Must a South Carolina county send changes to a proposed zoning regulation back to its planning commission?

Plain-English summary

Lancaster County asked what role its planning commission had when the county council changed a recommended zoning regulation or map. The May 2001 informal opinion read the zoning statute to require returning every council change to the commission for review and recommendation before enactment. The AG said the statute did not excuse small or inconsequential changes.

The commission had a period set by ordinance, no longer than thirty days, to respond. If it sent no report in that time, the change was deemed approved. The council had to give the commission the opportunity to review, but it retained authority to decide whether to accept the commission’s recommendation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

County councils

The letter read the statute to require commission review of any departure from recommended zoning text or maps. It left final zoning policy with the council.

Planning commissions and applicants

The opinion gave the commission a chance to report on all changes, including inconsequential ones. A failure to report within the ordinance’s prescribed period counted as approval under the quoted statute.

Common questions

Did the council need to return only substantial zoning changes? A: No. The AG said the statute required review of all changes to the commission’s recommendation.

Could the commission block a change by staying silent?
A: No. The quoted statute deemed a change approved if no report came within the prescribed time.

Did the council have to follow the commission’s second recommendation? A: No. The AG said the council retained final decision-making authority.

Background and statutory framework

The letter interpreted Section 6-29-760(A) of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act. It also cited S.C. CODE ANN. §6-29-340 for the commission’s continuing planning role. The quoted zoning provision covered public hearings, notice, return of changed text or maps, and the commission’s response period.

Citations and references

• Section 6-29-760(A): the review obligation at issue.
• S.C. CODE ANN. §6-29-340: planning commission duties.

Official title

Concerning an interpretation of South Carolina Code of Laws Section 6-29-760(A) which clarifies the role of the Planning Commission in reviewing any changes made by County Council before enacting a zoning regulation.

Requester

William R. Sims, Esquire

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/may-31-2001/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/01may-31-sims.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLIE CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

May 31, 2001
William R. Sims, Esquire
Lancaster County Attorney
Box 1809
Lancaster, South Carolina 29721

RE: Informal Opinion
Dear Mr. Sims,
By your letter of May 15, 2001, you have requested an opinion of this Office concerning an interpretation of South Carolina Code of Laws Section 6-29-760(A). By way of background, you have provided the following information: In Lancaster County, the Planning Commission holds the public hearings on rezoning requests and changes to text amendments of the county's zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission votes on the request or change and sends it to County Council. County Council then either approves or denies the recommendation of the Planning Commission. From the materials you have provided us, it appears that the members of the Planning Commission seek clarification as to the role of the Planning Commission in reviewing any changes made by County Council before enacting a zoning regulation. For a number of years, local planning in South Carolina was governed by a myriad of statutes including Section 6-7-10 et seq. of the South Carolina Code of Laws. In 1994, the General Assembly enacted the South Carolina Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act (codified as Section 6-29-310 et seq.). The purpose of the Act was to consolidate and update the existing planning enabling legislation. Pursuant to this Act, "it is the function and duty of the local planning commission, when created by an ordinance passed by county council, to undertake a continuing planning program for the physical, social, and economic growth, development, and redevelopment of the area within its jurisdiction." S.C. CODE ANN. §6-29-340. Thus, the planning commission plays a significant role in ensuring that zoning regulations for a given area are consistent with the overall plan designed for the county's welfare.

REMBERT C. DENNIS BUILDING

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA, S.C. 29211-1549

•

'TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Mr. Sims
May 31, 2001
Page 2of3
Turning to your specific question, S. C. Code Section 6-29-760 provides in great detail the procedures that must be followed by the County when altering the recommendations of the Planning Commission. That provision reads, in part:

I

f'

(A) Before enacting or amending any zoning regulations or maps, the governing authority or the planning commission, if authorized by the governing authority, shall hold a public hearing on it, which must be advertised and conducted according to lawfully prescribed procedures. If no established procedures exist, then at least fifteen days' notice of the time and place of the public hearing must be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality or county. In cases involving rezoning, conspicuous notice shall be posted on or adjacent to the property affected, with at least one such notice being visible from each public thoroughfare that abuts the property. If the local government maintains a list of groups that have expressed an interest in being informed of zoning proceedings, notice of such meetings must be mailed to these groups. No change in or departure from the text or maps as recommended by the local planning commission may be made pursuant to the hearing unless the change or departure be first submitted to the planning commission for review and recommendation. The planning commission shall have a time prescribed in the ordinance which may not be more than thirty days within which to submit its report and recommendation on the change to the governing authority. If the planning commission fails to submit a report within the prescribed time period, it is deemed to have approved the change or departure. When the required public hearing is held by the planning commission, no public hearing by the governing authority is required before amending the zoning ordinance text or maps. S.C. Code Ann.§ 6-29-760 (emphasis added). In interpreting a statute, the primary purpose is to ascertain the intent of the General Assembly. Statev. Martin, 293 S.C. 46, 358 S.E.2d 697 (1987). The words of a statute must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to subtle or forced construction to limit or expand the statute's operation. Bryant v. City of Charleston, 295 S.C. 408, 368 S.E.2d 899 (1988). The Court must apply the clear and unambiguous terms of a statute according to their literal meaning. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270, 403 S.E.2d 660 (1991). Applying these rules of statutory construction to the question at hand, the critical language appears to be the sentence emphasized in the quoted provision above: No change in or departure from the text or maps as recommended by the local planning commission may be made pursuant to the hearing unless the change or departure be first submitted to the planning commission for review and recommendation. In other words, the plain language of the statute requires that the County Council submit any changes made to the recommendations of the Planning Commission back to the Commission for its review. Note that the statute does not require that changes be substantial before the County returns them to the Commission. The statute appears to prohibit all changes without first

Mr. Sims
May 31, 2001
Page 3of3
an opportunity for the Commission to review and make its recommendations to the County. As a practical matter, however, when the changes are inconsequential, the Commission may elect not to submit a report on the changes to the County, in which case the changes are deemed approved. As a final note, and as you indicated in your discussion at the meeting, although the County must submit its changes to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations, the Commission must only be given the opportunity to make its recommendations. Nowhere in the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act does it require that the County accept the recommendations of the Commission. That decision-making authority remains vested in the local governing body. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific question asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. With kind regards, I remain Very truly yours,

Susannah Cole
Assistant Attorney General

I