[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6210782,"mediaKeyId","3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d","parentId",3708609,"title","Planning Staff Presents Concept for Sign‑Code Maintenance Amendments; Digital‑sign and Clarity Updates Proposed","audioSeconds",358,"startMs",5082000,"endMs",5440000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d&start=5082&end=5440","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d/thumbnail_5082000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6210782/New-Hanover-County/North-Carolina/Planning-Staff-Presents-Concept-for-SignCode-Maintenance-Amendments-Digitalsign-and-Clarity-Updates-Proposed","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6210782-df82eddc305922a0a016d208aabb36b9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178707&Signature=BX6-BKBnHjTn3~W0x9T4XVipQ7ORoXLB7QCp6pG1pbq8VlQ3fTpAp4haNq0GGFYFI~Gsg-0C4xgSg-YMN4FXU50Abz~RTqXBqcphXqbTAGWhjitvDGSUhTdmtPJY6RYHtAeHaLBGNKANt476USDitW6h9ZvPXlmrmMQ~QpnbVbFMlf2Qoyiq-q9x2f5NjMc63wGJp9jxEdFmjoTUSi4wOSNPb0Dh4qzWV~vumU5rgBCTp~Al1DnEyFGB3vw0ZJ0JBMyAn6polfdxNTaT8hZtonYnLVOTtAPve~2gPDNks4w9wYGKfCUPuej26UImNzZUF027-lrlD0GB2z3WDna8kQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hanover County, NC","date","2025-06-06T12:24:58Z","article","Planning department staff presented a concept proposal June 5 to update the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) sign standards with maintenance amendments focused on clarity, modern technology and enforceability.

Rebecca Roth (staff) said the UDO adopted in 2020 included reorganized sign rules but that subsequent court decisions, state statute changes and technological advances — especially digital signage — require maintenance updates. Staff recommended three categories of edits: new provisions to address digital signs (brightness levels, speed of copy change and enforceable limits); clarifications of terms and nonconforming sign policies (the prior amortization approach was removed and staff wants clearer language about what remains legal); and administrative/permitting updates to synchronize the county’s sign permit process with local sign companies and the building/permit staff.

Roth said staff will coordinate with the county attorney’s office and sign‑permitting staff and hopes to publish a public comment draft in July and present a public hearing draft to the board in August. Board members asked whether audio associated with digital signs should be addressed; Roth said staff would research audio and add guidance if appropriate. Board members also noted that signs in the state right of way require coordination with NCDOT and that enforcement authority references should reflect current department roles.

No formal action was taken; staff will work with legal counsel, the permitting division and sign vendors to draft detailed language for public review.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","New Hanover County Planning Board Meeting - June 5, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Planning staff presented concept amendments to the county’s Unified Development Ordinance on June 5, proposing updates to sign standards — including new digital‑sign provisions, clearer rules for nonconforming signs and permitting updates — and asked the board for input before drafting public materials.","taxTitle","New Hanover County, North Carolina","taxId",4902,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6210787,"Planning Board Approves Modification to Carolina Beach Road Project, Replacing 126 Apartments with 85 Townhouses and Retaining Mini‑Storage",808,3600000,4408000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d&start=3600&end=4408","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d/thumbnail_3600000.jpg","/articles/6210787/New-Hanover-County/North-Carolina/Planning-Board-Approves-Modification-to-Carolina-Beach-Road-Project-Replacing-126-Apartments-with-85-Townhouses-and-Retaining-MiniStorage","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6210787-2ff191f9f9490ed1234460123cd4068d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178707&Signature=HeCHEjU36LlBdQqQJWupEmRVyKb2~Q9XIltFT9d-OVhozTZf3IVtiRtSoSsJyNqXzDF--xLxbxOs80TRaXcIwA2pPJ259FnDLKwRcp6bahdfuRYKgcG1n1kyanAe8zvEGB3BCVttPC8S427TcyBPcHd2gLMEsMe93VoAhh6UiILVmUkW~HtpvpZ-mkIlpM90hwZnCg-KNe4XWDOma~pGnqjnI7zEJaVaQEQbKAW0TYp1P7A-1P~Qltajs9rAkGC0TjovQ3WqlD9md8-ZSs72pjyK8Hw7U9R-B0r6yAtJKF0~ieJJl4qo2YXnWmoduJT-Z3rxSvjt7UM1j6JAMaG3Xw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Board recommended approval June 5 of a modification to a 2023 rezoning that changes the residential component of a 13.94‑acre site on Carolina Beach Road from 126 multifamily apartments to 85 single‑family row‑style homes while retaining a 36,000‑square‑foot mini‑storage component.

Ryan Bale (staff) summarized the earlier 2023 approval: the site had been rezoned then for 126 multifamily units and a 36,000‑square‑foot storage facility. The current modification replaces the multifamily portion with 85 row homes, a decrease of 41 units, and retains the mini‑storage in the front portion aligned with the community mixed‑use designation; staff recommended approval with updated conditions limiting storage size and locating RV/boat storage interior to the facility, among other conditions.

Applicant counsel Corey Lee said the change responds to market demand for for‑sale housing and that the modified plan produces fewer daily vehicle trips than the approved plan; the applicant also said they met with neighbors and kept previous design setbacks and many prior conditions. One nearby resident, Charles Ferguson, opposed the southern access leg that would connect the project through Southern Charm Drive into the adjacent neighborhood, saying it could increase cut‑through traffic and create safety risks for children in the subdivision. The applicant said gate language from the prior approval (that access shall not be gated) could be reconsidered; the applicant requested the option to provide a gate for emergency access. The board discussed fire‑code requirements and noted that secondary access requirements are tied to the fire code (secondary access typically required at 100 units). Staff and the applicant discussed that the southern access easement from Southern Charm to Carolina Beach Road was recorded as a public access easement and that the condition in the prior approval that it “shall not be gated” could be modified.

The board approved the modification with conditions that include: requiring RV/boat storage to be interior to the mini‑storage facility and not visible from rights of way; the Southern Charm–Carolina Beach Road access easement to be public; the Carolina Beach Road access easement not to be gated; single‑family homes limited to three stories; a maximum mini‑storage footprint of 12,000 square feet per building and 36,000 gross square feet overall; a minimum 20‑foot public access easement along Carolina Beach Road to accommodate future pedestrian and bicycle use; a 20‑foot buffer between new residences and adjacent residential structures; and limits on storage and heights. The board also agreed to allow the applicant to pursue an option to gate the Southern Charm access for emergency purposes subject to applicable approvals.","The Planning Board approved a modification to a prior 2023 rezoning to reduce apartment units and replace the multifamily portion with 85 single‑family row homes while retaining a mini‑storage facility; board allowed developer to request gating of one access for emergency use by condition.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6210792,"Planning Board Recommends Contractor Office Rezoning for 4222 Castlehane Road",528,5365000,5893000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d&start=5365&end=5893","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d/thumbnail_5365000.jpg","/articles/6210792/New-Hanover-County/North-Carolina/Planning-Board-Recommends-Contractor-Office-Rezoning-for-4222-Castlehane-Road","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6210792-3c6c928852cf32d73d2ae5b5e2d6230e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178707&Signature=XG5-dFn62AvP32nK~aR~BV-ybryMlgvVro8SgAjSr4sSueKO86u7ix9uh5lzyiG7LbKSLxAga4IlIOgdioujV6zF-drVTG33rDZ6A5lslEFFS0OfpwWc5kYRVfhclA~mzEtIGItN0rZKzrM-vITQAtdS6brv42xRtb8D44G8m9CLEq4RimlOYDvDkmFNaluqkm7HXiAA~slY1DFatcPSfnzZ9Bvs01G5abbUUFxWO7CpeNeZmuT6UgBiDhUeRrOfc02dx2JZ~DLyFVjX66kTCnJZjrRt2UiAlLv521EffIP4~R2kaAtfQrj1ZvyY4aNHKBwqW78ymZqQWQ5OtqyYkw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The New Hanover County Planning Board unanimously recommended approval June 5 of a conditional rezoning for 4222 Castlehane Road to permit a contractor office and associated storage and parking.

Catherine May, planning staff, described the 2‑acre property and said the site included a single‑family home with contractor vehicles currently on the property. Staff recommended the conditional B‑2 rezoning because similar adaptive‑reuse and contractor operations have been approved nearby and the 2016 comprehensive plan designates the corridor as community mixed use. Miss May said staff’s conditions would limit allowed uses, require the existing house be renovated for office use, have parking located behind the structure, retain rear trees for buffer and place the storage/equipment yard behind a fenced enclosure.

Cindy Wolf, the applicant’s representative, said the proposal was intended to be a base for Brothers Landscaping (contracting business) with most work performed at off‑site job locations. She described the layout: office in the existing building, employee parking behind the house, a fenced equipment yard screened from the road, and a stormwater pond meeting state and county regulations; she said hours would be typical weekday hours and the operation would have about 11–12 employees who are usually in the field.

No speakers registered in opposition. The board adopted conditions limiting uses to contractor office and private business/professional offices, retaining the existing structure for office use, locating parking behind the primary structure, and retaining trees at the rear of the property to meet landscape buffer requirements. The motion passed unanimously and the recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.","The board unanimously recommended rezoning 4222 Castlehane Road from R-20 to conditional B-2 to allow a contractor office with a storage yard; conditions call for adaptive reuse of the existing house, parking to the rear and tree retention.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6210797,"Planning Board Moves Forward on Castlehane Road Commercial Rezoning; Applicant Asked to Correct Zoning Label",2775,2542000,5317000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d&start=2542&end=5317","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d/thumbnail_2542000.jpg","/articles/6210797/New-Hanover-County/North-Carolina/Planning-Board-Moves-Forward-on-Castlehane-Road-Commercial-Rezoning-Applicant-Asked-to-Correct-Zoning-Label","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6210797-78d3f583fa9d43f6f2cdc53872d43c00/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178707&Signature=be3fsPldftOn-7RiFxoBFsdJ0~O7g-re60T3W3NPfwYXtNhBDgX46M4sMGUWmkfa2M6ckHdKqz2YttlnNVeKpBocBj1pNpioPMQJnvdHC71L~NIcmoJ-OahSongM8wojfOglsY1KO4FrUkhIomVsoOt9PCve6XfgIdZxDwP9arl8Bz6vf~QmzZZ2JuU45rS6ZDFmNo03fJw9d5wu4sIoWCHUsbMSahL30FyKjy-VZ3epVWL56EA9Nu4EcHfV5AzmWhTf8qfaVTsS6LM5~RD~WHdNsZq2KkfSyIZgqxDbI1fx4v-A0kqXk3hQdlnStLf3cUMYiAwN5miOw8fp~xPVNA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Board recommended approval on June 5 for a conditional commercial rezoning at 3419 Castlehane Road, near the I-140 interchange, after the applicant and staff clarified the intended district.

Staff introduced the application as a request to rezone 4.31 acres from R-20 residential to a conditional commercial district to allow a marine contractor office with warehousing and related uses. Catherine May (staff) said the parcel sits south of Chair Road with nearby commercial development and that the site is below the traffic‑impact analysis threshold. Staff noted a likely change from conditional CS (Commercial Services) to conditional B-2 (Regional Business) to meet setback requirements; both CS and B-2 would allow contractor office and warehousing uses, but the setback and buffer treatments differ. Because the application packet had a typographical error listing CS on page two, staff recommended continuing the item to the July 10 planning board meeting to re‑advertise under the correct district and ensure staff analysis matched the advertised district.

The applicant, Cindy Wolf of Design Solutions, said the CS listing on one page was an inadvertent error and that the remainder of the application, concept plan and public notices reflected B-2. She asked the board to move forward rather than continue; she emphasized the design limits uses and would be re‑advertised before the commissioners’ hearing.

Board members discussed whether staff had sufficient analysis to proceed. Staff confirmed the change to B‑2 would mainly affect setback requirements and that the planner’s analysis supporting the proposal had been completed. Board members agreed the B‑2 district is appropriate given nearby commercial uses along Castlehane Road and that staff could incorporate a condition preserving what is shown on the concept plan.

The board voted unanimously to recommend approval with conditions: maintain the plan’s shown setbacks (as required under B‑2), a six‑foot screening fence along the northern boundary of the gravel service yard, prohibition of outdoor storage within an existing utility easement, and installation of the required transitional buffer if the easement holder does not permit landscaping within the easement. Staff will ensure the case is advertised and noticed correctly in advance of the commissioners’ hearing.","The board recommended approval of a commercial rezoning near the I-140 interchange (3419 Castlehane Road) after applicant confirmed the intended district is conditional B-2 rather than CS; staff had recommended a continuance to update advertising and analysis but the board forwarded a recommendation to the commissioners.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6210802,"Planning Board Recommends Approval for Heron Cove 67‑lot Rezoning on Gordon Road",3662,497000,4159000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d&start=497&end=4159","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3708609-37b7d9c41cd42fba70d9472c8ac0050d/thumbnail_497000.jpg","/articles/6210802/New-Hanover-County/North-Carolina/Planning-Board-Recommends-Approval-for-Heron-Cove-67lot-Rezoning-on-Gordon-Road","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6210802-2e7345639ac1650c0d37359f7d1d590a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178707&Signature=jTH1r6wszGOXNMrC3zZzTFHgu~9mQqqV0ycPfgMmNCfUKuywbWkiFE01-bb6bxLStsuRm0rINWVzXXmmEmgs0OYeVSMRvfh0Yo4fa51x1vYEdfINByCMjvbF9rO5lOv8CMeQ4gl3Y5IzYDcmEBuUY6zRdJ97Yy-y9r21NoYIFF50pgY0hV-wMvhV7GZ-2fUUIarZFrXkGnykMv-bmqHEIlotqcdwtAPDwr8ufLFJBgVj~jFdzRKBjRShWJGAZt5y7niEKo3GgCDRCqkiyJgD6i6BgZFYINhqJscf3b1u5ibW8HmDHRMDM0tFW3ZIeKteVhSgwB6i9lf1tdBz~tjwGw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The New Hanover County Planning Board voted 4-0 on June 5 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve a conditional rezoning that would allow a 67‑lot single‑family subdivision, called Heron Cove, on about 10.8 acres at 1927 Gordon Acres Drive and adjacent parcels on Gordon Road.

