DOCSLIB.ORG

Francis Marion Plan FEIS Chapters 1 to 4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250- 9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. Francis Marion National Forest Final Environmental Impact Statement For the Revised Land Management Plan January 2017 Berkeley and Charleston Counties, South Carolina Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible Official: Rick Lint, Forest Supervisor 4931 Broad River Road Columbia, SC 29212 For Information Contact: Mary Morrison, Project Leader 4931 Broad River Road Columbia, SC 29212 Phone: 803-561-4000 Abstract: Three alternatives for revision of the 1996 Francis Marion National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (forest plan) are described, compared and analyzed in detail in this final environmental impact statement. Alternative 1 represents no change from the current forest plan. Alternative 2 is the alternative preferred by the Forest Service and is the foundation for the revised forest plan. Alternative 3 is a variation of alternative 2 and considers less prescribed burning near communities and major roads. The notice of intent to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2014 (Vol. 79, No. 83, FR, pp. 24372 to 24375). The notice of intent asked for public comment on the proposal from May 1, 2014 to June 16, 2014. A 90-day comment period was initiated on August 14, 2015 with the publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register (Vol. 80, No. 157, FR, p. 48854). Approximately 37 letters and emails were received during the comment period. The letters were reviewed and concern statements were developed. Specialists addressed these concern statements and their responses are provided in the response to comments. Public input was also used to update the revised forest plan and its associated final environmental impact statement. All changes were considered minor and were within the scope of the analysis in the draft environmental impact statement. Contents Summary ....................................................................................................................................... viii S.1 Proposed Action .................................................................................................................... 1 S.2 Issues Addressed ................................................................................................................... 1 S.3 Alternatives ........................................................................................................................... 1 S.4 Summary of Effects Analysis ................................................................................................ 1 S.5 Scope of the Decision ............................................................................................................ 2 Chapter 1. Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Document Structure ............................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................................ 10 1.4 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................ 13 1.5 Decision Framework ......................................................................................................... 14 1.6 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................... 15 1.7 Issues ................................................................................................................................. 17 1.7.1 Significant Issues ........................................................................................................ 17 1.8 Relationship to Other Documents ..................................................................................... 20 1.9 Other Related Efforts ........................................................................................................ 20 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action ............................................................... 21 2.1 Alternative Development .................................................................................................. 21 2.1.1 How Alternatives 2 and 3 Were Developed ............................................................... 22 2.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail ..................................................................................... 25 2.2.1 Alternative 1. No Action (1996 Forest Plan).............................................................. 25 2.2.2 Alternative 2. Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative) ............................................. 25 2.2.3 Alternative 3 ............................................................................................................... 26 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .......................................... 26 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives .............................................................................................. 27 2.4.1 Alternative 1. No Action (1996 Forest Plan).............................................................. 27 2.4.2 Alternative 2. (Proposed Action) ................................................................................ 31 2.4.3 Alternative 3 ............................................................................................................... 38 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ........................................... 46 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 47 3.2 Physical ............................................................................................................................. 47 3.2.1 Soils ............................................................................................................................ 47 3.2.2 Geology and Groundwater ......................................................................................... 57 3.2.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................................. 71 3.2.4 Climate Change .......................................................................................................... 74 3.2.5 Watershed and Water Resources ................................................................................ 85 3.3 Biological Environment .................................................................................................. 101 3.3.1 Ecosystems ............................................................................................................... 101 3.3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................ 140 3.3.3 Species of Conservation Concern ............................................................................. 170 3.3.4 Forest Health and Protection .................................................................................... 205 3.4 Economic and Social Environment ................................................................................. 227 3.4.1 Forest Products and Timber Harvesting ................................................................... 227 3.4.2 Community Wildfire Protection Planning ................................................................ 233 3.4.3 Infrastructure ...........................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Establishing the Francis Marion

