2025-2026 Bill 227 Text of Previous Version (Apr. 29, 2026)

(Text matches printed bills. Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.)

A bill

TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-720, RELATING TO ZONING ORDINANCES, SO AS TO DEFINE "CONCURRENCY PROGRAMS"; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-1130, RELATING TO REGULATIONS, SO AS TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO AN ADOPTED CONCURRENCY PROGRAM.

Amend Title To Conform

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Section 6-29-720(C) of the S.C. Code is amended to read:

(C) The zoning ordinance may utilize the following or any other zoning and planning techniques for implementation of the goals specified above. Failure to specify a particular technique does not cause use of that technique to be viewed as beyond the power of the local government choosing to use it:

(1) "cluster development" or the grouping of residential, commercial, or industrial uses within a subdivision or development site, permitting a reduction in the otherwise applicable lot size, while preserving substantial open space on the remainder of the parcel;

(2) "floating zone" or a zone which is described in the text of a zoning ordinance but is unmapped. A property owner may petition for the zone to be applied to a particular parcel meeting the minimum zoning district area requirements of the zoning ordinance through legislative action;

(3) "performance zoning" or zoning which specifies a minimum requirement or maximum limit on the effects of a land use rather than, or in addition to, specifying the use itself, simultaneously assuring compatibility with surrounding development and increasing a developer's flexibility;

(4) "planned development district" or a development project comprised of housing of different types and densities and of compatible commercial uses, or shopping centers, office parks, and mixed-use developments. A planned development district is established by rezoning prior to development and is characterized by a unified site design for a mixed-use development;

(5) "overlay zone" or a zone which imposes a set of requirements or relaxes a set of requirements imposed by the underlying zoning district when there is a special public interest in a particular geographic area that does not coincide with the underlying zone boundaries;

(6) "conditional uses" or zoning ordinance provisions that impose conditions, restrictions, or limitations on a permitted use that are in addition to the restrictions applicable to all land in the zoning district. The conditions, restrictions, or limitations must be set forth in the text of the zoning ordinance; and

(7) "priority investment zone" in which the governing authority adopts market-based incentives or relaxes or eliminates nonessential housing regulatory requirements, as these terms are defined in this chapter, to encourage private development in the priority investment zone. The governing authority also may provide that traditional neighborhood design and affordable housing, as these terms are defined in this chapter, must be permitted within the priority investment zone; and

(8) "concurrency programs" that condition land development approval on public facility and service adequacy, also referred to as "adequate public facility programs." Such programs must ensure that growth and infrastructure investment proceed consistently with locally adopted comprehensive plans and must not be administrated to unreasonably prevent or delay development where proportionate mitigation is available. Concurrency programs may be enacted within the zoning ordinance or in land development regulations, pursuant to Section 6-29-1130(A).

(a) Concurrency programs may not condition approval on the availability or adequacy of parks or libraries, and are limited to:

(i) transportation facilities;

(ii) water supply and distribution;

(iii) wastewater collection and treatment;

(iv) stormwater management;

(v) law enforcement;

(vi) fire protection and emergency medical services; and

(vii) public schools; provided, however, that concurrency conditions based on school capacity may be imposed only if the school district or other governmental entity responsible for school construction and capital improvements is a party to the governing authority's adopted capital improvements program or has entered into a written intergovernmental agreement with the governing authority committing to address identified school-capacity level-of-service deficiencies on a schedule concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts. School-based concurrency conditions must be limited to capacity impacts at the school attendance zones directly served by the proposed development, and no development may be conditioned on school improvements serving areas beyond those zones.

(b) Facilities are deemed "available" or "adequate" if:

(i) capacity exists at time of application, taking into consideration all existing development entitlements regardless of building status;

(ii) capacity is fully funded by the adopted capital improvements program or with proportionate share contributions pursuant to subitem (f) and is scheduled for completion concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts; or

(iii) capacity will be provided through a binding agreement pursuant to subitem (g).

(c) Level-of-service standards must be objective, applied uniformly to similarly situated development, and reviewed at least every five years. Standards must reflect adopted land use policies, may not require facility expansion inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, and may be multimodal, and must be differentiated within designated growth or redevelopment areas and rural or conservation areas. Failure to meet a standard may not result in denial if the applicant commits to proportionate share mitigation.

(d) A concurrency program must:

(i) maintain consistency with the local adopted comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and land development regulations;

(ii) establish clear application review procedures;

(iii) credit developer contributions toward concurrency requirements;

(iv) allow developers to remedy deficiencies through proportionate share contributions or construction of improvements committed in a binding agreement on a schedule concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts;

(v) establish an appeals process for concurrency determinations; and

(vi) establish time-limited capacity reservations that expire and revert to available capacity upon failure to demonstrate substantial progress within a defined period.

(e) A concurrency program may:

(i) provide exemptions or streamlined review for development with minimal facility impacts;

(ii) provide exemptions from concurrency requirements to:

(A) developments in which at least fifty percent of units are deed-restricted at or below eighty percent of area median income, or that receives federal, state, or local affordable housing financing, subject to applicable building codes, life-safety standards, and utility connection obligations; and

(B) an entity organized pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code as a nonprofit corporation to build, rehabilitate, or repair a home for the benefit of an individual or family in need, subject to applicable building codes, life-safety standards, and utility obligations. For purposes of this subsubsubitem, "individual or family in need" means an individual or family whose income is at or below eighty percent of the county median income; or

(iii) provide exemptions from concurrency requirements to developments proposed within a locally defined priority growth area, subject to applicable building codes, life-safety standards, and utility connection obligations.

