Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Impervious Coverage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lincoln County tables Carolina Elite Builders request to exceed impervious limit after neighbor runoff concerns

Lincoln County Planning Board / Board of Commissioners · April 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The planning board on April 7 tabled a request by Carolina Elite Builders LLC to exceed the county's 36% impervious-coverage limit (the '10-70 option') at 1499 Midtown Drive after neighbors described repeated flooding and staff said the county's option carries no stormwater-retention requirement.

On April 7 the Lincoln County planning board voted to table Special Use Permit (SUP) 540, a request from Carolina Elite Builders LLC to exceed the county's 36% impervious-coverage cap for a 1.87-acre Midtown Drive parcel. Staff said the applicant proposes roughly 64.5% impervious coverage under the county’s 10‑70 option, which can allow up to 70% coverage on a site.

Taylor Veil, representing the applicant, told the board the current owners do not intend to add further paved area and that prior work reflected a miscommunication with a former partner. "We do not plan to put any more impervious surface here," Veil said and incorporated the submitted findings of fact into testimony.

Neighbors pressed the board on local flooding and property impacts. "My land's being washed away," said resident Sherry Garner, who described repeated flooding of her property and asked whether the applicant would take responsibility for culvert maintenance and measures to slow runoff. Donna Stone, whose lot abuts the site, said the work has already been completed and that the change had harmed her property and created safety concerns for children biking in the narrow road.

Staff explained the regulatory tension: building officials issued a temporary certificate of occupancy on Feb. 5 after determining there was no immediate life-safety issue, but zoning noncompliance is a separate land-use matter. Planner Andrew Bryant noted that under the 10‑70 option "there's actually no stormwater requirements for treatment or retention of that stormwater," though he said the applicant could voluntarily reduce runoff velocity and that the county could only add conditions that are specific and enforceable.

Citing the unresolved questions about runoff, existing site modifications, and potential enforceable mitigation, Chairman Lyman moved to table the application so staff and the applicant can develop mutually agreeable, specific measures. The motion carried by voice vote. The board directed staff to work with the applicant to produce more detailed options for slowing or containing runoff and to set a date for the follow-up hearing.

Next steps: SUP 540 was tabled to a later date; staff will work with the applicant to identify specific, enforceable mitigation or design options to address neighbor runoff and erosion concerns prior to the board's next consideration.