    Establishing the Francis Marion

    How the Weeks Act benefited the lowcountry of South Carolina is a tale with a twist. Lumber companies were cooperating with the Forest Service on fire control and other issues two decades before the federal government purchased its first acre of land under the Weeks Act. Not surprisingly, when it came time to buy land, the Forest Service turned to those same companies first. Establishing the Francis Marion NATIONAL FOREST HISTORY IN SOUTH CAROLINA’S LOWCOUNTRY, 1901–1936 t the end of the nineteenth century, the center of lumber production was shifting from the Northeast and the Great Lakes states to the vast southern Apine belt that stretched in a crescent from Virginia to Texas. The big indus- trial timber corporations had begun running out of merchantable timber in the North and turned to areas with seemingly inexhaustible Atlantic Coast Lumber was considered one of the largest pro- lumber resources, the Pacific Northwest and the South.1 ducers on the eastern seaboard.2 Though logging and lumber milling had occurred in South When timber companies left the Great Lakes states, they left Carolina throughout the nineteenth century, the turn of the behind hundreds of thousands of acres of depleted lands, almost twentieth century marked the commencement of large-scale completely denuded of timber. Implicit in the growth of the industrial logging in the coastal plain pine belt. Funded by north- South Carolina lumber companies was the possibility that the ern capital, the Atlantic Coast Lumber Corporation, the E. P. same cycle would be repeated. However, the U.S. Bureau of Burton Lumber Company, the A.
  • Module 4: Fire Management

    Module 4: Fire Management

    Module 4: Fire Management Photo: Michal Bukowski Statue of St. Florian, the patron saint of firefighters, erected in the XIX century after a great fire in the village of Lipnica Murowana, in Lesser Poland. Module 4: Fire Management Proposed Agenda Time Section name 8:00 8:30 Welcome 8:30 9:00 Introduction and Objectives 9:00 9:30 Activity I and discussion 9:30 10:00 Break 10:00 10:30 History and Policies 10:30 11:00 Standards and Orders 11:00 11:30 1910 revisited 11:30 12:00 How Things Change 12:00 12:30 Lunch 12:30 1:30 Incident Command System 1:30 2:00 Wildland Fires 2:00 2:30 Structural Fires 2:30 3:30 Risk and Safety 3:30 4:00 Lessons Learned 4:00 4:30 Egos, Personalities, and Politics 4:30 5:00 Wrap-up 5:00 5:30 Discuss plans for the fire field trip 2 Module 4: Fire Management Overview Content Outline This module focuses on the history and social ■ Introduction contexts of fire management, how those contexts ■ History and Policies influence policies, how fire management evolved ❏ The Incident Command System over time, and basic fire management objectives. ❏ The NWCG ❏ More tragedies mean more adaptation Learning Objectives ❏ Standardization ■ Wildland and Structural Fires ■ Understand the history of wildland fire ❏ Wildland fires fighting in a cultural, political, and social ❏ Structure fires context ❏ Risk ■ Identify and define different approaches to ■ Put it out suppressing and controlling fire ❏ Fire prevention ■ Understand the management objectives for ❏ Fire control fire suppression (wildland and structure) ❏ Fire exclusion ■ Compare and contrast the uses of fire con- ❏ Fire suppression trol vs.
  • 03050201-010 (Lake Moultrie)

    03050201-010 (Lake Moultrie)

    03050201-010 (Lake Moultrie) General Description Watershed 03050201-010 is located in Berkeley County and consists primarily of Lake Moultrie and its tributaries. The watershed occupies 87,730 acres of the Lower Coastal Plain region of South Carolina. The predominant soil types consist of an association of the Yauhannah-Yemassee-Rains- Lynchburg series. The erodibility of the soil (K) averages 0.17 and the slope of the terrain averages 1%, with a range of 0-2%. Land use/land cover in the watershed includes: 64.4% water, 21.1% forested land, 5.4% forested wetland, 4.1% urban land, 3.1% scrub/shrub land, 1.4% agricultural land, and 0.5% barren land. Lake Moultrie was created by diverting the Santee River (Lake Marion) through a 7.5 mile Diversion Canal filling a levee-sided basin and impounding it with the Pinopolis Dam. South Carolina Public Service Authority (Santee Cooper) oversees the operation of Lake Moultrie, which is used for power generation, recreation, and water supply. The 4.5 mile Tail Race Canal connects Lake Moultrie with the Cooper River near the Town of Moncks Corner, and the Rediversion Canal connects Lake Moultrie with the lower Santee River. Duck Pond Creek enters the lake on its western shore. The Tail Race Canal accepts the drainage of California Branch and the Old Santee Canal. There are a total of 43.8 stream miles and 57,535.3 acres of lake waters in this watershed, all classified FW. Additional natural resources in the watershed include the Dennis Wildlife Center near the Town of Bonneau, Sandy Beach Water Fowl Area along the northern lakeshore, the Santee National Wildlife Refuge covering the lower half of the lake, and the Old Santee Canal State Park near Monks Corner.
  • Preparation for Initial Company Operations-Student Manual