(f) A governing authority may require sufficient contributions to offset a development's proportionate share of facility impacts, based on documented impacts, reduced by developer-provided capacity, and applied consistently to similarly situated projects. No development may be required to fund preexisting deficiencies beyond its proportionate share or to pay twice for the same impact on the same facility; all prior impact fees or other contributions addressing the same impacts must be credited. A proportionate share contribution satisfies concurrency only if the relevant improvement is included in the adopted capital improvements program, or an amendment thereto, or applicable intergovernmental capital agreement, and is scheduled for completion concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts, or if the developer's contribution together with other committed funding is sufficient to fully fund the improvement on that schedule.

(g) Governing authorities, property owners, and other governmental entities may enter into written agreements providing for phased improvements, reimbursement mechanisms, capacity credits, or excess capacity contributions, subject to the following:

(i) an agreement is a mechanism for achieving concurrency, not a substitute for it. The governing authority must make a written finding that required improvements will be completed concurrent with or prior to the impacts they serve;

(ii) the agreement must correlate each development phase with the infrastructure necessary to serve it. No certificate of occupancy for a given phase may be issued unless the serving infrastructure is complete or contractually secured;

(iii) where the agreement relies on future developer construction, the developer must provide a performance bond, letter of credit, or equivalent security sufficient to complete the committed improvements;

(iv) capacity credits may be granted only for improvements constructed and accepted by the governing authority, or for which full funding has been secured pursuant to subitem (g)(iii); and

(v) agreements must be recorded in county deed records and run with the land, binding all successors. Material default suspends further development approvals until cured or the agreement is renegotiated consistent with this section.

(h) A governing authority may not deny or condition approval of a development application on concurrency grounds for a facility type unless:

(i) the governing authority has in effect a comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to Section 6-29-510 et seq. that includes all mandatory plan elements and has been reviewed within the cycle required by law; and

(ii) for any facility type cited as the basis for a concurrency determination, the governing authority has included in its adopted capital improvements program or applicable intergovernmental capital agreement a realistic plan to address any identified level-of-service deficiency or has made a written finding that the deficiency is attributable solely to the proposed development's proportionate share impacts rather than a preexisting shortfall. For purposes of this section, a "realistic plan" means one that identifies a funding source, a responsible party, and a projected schedule, even if full funding has not yet been secured. A capital improvements program entry or intergovernmental capacity agreement entry that has remained without meaningful progress for more than thirty-six consecutive months no longer satisfies this standard unless the governing authority makes an updated written finding demonstrating renewed commitment, revised funding, or a changed schedule with a credible basis for completion.

(iii) A governing authority that lacks a current comprehensive plan, or that cites a level-of-service deficiency without either a capital improvements program entry or intergovernmental capital agreement entry meeting the standard of subsubitem (ii) or a written proportionate-share finding, may not deny a development application on concurrency grounds for the facility type at issue, but may impose proportionate share mitigation conditions consistent with subitem (f).

(i) A concurrency program may not interfere with development approvals within the jurisdiction of another local government, pursuant to Section 6-29-330, provided, however, that this provision does not limit the authority of local governments to enter into multijurisdictional agreements relating to inadequate facilities affecting both jurisdictions.

(j) A concurrency program adopted in compliance with this subsection is presumed to be a valid exercise of police power and not an unconstitutional taking or equal protection violation. This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence that the program, as applied, denies all economically viable use, is arbitrary or capricious, discriminates against similarly situated properties without rational basis, or operates as a de facto moratorium by systematically denying approvals that are otherwise consistent with the locally adopted comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and land development regulations where proportionate mitigation has been offered.

(k) Governing authorities must process applications for concurrency determinations under a concurrency program adopted pursuant to this subsection and Section 6-29-1150, including the time periods for review and decision and the procedures for appeal from any decision rendered thereunder. Any denial of a concurrency application must be accompanied by written findings identifying the specific level-of-service standard, capital improvements program element, or adopted concurrency program provision that the application fails to satisfy, and must specify what proportionate share mitigation, if any, would be sufficient to cure the deficiency and allow approval.

(l) A governing authority administering a concurrency program must make the following information publicly available on its official website and must update such information no less than annually:

(i) the current adopted level-of-service standards for each facility category subject to the concurrency program;

(ii) a general description of any facility category for which the governing authority has determined that a capacity deficiency exists, and a reference to the capital improvements program element addressing that deficiency; and

(iii) the written findings supporting any denial of a development application on concurrency grounds, including identification of the specific facility category and level-of-service standard at issue.

A governing authority that receives a written request from a development applicant for information relevant to a concurrency determination affecting that applicant's property must respond in writing within forty-five days.

SECTION 2. Section 6-29-1130(A) of the S.C. Code is amended to read:

(A) When at least the community facilities element, the housing element, and the priority investment element of the comprehensive plan as authorized by this chapter have been adopted by the local planning commission and the local governing body or bodies, the local planning commission may prepare and recommend to the governing body or bodies for adoption regulations governing the development of land within the jurisdiction. These regulations may provide for the harmonious development of the municipality and the county; for coordination of streets within subdivision and other types of land developments with other existing or planned streets or official map streets; for the size of blocks and lots; for the dedication or reservation of land for streets, school sites, and recreation areas and of easements for utilities and other public services and facilities, including through an adopted concurrency program; and for the distribution of population and traffic which will tend to create conditions favorable to health, safety, convenience, appearance, prosperity, or the general welfare. In particular, the regulations shall prescribe that no land development plan, including subdivision plats, will be approved unless all land intended for use as building sites can be used safely for building purposes, without danger from flood or other inundation or from other menaces to health, safety, or public welfare.

SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

----XX----