Southampton supervisors approve two comprehensive-plan amendments after lengthy public debate

The Southampton County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 24 voted to approve two separate amendments to the county's comprehensive plan after extended public hearings that drew dozens of residents, landowners and experts.

The first amendment, filed by members of the Brinkley/Daughtry family, asked the board to change the county's land-use designation on a large tract to allow low-density single-family (R-1) residential development. Troy Brinkley and Lisa Daughtry Brinkley told the board they own the property and asked for the amendment so the family could explore residential development prospects.

Supporters, including developer and longtime residents, said the land is well placed for housing near existing roads and that responsible development could increase the county's tax base and housing options. ‘‘We believe this request aligns with surrounding low-density residential zoning and supports the county's long-term planning objectives,’’ Lisa Daughtry Brinkley said.

Opponents warned the board that the amendment could strain schools, roads and other county services and cited on-the-ground constraints such as wetlands and existing drain tile. Landowner and critic Paul Yoger raised yield concerns and infrastructure limits, saying the change could bring hundreds or thousands of new residents and noted the county's limited grocery and service capacity. Professional engineer Larry Berry told the board that, based on wetlands, stormwater and road requirements, actual lot yield would likely be far lower than some estimates.

The applicant and the board's planning staff acknowledged uncertainty in some figures used during the hearing. The application paperwork presented one acreage figure (the applicant noted "484 acres" for the requested amendment), while critics and some earlier filings referenced other totals; the board heard multiple, inconsistent acreage and yield estimates during testimony.

The second amendment, submitted on behalf of Holland Nursery Incorporated for several adjoining parcels (about 115 acres as presented), received similar public scrutiny and was presented by a family representative who said the company plans to return with more detailed rezoning and engineering work before any subdivision or construction.

Board members emphasized that an amendment to the comprehensive plan is only the first step and that any future rezoning or subdivision would require formal studies (wetland delineations, traffic impact studies, soil borings, septic evaluations) and additional public review. Several supervisors urged careful, phased follow-up work before site development.

The board ultimately approved the comprehensive-plan amendments after motions that cited the planning commission's record and the public input. Several supervisors spoke about balancing the county's vision with practical, phased development; at least one member said they voted against the change during prior consideration and remained skeptical but accepted the majority decision.

What happens next: approval of the plan amendment only changes the land-use guidance; any rezoning, subdivision or construction will require additional studies, permitting and separate approvals by county staff, the planning commission and the board.

Quotes from the hearing: "We're asking you to strongly consider our request to change the comprehensive plan," Troy Brinkley told the board. "We would go through the planning process to develop something we all could be proud of." (Troy Brinkley, applicant)

"I would urge you to stick with the comp plan," said one resident who opposed the amendment, citing schools and public-service capacity.

Ending: The board approved both amendments and said it expects applicants to complete the detailed engineering, environmental and traffic studies required for any future rezoning and development applications.