of       unacceptable impact on bridge
         I                       ~~~~~~~~bascule and swing bridges.     conditions at the bridge, the          traffic, where (1) vehicle
                                                                       impact may be mitigated where:         crossings exceed 10,000 per day
                                   Note: In making this                 (1) vehicle crossings are less         as reported by the most recent
                                   determination:  (1) a marina        than 10,000 per day, as reported        n I I-Tay department count, and
         I                       ~~~~~~~~siting on either side of +--e  by the most recent highway dept.   ~i2) vertical clearance beneath
                                   Ben Sawyer or Wappoo Bridge         count, and (2) vertical clearance       the bridge is less than 15
                                   shall be considered to have         beneath the bridge is at least          feet.
                                   no direct impact, because of        7.5 feet, but no greater than 15        Note:  Dry stack marinas shall
                                   their relative height and urban    feet.                                    be exempt from these conditions,
                                   location on the Intracoastal                                                provided (1) no boats exceeding
                                   Waterway; (2) a marina siting                                               the clearance of any bridge
                                   on the waterway and/or Charleston                                           between the marina and ICWW
                                   Harbor side of any other bascule                                            are stored  or kept at the
                                   or swing bridge, except the Dawho,                                          facility, (2) no fuel pumps
                                   shall be considered to have no                                              shall be accessible from the
                                   direct impact, as opposed to a                                              water, and (3) assurances to
                                   siting on the opposite side;                                                this effect shall be provided
                                   (3) a marina siting in the vicinity                                        and shall constitute "conditions
                                   of and on either side of the Dawho                                          of approval."
                                   shall be considered to have a direct
                                   impact and require mitigation as
                                   provided for by this matrix.

           MARINA SITING STANDARDS
    I    ~Impact Matrix (Continued)

           ELE~MENTS IMPACTED           CONDITIONS GENERALLY                 CONDITIONS GENERALLY MARGINAL TO        CONDITIONS GENERALLY
           BY MARINA SITING           ACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING          MARINA SITING, REQUIRING MITIGATION   UNACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING

           Streets and Roads          Marina siting will have no           Marina siting will impact the           Marina siting will have a
                                       significant impact on existing      transportation system, but the          substantial negative impact,
                                      traffic patterns; create no         situation may be mitigated through    where:  (1) neighborhood
                                      hazardous intersections;            street design modifications, such       streets would provide the
                                      cause to be installed no            as acceleration-deceleration ramps,   primary access to a comnmer-
          I                         ~~~~~~~~~additional traffic controls;  street alignments, installation of    cial or boatyard marina, or
                                      or utilize neighborhood or          traffic controls, and other design    (2) a potentially hazardous
                                      minor streets as the principal      alternatives which would minimize       intersection would be created.
          I                         ~~~~~~~~~means of access, unless, of  the impact.
                                      course, the proposed marina
                                       is a residential docking
                                       facility, designed to serve
                                       the neighborhood in question.
           Marsh Areas and
            Wetlands                  Marina siting will have no           Marina siting would impact marshes,   Marina siting would substan-
                                       affect on marshes, wetlands,        wetlands or mudflats, but through       tially impact marsh and wet-
                                       mudflats, and similar areas         proper site planning and design         lands, disturbing and dis-
                                       contiguous or adjacent to           consideration of the following          rupting the use of such areas
                                       coastal waters.                     elements, the impact could be           as wildlife habitats, and
                                                                           eliminated or reduced to an            marine life resources.  Also,
                                                                           acceptable level by:                   where marina siting would
                                                                           (1) providing open dockage toafetnirplcbe
                                                                           deep water, as opposed to excava-      historic and archaeological
                                                                           tion and filling; (2) limiting         site.
                    I                                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~impervious surface areas to no
                                                                           more than 25 percent of the "high
                                                                           ground;" (3) utilizing best
                                                                           management practice~s) as recoin-
                                                                           mended by the S. C. Coastal
                                                                           Council, in the design of a storm-
                                                                           water runoff system (sete SC~_C
                    I                                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Stormwater Management Guide!lines,
                                                                           1983) ; (4) minimizing any distur-
                                                                           bance of such areas by retaining
                                                                           them, as nearly as possible, in
                                                                           an unaltered state.

