Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Belmont Farm Wetlands topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Belmont Farm/Citation Center moves ahead as Corps review and ~$480,000 mitigation figure emerge

Lexington City Technical Review Committee (planning/technical committee)
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

After a weeks‑long review and coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the planning committee approved a revised Belmont Farm / Citation Center development plan and final plat while requiring documentation on utility easement conflicts and stormwater. The applicant reported a pending Corps permit and estimated mitigation costs in the mid‑hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The technical committee considered revisions to the Belmont Farm / Citation Center final record plat and development plan that had been postponed while the applicant resolved a jurisdictional wetland/stream delineation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

Vision Engineering’s representative, Jihad Halani, told the committee the Corps had walked the site and the applicant agreed with the Corps’ delineation; a mitigation package and a permit application are currently in the Corps’ public notice (30‑day) period. Halani said the applicant estimates mitigation costs of roughly $480,000 to $500,000 to address impacts to the intermittent stream and adjacent wetlands: “that mitigation is going to be close to $500,408.03,” he said while describing the process of agency review and anticipated mitigation credits.

Staff and technical committee members discussed stormwater routing, pipe sizes and whether the development relies on regional detention basins. The applicant said initial drainage studies indicate the proposed phases will be supported by existing regional detention but that additional stormwater and sanitary sewer confirmation would be submitted. Committee members asked for clarity on utility easement conflicts overlapping building footprints; applicants said they had submitted easement release requests and would resolve those issues before building permits on affected lots.

The committee approved the final record plat (PLN FRP 267) and recommended approval of the amended development plan (MJDP 2576) with sign‑offs and a note that utility easement conflicts must be resolved prior to the issuance of building permits for certain lots (lots 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 as noted in staff comments). Staff said USACE review and any required mitigation will be part of the permitting record and must be completed before applicable permits that depend on that mitigation are issued.

Next steps: the applicant will complete the USACE public comment/permit process, finalize stormwater analyses for later phases, resolve easement conflicts or obtain relocation agreements, and provide updated documentation to planning staff and building inspection prior to building permits.