Zoning – State Enabling Act – Land Development Decisions

Listen to this article

Georgetown County Council lacked authority to approve a duplex-development application after the Planning Commission recommended denial because county ordinances granting the council final approval power conflicted with the state Enabling Act, which makes Planning Commission land-development decisions final and appealable directly to circuit court.

The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and allowed the challenge to move forward.

The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging Georgetown County Council’s approval of a residential subdivision application that would permit construction of six duplexes, or twelve residential units, on a 2.01-acre parcel on Pawleys Island. The dispute arose after the Georgetown County Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend denial of the application, but County Council subsequently approved the project pursuant to provisions of Georgetown County Ordinance 607. Neighboring landowners and community organizations filed suit, arguing the county lacked authority to override the Planning Commission’s decision and that the approval conflicted with state planning law and the county’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

The Court of Appeals agreed that the plaintiffs had stated viable claims and that dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) was improper. Central to the court’s decision was the South Carolina Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Enabling Act, which provides that planning commissions are responsible for approving or disapproving land development plans and that their decisions are final, subject to appeal in circuit court. The court concluded that portions of Ordinance 607 requiring County Council approval of certain site plans directly conflicted with the statute because they inserted an additional layer of review and effectively transferred final decision-making authority from the Planning Commission to County Council. According to the court, where local ordinances conflict with state law, the statute controls. Because County Council acted without statutory authority when it approved the application after the Planning Commission recommended denial, its approval was ultra vires and void.

The court also rejected the circuit court’s conclusion that the challenge was barred because the ordinance at issue had originally been adopted years earlier. It explained that the plaintiffs were not untimely challenging the enactment of the ordinance itself but were instead timely contesting County Council’s more recent approval of the development application. As a result, the applicable limitations period did not prevent the lawsuit from proceeding.

The appellate court further held that the plaintiffs were not required to plead a constitutional violation to survive dismissal under the circumstances presented. The case involved a challenge to County Council’s authority to approve a site plan rather than a direct constitutional attack on a legislative zoning enactment. Even assuming such allegations were required, the complaint sufficiently alleged arbitrary governmental action, disparate impacts on a minority community, and concrete harms to neighboring property owners, including increased traffic, stormwater drainage problems, and inadequate public-safety infrastructure. Those allegations were adequate to state a claim and warranted further proceedings.

Reversed.

Bryant v. Georgetown County (Lawyers Weekly No. 012-033-26, 7 pp.) (Per Curiam) Appealed from Georgetown County Circuit Court (Kristi F. Curtis, J.) F. Patrick Hubbard, of Columbia, and Cynthia Ranck Person, of Pawleys Island, for Appellants. H. Thomas Morgan, Jr., Smith Robinson Holler DuBose Morgan, LLC, of Camden; Shanon N. Peake and Sydney Jean Douglas, of Smith Robinson Holler DuBose Morgan, LLC, both of Columbia, all for Respondent Georgetown County. Chad Nicholas Johnston, of Burr & Forman, LLP, of Columbia, for Respondent Covington Homes, LLC. South Carolina Court of Appeals Unpublished