           Shellfish Areas            Marina siting is generally           Marina siting is generally unaccep-   Marina siting is generally
                                      acceptable in any polluted          table in any SA, pristine classified  unacceptable:  (1) in any SA,
                                      areas or areas "closed to shell-   waters, but may be located in such    pristine classified waters
                                      fish harvesting."  This includes   areas where (1) they have been closed where there is an existing
          I                         ~~~~~~~~~principally SB and SC classified   to shellfish harvesting by DHEC,  use of shellfish which would
                                      waters.                             (2) they are void of shellfish beds,  be closed or destroyed by such
                                                                           or (3) they would cause no closi .ng    siting, or (2) in any SAA,
                                                                           or destruction of any known shell-    pristine classified waters,
                                                                           fish areas of value for human          or waters capable of meeting
                                                                           consumption or marketing purposes.    SAA standards (see Constraints
                             *                                                                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~map).

       MARINA SITING STANDARDS
       impact Matrix (Continued)

       ELEMENTS IMPACTED             CONDITIONS GENERALLY                  CONDITIONS GENERALLY MARGINAL TO         CONDITIONS GENERALLY
       BY MARINA SITING            ACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING          MARINA SITING, REQUIRING MITIGATION   UNACCEPTABLE TO MARINA SITING

       Existing Land Use           Marina siting is generally           Where marinas are permitted by           Marina siting is prohibited
    I                             ~~~~~~~~~~acceptable (1) where recoin-  zoning as "conditional uses," the      from certain areas by some
                                   mended-by applicable Land            implication is that such a siting       local zoning ordinances, and
                                    Use Plans, (2) where per-            could have a negative impact on         is not recommended for others
                                   mitted by applicable zoning          existing land use.  To reduce, if       by some local Land Use Plans.
                                    regulations as a use by right,       not eliminate such a possibility,       But ordinances and plans are
                                    or (3) where such siting is          the following safeguards are            subject to change. As a result,
                                    sufficiently removed from            recommended:  (1) require instal-       a more definitive criteria pro-
    I                             ~~~~~~~~~~existing residential develop-  lation of bufferyards, appropria-     hibiting such development is
                                   ment so as to have no impact         tely dimensioned to assure              recommended where such a
                                   on such use.                         adequate buffering of adjacent          change (1) would create a
             I                                                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~land uses from noise, light,  "1spot zone," or isolated
                                                                        access or visual nuisance,              district unrelated to adjacent
                                                                        (2) limit the size and scale of        properties,  (2) would be
                                                                        the marina if the area to be            incompatible and at variance
                                                                        impacted is-predominantly resi-         with existing land uses,
                                                                        dential and the waters are used         (3) would be a detriment to
                                                                        for primary contact recreational        improvement or development of
                                                                        Iactivities,  (3) require land-         adjacent property,  (4) would
                                                                        scaping and structural design           adversely affect property
                                                                        modifications as appropriate for        values in adjacent areas,
             I                                                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~the area in which the marina is  (5) would allow a land use
                                                                        to be located, (4) impose other         out of scale with the needs of
                                                                        requirements as necessary to            a given neighborhood or com-
                                                                        make the marina compatible with         munity, or (6) create a safety
                                                                        existing land uses.                     hazard in water areas used
                                                                                                                extensively for primary contact
                       *                                                             ___             ___        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~recreational activities.

