Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines action on rezoning request for Ridgeway property after planning commission denial
Summary
A rezoning request by Scott and Dorothy Bratton for a Ridgeway property was denied by the county planning commission and the Fairfield County Council did not advance the ordinance to second reading after motions to table and to approve failed for lack of a second.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scott Bratton spoke at the Jan. 27 Fairfield County Council meeting to ask the council to approve a rezoning of two lots in Ridgeway from R-1 (single-family residential) to RD-1 (rural residential).
Bratton said the two lots were conveyed in one deed and that the combined tax bill "was $19 for the first two years" and had risen to "$34,100" in the last two years; he asked council to either approve the rezoning or table the matter so the tax assessor could explain changes in his property tax status. "I ask for your approval for the rezoning. And if you won't do anything else, what I ask for you is to table this, get the tax assessor to explain it in such a way that it makes sense," Bratton said.
County staff identified the item as a first-reading ordinance to amend the Fairfield County Land Management Ordinance No. 599 and the zoning map for tax map number 115-04-00-013-000 (1197 Rock Bridal Road). The Fairfield County Planning Commission had recommended denial of the rezoning request.
Council members debated procedure. The county attorney advised that South Carolina law limits discussion on first reading and that the council could either approve the ordinance on first reading, table it to a later reading, or take no action. A motion to table to second reading was made but failed for lack of a second. Later, a motion to approve first reading was made but again failed for lack of a second. The county attorney explained that, under the council's practice, lack of approval or lack of a second effectively causes the request to be denied.
Because the planning commission had already recommended denial and because council did not secure the necessary motion and second to advance the ordinance, there was no adoption or referral recorded during the meeting. The council did not set any additional dates for further review during the Jan. 27 meeting.

