Mount Pleasant

What Mount Pleasant’s boards have decided, read from the record.

Design review, zoning appeals, and council votes — a request in Mount Pleasant can clear more than one body before it’s decided, and we read every one of them the same way, tied to the parcel each one was about.

How we read the record Talk to us

99.51%Weighted · audited 2026‑07‑30

Of case records audited against their source documents, weighted to the corpus’s real composition, 99.51% agreed with the source — measured on the Charleston Board of Zoning Appeals corpus.

What that number measures, what it doesn’t, and why we won’t publish 100% →

Coverage

What we hold for Mount Pleasant, and whether it can carry a rate.

Sources held and classified for this town

Can carry a published approval rate

Cannot — each row says why

Generated from the store, observed 2026-08-01. The same registry the full coverage page reads from, filtered to this town. Counts are floors — they describe what we have classified, not everything that exists. **Readable text** is the share of the documents that produce a board's cases which carry an extractable text layer, measured by fetching every catalogued document.
Jurisdiction	Body	Record kind	Readable text	Rate?	Why
Mount Pleasant	GIS zoning layer	not_a_decision_source	not a document corpus	No	A reference layer, not a record of decisions.

Elsewhere in the county

Mount Pleasant is one of three places we hold so far.

↑ All of Charleston County City of Charleston → North Charleston →

Have a Mount Pleasant parcel already in mind?

Tell us the address or the TMS and we’ll tell you plainly whether the record covers it — including when it doesn’t.

grier@upyourbids.com