Beaufort annexes ‘donut holes.’ Here’s why some residents are criticizing the process
The Beaufort City Council on Tuesday agreed to annex 26 “donut holes” — land surrounded by city property but not part of it — but delayed rezoning one of the properties after encountering pushback by residents.
But most of the criticism of the city was regarding form — mainly the difficulty of deciphering the legalese in the public notices and agenda materials — and not substance.
The issue highlighted arcane rules for annexation, the city’s push to clean up pockets of county land within its borders as it continues to grow and the public’s push for clear information about what’s going on.
The 26 scattered properties — held by 16 owners — are located on Robert Smalls Parkway, Greenlawn Drive and Circle, Old Jericho Road, Parris Island Gateway, Ice House Road, Palmetto Drive and Estelle Road. Altogether, they total 41.53 acres.
The properties are called “donut holes” because they are islands in Beaufort County’s jurisdiction but surrounded by the city. One of the properties, for instance, is sandwiched between a liquor store and the Red Rooster cafe just off Boundary Street.
City seeks efficiency
The city wants to close the donut hills for the sake of efficiency, Mayor Stephen Murray said.
The properties can lead to questions about whether city police or the Sheriff’s Office should respond to calls, Murray said. The donut holes also affect other services such as trash collection, and absorbing the properties will assists with orderly development especially as the city continues to grow.
“The question is,” Murray said, “how do we shape the growth in the most responsible way with the best possible outcomes?”
Transparency criticized
But the manner in which the annexation en mass occurred sparked criticism that the city wasn’t transparent in identifying the properties, the intent behind the move and how the the properties will be zoned, which will affect what can be constructed.
Agenda packet information on the annexations describes one of the parcels and the owners like this: “Rezoning six parcels of property located at 1404, 1407, 1507, [No address], 1610, and 1716 Greenlawn Drive from C3NMU (Neighborhood Mixed Use) to T5 -Urban Corridor District (T5-UC). The properties are identified as District R100, Map 01, and parcels 0241, 0261, 0257, 0006, and 005F. This is a rezoning request as a result of a petition for annexation. Applicant: 303 Associates, Clifford Earl & Joy King, and Beaufort Housing Authority.”
Chuck Newton, of the Sea Island Coalition, a development watchdog, said residents get suspicious if they don’t understand the information. He noted the city used long tax identification numbers when it gave public notice about the properties and the annexation petitions.
“Why do governments do this? No typical resident knows how to navigate this stuff, even if they were interested,” Newton wrote in an opinion piece on the proposal published in the Beaufort Gazette and Island packet that a resident quoted at the meeting Tuesday. “But posting notices like this seems designed to ensure the public stays disinterested, and in the dark.”
The group does not usually get involved in proposals in the city of Beaufort, Newton said, but decided to speak out because it received so many calls about the proposal.
The city did all the right things required by law, Newton said, holding public hearings and publishing the notice of the public hearings. But meeting the letter of the law, Newton said, doesn’t ensure taxpayers understand what’s really going on.
“What we need is not more, but effective communication,” Newton said.
City defends process
Murray, who met with a group of Polk Village neighborhood residents about the annexations previously, said the city can be more accessible.
But Murray defended the city, too, noting that the addresses were part of the public record.
And rules on annexations can be confusing and nonsensical, Murray added, with the city having only so much control over that process. The city has made great strides in transparency in recent years, said Murray, pointing out that budget documents and public meetings are now accessible online. And he took some issue with the criticism, noting council members are basically volunteers trying to help the community, not D.C. politicians “making a couple hundred thousand a year.”
“Give us some credit,” Murray said. “We are working really hard to meet people where they are.”
The properties are separate annexations but were brought together as a package for the City Council to consider as the city began looking into donut holes about six months ago, Deputy City Manager Reece Bertholf said.
“The fundamental idea,” Bertholf said, “is to close the gap between municipality and county boundaries.”
The vast majority of the property owners petitioned the city to have the property annexed, Bertholf said, and there were four public meetings before the Metropolitan Planning Commission and council.
Some of the property owners are property developers, such as 303 Associates.
Polk Village concerns
Several residents from Polk Village neighborhood, which is located north of Boundary Street behind Chick-fil-A and Walgreens, said they had concerns with future development plans at 1502 Palmetto Drive, one of the properties that was annexed.
Roxanne Pierce called the city getting a foothold in Polk Village “like a Pac-Man.” She urged the city to “slow down and evaluate things.”
“I don’t care if you call us a ’hood,” Pierce said, “or donut hole.”
As for her, Pierce said, she prefers living in the county. And she’s worried that a higher density proposal will be constructed at the 1502 Palmetto Drive property.
That area, residents say, already is difficult to access because of its location near busy Boundary Street.
The property owners ultimately control what will be proposed on the land, Murray said, but zoning does limit the uses.
The city also voted to rezone 25 parcels for residential uses except for the 1502 Palmetto property that residents raised concerns about. While that property has been annexed, the City Council will not vote on its zoning until that’s discussed first by the Metropolitan Planning Commission, which was scheduled to discuss it Wednesday, June 22.
“I second that,” Judy Waters yelled out from the audience, when the council proposed withholding a vote on zoning for the Palmetto Drive property.
Waters wanted to know whether other properties in the Polk Village neighborhood would be annexed. Unless residents asked for it, Murray said, the chances of them being “forcibly annexed” are slim, but local leadership is in support of closing donut holes, he added.
This story was originally published June 22, 2022 at 2:39 PM.
