Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board denies conditional rezoning for 906-home proposal near Wylie Branch; case heads to commissioners
Summary
The Pender County Planning Board voted to deny a conditional zoning request that would have allowed 906 single-family homes on roughly 600 acres near Wiley/Wylie Branch, citing conflicts with the county’s future land use map, school overcrowding and floodplain concerns.
The Pender County Planning Board voted to deny a conditional zoning map amendment that would have rezoned about 600 acres in the Topsail area to allow 906 single-family detached homes. The board cited inconsistency with the future land use map, concerns about school capacity, proximity to special flood hazard areas and broader infrastructure and traffic impacts. The planning board’s denial is advisory and will be forwarded to the Pender County Board of Commissioners, which will consider the case at its July 14 meeting in Hampstead.
Planning and community development director Daniel Adams summarized the application (rezone 2025-84), saying the proposal by Tidewater Associates on behalf of Asides Construction and USA Global Resources would rezone four parcels totaling approximately 600 acres from Rural Agricultural to a conditional zoning district to permit 906 single-family detached homes. Adams said the tract is largely wooded and contains about 224 acres within FEMA’s 1% or 0.2% annual chance flood zones. He also said staff recommended denial because the proposal was inconsistent with density guidance in the comprehensive land use plan and would add students to already overcapacity schools.
Adams told the board that Pender County Schools uses a planning metric of 0.4 students per household; at 906 homes that equates to about 362 students assigned to South Topsail Elementary, Topsail Middle and Topsail High School under current districting. Adams also said the developer estimated full-build average daily trips of 7,664 (553 AM peak, 789 PM peak) and that a traffic impact analysis would be required if the rezoning were approved.
Applicant representatives, including attorney Scott Holmes and engineer Josh Edmondson, disputed staff’s conclusion and argued the project could be phased, that it would preserve wetlands and open space and that the developer had proposed land for a school site and up to 50 acres of county parkland as community benefits. Holmes said the developer has been negotiating possible public benefits and that much of the back acreage would be preserved; Edmondson said the project team had a TIA scope approved by the Wilmington MPO and offered to restrict construction traffic from using existing Wiley Branch streets.
More than two dozen residents spoke during public comment, primarily neighbors from Wiley Branch and nearby subdivisions. Speakers raised concerns about school overcrowding, bus service delays, traffic on Island Creek Road and U.S. 17, flooding and stormwater runoff, and the developer’s track record in existing nearby subdivisions. Representative comments included: "Topsail Schools... are already overwhelmed, overcrowded," and "adding 900 more homes is going to drastically increase traffic and flooding risk," from residents who said they experience repeated bus delays, standing water behind homes and daily congestion on Highway 17.
Several planning board members said they were sympathetic to the applicant’s argument that the market needs housing, but that the rezoning as proposed did not provide sufficient assurances about school capacity, roads and floodplain constraints. Board member discussion noted the distinction between a by-right development in RA (which could produce several hundred one-acre lots) and a conditional rezoning (where the board and commissioners can impose conditions). Adams explained that a by-right buildout under RA could yield roughly 450–480 lots after factoring in right-of-way and wetlands; he also noted that density in conditional zoning is calculated on gross acreage while other districts use net buildable acreage calculations.
After discussion, a board member moved to deny the conditional rezoning and find the proposal inconsistent with the Pender 2 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (citing Goal 5.1, Goal 5.8, Objective 4.6 and several policies). The motion to deny passed by voice vote; the board chair said the denial would be forwarded to the Board of Commissioners for their July 14 meeting.
Ending: The planning board denied the rezoning request but several members said they would be open to reviewing a revised proposal with reduced density or clearer commitments on school sites, parkland and infrastructure improvements. The denial is a recommendation to the county commissioners, who will make the final decision.
