Chatham County pauses UDO rezoning work after passage of North Carolina Senate Bill 382 restricting downzoning

Chatham County planning staff presented an overview of North Carolina Senate Bill 382 and its effects on the county—s newly adopted Unified Development Ordinance at the Jan. 21 meeting, and asked the Board of Commissioners for direction on how to proceed with zoning‑map drafting and implementation.

Chance Mullis, a planning staff member, told the board SB 382—s late-session language added a restrictive down‑zoning provision that limits local governments' ability to adopt downzonings without written consent from all impacted property owners and has a 180‑day retroactive clause. "It really just restricts local government's discretion to amend local zoning ordinances," Mullis said, summarizing the new language.

Staff explained the change could affect a wide range of UDO provisions — not just map changes. Examples cited included the county—s watershed density options, use tables (permitted principal/accessory uses), building‑design and addition standards, landscaping and screening standards, and sign provisions. Because the statute could treat many reductions in permitted intensity as a down‑zoning, staff said the county may need to review the entire UDO to identify provisions that would have to be revised to remain in compliance.

Mullis and consultants advised that some jurisdictions have found SB 382—s retroactive element has already voided rezoning approvals adopted before the bill—s effective date, creating urgent legal and implementation issues for local governments that enacted UDO changes earlier. Staff told the board they have been monitoring guidance and legal analysis from the UNC School of Government, the North Carolina chapter of the American Planning Association and peer counties.

Given the breadth of potential changes and legal risk with retroactivity, staff recommended pausing county‑initiated rezonings and withholding final drafting of zoning maps until the General Assembly clarifies or amends the law. Commissioners discussed timing and policy priorities and repeatedly said they did not want staff to spend substantial time preparing documents that could prove unusable under the statute. The board signaled consensus to follow staff—s recommendation to hold zoning‑map drafting and monitor legislative developments closely.

Staff will return with next steps once the county has clearer legislative direction; they also indicated they will continue limited technical work and stakeholder engagement where it will not create legal exposure.

Contacts: Chance Mullis, planning staff; county attorney (legal analysis).