Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to slow Cane Bay rezoning, citing wetlands, flooding and traffic
Summary
Dozens of residents told Berkeley County Council they fear Grambling’s proposed Cane Bay project will worsen flooding, destroy wetlands and overload roads; hydrology experts and neighbors asked for independent review and stronger buffers before zoning changes proceed.
Dozens of residents pressed Berkeley County Council on July 20 over a large rezoning package tied to developer Ben Grambling and the Cane Bay plan, urging elected officials to slow the process until independent analyses address wetlands, flood risk and traffic.
Ken Lee, a local hydrologist, told the council the project will “intensify flooding downstream” and pointed to a rain-event rescue in August 2024 as evidence that nearby development has already caused serious flooding. He urged the county to "slow down, seek out a competent, independent third party to review all data affecting the quality and safety of Mr. Grambling’s plan," saying the scale of the proposal requires additional scrutiny.
Other residents offered technical and experiential concerns. Kathy Lee, a professional geologist, asked the council to publish Army Corps of Engineers and county planning surveys and said the developer’s stormwater master plan concedes downstream impacts: “My findings show that this has not been established” as for the public welfare standard required for rezoning. Stephen Rivers, who cited GIS audits and discrepant entitlement counts, said the developer’s claim of tens of thousands of entitlements is inconsistent with on-the-ground buildable acreage and urged council to act only on “ground truth” data.
Developers and some neighbors urged balance. Anne Giffier said developer GrandLinx offered concessions including land set aside as a wetlands conservancy, and said after community engagement she supports the project with safeguards. Donna Beauchene likewise praised the design team but asked for safeguards and limits on rental-unit counts, citing prior flooding issues tied to other nearby expansions.
The council moved a batch of zoning bills for consideration and approved bill 26-28 (an amendment related to a 308-acre industrial/office park site) after discussion; at least one council member recorded on the public record that noise and other neighborhood impacts factored into prior votes. Several speakers asked the council to separate large land-use items and vote them individually rather than combine them into omnibus actions.
Next steps: dozens of first‑reading items were entered into the record and will be routed to committee for review. Residents who urged independent third‑party review said they expect the council to commission additional analysis before final readings and votes.
