Planning Board approves 355‑lot Piver Tract master plan despite widespread public concerns about traffic, emergency access and wetlands
Loading...
Summary
After two hours of public testimony raising traffic, school‑capacity, emergency‑egress and wetland concerns, the Pender County Planning Board approved a 147‑acre master development plan for the Piver Tract (about 355–358 single‑family lots) by a recorded majority; staff and the fire marshal said technical requirements will be verified during permitting.
The Pender County Planning Board approved a master development plan for the 147‑acre Piver Tract in the Topsail Township after extended presentations by staff and the applicant and nearly two hours of public comment urging changes.
Staff and the applicant presented the proposal as a Planned Development (PD) that meets the county’s Unified Development Ordinance and the Imagine Pender 2050 future‑land‑use designation for a coastal neighborhood (up to 3 dwelling units per acre net). The plan proposes roughly 355–358 detached single‑family homes across about 147 acres, roughly 20 acres of open space, the preservation of approximately 12–13 acres of wetlands, multiuse paths and amenities including a clubhouse, pool and community dock. Staff said a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) recommended a right‑turn storage lane at the Country Club Drive entrance for phase 1 (first ~95 lots) and signalization at the Country Club Drive/Spring Garden Road intersection in later phases (around 228 units), and that NCDOT will determine final permit requirements.
Residents raised a common set of concerns at the public hearing: congestion on Country Club Road and nearby feeder streets, the safety of single‑access subdivisions, the applicability of Appendix D of the North Carolina Fire Code (which requires two points of ingress/egress for large subdivisions unless topography or other constraints apply), potential stormwater runoff and wetland impacts to Nixon Creek and Old Topsail Creek, and school‑capacity strain. Representative comments included: “355 is way too much to put on there” (Mitchell Clark) and “Simply put, our community is not built to safely support this level of density” (Ivan Bloom), who called the project the “Piper Triangle of death.”
Fire Marshal Burton told the board that Appendix D was recently adopted by the county and that the code generally requires two ingress/egress points for developments of this size unless a remoteness or topographical exception applies; she said a gated emergency access may comply if it meets minimum standards (20‑foot paved width, 75,000‑lb load capacity, turning‑radius and vertical‑clearance requirements) and is properly maintained and documented (Knox key/KNOX box). Applicant representatives said a recorded 25‑foot access easement exists (recorded March 25, 1988) and that they can use engineering demonstrations (AutoTurn simulations, upgrades to pavement and drainage) to meet fire‑code and DOT requirements during the preliminary‑plat and permitting process.
NCDOT’s district engineer explained that DOT evaluates TIAs against the future‑no‑build baseline and may require off‑site improvements where the development contributes materially to a movement (the usual screening threshold is a 10% contribution). DOT staff said the TIA examined nearby approved projects (including Hawksbill Cove) and concluded mitigation described in the TIA could address the MDP’s impacts, subject to DOT’s permit conditions.
After asking several technical and policy questions and citing limits imposed by state law on local control of roads and density, the Planning Board moved to approve the MDP on an administrative determination that it meets the UDO. The board’s vote was recorded as carrying (transcript indicates a 5–2 result). Staff will include specific TIA conditions, fire‑access improvements, and final utility and stormwater requirements in subsequent plat and permitting reviews.
What the approval does and does not do: Approval of a PD master plan is an administrative finding that the concept meets ordinance standards; it does not authorize construction. The developer must still obtain required permits (preliminary/final plats, driveway permits, NCDOT driveway/roadwork permits, utility permits and any required wetland/JD determinations) and demonstrate compliance with fire‑code access and load criteria. If at permitting those technical standards are not met, the developer will have to revise designs before final approvals.
Key quotes from the hearing:
"Appendix D exists specifically to prevent exactly this type of situation placing hundreds of families on a single point of entry and exit," said Ivan Bloom, a nearby homeowner, summarizing public safety concerns.
"Appendix D backs up chapter 5... 200 homes, anything over 200 homes, requires 2 ingress and egress points," Fire Marshal Burton explained when asked to clarify fire‑code requirements.
Next steps: The development team will proceed to the engineering and permitting stage; staff will monitor technical compliance in TRC and permitting reviews and will require the TIA and fire‑access conditions to be satisfied before infrastructure and building permits are issued.
