Neighbors urge Lancaster County enforcement after trees cleared at Barbourville Road site

Several residents of Oliver Terrace in Indian Land urged Lancaster County Council on Tuesday to investigate a development at 9901 Barbourville Road, alleging land-use violations, removal of large canopy trees and poor communication from county planning staff.

The comments came during the meeting’s public-comment period and were not a formal council agenda item; residents asked council to instruct staff to investigate and, if appropriate, issue enforcement actions including a stop-work order.

Jeff Larson, who said he lives at 2010 Oliver Terrace, told council the site near Highway 160 was re-subdivided in 2024 and again more recently and that the developer is using a minor subdivision pathway although the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) chapter 9, he said, requires use of the major-subdivision process when a prior subdivision’s parcel count is increased. "This is a major subdivision, subverting the rules under the guise of a minor subdivision," Larson said. He said he filed a formal complaint with county staff in August and additional complaints in March and that he believes staff has not investigated as required by the UDO.

Larson also alleged the applicant advertised the project as retail/office in marketing materials while applying under a day-care classification that carries smaller setback requirements; he characterized that discrepancy as possible falsified documents submitted to obtain smaller setbacks. "They applied for a day care ... in their brochure, their website, their LinkedIn posts, they all advertise it being retail, office, and collocated multiple tenants," Larson said.

Neighbor Janine Clifton said trees removed from the site included canopy trees she estimated at 20–50 feet tall and larger than 24 inches in diameter; she said the developer’s proposed buffer planting uses small ornamental shrubs rather than large canopy trees that would provide a meaningful barrier. "We're getting little bitty shrubs that are gonna be less than ankle and knee high," Clifton said.

Anne Gable, another Oliver Terrace resident, said neighbors had attended multiple planning commission hearings last year where a similar commercial plan was denied, and she questioned why the county did not notify residents when permits were issued or why a stop-work order was not issued after the demo began. "What is the point of the UDO if the county does not enforce it?" Gable asked.

Council did not take formal action during the public-comment period. County staff referenced the UDO and appeals procedures in a later agenda item; residents said they had filed complaints and expected staff to investigate. No county response committing a specific enforcement step was recorded on the transcript.

Quotes in context: "This is a major subdivision, subverting the rules under the guise of a minor subdivision," Jeff Larson said, describing the filing pathway used by the applicant.

"We're getting little bitty shrubs that are gonna be less than ankle and knee high," Janine Clifton said about the buffer planting proposed by the developer.

What’s next: residents asked council to investigate and to ensure staff enforces UDO requirements for subdivision classification, tree retention and buffer plantings. The transcript records complaints filed in August and in March but does not show a staff-initiated enforcement action or a council directive taken during the meeting.