Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Moratorium topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Laurens County councilors hear public comment and debate third reading of open-space moratorium
Summary
Council considered third reading of ordinance 9-89, a temporary moratorium on open-space developments. Public commenters split between landowner rights and calls to fix ordinance loopholes; council members debated growth, but the provided transcript shows a motion and second without a recorded final vote.
Laurens County councilors on Aug. 11 advanced a motion to consider third reading of ordinance 9-89 — a proposed moratorium on open-space developments — after an extended public-comment period that included both landowners urging continued growth and residents and planning advisors calling for a pause to fix perceived loopholes.
The discussion followed public testimony from several speakers. Dairy farmer Glenn Easter asked the council to allow the county to grow and to respect landowners’ rights while coexisting with agricultural uses. "We must respect our landowner's rights," Easter said, urging councilors to consider owners’ perspectives as they vote. Opponents of rapid track-home development framed their remarks as support for careful planning rather than opposition to growth.
Supporters of a limited pause included Chris Leonard, who said the moratorium would be a "pause to try to fix the part of the ordinance that has a lot of loopholes, ambiguity, and vagueness," and Ashley Riddle, a member of the zoning task force, who said the planning commission had voted unanimously to request the moratorium so staff and the commission could address loopholes. Nancy Garrison told the council the pause would give staff time to reconcile contradictions in the county code, citing ordinance 9-26's references to a future land-use map that is not in the newest comprehensive plan.
Ethan Anderson, speaking from a growth-policy perspective, urged the county to adopt stronger infrastructure funding tools rather than simply restricting development. He proposed a county growth and infrastructure trust fund in which developer and new-homebuyer impact fees would be placed into a transparent, interest-bearing account for roads, schools, sewer and water, public-safety facilities and parks; Anderson suggested exemptions for affordable housing and veteran-owned developments and recommended annual citizen input and independent audits.
On the dais, a motion to approve ordinance 9-89 on third reading was made and seconded (the second was recorded as coming from Speaker 6). Council member Speaker 11 spoke at length about balancing preservation of rural character with the need for affordable housing, cited county population changes since 2010, and noted that, as of the transcript, "There are no current active open space developments in the Laurens County pipeline." The transcript does not include a final roll-call or recorded outcome for the third-reading motion in the provided segments.
Next steps: the motion was seconded and discussion occurred, but a final vote on third reading is not recorded in the supplied transcript segments; the item remained under council consideration at the end of the provided material.