    Preparation for Initial Company Operations-Student Manual

    Preparation for Initial Company Operations PICO-Student Manual 1st Edition, 5th Printing-April 2014 FEMA/USFA/NFA PICO-SM April 2014 Preparation for Initial Company Operations 1st Edition, 5th Printing Preparation for Initial Company Operations PICO-Student Manual 1st Edition, 5th Printing-April 2014 This Student Manual may contain material that is copyright protected. USFA has been granted a license to use that material only for NFA-sponsored course deliveries as part of the course materials, and it shall not be duplicated without consent of the copyright holder. States wishing to use these materials as part of state-sponsorship and/or third parties wishing to use these materials must obtain permission to use the copyright material(s) from the copyright holder prior to teaching the course. PREPARATION FOR INITIAL COMPANY OPERATIONS NOTICE: This material has been developed by the National Fire Academy (NFA) of the United States Fire Administration (USFA) for use by State and metropolitan fire training programs. NFA endorsement of this material is conditional on use without modification. NFA material, whether printed text or software, may not be used in any manner that would mislead or that would suggest or imply endorsement by NFA of any commercial product, process, or service. ii PREPARATION FOR INITIAL COMPANY OPERATIONS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL FIRE ACADEMY FOREWORD The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), an important component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), serves the leadership of this Nation as the DHS's fire protection and emergency response expert. The USFA is located at the National Emergency Training Center (NETC) in Emmitsburg, Maryland, and includes the National Fire Academy (NFA), National Fire Data Center (NFDC), and the National Fire Programs (NFP).
  • Sunrise Fire Rescue Operations and Policy Manual

    Sunrise Fire Rescue Operations and Policy Manual

    UPDATED ON 6/21/2016 OPERATIONS AND POLICIES MANUAL Sunrise Fire Rescue Operations & Policies Manual Index June 21, 2016 SECTION 1 ORGANIZATION 100.00 Mission Statement August 4, 2003 100.01 Organizational Structure October 1, 2013 100.02 Operations & Policies Manual (OPM) February 3, 2014 SECTION 2 HUMAN RESOURCES 200.00 Duties & Responsibilities 200.01 Firefighter/EMT December 23, 2014 200.02 Firefighter/Paramedic December 23, 2014 200.03 Fire Inspector December 23, 2014 200.04 Driver Operator December 23, 2014 200.05 Rescue Lieutenant – Section 1 Shift December 23, 2014 200.05 Rescue Lieutenant – Section 2 Non Shift December 23, 2014 200.06 Fire Captain December 23, 2014 Sect. 1 Fire Captain EMS Shift Supervisor December 23, 2014 Sect. 2 Fire Captain EMS Non Shift December 23, 2014 Sect. 3 Fire Captain Fire Life Safety December 23, 2014 Sect. 4 Fire Captain Plan Review December 23, 2014 Sect. 5 Fire Captain Logistics December 23, 2014 Sect. 6 Fire Captain Special Operations July 28, 2010 Sect. 7 Fire captain Training April 30, 2013 200.07 Fire Marshal April 27, 2011 200.08 Battalion Chief April 30, 2013 Sect. 1 Support Battalion Chief April 30, 2013 Sect 2 Emergency Management Battalion Chief April 30, 2013 200.09 Fire Division Chief April 30, 2013 201.00 Promotional Qualifications 201.01 Entry Level/Firefighter December 23, 2014 201.02 Driver Operator December 23, 2014 201.03 Rescue Lieutenant December 23, 2014 201.04 Fire Captain December 23, 2014 201.06 Battalion Chief December 23, 2014 201.07 Special Operations Team Member April
  • Countrytime - Best of 320 Titel, 20,1 Std., 1,88 GB

