Edgefield County Council reviews five-year comprehensive plan updates; public hearing set for November

Edgefield County officials met in a called session on Sept. 18, 2024, for an informational review of proposed five-year updates to the county’s comprehensive plan. The meeting, described by the presiding councilmember as a workshop with "no votes tonight," featured a staff presentation of textual edits, map changes, and two substantive policy proposals that would authorize future zoning changes if the council chooses to pursue them.

Planning staff — introduced in the meeting as "Doc" — told council the packet is already posted online and that the five-year review is a relatively short process compared with the statutory 10-year rewrite. "This, like you said, is just a five-year review," Doc said, adding that the update "is only gonna require you to do a public hearing and a simple resolution." The presentation walked council through the comprehensive plan’s elements and highlighted proposed edits to charts and language updated with 2020 Census data.

Two items were flagged as substantive proposals. First, staff recommended authorizing the creation of a Rural Agriculture (RA) district, described as a rural, small‑scale commercial and residential district with a two-acre minimum lot-size requirement. Doc emphasized the change "only makes it legal for you to create it if you choose to do so" and does not itself create new zoning or reclassify property.

Second, planning staff recommended expanding several Highway Overlay Districts — including sections of U.S. 25 south to the town limits of Edgefield and other intersections — primarily to impose billboard and signage controls and landscaping requirements on commercial sites. Doc said overlays "do not have any effect on residential property or agricultural property" and are intended to limit the size and placement of commercial signs.

Staff also proposed many non-substantive edits: updated demographic and housing charts drawn from the 2020 Census, terminology changes to improve readability (for example, replacing "suburban density" with "suburban residential"), and the removal or rescheduling of items in the Priority Investment Plan (PIP) that are completed or ongoing. Doc said completed projects — such as gateway signage and branding efforts — have been removed from the PIP; other items were moved to "ongoing" or to the 2029 timetable.

On recreation, council debated a highlighted PIP item proposing the creation of a nonprofit to support parks and programming. The council recalled prior discussion of forming a 501(c)(3) to assist fundraising but noted the county already maintains a dedicated recreation revenue line and has a newly hired recreation director. Council suggested the nonprofit language could be deleted or reworked; staff said they would "scratch that out later" if council preferred.

Council members pressed staff on a handful of clarifications: whether the council must return substantive changes to the planning commission (Doc advised that while minor edits can be made at the resolution stage, sweeping changes to the land‑use chapter should be sent back to the planning commission), and whether specific corporate names should appear in broadband language (members asked staff to use generic phrasing instead of naming carriers).

The meeting also included map-level changes: an expansion of the estate‑residential future land‑use category across areas near Merriweather (intended to preserve low‑density, large‑lot development where water and sewer are scarce) and selective adjustments near town edges to allow a denser future land‑use category that would make higher‑density zoning an option later if desired. Doc reiterated that the comp plan itself "is not regulatory in any way" and any zoning changes would require separate action.

Council agreed on next steps for public engagement and adoption. The presiding member proposed a shortened presentation at the October regular meeting, a public hearing in November, and a potential vote on a resolution in December (or later if public input requires more time). "Public hearing November," the presiding member confirmed during the meeting.

No policy votes were taken during the called workshop. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn moved by Mr. Moody, seconded by Mr. Talbert, and approved unanimously.

What’s next: staff will post the presentation materials online, circulate the packet to council members by email, and schedule the October briefing, the November public hearing, and a later resolution/vote depending on public comment.