Berkeley County council discusses Nexton amendment as residents and members warn of density and civic-site losses
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Nash Nexton Holdings described an eleventh amendment that would release property for potential annexation, reduce certain entitlements and prepay impact fees; council heard strong objections from members and residents who said shifting capacity from 447 homes to roughly 1,200 would change community character. No council vote was taken.
Brent Chabablo, representing Nash Nexton Holdings, told Berkeley County Council the proposed eleventh amendment to the Nexton development agreement would "release the property in question from the existing development agreement" and "reduce our existing entitlements under our development agreement by 2,000 units," while identifying land for a county water tower and prepaying one-time fire impact fees for the annexed parcels.
Council members and residents urged caution. Mister Davis said the change in capacity for the specific tract — from 447 homes under the original agreement to as many as 1,200 under the amendment — would "tremendously impact that part of the county" and described the proposal as a departure from the commitments that guided earlier approvals.
Supervisor Crittenden and other council members highlighted prior decisions to route sewer lines around rural communities and said they would not support increasing density in the affected area. Council members also noted that the amendment would eliminate a previously required civic-site purchase that had been discussed for a county civic center near the interchange, a loss several members characterized as significant for long-term community planning.
Chabablo said the numbers reflected adjacent zoning and traffic-capacity analysis led by the town of Summerville and that the developer first discussed the possibility of annexation with county staff earlier in the year. He told the council the zoning determination for the parcel was finalized around October and that Nash Nexton would work with the county to address concerns.
The land-use committee treated the item as a discussion; no vote was taken. Several council members asked staff to continue conversations with the developer and the town of Summerville and signaled they would insist on maintaining previously stated limits for that rural area unless an acceptable compromise is found.
The county will hold staff-level follow-ups with interested council members and stakeholders; any proposal to increase unit counts on county-owned or county-controlled land would need to be returned to council for formal action.