    Countrytime - Best of 320 Titel, 20,1 Std., 1,88 GB

    Seite 1 von 13 -CountryTime - Best Of 320 Titel, 20,1 Std., 1,88 GB Name Dauer Album Künstler 1 Absence of the heart 3:31 Everything's Gonna Be Alright - Deana Carter - 1998 (RS) Carter Deana 2 Ain't i the lucky one 2:14 The Essential Marty Robbins: Robbins Marty 3 All i have to do is dream 2:33 Duets - 36 of the Worlds Greatest Ever Duets - Comp 1997 (CD… Gentry Bobbie & Campbell Glen 4 All of that love from here 3:25 Wynonna - Wynonna Judd - 1992 (RS) Judd Wynonna 5 All the things we've never done 3:25 Wild Angels - Martina McBride - 1995 (RS) McBride Martina 6 Already gone 4:36 Love On The Inside - Sugarland - 2008 (RS) Sugarland 7 Already somebody's lover 3:36 Lila - Lila McCann - 1997 (VA) McCann Lila 8 Always on your side 4:15 Wildflower - Sheryl Crow - 2005 (RS-VBR) Crow Sheryl 9 Always on your side (ft Sting) 4:11 Hits And Rarities - Sheryl Crow - Comp 2007 CD1 (RS-VBR) Crow Sheryl 10 Amoureuse 3:39 Music Makes My Day - Olivia Newton-John - 1973 (RS) Newton-John Olivia 11 Angels in waiting 3:37 Tammy Cochran - Tammy Cochran - 2001 (VA) Cochran Tammy 12 Any woman 3:21 Just The Same - Terri Clark - 1996 (RS) Clark Terri 13 Anyone who had a heart 4:02 Sing: Chapter 1 - Wynonna Judd - 2009 (RS) Judd Wynonna 14 Anyone who had a heart 3:17 Indigo - Women Of Song - Olivia Newton-John - 2004 (RS) Newton-John Olivia 15 Anyway 4:41 Waking Up Laughing - Martina McBride - 2007 (RS) McBride Martina 16 At the end of the day 3:36 Lisa Brokop- Lisa Brokop - 1995 (IS) Brokop Lisa 17 Attention 3:35 Back With A Heart - Olivia Newton-John - 1998
  • East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility Lisa Briggitte Randle University of South Carolina

    East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility Lisa Briggitte Randle University of South Carolina

    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2018 East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility Lisa Briggitte Randle University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Randle, L.(2018). East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4962 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility By Lisa Briggitte Randle Bachelor of Arts University of South Carolina, 1979 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 1990 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 2009 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2018 Accepted by: Kenneth G. Kelly, Major Professor Leland Ferguson, Committee Member Michael E. Hodgson, Committee Member Kimberly Simmons, Committee Member Terrance Weik, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Lisa Briggitte Randle, 2018 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION I am honored to dedicate this dissertation to my friend and mentor, Dr. Leland G. Ferguson, for initiating the East Branch of the Cooper River Project and for his wise words of support when the completion of this dissertation seemed overwhelming. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the financial support of the University of South Carolina’s African American Professorial Program, the Anthropology Department’s Dorothy O’Dell Travel Grant, and a grant from the Archaeological Society of South Carolina.
  • An Early History of Southern Barbecue

    An Early History of Southern Barbecue

    Bard College Bard Digital Commons Senior Projects Spring 2016 Bard Undergraduate Senior Projects Spring 2016 Smokin' Out the Truth: An Early History of Southern Barbecue Morgan Vivianne Di Santo Bard College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2016 Part of the American Material Culture Commons, and the United States History Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Di Santo, Morgan Vivianne, "Smokin' Out the Truth: An Early History of Southern Barbecue" (2016). Senior Projects Spring 2016. 131. https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2016/131 This Open Access work is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been provided to you by Bard College's Stevenson Library with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this work in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Smokin’ Out the Truth: An Early History of Southern Barbecue Senior Project Submitted to The Division of Social Studies of Bard College by Morgan Di Santo Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 2016 In loving memory of James Gregan. Acknowledgements I would first like to express my deep gratitude to my advisor, Christian Crouch. I am forever grateful for her patience, compassion, and wisdom. She believed in me and reminded me to have confidence in my own abilities.
  • Tanya Tucker

    Tanya Tucker

    Tanya Tucker │Biography │ One of country music’s greatest legends, Tanya Tucker, has just released her much anticipated new CD, My Turn, on Saguaro Road Records. On this new album Tucker takes classic country songs originally recorded by the all time great male legends of the time and turns the tables, giving classics such as “You Don’t Know Me” and “Oh, Lonesome Me” a powerful reconstruction from a woman’s point of view. Only 13 when her provocative “Delta Dawn” caused a nationwide stir and became a Top 10 country hit, Tucker has built one of the most successful and compelling careers in music. Considered one of the very few females of the “outlaw” country movement, she holds a Grammy award, two Country Music Association awards, Two Academy of Country Music awards, and three CMT Awards. 23 of her albums have landed in the country Top 40 chart since her 1972 debut, and she has amassed 10 #1 country singles, 33 that have reached the Top 5, and 41 in the Top 10. Always reinventing herself, Tanya again became a media darling in 2005 as the star of her own television reality series, Tuckerville. The primetime series was a huge hit for TLC, generating the cable network’s highest Neilsen ratings ever, and guaranteed the show’s return in 2006. Having sold over 50 million records over the last three decades, country music icon Tanya Tucker is among the all-time best selling female vocalists in country music. “Surprisingly mature at a very young age, Tanya Tucker continues to grow today, taming and conquering tunes long assumed to be a man’s territory.
  • Summary of Public Comments

