Planning committee opposes Mount Pleasant annexation of Hamlet Beach Road parcel
April 26, 2025 | Charleston County, South Carolina
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Charleston County Planning and Public Works Committee on April 24 voted to send a resolution to the Town of Mount Pleasant opposing an annexation request for property at 20790 Hamlet Beach Road.
Committee members said the resolution is intended to put the county's concerns on the record and initiate a formal communication to Mount Pleasant. The committee's chair said he asked that the item be placed on the agenda so the county's views would be transmitted in writing.
Council members who spoke urged prompt action. One member noted the annexation effort had been initiated by property owners and that there were outstanding issues, including heirs' property disputes, that had delayed the town's process. "If we want our voices to be heard, now is the time," a councilmember said during debate.
Councilman Kabroski told the committee he had spoken with Mount Pleasant planning staff and town council members and said that in at least some respects Mount Pleasant's proposed zoning would match the county's S-3 designation. Councilman Grabrowski urged caution, saying annexation can lead to leapfrogging of development north and east and that historic, primarily African American settlements can be affected when municipal annexations change land-use patterns.
The committee approved the resolution and said it would deliver the county's position to Mount Pleasant ahead of that town's upcoming meetings.
Why this matters: committee members framed the resolution as a preemptive step to preserve county planning tools and to flag concerns about the pace and character of development near long-established, unincorporated communities. One council member described the annexation as a potential avenue for developers to bypass local moratoriums and planning limits.
What happens next: the county will transmit the resolution to Mount Pleasant; committee members said they intended to attend the town's planning meeting and follow the annexation request as it proceeds through that town's process.
Ending: The county's resolution adds an official county-level objection to the public record and signals the council's intent to monitor the annexation as the town’s review continues.
Committee members said the resolution is intended to put the county's concerns on the record and initiate a formal communication to Mount Pleasant. The committee's chair said he asked that the item be placed on the agenda so the county's views would be transmitted in writing.
Council members who spoke urged prompt action. One member noted the annexation effort had been initiated by property owners and that there were outstanding issues, including heirs' property disputes, that had delayed the town's process. "If we want our voices to be heard, now is the time," a councilmember said during debate.
Councilman Kabroski told the committee he had spoken with Mount Pleasant planning staff and town council members and said that in at least some respects Mount Pleasant's proposed zoning would match the county's S-3 designation. Councilman Grabrowski urged caution, saying annexation can lead to leapfrogging of development north and east and that historic, primarily African American settlements can be affected when municipal annexations change land-use patterns.
The committee approved the resolution and said it would deliver the county's position to Mount Pleasant ahead of that town's upcoming meetings.
Why this matters: committee members framed the resolution as a preemptive step to preserve county planning tools and to flag concerns about the pace and character of development near long-established, unincorporated communities. One council member described the annexation as a potential avenue for developers to bypass local moratoriums and planning limits.
What happens next: the county will transmit the resolution to Mount Pleasant; committee members said they intended to attend the town's planning meeting and follow the annexation request as it proceeds through that town's process.
Ending: The county's resolution adds an official county-level objection to the public record and signals the council's intent to monitor the annexation as the town’s review continues.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting