Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves Hawksbill Cove master plan revision with drainage condition after lengthy public hearing
Summary
The Pender County Planning Board approved a revision to the Hawksbill Cove master development plan for a 376‑acre project off Country Club Drive, converting previously approved multifamily units into single‑family product types and reducing commercial space, and added a drainage capacity condition tied to an identified parcel.
Get email alerts on the Large Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pender County Planning Board on Aug. 1 approved a revision to the master development plan for Hawksbill Cove, a 376‑acre planned development off Country Club Drive in Hampstead, subject to updated conditions including a drainage requirement tied to an identified parcel.
The applicant sought to revise a plan originally approved Dec. 7, 2010. The earlier approval allowed 1,105 residential units made up of 490 single‑family and 615 multifamily units, plus roughly 50,000 square feet of commercial and 60,000 square feet of civic/recreational uses. Under the revision the total unit count remains the same but the developer is converting what had been multifamily units into single‑family product types: 615 single‑family attached units (townhomes/duplexes/triplexes) and 490 single‑family detached units. The commercial allocation is reduced to 23,200 square feet and the prior 60,000 square feet of civic/recreational space has been removed from the allocation.
Staff and the applicant said several of the original infrastructure conditions have been completed, including construction of the Transfer Station Road extension and installation of a traffic signal at U.S. 17 and Transfer Station Road per NCDOT requirements. The applicant also plans to use an off‑site wastewater treatment provider (Pluris) rather than on‑site spray fields that had been contemplated in the older plan.
Justin Brantley, planning staff, summarized the revision for the board: it keeps the same total unit count, establishes detailed dimensional standards for lot types (including a minimum 5,000 square‑foot single‑family lot and 3,300 square‑foot duplex lots), expands pedestrian and multiuse path commitments (an 8‑foot multiuse path along the main collector, sidewalks on neighborhood streets and a 10‑acre centralized amenity site), and elects for deeper perimeter buffers — 30 feet along much of the northern and southern property lines and 60 feet at the northeastern corner.
Staff calculated a net density of about 3.5 dwelling units per acre (gross 2.94 units/acre across roughly 376 acres), saying that the revised plan sits within the county’s future land‑use designations for low‑density and coastal residential areas.
The board heard substantial public comment about traffic, stormwater and potential historic burial sites on the property. Residents told the board current traffic on Country Club Drive is frequently congested and unsafe and asked how the county and NCDOT will address the added traffic. Ronald Stevenson, the applicant’s traffic engineer (DRMP), said Transfer Station Road was constructed to provide a second access and that the developer’s primary entrance lines up with Transfer Station Road. He also said he expects a portion of the bypass work to be completed before substantial traffic is generated by the development.
Several speakers urged careful stormwater review and a county‑level assessment of culvert capacity downstream of Country Club Drive. Christian Kleinfelder, president of the Belvedere Property Owners Association, asked the county to review culverts and drainage infrastructure that convey runoff toward Nixon Creek and the golf course lake; the applicant’s civil engineer and county staff said the applicant will analyze off‑site inflows to ensure post‑development runoff does not exceed pre‑development discharges and that further technical review will occur through the Technical Review Committee and state permitting.
A 13‑year‑old commenter, Sydney Brock, told the board the site contains marked and suspected unmarked graves dating to the 18th century and urged the developer and county to investigate and preserve burial sites. Staff noted historical resources and said future TRC and state review would involve the state historic preservation office as appropriate.
Before voting, planning staff and the applicant agreed to a new condition requested by board members: the drainage connection at Country Club and the project parcel identified in deed book 3136, page 140 must convey the same volume of water that currently passes under Country Club Drive, up to and including the 100‑year storm event. Staff said engineering review and state agency comments during TRC review would determine the means and methods to meet that standard; the applicant’s engineers agreed to analyze and design a conveyance (which could be pipe, reinforced swale or other conveyance) sufficient to match existing capacity.
After discussion the board approved the master plan revision by voice vote with one member recorded as abstaining. The approval included the staff‑recommended conditions and the added drainage condition. The approval also reaffirmed that the developer will dedicate a public access easement for the project’s main collector (‘‘Leatherback Lane’’) and construct an 8‑foot multiuse path along one side of that collector, provide buffer depths along project edges and preserve over 33 acres of open space (approximately half required to be active amenities).
The planning director and staff reminded the public that approval of a master development plan initiates the engineering submittal phase (preliminary plat and TRC review); those technical reviews will generate additional notices and opportunities for technical questions and comments.
Motion and vote: the board adopted a motion to approve the Hawksbill Cove master development plan revision (conditions per staff plus the additional drainage/conveyance condition). The motion carried on a voice vote; one board member announced an abstention.

