Burlington residents say LGI Homes runoff is washing out driveways, city issues notice of violation

Charles Gupton, a resident of 2224 Mathis Trail, told the Burlington City Council on July 21 that grading tied to the Riverwalk subdivision developed by LGI Homes cleared vegetation and has allowed large volumes of runoff to flow down private roads and into neighbors’ yards and driveways. “Because of that grading work, there is nothing to slow down and filter the runoff,” Gupton said, adding that a retaining wall appears to be “funneling the water” toward a neighbor’s driveway and under a home.

John Hurdle, who said he has lived at 150 Freeland Trail for 40 years, told the council the runoff has come “under my house” and washed out his driveway repeatedly. “If the pillars wash out from his mobile home, it’s gonna fall over,” Hurdle said, describing muddy, clay‑colored flow that he said reaches local creeks and the Haw River.

Brian Hurdle, John’s brother, told the council the contractor SunRock was hired by LGI and that large areas were clear‑cut. He said the contractor left the site and that exposed soils have continued to erode, which he alleged has sent sediment toward the river. “All that water is coming down all the driveways of the seven residents there,” Brian Hurdle said.

Neighbor Alexander Bahena Rivera said he recorded videos and provided them to the city to show the volume of water running near the Hurdle property. “It’s really worrying to see all that water running from under his trailer there,” he said.

City staff provided a timeline of the project and described enforcement steps. Jamie, a city staff member, said the development’s plans date to 1978, were revived around 2023, and that the erosion and sedimentation control permit was issued after TRC approval in 2024. Jamie said inspections were in compliance until May 2025, when the contractor pulled off site amid apparent payment issues. Staff has “issued a notice of violation to LGI,” Jamie told the council, and is performing a joint inspection with NCDEQ and representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because “the sediment that has gone on‑site off‑site and into the river is in violation of buffer rules.”

Council members asked whether the city had a bond or other leverage to require remediation and raised the possibility of contracting for repairs and placing a lien if the developer lacked funds. Staff said there was no bond posted in favor of the city. The council directed city leadership and the city attorney’s office to investigate legal options and to work with state agencies to pursue remediation and next steps.

The council did not take a formal vote on emergency repairs at the meeting; members said they would follow up with legal review and coordination with NCDEQ and the Army Corps. The residents who spoke asked the city to compel the developer to extend the retaining wall and restore erosion controls so the runoff is directed to the site’s holding ponds.