       Public Services
       and Utilities               marina sr  can be                    Marina siting will create addi-         Marina siting (1) cannot be
                                    accommodatied with "in-place"       tional demands for public services    adequately facilitated without
                                   water liosewerage                   and utilities, but all such             creating an excessive demand on
                                   facilities, fire and police          essential support elements can and    local government for drainage
                                   protection, etc., creating no        will be made available to the site    system improvements, additional
    I                             ~~~~~~~~~~additional need  for such    without creating an excessive           fire and police protection,
                                   facilities or demands on             demand on local government.             and/or water and sewer facil-
                                   such services.                                                               ities, including any additions
                                                                                                                necessary to handle "pump-out"
                                                                                                                facilities, or (2) all essen-
                                                                                                                tial public services and
                                                                                                                facilities are not available

                                                                                                                to the site.

                                   APPENDICES

          APPENDIX A      Martin County, Florida, Dock Standards and
    I                   ~ ~~~~~Regulations
          APPENDIX B      Use Conditions For Siting Recreational
    I                   ~~~~~~Marinas In Charleston County
          APPENDIX C      Population Distribution and Projections,
                          Charleston County, 1980-2000
          APPENDIX D      Population Projection Methodology

       I~~~~~~~~~~~6

                         APPENDIX A

                  1MARTINi COUNTY, FLORIDA
              DOCK STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS

    :.   "RPOCSE AND :NTENT

    .a'  The purpose of these standards and -egulations is to iem'ent
    those sections of the Martin County ComDrenensive Plan Dertaining to
    shoreline construction within and adjacent to the estuaries of the
    County, and further to Drov'de general oolicies and ouidelines 'or
    the consideration, location, design oarameters, pernitting and
    construction of docks within the waters of Martin County.

    (b'  :t is the intent of these policies to,  1) Employ flexible
    parameters and dock design criteria in order to minimize adverse
    environmental and social impact.  2)  To estaol4sh easily understood
    guidelines for the waterfront property owner utilizing
    scientifically based standards to  -ACl'fvy and expedite the
    Dermitting process.  3)  To aid ....   air and equitable
    distribution of access to and use of submerged lands between the
    uplands and channels.  4)  To assure a direct unobstructed means of
    ingress and egress over the foreshore and ti:a, waters to the
    channel.  5;  To encourage the sDace eff;cient utilization of
    docKs.  6)  To eliminate the necessity of arbitrary decision making
    in the permitting approval process.

     .  DEFI :NTICNS

    The following definitions shall be emolcyed in interpretation of the
    purpose and intent:

    1)  "Dock" (or "Pier") shall mean a fixed or floating structure
    providing access on or over submerged lands.

    2)  "Mooring Piling" shall mean a stake, post, pillar, pilings used
    for the purpose of berthing buoyant vessels either temporarily or
    indefinitely or for a finite period, whether or not used in
    conjuction with a Dock.

    3)  "Platform" shall mean any portion or portions of a dock with a
    width in excess of the allowable width of tre access pier.

    4)  "Comrercial dock" shall mean a docking facility constructed and
    used for the purpose of sale, lease, or rent 'or profit.

    5) "Non-Commercial dock" shall mean any docking facility not herein
    defined as a commercial dock.

          6)   Riparian line' shall mean a line as near as practicable toward
          the direction of the thread of the stream or channel from the
          intersection of the Mean High Water Line (MHWL) with the upland
          property line which will provide fair and equitable access between
          the upland and the stream or channel; this line is generally
          perpendicular to the MHWL at point of intersection with the upland
          ownership line.  In cases where there is a significant dispute as to
          the proper location of the riparian lines, a riparian line survey is
          recommended.

          7) "Waterway width' shall mean, with respect to aiy dock to which
          the measure applies, the straight line distance from the point at
         which the centerline of the dock or pier intersects the mean high
         water line measured to the nearest point on the mean high water line
         of the opposite shore of the waterway.

         8) "Submerged Lands" shall mean all those lands Tying waterward of
          the mean high water line.

