Brunswick County commissioners deny rezoning for Leland‑area parcel after residents warn of flooding, traffic and school strain

A majority of the Brunswick County Board of Commissioners voted 3‑2 on Aug. 18 to deny a rezoning request for a 58.9‑acre parcel near Leland, leaving the property classified as Commercial Intensive (CI).

Planning staff opened a de novo public hearing on appeal Z‑09/17 and recommended approval, telling the board the parcel (tax parcel 02100058 on Stella Drive NE) is consistent with the Blueprint Brunswick 2040 comp plan and that a submitted planned‑development plan proposes 100‑year stormwater controls. Staff said county water is not currently available at the site and summarized school and road capacity issues in the area.

The applicant’s representative, Sam Frank of Norris Bland Consulting Engineers, described the filing as a ‘‘downzoning’’ from CI to R‑7,500 intended to align the parcel with the comp plan and argued that the residential district would generate less impervious surface and lower traffic intensity than some uses allowed under CI. Frank said the applicant had submitted PD materials showing single‑family development and reiterated that wetlands are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Several neighbors and members of the public urged denial. Steve Parker said runoff from the site feeds Potter Branch and Hoods Creek and described extensive flooding in the area during last year’s storms. Kimberly Parker, who said she authored the appeal, told commissioners wetlands and overflow from recent storms put nearby residents at heightened risk and asked the board to ‘‘use wisdom’’ and slow development.

Commissioners asked staff to confirm density and infrastructure figures; staff replied that the CI designation allows roughly 4.4 units per acre under some scenarios and that the R‑7,500 designation could equate to roughly 5.8 units per acre depending on the project type and whether multifamily is included in a PD. Staff also noted that PD submittals typically design stormwater to a 100‑year standard versus a 25‑year standard for some by‑right CI development.

During deliberations commissioners split, with some citing concern about placing residential uses amid commercial corridors and potential conflicts with surrounding CI parcels, while others pointed to planning staff and planning‑board vetting and emergency‑management assurances on evacuation and stormwater modeling. The board ultimately approved a motion to keep the zoning as CI and directed staff to prepare the necessary consistency statement reflecting the board’s action.

What’s next: The board’s vote closes this round of the de novo hearing; staff will prepare the required consistency statement for the record. Any further appeals or applications would follow statutory procedures under North Carolina general statutes and county UDO rules.