Hair Salon near West Ashley, SC

Just a few turns off Savannah Highway, as the car dealerships and fast-food joints give way to expansive views of saltwater and marsh, a one-story home is nestled among a thicket of wildlife.

Four massive live oak trees anchor the lawn. Bird feeders dangle from the heavy branches. A gravel path snakes its way through nearly 100 species of flowering plants, trees, grasses, shrubs and more. Bees, butterflies and other animals flap and crawl, happy to call this place home.

Elliotte Quinn has created an oasis in his front yard.

Quinn, who moved with his family to Edgewater Park three years ago, is part of a growing number of property owners choosing to embrace native planting. The technique uses specific plant species to attract native pollinators, ultimately creating a balanced food web.

Proponents argue native plants help battle erosion, reduce air pollution and promote biodiversity. Pesticides and lawn mowers are no longer needed as the ecosystem begins to keep itself in check.

Native yards vastly differ depending on the gardener. But they almost never fit the mold of a traditional American lawn — grassy and weedless, with a few evergreen bushes framing the front, said David Manger, owner of Roots and Shoots, a native plant nursery in West Ashley.

A native yard, particularly to the untrained eye, can look wild and unkempt, Manger said. Some property owners find themselves fighting community associations, disapproving neighbors or government ordinances to keep their chosen aesthetic.

Quinn can attest. The father of three, who works during the day as a lawyer specializing in construction defects, has received two complaints in under a year from Charleston County’s zoning and planning department.

Code enforcement officers told him the front yard violated an ordinance concerning weeds and rank vegetation. The most recent complaint — a June 7 letter shared with The Post and Courier — threatened a summons and hefty fine if he didn’t get rid of the “overgrowth.”

Both times, after Quinn explained his choice to cultivate the yard with native plants, county officials dropped the case.

‘Quinn’s Meadow’

Quinn’s passion for native planting exploded during summer 2020, in the throes of the COVID-19 pandemic. He started a vegetable garden with his young daughters, spurred by a childhood interest in wildlife and conservation.

They grew tomatoes and pumpkins, but worms began destroying the plants. Not wanting to spray the garden with pesticides, Quinn began reading about natural alternatives. He learned what he could plant to attract predator insects.

“That kind of spiraled off into something of an obsession with native plants,” he said.

Quinn ripped up the grass in his front yard, tossed out some seeds and bedded a few plants. He eventually hired someone to turn over the topsoil, put down compost and create gravel walkways.

The garden — which his daughters affectionately call “Quinn’s Meadow” — grew from there.

Green is the dominant color across the yard. But if a visitor sat on the front porch swing where Quinn likes to spend early mornings, they’d notice pockets of flowers interspersed with grass and fruit trees. They might hear the chirp of a painted bunting, delighting in its feathery rainbow of reds, blues and greens.

Manger, who used to lead the Charleston Permaculture Guild, said the number of people committing to sustainable agriculture has increased over the years. He’s noticed property owners beginning to steer away from typical yard spaces.

Edgewater Park, where Quinn lives, doesn’t have a homeowners association. But Manger said more people are coming to Roots and Shoots for advice on how to use native plants and work around stringent rules.

A compromise, for instance, could be to cover half of the yard with native plants and leave a small mowing strip of grass at the front, Manger said. This signals to neighbors the garden is both maintained and intentionally designed.

A fine line

Quinn first received an email from Charleston County in September 2022, he said. A code enforcement officer told him they’d gotten a complaint about his yard and wanted to talk.

By the time they spoke on the phone, the officer had driven by the property and realized the design was intentional — not the result of a lazy homeowner. The officer closed out the complaint.

Months later, on June 7, county officials notified Quinn they’d received another complaint of vegetation overgrowth. An officer inspected the property and found him in violation of a county ordinance prohibiting uncultivated, dense overgrowth, the letter states.

The county gave Quinn until June 22 to remove it, threatening him with a summons and $1,087 fine. He responded with an eight-page letter explaining why his yard complies with the ordinance.

Quinn spends hours each month intentionally cultivating his garden — planting, weeding and watering new plants — he wrote. Many of the native plants are considered priority species by the S.C. Department of Natural Resources. Prohibiting a property owner from growing them would conflict with state environmental and resource protection statutes, Quinn said.

County officials relented, deciding he hadn’t violated any ordinances. They closed the case.

Quinn feels bothered by the whole situation but is grateful to have a legal background, he said. The homeowner wondered about others who might find themselves subject to similar scrutiny.

If a government went through with imposing a fine or issuing a summons for native planting, Quinn offered to represent them pro bono — to stand up for others who want to change how we do landscaping, he said.

