SC Supreme Court blocks development on fragile coastal sand spit. Is the fight over?
Despite rising sea levels and increasing hurricane threats, developers have sought for more than two decades to build an exclusive resort community on a barren, sand spit south of Charleston.
But each time they’ve taken their case to the S.C. Supreme Court, they’ve lost. On Wednesday, Kiawah Development Partners II suffered its latest setback, when the court sided with environmentalists against the high-end project at Captain Sam’s Spit.
The court again turned down the development company’s push for an extensive seawall to protect the backside of the spit from rising water levels and erosion. The steel wall, which would be nearly a half-mile long, would have made it easier to build the 50-home project at Captain Sam’s.
Wednesday’s ruling, which reverses an administrative law court decision, is the third major Supreme Court setback for the Kiawah Development Partners group in an effort to protect property that would be developed on the 170-acre spit.
Trenholm Walker, an attorney for Kiawah Development Partners, said he’ll ask the court to rehear the case, Charleston’s newspaper, The Post and Courier, reported.
The court discounted economic arguments by developers, agreeing that the public has a right to enjoy the natural environment at Captain Sam’s. The spit’s beaches are public, and the area is inhabited by an array of wildlife. On many days, people stroll the beach or kayak around the backside of the spit.
“While economic interests are relevant, relying on tax revenue or increased employment opportunities is not sufficient justification for eliminating the public’s use of protected tidelands,’’ the court wrote.
The court went on to say that “evidence of purely economic benefit is insufficient as a matter of law to establish an overriding public interest.’’
An interesting twist in the case is that developers had sought to build the steel wall, described by the court as “gargantuan,’’ outside of the state’s primary jurisdiction over coastal development. But the state still retained some jurisdiction, and the court ruled that the wall would eventually fall into the state’s primary jurisdiction because of erosion.
Dealing with erosion
Like other places on the state’s coast, parts of Captain Sam’s Spit are eroding as sea levels rise and increasingly powerful hurricanes pound the South Carolina coast. Many critics of the development say it’s foolish to build on such vulnerable land, particularly since it’s such a scenic and important slice of nature.
Environmentalists applauded the decision.
“Building homes on the fragile Captain Sam’s Spit was a bad idea years ago when the developer KDP first announced its plan to construct 50 homes there,’’ said Laura Cantral of the SC Coastal Conservation League. “The S.C. Supreme Court drove home, for the third time today, that it’s still a bad idea.’’’
Cantral’s group has fought the project since it was first proposed.
“The fragile piece of sand is no place for a 2,380-foot steel wall, along with a roadway, stormwater management system and utility lines, which would have been devastating to such an ecologically sensitive and fragile landscape. Captain Sams is a valuable public resource,” Cantral said in a prepared statement.
The S.C. Environmental Law Project, which represented the league, called the Supreme Court decision a “resounding victory’’ for the spit and for the public.
Amy Armstrong, the law project’s director, said she expects the developers to again seek state permission to build on the property. Developers have had plans dating to the late 1990s to build on the property, and in 2005 announced they would construct the 50 homes if they could get state approval.
Even though legal fees aren’t cheap and many people oppose the project, the developers believe they can make major profits by developing Captain Sam’s, Armstrong said.
“It doesn’t appear they are going to relent anytime soon,’’ Armstrong said told The State. “I would hope this would be the end of it.’’
