Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster County Council denies conditional-use permit for proposed Indian Land place of assembly after fraught public hearing
Summary
After a multi-hour public hearing with dozens of speakers both supporting and opposing a proposed place of assembly at 10935 Harrisburg Road, Lancaster County Council voted unanimously to deny the conditional-use permit, citing traffic, infrastructure and neighborhood compatibility concerns under the county Unified Development Ordinance.
Lancaster County Council voted unanimously on May 14 to deny a conditional-use permit sought to convert a house at 10935 Harrisburg Road in Indian Land into a place of assembly.
The applicant, Arafat Muhammad of Waxon Investments, told the council the proposal would use existing structures and 28 parking spaces, and that the site could accommodate roughly 100 people for standing assemblies while complying with county site-plan, SCDOT and fire marshal requirements. "This is a small project," Muhammad said, describing the group as local professionals seeking a neighborhood gathering place and pledging to meet county safety and stormwater standards.
The hearing drew more than 50 people who spoke on both sides. Supporters framed the request as a local community center for families and youth. One proponent told council, "This isn't just about a building but it's having a place that brings peace and guidance and hope into our lives," and urged the council to approve the conditional use so area families would have a local gathering site.
Opponents focused on traffic safety, neighborhood compatibility and infrastructure. Several long-time residents described crowded conditions on Harrisburg Road and near planned schools and said additional institutional traffic would worsen emergency response times. A number of residents also raised the presence of an apparent family cemetery on the site and asked the council to consider historic-resource and stormwater implications.
Planning staff and the planning commission both raised concerns about compatibility with surrounding low-density residential zoning and infrastructure capacity; the planning commission had recommended denial. During deliberations council members repeatedly asked whether the county and state agencies could mitigate traffic and emergency-service impacts and noted uncertainty about longer-term growth and how a conditional-use approval could affect neighboring parcels.
Chairman Kins framed the council's decision as one anchored to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), saying the motion to deny was made "based on the UDO standards, including compatibility of surrounding uses and traffic and infrastructure impacts." The motion to deny carried unanimously.
What happens next: Because the county denied the conditional use, the applicant may revise the proposal and resubmit or pursue other land-use paths; any future submission will be judged against the same UDO standards and would require separate hearings and approvals. The council's denial preserves the planning commission's earlier recommendation and leaves outstanding questions about traffic engineering and preservation of the gravesite allegation.
Sources: public hearing statements and staff presentation to Lancaster County Council.