A Charleston County spokeswoman refused to make anyone from its zoning and planning department available for an interview. The department takes all complaints seriously and investigates them, she said.

Manger hopes that as native planting becomes more common, code enforcement officers will have more tools in their arsenal to decipher a native lawn from an overgrown one.

“It’s definitely a fine line,” he said. “You’d kind of have to know what plants you’re looking at.”

Plenty of flowers and a general diversity of plant species are usually signs of a native yard, Manger said. But the best way to find out is by asking the gardener.

If you spoke to Quinn, he’d proudly show you his favorite flower: the swamp rose mallow. The native hibiscus, with big white petals and a dark-pink center, blooms only for a day.

If you’re lucky, you might catch a glimpse of a chimney bee pollinating the flower. This specialist insect primarily forages on hibiscus plants; Quinn knows he’d never see one if he had a traditional lawn.

The city of Charleston and the National Trust for Historic Preservation have argued that North Charleston’s “leap frog” annexation inside the rural Ashley River Historic District will destroy the area’s continuity and damage its archeological significance.

And now, almost five years since the legal fight began, the courts still aren’t convinced.

In the latest decision involving the annexation dispute between two of the state’s largest cities, the S.C. Court of Appeals did not block North Charleston’s annexation of a 1-acre parcel along S.C. Highway 61 which could eventually pave the way for North Charleston’s expansion throughout West Ashley.

The appeals court’s unanimous ruling affirmed the 2019 ruling by Circuit Judge Eugene Griffith Jr. The lower court ruled in 2019 that neither Charleston nor the National Trust have the legal right to challenge North Charleston’s 2017 annexation.

“We find respondents lack standing to challenge the annexation of the acre by North Charleston,” wrote Chief Judge Bruce Williams in the Feb. 1 decision. “Therefore, further consideration of the matter by this court is foreclosed.”

In 2017, North Charleston properly annexed the 113 acre-tract known as Runnymede Plantation off S.C. Highway 61 owned by the Whitfield Construction Co. The company then gave North Charleston an acre of land on the opposite side of S.C. 61 which North Charleston attorneys have said is adjacent to the larger, 2,200-acre tract also owned by Whitfield.

The city of Charleston argues the annexation of the acre was not proper because it jumps over a strip of land — a 100-foot wide buffer running along the highway — that was already owned by the National Trust and annexed into the Charleston.

Charleston plans to appeal the court’s latest decision to the state Supreme Court because state law “clearly forbids this kind of land jumping, and allowing it to stand would set a terrible precedent,” city spokesman Jack O’Toole said.

In late 2017, around the same time North Charleston hopped over Charleston’s boundary to claim the 1-acre parcel, the city of Charleston annexed a total of about 6,000 acres in the surrounding area. That annexation included the 2,200-acre Whitfield tract and a 30-acre property called Millbrook Plantation LLC.

Because the city used the 75 percent rule, it was able to take both properties without the owners’ consent because 75 percent of surrounding property owners with 75 percent of the total land value had asked to join the city.

Property owners who joined included those who wanted to preserve the area’s rural character. North Charleston responded two days later with its own attempt to annex the Millbrook and Whitfield properties. Though North Charleston started its annexation last, it finished its annexation before Charleston.

Charleston argued that under the “prior jurisdiction doctrine,” it was allowed to finish the process without interference. The appeals court affirmed that the Supreme Court has refused to adopt that doctrine.

Charleston says it also has environmental concerns.

The city alleges that North Charleston’s “scheme” to use the 1-acre lot to gain continuity with the abutting 2,200-acre parcel would eventually bring unwanted development. Charleston and the National Trust emphasize that development on that tract would not be controlled by the Charleston Urban Growth Boundary, designed to limit construction along the rural corridor.

Overdevelopment would lead to the destruction of the archeological significance of the district, the city and National Trust said.

“This massive tract sits at the top of the Church Creek drainage basin,” O’Toole said. “We have a duty to protect it from overdevelopment in order to prevent flooding throughout the entire area.”

North Charleston is pleased with the ruling.

“The city of North Charleston appreciates the thoughtful consideration provided by the Court of Appeals and is pleased to see the trial court’s ruling in favor of North Charleston affirmed,” said City Attorney Derk Van Raalte.

The case was expected to help clarify state annexation law, which says land to be annexed must be contiguous to land already in a city’s limits. North Charleston has argued in the past that its annexation of the 1 acre was legal due to a lesser-known statute that allows for cities to annex property “adjacent” to city limits.

But the appeals court acknowledged that their decision has not “yet addressed whether the term ‘adjacent’ within section 5-3-100 requires contiguity.”

Justices appear to want to be done with the matter.

“Respondents have failed to demonstrate that North Charleston’s annexation of the acre incites anything more than a boundary dispute between two municipalities,” Williams said. “Further, the absence of a challenge to the annexation by the State is illustrative of the State’s position on whether the matter rises to a level of public concern.”

Some members of Charleston City Council squealed when they saw the price for reviving a dead pig.

And apparently they aren’t hog wild about any of the other options, either.

That leaves the fate of West Ashley’s Sumar Street redevelopment plan murky for another week, and that’s too bad. Because this is more important than some folks realize.

You see, the trajectory of revitalization in the biggest area of Charleston hinges on this decision. Not that you’d know it from council’s response.

Back in April, several council members said $45 million was way too much to spend on a redevelopment of the three-acre site of that old Piggly Wiggly off Sam Rittenberg Boulevard.

Which is kind of on-brand for the city’s historical treatment of West Ashley.

A little background: The city bought the site of the former grocery store years ago, at the demand of local residents, to keep it from becoming a convenience store. People who live in the area argued that the property, as the gateway to the city’s largest population hub, deserved something more substantial.

So the city contracted with a developer who came up with a design for West Ashley’s first significant municipal services building, along with neighborhood meeting space, a public park and some room for small businesses and restaurants.

Which, not coincidentally, is exactly what surveys showed West Ashley residents want there.

So that’s what architects designed … along with underground parking to make the most of a tight space. But evidently that seemed too extravagant for a part of town that doesn’t even rate a Logan’s or Bonefish Grill.

Council members demanded the developer give them some more, uh, cost-effective options.

Well, a City Council committee saw the cheaper options on Monday … and didn’t have much to say. Probably because they also saw how public opinion is running on this.

At a packed-house public meeting last week, residents were given three choices. 1) The current design. 2) The same development, only smaller, with a multistory parking deck that might save $8 million to $9 million … but unsurprisingly eats up much of the open space. 3) A development with about one-third the building space and a huge surface parking lot.

The results were telling: 72% voted to stick with the underground parking. Charles Smith, a member of the West Ashley Revitalization Commission since its inception, says there’s a reason for so much community unanimity these days.

“We have accepted less than the best for long enough,” Smith says. “This is a gateway project that sets the bar for everything that comes after it.”

He’s right, and here’s an example. Right now, the owner of Ashley Landing Shopping Center — which sits next to the Sumar Street site — is planning to move its Publix into the strip center across the parking lot and replace the grocery store with apartments.

Residents rightly worry about the developer getting all that right for the neighborhood. The city, Smith says, needs to set the example.

“How can we ask that developer to bring their A-game to that site if we’re not willing to bring our A-game next door?”

Yep. And all this will have a cascading effect down Sam Rittenberg Boulevard and along Savannah Highway. Smith notes the West Ashley Revitalization Commission understands the area is destined for more urban-level density, but would like to keep it in the areas currently covered in old, needing-to-be-replaced strip malls.

You know, instead of building them farther out and adding to everyone’s commute.

But some folks on council, which never blinks at spending twice as much on grout for the Italian marble at the Gaillard, are trying to be cheap here.

And it all seems to revolve around the difference in cost for underground parking versus a parking garage. But it’s not that big a deal.

The city’s portion of this redevelopment would be paid for with parking revenue and tax-increment financing — the same model considered for the infrastructure at Union Pier’s redevelopment. Can you imagine asking downtown residents to accept a cheaper alternative?

“You’d get laughed out of the room,” Smith notes.

Well, Charleston’s biggest population center deserves no less.

The council’s Committee on Real Estate heard the options on Monday, but didn’t recommend one plan over another. The usually plain-spoken council members didn’t really say much of anything that suggested how they feel about this latest development. What’s that mean?

Well, it means the showdown at next week’s City Council meeting could go any number of ways.

But you can bet if they send the developer back to the drawing board, literally, it will only bolster the perception that Charleston’s biggest community is considered its least important.

And that’s why we can’t have nice things.

Shane Melton, who lives in West Ashley, received a big surprise during what should have been a routine visit to the Department of Motor Vehicles.

CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCSC) - Shane Melton, who lives in West Ashley, received a big surprise during what should have been a routine visit to the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Melton learned he is a dead man walking.

“There’s just nothing I can do,” he says.

The Social Security Administration incorrectly declared him dead, he says. He discovered this when he went to renew his driver’s license. Instead, he was shuffled into a back room and was accused of impersonating a dead man and stealing his identity, Melton says.

“They started interrogating me saying I was deceased and told me they’re going to call the cops on me,” he says. “They confiscated my ID, so I left.”

Melton says this initially didn’t seem like a major issue, but then he was laid off from his job.

“This has upended our entire lives,” his wife, Morgan Key, says.

