By Michael Andersen
The debate over Pine Island and the Cultural Protection Overlay on St. Helena Island has become one of the most important land-use issues in Beaufort County.
It is also one of the clearest tests of whether county government will stand by the rules communities relied on when those rules become inconvenient to development interests.
For those who have not followed the issue closely, Pine Island is a proposed development on St. Helena Island that has raised serious concerns because of its location within the Cultural Protection Overlay, commonly called the CPO. The CPO is a special land-use district created to help protect the cultural, rural, and environmental character of St. Helena Island, including its historic Gullah-Geechee communities.
That context matters.
This debate is not simply about one project, one property owner, or one ordinance. It is about whether a community has the right to shape its own future before that future is decided for it.
I believe it does.
St. Helena Island is not a blank slate. It is not just another piece of land waiting to be maximized, marketed, and transformed. It is a living community with history, family land, churches, farms, waterways, neighborhoods, and traditions that cannot be recreated once it is lost. The residents who have spoken out about Pine Island and the CPO are not reacting to change in the abstract. They are responding to a very real concern that the island’s identity and rural character could be weakened one exception at a time.
That concern deserves to be respected.
The CPO did not appear out of nowhere. It came from experience. St. Helena residents saw what happened on other Sea Islands, especially Hilton Head Island, where development pressure dramatically changed the character of the island over time.
Hilton Head was once home to deeply rooted Gullah-Geechee community. Families lived on land connected to generations of history. But as the island transformed into a resort destination, rising land values, rising taxes, gated communities, golf courses, tourism, and development pressure changed the landscape permanently. Some families were able to hold on. Most were pushed out, priced out, or forced into long fights to protect land their families had owned for generations.
That history is not ancient. It is recent enough for people here to remember.
And that is exactly why St. Helena has tried to take a different path.
The CPO represents a community saying clearly: we have seen what unchecked development pressure can do, and we do not want that future imposed here.
That does not mean every concern raised by property owners should be dismissed. Property rights matter. Clear rules matter. Fair application matters. If parts of the CPO need to be clarified, Beaufort County should clarify them. If language needs to be tightened, it should be tightened. If the ordinance can be made stronger and more legally defensible, then the County should do that work.
But there is a major difference between strengthening an ordinance and weakening it.
Too often, debates like this are framed as though cultural preservation and property rights cannot coexist. I reject that premise. Beaufort County already regulates land use in countless ways. We have zoning districts, overlays, setbacks, density limits, stormwater rules, environmental protections, and design standards. We accept those rules because land-use decisions do not affect only the person holding the deed. They affect roads, drainage, neighboring properties, public services, natural resources, and the broader character of a community.
The CPO is no different in principle. It simply recognizes that St. Helena Island is unique and that the consequences of getting land-use decisions wrong there are especially serious.
Pine Island became so contentious because many residents saw it as a test of whether the CPO actually means what it says. If a project can move forward despite conflicting with the intent of the overlay, then what message does that send to the next developer?
That is not a small question.
If Beaufort County makes exceptions for one “special” project, every future applicant will ask why their project should not receive the same treatment. Over time, that is how protections are hollowed out. Not always through one dramatic vote, but through a series of exceptions until the original purpose no longer matters.
That is why the County should not retreat from the CPO. It should strengthen it.
If the ordinance has weak points, fix them. If its language needs to be clearer, make it clearer. If enforcement needs to be more consistent, make it consistent. If the County believes the purpose of the CPO is worth defending, then it should make sure the ordinance is written, applied, and enforced in a way that can withstand serious scrutiny.
The answer is not to abandon the CPO. The answer is to make it clearer, stronger, more consistent, and more defensible.
This matters beyond St. Helena.
The decisions made over the next few years will shape Beaufort County for decades. Growth pressure is not going away. Development interests will continue looking for opportunities. Land values will continue rising. Communities that wait until the bulldozers arrive to decide what they value often find themselves too late.
St. Helena tried to decide earlier. That should count for something.
County Council should listen to the residents who have been raising these concerns for years, respect the purpose of the CPO, and defend the principle that some places are worth protecting before they are changed forever.
Because once St. Helena loses what makes it special, no ordinance, lawsuit, or campaign promise will ever bring it back.
Michael J.D. Andersen is a Republican candidate for Beaufort County Council District 4. He lives in Mossy Oaks, works as an accountant at a local CPA firm, and serves on the City of Beaufort’s Parks and Trees Advisory Committee.