Planning commission recommends denial of Johns Island rezoning after hours of public opposition

CHARLESTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — The Charleston County Planning Commission on Aug. 11 recommended denial of a request to change a Johns Island property’s designation from limited commercial to mixed use, a move that would have allowed greater residential and commercial intensity on the parcel.

Staff presentation and recommendation: In a staff presentation, Marcia Miller, a planner with the county, summarized the request (comp plan amendment ACP-06-25-00125 and ZLDR amendment ZLDR-06-25-00134) to change Tax Map Serial (TMS) number 313-00-00-179 from limited commercial to mixed use within the Johns Island Maybank Highway Corridor overlay. Miller said mixed use would allow multifamily dwellings, hotels and motels, parking garages and gasoline service stations that are not allowed under the current limited commercial designation; it would also change density limits from 6 units per acre to 8 units per acre, and, Miller noted, approval with a 50-foot right-of-way dedication would raise entitlements from 12 units per acre to 19.

Why it mattered: The proposal prompted sustained public comment. Opponents said the parcel’s dirt access roads, existing congestion at Maybank and River Road, and local drainage issues make higher intensity development inappropriate now; proponents and the applicant argued mixed use would add housing near a planned Trident hospital and reduce long commutes for employees.

What speakers said: Philip Simmons, the applicant, described his family’s long Johns Island history and said his family “are a very small company” that would prefer to develop or lease the land themselves; he argued mixed use could supply housing for hospital staff and reduce traffic. Opponents included Pam Skinner of the Johns Island Task Force, who said the upzoning did not meet the comp plan criteria that require events or conditions “after adoption of the comp plan” to justify changes, and Tory Sanders of the Coastal Conservation League, who said the area’s infrastructure “is still struggling to catch up” and that the parcel’s surrounding roads cannot accommodate the requested density. Multiple residents warned of evacuation and flooding risks and said existing roadways already perform poorly.

Commission discussion: Commissioners split along planning-for-the-future and community-protection lines. Commissioner Adam McConnell argued the commission must plan for future population growth and housing needs, saying “doing nothing is not an option.” Other members, including Chair Cindy Floyd, said the comprehensive plan was recently updated with community input and should not be set aside; several commissioners cited overwhelming public opposition and existing infrastructure deficits.

Action and outcome: A motion to approve staff’s recommendation failed. A subsequent motion to recommend disapproval carried on a roll call vote (Chair Cindy Floyd, Warwick Zohn, David Kent, Warren Zohn? [note: transcript lists names], and others recorded in the roll). The planning commission’s recommendation is advisory to County Council.

Next steps: Planning staff announced the request will go to County Council public hearing on Aug. 26, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. in Council Chambers and will appear before Council’s Planning and Public Works Committee on Sept. 11, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.; final action requires three readings at Council’s discretion.

Context and limits: The article reports only what was stated at the Planning Commission meeting. The staff recommendation, public comments and the commission’s recommendation are recorded; whether the applicant will submit a different proposal or time frame was not specified at the meeting.