Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows proposed pervious‑surface driveway mandate after lengthy debate
Summary
After hours of testimony from neighborhood pilots, contractors and council members about costs, maintenance and environmental benefits, council removed mandatory driveway replacement from the draft and approved requiring pervious surfaces for new driveways and for newly constructed or substantially replaced surface parking; staff will draft precise replacement/repair language for planning commission review.
Council debated for several hours before amending a zoning code update that would push Kiawah Island toward more pervious driveway and surface‑parking materials.
The ordinance—drawn from the comprehensive marsh‑management plan—originally proposed that new driveways and driveway replacements be constructed of pervious materials to reduce runoff. Neighborhood representatives from pilot projects (Oceanwoods, Inlet Cove, Sparrow Pond) described costs and uptake: Jean Bavenick and Jean Hutchinson reported negotiated contractor prices ranging from roughly $12 to $23 per square foot for pavers and described strong voluntary participation in some neighborhoods. Builders and some council members cautioned that replacement costs could be substantial for certain homeowners and urged incentives or grandfathering for projects already in permit review.
Planning staff emphasized benefits for stormwater management and noted a proposed infiltration standard. Council members split on whether replacement driveways should be mandatory. After discussion the council voted to amend the draft by deleting mandatory driveway‑replacement language for now, while keeping requirements that all newly constructed driveways and newly constructed, enlarged or substantially replaced surface parking facilities be pervious. The council also asked staff to return with administratively precise definitions for "replacement," "substantial repair," and implementation dates and to send any text changes to the planning commission for a recommendation before final adoption if the draft departs from the prior planning commission text.
Ending: Council directed staff to prepare clarified language on what constitutes replacement or substantial repair, to circulate guidance about grandfathering and permit timing, and to continue exploring incentive mechanisms rather than compulsory replacement for existing driveways.
