Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission weighs broad changes to disturbed‑acreage limits, seeks more stormwater review
Summary
Staff presented draft Ordinance 25‑07 to raise some staff‑level disturbance thresholds and add stricter BMPs and stop‑work consequences; commissioners and residents focused on water quality near Lake Murray and asked staff to return with additional stormwater advisory board review.
Lexington County planning staff presented a draft amendment to the countys land development manual (Ordinance 25‑07) that would raise certain staff‑level disturbed‑acreage thresholds and tighten erosion‑control and enforcement measures.
The ordinance would move the staff approval threshold from 20 to 25 acres for routine residential projects, allow expanded master plans for residential projects up to 50 acres with additional best management practices (BMPs) and stabilization agreements, and create a review path for projects between 51 and 75 acres that would require Stormwater Advisory Board review and a county‑council decision. Staff also proposed allowing cash surety for stabilization agreements and making incorrect BMP installation grounds for an immediate stop‑work order.
"If you go above and beyond what has been permitted for this particular section" staff said, "that's what it focuses on," noting that an improperly installed BMP would trigger enforcement that can include a stop‑work order. The draft text also requires an expanded set of BMPs for larger projects and adds site notification signage with developer/contractor information.
Commissioners pressed staff on the tradeoffs between acreage thresholds and site‑specific protections. One commissioner said, "Lake Murray is our jewel," and urged stronger protections for shorelines and feeder streams; staff responded that additional BMPs in the expanded master plan are intended to address topography, soils and proximity to water bodies and that perennial streams already carry a 100‑foot buffer in county practice.
Several commissioners recommended tailoring BMP requirements to site conditions rather than using acreage alone. Staff agreed the county has considered matrices and site‑specific approaches but said practical limits (outdated public soil surveys, variable online topos, inspection capacity) make a purely site‑by‑site rule difficult to implement without additional technical work.
Public commenters and the planning commission debated the proposed stop‑work language. A commissioner who supported stronger enforcement also suggested allowing a single corrective opportunity before an immediate stop work order; staff emphasized third‑party inspection requirements and developer obligations to inspect every nine days and after significant rain events.
After extended discussion, commissioners did not take a final recommendation on the draft ordinance. Instead, they asked staff to return with revisions and to send the current draft back to the Stormwater Advisory Board for additional comment before the planning commission makes a formal recommendation to County Council.
What happens next: staff will present Stormwater Advisory Board feedback to the planning commission at a future meeting before any recommendation to County Council.