Staff told the board the applicant seeks to rezone the site from R-15 to a conditional R-5 district to allow a 67‑lot single‑family development. Zach (staff planner) said the site is wooded, largely surrounded by R-15 zoning, and that the request is “generally consistent with the comprehensive plan” and with the general residential place type; staff recommended approval subject to conditions. The applicant’s presentation emphasized preserved open space, a reconfigured road to save an 18‑inch oak and bicycle and pedestrian connections to Gordon Acres Drive and Daniel Boone Trail. Amy Schaeffer, representing the applicant team, said the developer agreed to plant two trees per lot and to leave trees in open‑space areas where feasible.

Neighbors urged denial or redesign. Sarah DeVries, Kim Turner and Tim Strickland, who spoke in opposition, said the parcel is narrow, would require extensive clearing, and that the layout (two rows of lots with a single internal roadway) would concentrate traffic and reduce neighborhood livability. DeVries asked whether the developer had pursued alternatives such as a single row of homes or using adjacent land offered to the developer. Strickland raised flooding concerns on nearby private roads and said he had observed past culvert washouts. Opponents pointed to tree removal and the limited ability of replacement plantings to replace mature canopy.

County engineering staff and the flood study manager responded to questions about stormwater and flood risk. Tim Lowe, county engineering, said stormwater ponds “are a condition of their permit. There’s an operation maintenance agreement that is signed and transferred over to the HOA for continued maintenance,” and described the county’s authority to require corrective actions if maintenance lapses. Staff also described an advisory Northern Watersheds Flood Study that maps some areas at a 1% annual chance flood risk; staff said the maps are advisory and not regulatory but intended to show property owners potential risk.

During debate board members cited the county’s housing shortage and the applicant’s concessions. Natalie English of the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce urged the board to support increased density as workforce housing. Board members noted the applicant reduced units from 81 to 67 since the prior hearing, added conditions for sidewalks, bike/ped connections and additional on‑lot trees, and preserved a significant oak tree.

The approval includes multiple conditions the board recorded in its motion: emergency‑only access to Daniel Boone Trail; minimum garage/driveway parking for the proposed homes (the motion retains a minimum one‑car garage but reflects that driveways and options for two‑car garages are available); a six‑foot fence at the rear of each lot; preservation of an 18‑inch oak tree within the internal road configuration; two trees of at least two inches caliper to be planted on each lot and maintained by the HOA under a landscaping easement; two 10‑foot bicycle/pedestrian easements connecting to Daniel Boone Trail and Gordon Acres Drive and an associated utility easement where needed; and tree preservation in open space areas except where conflicts exist with essential stormwater or easement needs. The board also recorded that staff review (TRC/zoning compliance) will be required before final platting.

Two board members — Colin Tarrant (chair) and Mr. Moore — disclosed conflicts and recused themselves from consideration of this case; Mr. Matthews also said he would recuse himself from a separate item later in the agenda. The motion to recommend approval passed 4-0.

The Planning Board’s recommendation will go to the Board of County Commissioners, which has a tentative hearing scheduled for July 21, 2025, at 4 p.m. at the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse.","The New Hanover County Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend rezoning 10.8 acres on Gordon Road from R-15 to conditional R-5 for a 67‑lot single‑family subdivision (Heron Cove). The approval includes conditions on access, parking, tree preservation and easements; two board members recused.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Staff Presents Concept for Sign‑Code Maintenance Amendments; Digital‑sign and Clarity Updates Proposed

Planning Board Approves Modification to Carolina Beach Road Project, Replacing 126 Apartments with 85 Townhouses and Retaining Mini‑Storage

Planning Board Recommends Contractor Office Rezoning for 4222 Castlehane Road

Planning Board Moves Forward on Castlehane Road Commercial Rezoning; Applicant Asked to Correct Zoning Label

Planning Board Recommends Approval for Heron Cove 67‑lot Rezoning on Gordon Road