    III.  DOCK CATEGORIES AND CRITERIA

         A.  Non-commercial single family and single establishment dock
         facility -

         1. Maximum width and area:

             a)  Access pier:  6 feet wide

             b)  Platform(s):  500 square feet in area

             c)  Bbat shelters, mooring pilings and lifts sJhall be e-xcluded
                 from this requirement.

         2. Unoccupied setbacks from riparian lines:

             a)  Mooring pilings and uncovered boat lifts:  10 feet

             b) All other structures and uses:  25 feet

         3. No docking facility may occupy or cause to occupy more than
         twenty-five percent of any water way width as measured at t'he
         location of the docking facility. Additionally, no docking facility
         may be located closer than one-hundred (100) feet to any established
         channel unless waived by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

         B.  Non-commercial multiple dock facility-

                                        A-2

        1. Maximum width and area:

            a)  Access pier:  8 feet wide

            b) Platform(s):  500 square feet in area

            c) Boat shelters, mooring pilings and lifts shall be excluded
            from this requirement.

        2. Unoccupied setbacks from riparian lines: 25 feet

        3. No docking facility may occupy or cause to occupy more than
            twenty-five (25) Dercent of any water way width as measured at
            the location of the docking facility. Additionally, no docking
            facility may be located closer than one-hundred (100) feet to
            any established channel unless waived by the U.S. Army Corps of
            Engineers.

        C.  Commercial Dock Facility - this category is estabi iteu to
        implement Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land designated
        for Marine Waterfront Commercial development which meets standards
        for Waterfront Resort Commercial or Waterfront General Commercial.

        1. Maximum Width and Area:

            a) Access pier: 12 feet wide

            b) Platform(s):  not applicable

            c) Boat shelters, mooring piles and lifts shall be excluded
            from this requirement

        2. Unoccupied setbacks from riparian lines: 25 feet

        3. No docking facility may occupy or cause to occupy more t-han
        twenty-five (25) percent of any water way width as measured at the
        location of the docking facility. Additionally, no docking facility
        may be located closer than one-hundred (100) feet to any established
        channel unless waived by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

        4.  Parking requirement:  one (1) parking space per five (5)
        slips or dock spaces.

    IV. PERMIT PROCEDURE

        A.  Non-commercial single family and single establishment facility
        dock -

            Applications for approval shall be processed together with any
            applicable Department of Environmental Regulation and U.S. Army
            Corps of Engineers permits in the same manner as required for
             obtaining building permits.

                                          A-3

    B. Non-commercial multiple dock facility-

        1. For a dock 200 feet or under in length:

            Applications for approval shall be processed together with
            any applicable Department of Environmental Regulation and
            U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits in the same manner as
            required for obtaining building permits.

        2. For two (2) or more docks with access piers 200 feet or
            under in length and for all docks greater than 200 feet in
            length having less than 99 slips:

            Applications for approval shall be processed together with
            any applicable Department of Environmental Regulation and
            u.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits in the same mann'-,  dN
            --'vired for multi-family site plan approval (Ordinan-
            or non-residential site-plan approval (Ordinance 142),
            whichever is applicable.

        3. For docks having more than (99) slips:

            In addition to meeting the above requirements, Planning and
            Zoning Board approval shall be obtained.

    C. Commercial Docking Facility

        1.  For a dock 200 feet or under in length:

           Applications for approval shall be processed together with
           any applicable Department of Environmental Regulation and
           U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits in the same manner as
           required for obtaining building permits.

       2.  For two (2) or niore docks with access piers 200 feet or
           under in length and for all docks greater than 200 feet in
           length having less than 99 slips:

           Applications for approval shall be processed together with
           any applicable Department of Environmental Regulation and
           U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits in the same manner as
           required for non-residential site plan approval (Ordinance
           142).

       3. For docks having more than (99) slips:

            In addition to meeting the above requirements, Planning and
           Zoning Board approval shall be obtained.

                                     A-4

      V.  WAIVERS

         Where there is a recorded agreement between the affected adjoining
          property owners, setback requirements shall be waived.