    Summary of Public Comments

    Draft Revised Land Management Plan Francis Marion National Forest Berkeley County, South Carolina Charleston County, South Carolina Summary of Public Comments August 2016 Introduction The Francis Marion National Forest (Francis Marion or Forest) released the “Draft Revised Land Management Plan for the Francis Marion National Forest and Associated Draft Environmental Impact Statement” on August 14, 2015 to begin the official 90-day comment period. The comment period ended on November 12, 2015. The Francis Marion received a total of 37 comment letters and emails on the draft land management plan (draft plan) and associated draft environmental impact statement (DEIS). No form letters were received. Letters and emails were received from individuals, groups, organizations, agencies, and business owners. Letters and emails were either delivered by the U.S. Post Office, submitted by email, or directly entered through the Comment Analysis and Response Application (CARA) input form by the commenter. Most comments received were entered directly by comments, but letters and emails that were submitted were entered by Forest Service staff into the CARA input form for a complete record. Reports generated by CARA on the coding structure and coded comments are attached All of the comment letters and emails were analyzed using a process called content analysis, which was completed by Forest Service personnel and contractors (see Appendix A in this Content Analysis Report). Of the 37 comment letters that contained unique and substantially different comments, comments that were coded, analyzed, addressed, and entered into CARA and then associated with one of the 153ed Public Concern statements (PCs). Then the IDT then developed responses to each of the PCs.
  • Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report - April 2012 University Libraries--University of South Carolina

    Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report - April 2012 University Libraries--University of South Carolina

    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons University South Caroliniana Society - Annual South Caroliniana Library Report of Gifts 4-2012 Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report - April 2012 University Libraries--University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/scs_anpgm Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Recommended Citation University of South Carolina, "University of South Carolina Libraries - Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report, April 2012". http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/scs_anpgm/3/ This Newsletter is brought to you by the South Caroliniana Library at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in University South Caroliniana Society - Annual Report of Gifts yb an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE UNIVERSITY SOUTH CAROLINIANA SOCIETY SEVENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL MEETING __________ UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA Saturday, April 28, 2012 Mr. Kenneth L. Childs, President, Presiding __________ Reception and Exhibit ..............................................................11:00 a.m. South Caroliniana Library Luncheon.....................................................................................1:00 p.m. The Palmetto Club at The Summit Club Location Business Meeting Welcome Reports of the Executive Council...................... Mr. Kenneth L. Childs Address......................................................................Dr. William A. Link Richard J. Milbauer Chair in History, University
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    Commission Draft Recommended 2/27/17 Introduction Background The basis of the comprehensive planning process is in the South Carolina Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act of 1994 (SC Code §6‐29‐310 through §6‐29‐1200), which repealed and replaced all existing state statutes authorizing municipal planning and zoning. The 1994 Act establishes the comprehensive plan as the essential first step of the planning process and mandates that the plan must be systematically evaluated and updated. Elements of the plan must be reevaluated at least once every five years, and the entire plan must be updated at least once every ten years. The Town of Moncks Corner is approximately 33 miles from downtown Charleston, South Carolina. Moncks Corner is the county seat of Berkeley County and is also part of the Charleston‐North Charleston Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This MSA has experienced rapid growth over recent decades; from 2000 to 2010, the population swelled from 549,033 to 664,607, a 21.1% growth rate. As the Charleston region is growing rapidly, Moncks Corner has begun to experience significant population growth. According to the U.S. Census, the Town’s population grew from 7,885 to 9,873, from 2010 to 2015, which represents a 24.5% increase. Outside the Town, Berkeley County is poised to add to current growth in the Charleston MSA with the arrival of the Volvo manufacturing plant, expected to be completed in 2018. Other manufacturers, such as Audio‐Technica, an audio manufacturing company, have recently opened distribution centers in Moncks Corner. As of June 2016, Berkeley County has recruited $1.1 billion in new economic investments with more than 4,100 jobs announced in only 18 months.