Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Planning board recommends denial of Walnut Grove townhome rezoning amid traffic and school concerns
Loading...
Summary
Pender County planning board on March 4 recommended denial of a conditional rezoning to allow 104 townhomes near Hampstead, citing traffic, school‑capacity and community‑character concerns despite staff’s recommendation of approval.
The Pender County Planning Board recommended denial on March 4 of a conditional zoning map amendment that would have allowed 104 single‑family attached townhomes on roughly 19 acres in the Hampstead area (Case REZONE‑2025‑91).
Staff presented the application and recommended approval. Virginia Norris, senior planner, told the board the proposal would rezone about 19 acres to a conditional district to allow 104 townhomes, provide 6.49 acres of open space (exceeding the 3.12‑acre minimum), retain about 1.7 acres of wetlands, and connect to Pender Water with sewer served by Plurist. Norris summarized staff findings and said, “Based on our analysis, staff recommends approval.” She also reported estimated trip generation of 742 daily trips and an estimated school impact of approximately 42 additional students.
The applicant, Landon Weaver of Bill Clark Homes, and the project’s planner described design tweaks made after a community meeting, including expanded buffers, sidewalks along the frontage and interior amenities. Weaver said the development would extend sewer to the area and called the product “a more attainable price point.”
Residents who signed up for public comment opposed the rezoning, citing traffic on US‑17 and the one‑lane St. John’s Church Road access, school crowding, drainage and changes to neighborhood character. Anne Jones said the plan “does not conform with what that neighborhood already has,” and several neighbors described daily safety and congestion problems around the nearby schools.
Board members pressed staff and the applicant on traffic impacts and enforceability of amenities shown on concept plans (staff noted a $15,000 minimum amenity contribution in the application materials but said the board could require construction or set different conditions through a conditional rezoning). The traffic consultant said North Carolina Department of Transportation staff determined the project did not meet thresholds requiring a traffic‑impact analysis for the trip totals presented.
After deliberation the Planning Board moved to recommend denial. A board member said concerns about roads, schools and cumulative growth made denial “reasonable and in the public interest.” The transcript records the board’s recommendation to deny and notes that if the applicant chooses to move the request forward it would be heard by the Board of County Commissioners on April 20 in Berghaw; the transcript does not record a roll‑call tally of individual votes.
Next steps: the applicant may appeal the planning board’s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners; that meeting was scheduled for April 20 in Berghaw.