    VI.  VARIANCE PROCEDURE

         The procedure for an authorization of variances as established in
          Section 23-37.5 (Powers) of the Martin County Code shall apply to
          this Ordinance.

    VII.  APPEALS PROCEDURE

          The procedure for appeals as established in Section 23-37.6 and
          23.37.7 (Appeals;Functions) of the Martin County Code shall apply to
          this Ordinance.

                                       A-5

                             APPENDIX B

                      USE CONDITIONS FOR SITING
              RECREATIONAL MARINAS IN CHARLESTON COUNTY

    Sec. 30.80.7110. Recreational Marinas

    1.   Permitted Uses.  Recreational marinas containing five or
         more boat slips may provide the following uses when
         specifically authorized either as a use-of-right or
         Conditional Use Permit approval:

         a.   All recreational marinas

              (1)   launching ramps and small hoists (to accommodate
                    primarily the launching of watercraft not
                    exceeding 3,000 pounds);

              (2)   piers, wharves and other facilities for the
                    berthing and securing of recreational watercraft;

              (3)  dockside maintenance and repair necessary to keep
                    watercraft in operable condition;

              (4)  wet storage and mooring of seaworthy pleasure
                    craft in operable condition;

              (5)   dispensing of fuel subject to Sec. 30.70.70.30;

              (6)   shower and laundry facilities for marina clientele
                    only;

              (7)  vending machines.

        b.   Recreational marinas providing 50 or more boat slips
              may provide the following additional services:

              (1)   bait and tackle retail sales;

              (2)   retail sales of basic marine supplies and
                    accessories necessary for boat operation, main-
                    tenance and upkeep (not to include the sale of
                    boats and/or motors);

              (3)   snack bars and retail groceries.

         c.   Other uses or services.  Marinas located in districts
              by use-of-right may provide such additional activities
              or services as permitted by the applicable use tables.

                                 B-1

    *       ~~2.   All recreational marinas shall meet the following criteria:

                 a.   Lot size and location.  The property shall have a
                      minimum of one acre of high ground above the mean
      I             ~~~~high water mark when public water and public sewer
                      are available, shall have frontage on a public-owned
                      road, and have a minimum width of 150 feet at the
                      water front.
                 b.   Services.  All services provided by the marina shall
                      be located on the same zoning lot or on the piers
                      associated therewith.
                 C.   Structures.  All retail sales and services shall be
      I             ~~~~enclosed.  The maximum structure size or bulk shall be
                      limited to 10 square feet of net floor area for each
      *              ~~~~boat slip.

                 d.   Setbacks.  All structures shall be set back a minimum
                      of 100 feet from abutting property zoned as an AR, R,
                      or OP District except where the property line is the
                      street right-of-way line, in which case the front yard
                      established for the zoning lot shall apply.

     I          ~~~e.   Parking.  Off-street parking shall be provided in
                      accordance with Article 30.65. Any parking associated
                      with the use of the launching ramp and other marine
      I             ~~~~activities must be accommodated on-site.  Parking
                      surfaces and off-street roads or driveways within the
                      facility shall be graded and covered with a permanent
                      dustproof surface.

                 f.   Storage.  Areas for boat trailer storage and open field
                      boat storage shall be designated and screened in
      I             ~~~~accordance with Sec. 30.10.20 from any adjacent AR, R,
                      or OP District. Open field boat storage on trailers
                      may be provided on a ratio of one 10 x 20 space for each
      *              ~~~~two boat slips.

                 g.   Signs.  Sec. 30.80.0631 shall apply for all signs
                      located within the district. Those signs which identify
                      commercial activity shall be placed and designed so as
                      not to attract the general public.

             -  h.   Waterborne activities.  The conducting of business
                      activities from or on waterborne craft is prohibited.

            3.~ Wastewater disposal facilities shall meet the requirements
     I         ~~~of the regulatory agencies having jurisdiction.

