The Josephine Driessen Beach Access Right-of-Way

‘Private Land’

(Not a “Community” Beach-Access)

Among the points listed, (intended to convince the Town Manager to block a permanent public access — a 32+ year, lawfully recorded access easement R/W – with two separately recorded agreements signed by the Town); were:

• “The gate appears to serve no legitimate purpose“…. and
• “Bradley Circle residents, renters and guests have a private beach access off Sweet Grass Manor. The beach park is rarely accessed by those on Bradley Circle”.

None of the above statements are accurate.

1. The purpose of the ‘access-gate’ according to (one of two) recorded easement agreements is, quote: “The Access Easement is for the purpose of providing pedestrian access to the Beach Park from the right-of-way of Bradley Circle for residents of the Bradley Circle and Second Avenue areas, and shall be now and forever appurtenant to the Beach Park. The Access Easement is intended to transferable with the Beach Park because the parties hereto agree that it is essentially necessary for the use and enjoyment of the Beach Park”.
2. The “Private” Beach Access (off of ‘Sweet Grass Manor’) is just that, ‘Private”. However, there is no HOA or POA for the Bradley Circle neighborhood, that has any easement allowing for the right of the “community” to use it or improve it. Some recorded easements do exist, for properties which have since been divided. Therefore, there are several lots that were subdivided from an original parcel that have inherited an easement. However, to be clear, the vast majority of properties on Bradley Circle do not have any such an easement allowing for the use of the ‘private beach access’ on ‘private land’. These officials were informed of this fact, shortly after the park access was blocked. Despite this, the Town has allowed this problem to persist, whereby residents and guests of every property (old and new), are being directed (by default) to use this private beach access to get to the beach. This is basically like the Town of Hilton Head is usurping ‘private’ land for ‘public’ use!
3. The beach park was regularly accessed by those on Bradley Circle, and beyond, for decades! Several residents, guests and members of the public (for whom it was intended); used it on a day-to-day basis, including myself and my family/pets. To suggest otherwise is simply an attempt to support his conclusion. It was either based on false testimony from someone at the meeting (or a false assumption). First of all, enjoying the public community park is a very legitimate use! Some folks may never go outside of their homes, but for those who do, having a community public park is a wonderful thing. A place to walk your pet, or to take your children to the playground, to ride bikes, or to have the freedom of movement between historic neighborhoods of Bradley Beach. Clearly, another purpose (another very legitimate use); was to provide ‘beach access’ to those properties on Bradley Circle that do not have either their own beach-access, or any easement right to use this particular ‘private’ beach access. Bradley Circle is a non-gated neighborhood on a Public County Road! This is an attempt to make a public neighborhood with no HOA, more “exclusive” like the ‘gated-communities’ on the island – which it is not. It is publicly accessible by County Road 24 hours a day….just like nearby Chaplin Park is ‘non-fenced’ and wide-open to the surrounding neighborhoods. In fact, this is the only such example on the entire island of a neighborhood (of any kind) being isolated from it’s community park – 24/7/365!!! They want us to believe it was a “safety issue” without any real evidence. In fact, there were no police reports associated with the access-gate in over 3 decades of regular use!!

• Since this occurred, various neighbors (most of whom do not have an easement), worked together with another that does, to improve the ‘private’ beach access. This only happened after I argued to the Town, that the ‘Safety Director’ had not only blocked a permanent legal public park access, but that in doing so, folks were being directed to use a dangerously dilapidated ‘private’ access instead. Only then, did these neighbors work together to improve the dangerous walkway (with one easement holder obtaining a ‘natural resources permit from DHEC). The Town did not provide a permit, but it did look the other way, as officials were fully aware of what was occurring. Of course, nobody is opposed to the access being improved and made safe. But for these folks to assume this would somehow confer upon them the legal right to use it, is remarkable.
• As part of this “improvement”, someone took it upon themselves to destroy a 200+ year old ‘Eastern Red Cedar’ tree, located on this private land. They did so without a Town ‘natural resources’ permit (because it could not have been permitted: For one thing, the owner of the land would have had to apply, and secondly – and most importantly – it was a protected species (a ‘specimen’ tree) that is unable to be removed for any reason without a variance. Exactly the type of tree that laws like this are meant to protect. As rare as Live Oaks, this close to the ocean. It was a very healthy tree, and dearly loved by those who used the access regularly (and the birds/wildlife that enjoyed it shade, and berries). When I reported this to Town officials, after discovering the company that was hired to take the tree, an investigation was started. However, to date, no person has been given a violation, even though the Town could compel the business license holder to reveal who hired them (which would allow them to be sued, by the way). Who is protecting this person?
• At one point, (on behalf of the owners of the private access), I erected a ‘private beach access’ sign, where one had previously been (one that falsely claimed that it was a ‘community’ beach access). Along with this, I erected a security camera on an unused Palmetto Electric pole). When discovered by Mr. Bromage and the Code Enforcement crew, I was told that it had to be removed by the end of the day, by email. Then, three policemen were sent to my home, to make sure that I was going to comply. When I went to retrieve the sign and the security camera, Mr. Bromage was waiting for me – arms folded – waiting to confirm that the items were removed by 5pm. The email also informed me that I had to apply for a ‘sign permit’.
• After submitting a ‘sign permit’, it was approved. Then, all of a sudden, it was withdrawn. Next, was several weeks of going back and forth with officials providing one excuse after another. I finally learned (from reading the LMO) that this sort of sign, is not required to have a ‘sign permit’! After the top LMO official (Trey Lowe) admitted to this fact; the Town officials suggested that every property with an easement to use it would have to agree in writing (for something the Town has no right to be involved with – at all). At this point, it was obvious to me that these were just efforts to obstruct the ‘private’ beach access sign. I then erected a sign on the private land (but without a security camera). After this, the sign was immediately stolen the next day! The Town has denied being involved.

Basically, this Town is ‘enabling’ every resident and guest to use a private beach access, to somehow excuse the fact that it has ‘blocked’ everyone’s legal right to enter and enjoy the public beach park – an action that has denied legal park and beach-access to residents and guests! So much for the Town’s often repeated strategic goal of ‘promoting access to parks and open space’ – and ‘connecting neighborhoods’! Enough is enough! After two years, we were forced to file a lawsuit. After three years of no help from our Ward 4 Representative; we remain hopeful that ultimately, reason and justice will prevail.