Kershaw County council passes first reading of airport overlay district after hours of public comment and amendments

Kershaw County Council approved first reading of a revised Airport Overlay District ordinance Tuesday, voting 5-2 to move the ordinance forward after more than three hours of public comment and several last-minute amendments.

The council’s amended ordinance narrows the boundaries of the most restrictive zone near the runway ends, clarifies that commercial agricultural restrictions do not apply to private, hobby or personal equine activities, raises some conditional-use density limits to preserve development viability in East Camden, and extends the time a use may remain nonconforming from one year to three years.

The amendments were presented to the council by Councilman Tomlinson, who moved the revised text as the vehicle for first reading. Tomlinson said changes were intended “to recognize the historic current land use trends near the airport and to provide opportunity for future development at East Camden while protecting the airport from high density and encroachment of incompatible uses.” The motion to adopt the amended ordinance was seconded by Councilman Tucker.

The vote on first reading as amended was: Shoemake — yes; Tucker — yes; Connell (chair) — yes; Cato — yes; Tomlinson — yes; Bridal — no; Jones — no. The motion carried 5-2.

Why it mattered: dozens of nearby property owners, equine community leaders and East Camden institutions urged council to soften or clarify the draft overlay, which planners and the county say is intended to protect the airport’s federal- and state-funded grant eligibility and to reduce incompatible development near runways.

Public comment and main changes

Ten members of the public spoke during the allotted public-comment block, most addressing the AOD draft. Speakers included homeowners bordering the airport and representatives of the equestrian community.

Holly Hawk, who identified herself as a property owner bordering the airport, told council she repeatedly requested operational, financial and cost-benefit information about a planned runway lighting rehabilitation project and had received “nothing but silence.” She said she could only conclude the county hired a contractor and incurred expenses without a cost-benefit analysis.

Other residents and equine advocates pressed council on several recurring points: that equestrian activities be permitted or grandfathered, that pasture grazing be distinguished from rangeland grazing, that conditional‑use restrictions not impair historic hunt-country operations on Red Fox Road and Dicey Creek Road, and that density limits be reconsidered for church and community uses. Lynn Canto urged permitting pasture grazing and grandfathering existing equine facilities; Greg Greshock and others warned some provisions could prevent rebuilding of barns or returning horses to a farm after a multi-year absence.

Pastor Craig Thompson said Malvern Hill Baptist Church — a nearly 100‑year‑old congregation with growing attendance — needed assurance the overlay would not prevent the church from building to accommodate expanding ministries.

Council response and staff notes

Council members and staff repeatedly said the version adopted on first reading was a response to public input and to guidance from aviation authorities. Councilman Tomlinson summarized key provisions he introduced: clarifying agricultural-use language so it does not affect hobby horses and small-scale private uses; limiting hunting/fishing restrictions to prohibiting shooting across airport property or at aircraft (a federal offense); revising conditional‑use occupancy density upward in some zones; extending the nonconforming-use cessation period from one year to three years; and amending the map so Zone C (the most safety-sensitive area near runway ends) is narrower, moving more parcels into Zone D to preserve development viability in East Camden.

Council members noted the figure often cited in public comment — a $22 million package of airport improvements — represents a catalog or “wish list” of possible improvements used to justify federal grant applications, not $22 million of county expenditures. Council members and staff also said the South Carolina Aeronautics Commission (SCAC) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have encouraged local land‑use controls around airports and that draft state guidance may make overlay districts a condition for some future funding.

What council didn’t decide tonight

Council approved first reading only; two additional public readings and opportunities for public comment remain. Council members asked staff to put the full, amended draft on the planning commission website and to continue town-hall style outreach. Councilman Jones unsuccessfully moved to table the ordinance; another amendment to remove less-restrictive outer zones (Zones D and E) was proposed and then withdrawn.

Quotes

“I’ve contacted staff and legal and asked them to work on a revision to the AOD,” Councilman Tomlinson said, calling the package a “wholesome process.”

“We need to get it right,” Councilman Cato said during debate, adding that state and federal guidance make it important to show local land‑use controls in place if the county seeks airport grant funds.

Ending

Council’s vote moves the amended Airport Overlay District to the next reading. Staff said it will publish the full amended text online and continue public meetings; council indicated it will take the time necessary before second and third readings to address outstanding community concerns.