Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Moratorium topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kershaw County Council advances temporary moratorium on subdivisions after heated debate over small lots
Summary
Council approved reading of a six-month temporary moratorium on subdivisions after weeks of discussion and public comment. Debate centered on whether the moratorium should include small/minor subdivisions; council members signaled plans to try to narrow the measure before final adoption.
Kershaw County Council on Tuesday advanced the first reading of a temporary moratorium on subdivisions, setting the measure for further revision after council members disputed whether the restriction should cover small (minor) subdivisions as well as major developments.
The moratorium reading cleared the council on a 5–1 vote among members present, with remote Councilmember Russell Brazel also recorded as voting in favor. Councilmembers Brent Shoemake, Chairman Connell, Brent Tomlinson and Jimmy Jones voted yes; Councilman Tucker voted no.
Council members and several residents said they supported a pause to update the county’s comprehensive plan and land‑use ordinance, but disagreed about how broadly the moratorium should apply. Councilman Jimmy Jones said his intent was to target large subdivisions: “My intention was to vote against it tonight because I don’t like what was presented with the small subdivisions… My intention was to vote against it tonight, only to keep the conversation going for us to make it better.”
Supporters in the public comment period urged a pause to allow the county to finish a capital improvements plan and update ordinances. Lynn Conteaux told the council: “Smart growth means planning for our community’s well-being… We should never settle for less. This means implementing a 6 month moratorium on large and small subdivisions to prepare for the smart growth and allow completion of the capital improvements plan.”
Opponents, including local residential builder David Dabney of Sweet Briar Homes, warned the moratorium’s current draft would harm small, locally owned building firms and contractors who work on minor subdivisions and one‑lot splits. Dabney said the county’s growth is concentrated in Lugoff and Elgin and asked council to “look at the areas in which are highly affected by it” before adopting broad limits.
Council discussion focused on two linked issues: (1) whether the moratorium should cover only major subdivisions (the council heard proposals that would define “major” as developments of 10 lots or more) and (2) how the county will use the moratorium period to complete studies and updates. Councilman Brent Shoemake said he and several colleagues had discussed a compromise to redefine “small subdivisions” so the moratorium would be less disruptive to family builders while still pausing larger developments long enough for planning work.
Legal and procurement issues also shaped debate. Several council members asked for legal advice on whether briefing planning‑commission members in open session could jeopardize county procurement rules or the county’s legal posture while the moratorium is being drafted. The county attorney recommended handling some of that work in executive session to receive privileged legal advice; council held an executive session on moratorium‑related legal matters earlier in the meeting.
What’s next: The council advanced the moratorium on reading and council members said they expect to propose amendments prior to later readings and public hearings. Staff and legal counsel were directed to prepare the ordinance language and supporting analysis for subsequent public notice and hearings; the council indicated a public hearing is planned for July 8 with a final reading targeted for July 22. The motion on reading did not itself adopt the moratorium as final policy.