            4.   Firefighting or fire prevention equipment shall be as
     I         ~~~specified by the local fire district in which located.

           U                              ~~~~~~~~~~B-2

           Sec. 30.80.7491. Camping and Picnicing Areas

                 In any Agricultural or Residential District where camping
            and picnicing areas are permitted, the following minimum
           conditions shall apply:

                Such areas shall be located only within public or
                 recreational vehicle parks and at least 100 feet
                from the nearest property line hereof.

           Sec. 30.80.8540. Excavation of Soil, Gravel or Rock

                In granting a Conditional Use Permit for this use, the
           Planning staff shall require that the application be accompanied
           by a copy of a valid permit from the State of South Carolina
           Land Resources Conservation Commission that has been issued within
           six months of the conditional use application date. The Board
            may, on a case basis, also require that the excavation area be
           screened, that a drainage plan be submitted and approved for the
           restoration of the site when excavation has been completed.
             When approval by the Planning Board has been granted to the
           applicant, the Planning staff will provide locator data by tax
           map data to the Environmental Health section of the Charleston
    I ~~County Health Department as well as to the Mosquito Abatement
           section of the Public Works Department.

           I~~~~~~~~~~~-

                                                                           APPENDIX C

                                        POPU11ATION DISTRIBUTION AND PROJECTIONS, CHAILESTON COUNTrY, 1980-2000

                                                                                                     Percent                                   ler.P
                                                                                                    of County            Population           of Colunty
                                                                          1980 Popula tion       Total,  1980      PrToiOl,200             ''t~a I_',20_0(1.

       STUDY AREA               TRAFPIC DISTRICTS AND ZONES            Cnu          IAL'S    Census      CHAT'S  ICHATS                 CHATS
                  No.  Name      (Established  in CHATS  Re~~~~~~~~~port)  CutEstimates    Count  Estimlates Rc~port  Adjusted Repor~t   Adj ust ed

    I McClellariville/          (Outside CIIATS Area)                   4,1 99    ---          1.5        ---                 4 ,3 00      --1.3
           Awe uda w
    2   Mit. Pleasant           L)-33, 34                              2 3 ,4 76    22,552     8.5        8.4     35,200    4 1, 7 00    10.1  12.5
    3   feuIl ivans Island/    )- 3 2                                  5,288     6,159        1.9        2 .3    13,020      6,600       3. 7     2.0
         isle of Palmns
    4   Charleston              D-i through 8                          4 0, 7 95   4 7 ,4 69  14.7       17.7     44,680    36,900       12.8     11.1
    5   Ch-arleston"Neck"       0-9, 10                                        p12,'649                           1 0,17 04   7, 0 00
    b   North Charleston        D-1l, 12, 13, 14 , 1 5, 18, 19, #                              3j.63
                                 20 (minus TZ27 3), 22 (T(" 286 ,  102,041                     36 .8      36. 53.6                                  42
                                 287, 288), 23 (290, 292, 293,
                                 294) , 1)-SI (485), D-S2 (486)                   8 4 , 997                       1 06 ,54 8  106 ,6 00
    7   St. Andrews/Bear
         Swami                 D)-24, 253, 26                          4 9 ,4 25   5 3,I113    1 7 .8    1 9 .9    7 2 ,94 5   6 3 ,2(0  2(.09(
            8   Folly Islan~~~ ~~~D- Ara 028    3~2    19�3305                                    .0C                  7  2(      "',0((    12.     11
     9   'James ISlIanI    I, I )- 27                                          _2 25 ,550                 1 08  13729
    10O  Johns I SI ad-                                                                        61
           (Pallrt)              D-30                                          _ 6,220                             863          ,0
    it, johms lsIand- (Part)263                                                        43.66.14 .0
          tiohi tcket / Kiawah!                                          9,9                      .4366.                                              .
               Seah  ok          D- 2                                               3,381                         12,q550      0,000--
    1 2   W~enadlawm Inland      I)- 31                                  2,4 40    2,1(         0 .9       0 .8     2,295      2,800       (. 7
    I 3   Ravoiiel /IHtl I ywood/--                                                                                                                   .o
         Meqqetl Atoe;          (Outside CIIAT1S Area)         I       10 ,950   ---            4 .0      --        --        1 3 ,30 0  --4
    14    EId i ste Island       (Outisde CHATS Area)                    1, 34 5   - --          0 .5      ---I 3 0(1    ---                         (.

