Sumter County Council unanimously approves rezoning requests and two third‑reading ordinances

Sumter County Council on Feb. 10 unanimously approved multiple land‑use changes and two third‑reading ordinances, moving forward rezoning requests and an economic development package for Georg Utz, Inc.

Vice Chairman James R. Byrd, Jr. moved to approve first reading for RZ‑25‑24, a request to rezone roughly 14.05 acres at 2140 Four Bridges Road from Agricultural Conservation (AC) to General Residential (GR); Councilmember Artie Baker seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Council discussion noted infrastructure constraints for that site, including the absence of public sewer service and the presence of special flood hazard areas; the Planning Commission had recommended denial.

Byrd also moved approval of RZ‑25‑26, a first‑reading rezoning of 10 parcels (about 48.46 acres) from Conservation Preservation (CP) to Agricultural Conservation (AC). The staff summary said the change would permit limited subdivision for immediate family members while maintaining minimum one‑acre lots and remaining consistent with military protection planning area policies; the motion passed unanimously.

On third reading, the council approved RZ‑25‑22, rezoning a 0.19‑acre portion of a parcel at 250 Progress Street from Light Industrial‑Warehouse (LI‑W) to General Residential (GR). The council was told the applicant had communicated with concerned citizens after prior discussion; the motion to adopt third reading passed unanimously.

In separate third‑reading actions, the council approved Ordinance 25‑1039, authorizing an option to purchase and a right of first refusal on property on Race Track Road as an amendment to agreements with Nova Molecular, and Ordinance 25‑1036, authorizing a fee‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes and related incentives for Georg Utz, Inc. (identified in meeting materials as Project Peanut), associated infrastructure credits, multicounty industrial park benefits, and the sale of roughly 47.02 acres in the Pocotaligo Industrial Park. Both ordinances received no public comment and were adopted by unanimous votes.

All motions and votes recorded at the meeting were carried unanimously; individual roll‑call tallies or separate recorded yea/nay votes were not specified in the meeting record. The council had no new business or committee reports at the meeting and adjourned at 7:06 p.m.