Because the government considers him dead, Melton says companies won’t hire him. The family even had to move in with his parents to cut costs.

“He’s done interviews, job interviews, and everything,” Key says. “He’s doing everything that he can to get that job but they just can’t hire him legally.”

Being incorrectly declared dead can cause a lengthy list of problems, according to attorney Mark Bringardner.

“That’s going to prevent you from being able to take out a loan, apply for a job, pass any sort of background check, and your credit score will instantly go to zero,” he says. “So, that will present a whole host of challenges that can’t be fixed overnight and will take several months, if not longer, to fix between submitting the paperwork to the social security administration, as well as the credit score company to restore your credit.”

This issue is not uncommon, Bringardner says.

“It’s estimated this happens between 6,000 to 12,000 times a year or more, so that’s roughly 20 to 30 people a day,” he says. “Usually that occurs because of a clerical error at the Social Security Administration office, a hospital, a doctor’s office, or somebody filling out a form incorrectly and checking the wrong box.”

Catching and correcting the problem quickly is key, Bringardner says.

“Anyone who’s been wrongfully declared dead by the social security administration should contact them immediately and try to submit the paperwork,” he says.

But Melton says he’s gone to the social security office three times with various paperwork. He says the issue is the items the Social Security Administration can use to prove he’s alive either require a valid ID to obtain, like a passport or certified medical records, or only apply to certain people, such as military records or a church membership.

Melton says he doesn’t have an ID, any of the other documents or a path forward—leaving him frustrated and trying to fix what seems like an unfixable mistake he didn’t make.

“It can happen to anybody,” he says. “I never thought it would happen to me until I go to the DMV one day and boom, I’m dead. There’s nothing I can do about it. I didn’t cause the problem and they’re pretty much making me fix the problem when it’s impossible fix.”

The Social Security Administration did not respond to a request for comment.

Some additional advice from Bringardner: make sure you’re periodically checking your credit report to ensure this same mistake hasn’t happened to you. If it does, be prepared to involve a lawyer to help sort things out, especially your credit.

Copyright 2023 WCSC. All rights reserved.

CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCSC) - Big plans are approved for an affordable housing complex in West Ashley. The news sparked excitement among some neighbors, but concerns about traffic and the location as well.

The city’s housing department, council members and neighbors agree, affordable housing is a need in West Ashley. But the development does come with a lot of planning and factors to consider when approving a plan.

City of Charleston District 2 Councilmember Kevin Shealy says he initially did not support a 2020 zone change of the property from general business to diverse residential.

“At that time and in 2020, there was a there was an office building sitting there and it’s actually a good location for an office building because people may not have to drive downtown to go to work. They can work and live in the same place which fits in with the West Ashley Revitalization,” Shealy says.

In March of 2023, the planning commission approved initial design plans for the complex. Shealy says he is an advocate for affordable housing, but wants to make sure it’s being put in practical places.

Jerry Gray, who has lived in the area for about 15 years, thinks incoming affordable housing is good news.

“Charleston can be the land of opportunity for a lot of people. And it’s also a window of opportunity for people who want to start out. So having some level of affordable housing where people can start out, start building an American Dream is critical for any neighborhood,” Gray says.

While he says he’s excited about the complex and the opportunities it can bring, he admits that traffic does cross his mind when a project like this is approved.

“Highway 61, we want to keep it as a scenic road. So yeah, traffic would be a problem and a consideration but again, there’s work around for that,” Gray says.

Shealy says he also worries about traffic for people who live in his district. He explains that the South Carolina Department of Transportation grades state roads on a scale from A to F.

“Ashley River Road during peak times grade is an E, and it’s very close to an F. And it probably will be one day unless we can do something about those roads. Hopefully we get some help from the state, state or county and maybe they can help with traffic flowing,” Shealy says.

Gray referenced how widening Glenn McConnell Parkway and the development of Bees Ferry Road has created a connector between areas and will solve some of the traffic woes.

“So those things can be overcome with good planning,” Gray believes.

Shealy says he wants to see hard workers in Charleston like firefighters, police officers and teachers live and enjoy the same area where they work.

“We need affordable housing in the right locations. Live work and play. That’s kind of what the West Ashley revitalization idea said. But that’s also a reason for us to make sure we have commercial properties out in West Ashley out in the western part of West Ashley so that everybody’s not driving to downtown, causing these traffic congestions,” Shealy says.

Shealy says while he initially did not approve of the housing complex, now that it’s on its way, he is dedicated to making sure it fits into the neighborhood.

Gray says he is excited to see more people enjoying the area and hopes the city does its due diligence incorporating plans for runoff, traffic and other aspects of development in the plans.

To learn more about the details of the complex, click here.

Copyright 2023 WCSC. All rights reserved.