      coiTY TOTAl.                                                    2 7(0,9 74 1267 , 4 5  21 00 .0    1 00 .0    3 49,2 80  33260      f

            1stjilial en (1,18O) for CHATS Area of Charle-ston CoUntY, 1982 CHATS Report.
     C1hATS Pr  ectde    a sod on)I CHIATS 1 980 En t. imatos, doeS, not inic lU e St llly A rea  1 , 1 3 and 14.
    4(11tjeCt tens by trico S. C. Di viscion of Rcs(_arc reiand Stat ist i cal Serv ico5, ha sod on 1980 Con ens D a ta
     Pioe jctlion  alitu'tel by Vi smer, Mcl~i I I & Ill I, Inc. , based on 2000 Project i~ons for the County by the S. C. lDi e~ii1,11 of
      lw:weirch atil S;Lutist ical I ervi~ces, and allo(catedl hack Lo tIn( study areas oil ithe basic. of hi sor icil I IrelId  illdI)~~'  ll
      by thf In'2C) CIII(;.

                                     APPENDIX D

           POPULATION PROJECTION METHODOLOGY

     I          ~~~The most recent "area" projections for Charleston County
           are contained in the 1982, Charleston Area Transportation Study
           Update, prepared by the BCD Council of Governments. This document,
    I    ~together with 1980 Census Reports, County projections by the
           South Carolina Division of Research and Statistical Services,
           and current population studies for specific areas of the County,
    I    ~constitutes the basis for updating sub-area projections to the
          year 2000.

                 In comparing 1980 Census data with 1980 Estimates in the
    I    ~CHATS Report, we found the CHATS estimates to be 2.7 percent higher
           than the official Census count. This meant there were 7,061 fewer
           people in the County than estimated by the CHATS Report. And
          while this is an acceptable variance, when projected to the year
           2000, the variance increases to over 11 percent in comparison with
           the official projection for the County, by the Division of Research
    I    ~and Statistical Services --- predicated on the 1980 Census.
                 As a result, we substituted the CHATS projection for Charleston
          County with the State's projection, giving us a revised "control
           number" or total population of 332,600 by the year 2000. This left
           us with sub-area totals exceeding the total for the County.

     *          ~~~Accepting the premise upon which the sub-area projections
          were based and the methodology used in making them, we then began
           an area-by-area adjustment, taking into account the previously cited
    *     ~~data.

                 Study Area 5, in Charleston, for example, had nearly 7,000
           fewer people in 1980 than estimated by the CHATS Report. As a
    I    ~result, the downward projection  shown in the report is actually
           an upward projection of nearly 4,000, based on the 1980 Census.
           But assumming the downward trend to be valid, our data adjustment
           shows a projected population of 36,900 for the area.
                 There were only three areas where the '80 Census was higher
           than the '80 estimates: (1) Mt. Pleasant, (2) North Charleston,
           and (3) Wadmalaw Island. As a result an increase adjustment greater
           than the CHATS projection seemed valid, especially in the Mount
           Pleasant area, where, based on 1980 Census data, a special popula-
           tion report has been prepared, indicating an even greater increase
           than shown by the adjusted data.

                 The general finding, however, was that the sub-area projections
          were somewhat high, and had to be adjusted downward to reflect the
           official State projection for the County, as a whole.

           I                            ~~~~~~~~~~D-1