Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council gives first reading to rural‑agriculture zoning text; map, parcel rollout deferred
Summary
Edgefield County Council voted unanimously Feb. 4 to give first reading to an ordinance that creates a new rural‑agriculture (RA) zoning classification in county code. The vote approved the text only; officials and staff said no map changes or parcel rezoning occurred and a separate public process will address where the district would be applied.
Edgefield County Council on Feb. 4 gave first reading to an ordinance that adds a rural‑agriculture (RA) zoning district to the county land‑development code, a text change council members and staff said does not itself rezone any parcels.
The ordinance creates a district that emphasizes agricultural uses, allows supporting commercial and residential uses and restricts industrial and large‑scale commercial development. Assistant Administrator Clark, who serves as the county’s planning director, told council: “What you have in front of you is the text amendment, not the map amendment. This does not apply to rural agricultural district anywhere on the map. You’re not zoning anything tonight.”
The RA text includes a minimum lot size of two acres. Clark and staff clarified that the two‑acre minimum would not immediately change existing lot‑size requirements in areas without water and sewer: “There is no water and sewer infrastructure in any of that area, and, therefore, their lot size requirement is 2.5 acres currently. If water and sewer expanded into that area, then you would need to consider the restrictive nature of 2‑acre lot sizes.”
Why it matters: The text change is preparatory — it establishes rules the county can apply later when it decides whether and where to place the RA district on the zoning map. Planning staff showed council a proposed map footprint that would cover roughly 1,600 parcels, primarily in Council District 2 with smaller portions in Districts 4 and 5; Clark said staff will not issue a final parcel list or mailings until council directs a map amendment because parcel boundaries change frequently.
Public comment and concerns: Resident Scott Cooper, who identified himself as a multigenerational Edgefield County resident from the Sweetwater community, urged caution and said the county should consider utility access and soil suitability before applying the RA district: “When considering the production of food, soil density, microbial activity, soil type, topography, water accessibility … all will have an economic impact on viability of any agricultural operation,” Cooper said, and added that a blanket designation could affect private property economics and future utility expansion.
Planning history and next steps: Clark said the RA language emerged from months of Planning Commission work and citizen input; he said the footprint shown to council expanded during the comprehensive‑plan update as residents and the commission asked to include additional areas. Council gave first reading to the ordinance unanimously; the item will return for second reading and a public hearing before a final map or any parcel rezoning is approved.
Council members emphasized the distinction between the text and map steps. Tiffany Arlund, council member, moved first reading; Moody seconded. Assistant Administrator Clark and a Planning Commission member in attendance answered technical questions during the session.
