Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Udo Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee flags UDO language on "ground movement" vs. "construction," warns of lease and maintenance consequences
Summary
Pulaski County commissioners discussed amended UDO drainage language that distinguishes "ground movement" from "construction," raising concerns that the distinction could delay solar-lease payments and complicate bringing private ditches onto county maintenance; members urged clearer wording and preservation of historic tile maps.
The Chair noted that amended Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) language regarding drainage had been circulated and asked members to flag any concerns. A committee member said the distinction between "ground movement" and "construction" could have material consequences for when lease payments to landowners begin under solar contracts and suggested the county seek clarity before adopting language.
"If they're calling that ground movement, it's not construction...we don't have to pay you yet if that's called ground movement," the committee member warned, describing a scenario in which lease payments tied to construction commencement could be delayed. The Chair said staff (Harlow) will be asked to review and clarify whether the UDO wording affects payment triggers or permitting timing.
Committee members also emphasized the need to preserve historical tile drainage maps. One member recalled Floyd Barnhouse's maps and urged that the county secure and digitize maps now because they may be lost over time: "if something happens to them, I'll never know where all the tiles are...if you don't have them now, you're never gonna have them." Members expressed concern that lack of maps could hinder future maintenance petitions.
The committee further discussed the county's limited authority over private ditches: members said private ditches generally lack county easements and are not under the county's maintenance authority unless they create problems for others; bringing a private ditch onto county maintenance would require meeting easement and standard requirements. Members warned that siting solar or other development within feet of private ditches could make future maintenance petitions more difficult and urged clearer ordinance language to avoid inadvertent grandfathering of problematic siting.
No ordinance changes were adopted at the meeting; members requested staff follow-up to clarify the UDO language, review relevant leases/permits, and collect or preserve tile drainage maps for the record.
